What happened to Capcom?

[Freestyler]

Resident Evil 6 is due out on October 2nd. 6 full months away.
DLCapcom are already showcasing 3 separate Map DLCs for it. For an unfinished game.

I wonder if they'll be on the disc...

[Misery]

DLC is meant to extend the lifespan of a product by being released further down the line...

I keep hearing this but where was it ever written that would be the case? Not having a go at you for thinking that, and I hate DLC too, it's just I can't believe that cynically holding back content wasn't always going to be on the agenda as soon as the concept of DLC was conceived.

I understand that. As I said at the end of my mammoth post, I realise that Capcom are a business and business will do these sorts of things.

I just think that DLC is utterly pointless and redundant if it isn't done in a way that keeps a disc in a console long after launch. The way Capcom (and other publishers to be fair) do DLC renders it nothing other than a shameless rip-off and so many people can't see it or don't care that they are being fleeced.

I'd love the extra characters in SFxTekken and I think I'd genuinely feel left out by not having them but I'm not going to download them when they are released because I'm not giving Capcom what they want. Sure, it won't make a difference in the grand scheme of things but I can't really rally against it so forcefully if I download the stuff myself

I think part of the problem is the extreme popularity of some of their games.

I mean, ok, SFxT. I honestly had expected little from this game, considering just how much I disliked SF4, for all sorts of different reasons. But no..... it turns out this one is my kind of fighter, and does alot of things that I want to see in one of these. It.... actually turned out to be very GOOD, much to my surprise. It's never gonna outdo Guilty Gear or Blazblue for me, but it's another one that I've been spending alot of time with.

And it's gonna be that way for alot of players; the sort of thing where, if you DONT end up with a copy somehow..... wether you payed for a new one or got it from somewhere else used.... you're gonna be missing out. And they've made SURE that the DLC..... or, ahem, better add quotes there, the "DLC"..... is as DESIRABLE as concievably possible, by sticking characters that people really like in there; Sakura and Blanka in there? Argh! That annoys me! And there's gonna be plenty of people looking at it and going "Well crap, so-and-so is in there! I like so-and-so! I cant use them at all unless I toss Crapcom some more money!", and that's exactly what those evil jerks were planning.

Resident Evil 6 is due out on October 2nd. 6 full months away.
DLCapcom are already showcasing 3 separate Map DLCs for it. For an unfinished game.

I wonder if they'll be on the disc...

You've GOT to be kidding. I thought they were being bold enough with THIS DLC fiasco. But SIX FREAKING MONTHS before the game EVEN COMES OUT? I'm sorry, but at this point, I'm honestly believing that they are TAUNTING their userbase on purpose with this. Like, we know you're gonna hate it, we know you're gonna be angry, but we also know that you RE fans are GOING to buy this game, and you WILL buy the DLC eventually..... so here it is, we're gonna PESTER you with it for SIX FREAKING MONTHS. ENJOY.

Either that or they really ARE so goddamn STUPID that they honestly believe that their FANS will believe that that is real DLC as opposed to something completed by launch that they just hold back, on disc or not.

[retrojc]

You all run on like Capcom have stole something from you.

Honestly don't care what Capcom do, as long as they're still putting out great games, which in my opinion they sometimes do!

[Misery]

You all run on like Capcom have stole something from you.

Honestly don't care what Capcom do, as long as they're still putting out great games, which in my opinion they sometimes do!

It's because it's a REALLY nasty business practice. Freestyler's analogy about buying a house but finding the bathroom locked until you throw more money at it is EXACTLY what Capcom is doing with this DLC stuff. Not to mention that this stuff ISNT EVEN REAL DLC. The DL in DLC stands for DownLoad. But you're not DOING that with these; the CONTENT.... the C in DLC..... is already on the disc. What you ACTUALLY download is merely a key that unlocks the content; that's it. You're not actually downloading any CONTENT. You're just PAYING THEM ACTUAL MONEY to unlock a part of the game you already paid full money for.

Say the game costs 60, right? Arbitrary number I chose just for explaining this. Well, basically what happens is, someone pays the 60.... already a steep price, gets back home, pops the game in, and then finds out that the ACTUAL price for the full game was not 60..... it's 70. And they better throw that last 10 at it, or part of the game will forever remain locked. THAT is what has people so angry.

DLC as a concept is fine. The idea is that DLC is POST-RELEASE content. Often developed entirely after release, occaisionally development of it will start shortly before release, but the vast majority of it is, one way or another, done later. When you buy DLC, you are paying them for that EXTRA time that it took them to develop the expansion/addon/whatever. Capcom did not take extra time for the stuff that everyone is screaming about. It SHOULD be covered by the game's normal price point; but because they are jerkbags, it isnt.

Not to mention the way they REACTED to people finding out about this. Outright lying about it, and also running around getting Youtube accounts banned just to try to further hide it..... and that's just the start. And then immediately after, they seem to be planning to do it AGAIN. Because they know they CAN. And this all is JUST recently; they've actually been a pretty nasty company for years now.



All of it makes me really glad that I generally dont take an interest in their games ANYWAY. I've no interest in Monster Hunter anymore, not since it went to Nintendo platforms, and I couldnt care less about basically anything else they make. SFxT is the first Capcom game for me to play in a LONG time, and is likely to be the last.

[ShadowMan]

You all run on like Capcom have stole something from you.

Honestly don't care what Capcom do, as long as they're still putting out great games, which in my opinion they sometimes do!

Same here. DLC issues or not I've still enjoyed what Capcom puts out as of late especially Ultimate MVC3 and Asura's Wrath, even the less popular stuff like Bionic Commando (not the remake).

[pratty]

Dubious DLC practices aside I think Capcom have still put out some good games this gen, don't forget to look outside the big releases where you'll find things like Ghost Trick, Okamiden, Zack and Wiki, and Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom.

Though I do tend to think that some of those releases only escaped DLC because they were on Nintendo platforms.

[DPrinny]

They just release a new bit of hardware every now and then

[Freestyler]

The ideal DLC solution: Developer releases more content for a year old game. Makes you want to play it again. Charges a reasonable amount, based on time/work investmet.

See, the Art and Sound assets are already in place, as is the programming code and physics engine. So it's an easier task to create some more maps or levels. Most of that data will already be in the users possession (via the actual disc they own) so it'll also be a reasonably small download.

The problem is that the Games Industry are so heavily focussed on getting the next Big Thing out (and rapidly rushing to the Next Big Thing) that some games aren't supported even in the short term. What was supposed to be six months worth of trickled-out DLC (intended for the above distribution method) suddenly becomes a massive splurge of Day 1 DLC, extra costumes, held back Maps and proper Endings, and other customer-baiting bad practices. And still you guys lap it up.

Stop. THEY won't. But you can.

[ShadowMan]

Dubious DLC practices aside I think Capcom have still put out some good games this gen, don't forget to look outside the big releases where you'll find things like Ghost Trick, Okamiden, Zack and Wiki, and Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom.

Though I do tend to think that some of those releases only escaped DLC because they were on Nintendo platforms.

TvC had content cut though. One of the Japanese magazines (might have been Famitsu?) showed off shots of Ingrid (Capcom Fighting Jam) who was going to be in the game. Phoenix Wright as well was in the planning stages but nothing came of him until UMVC3. Plus there was a big list released a while back listing characters that they wanted to include but couldn't for whatever reason (Nemesis, Tyrant, Leon, Charlie were all on the list...). Its a shame that bar the USA release it didn't get a sequel or another upgrade or whatever as the roster could have been even better
Ghost Trick is a class act, I played the DS version and was well pleased with it. Good story and clever puzzles.

[retrojc]

You all run on like Capcom have stole something from you.

Honestly don't care what Capcom do, as long as they're still putting out great games, which in my opinion they sometimes do!

It's because it's a REALLY nasty business practice. Freestyler's analogy about buying a house but finding the bathroom locked until you throw more money at it is EXACTLY what Capcom is doing with this DLC stuff. Not to mention that this stuff ISNT EVEN REAL DLC. The DL in DLC stands for DownLoad. But you're not DOING that with these; the CONTENT.... the C in DLC..... is already on the disc. What you ACTUALLY download is merely a key that unlocks the content; that's it. You're not actually downloading any CONTENT. You're just PAYING THEM ACTUAL MONEY to unlock a part of the game you already paid full money for.

Say the game costs 60, right? Arbitrary number I chose just for explaining this. Well, basically what happens is, someone pays the 60.... already a steep price, gets back home, pops the game in, and then finds out that the ACTUAL price for the full game was not 60..... it's 70. And they better throw that last 10 at it, or part of the game will forever remain locked. THAT is what has people so angry.

DLC as a concept is fine. The idea is that DLC is POST-RELEASE content. Often developed entirely after release, occaisionally development of it will start shortly before release, but the vast majority of it is, one way or another, done later. When you buy DLC, you are paying them for that EXTRA time that it took them to develop the expansion/addon/whatever. Capcom did not take extra time for the stuff that everyone is screaming about. It SHOULD be covered by the game's normal price point; but because they are jerkbags, it isnt.

Not to mention the way they REACTED to people finding out about this. Outright lying about it, and also running around getting Youtube accounts banned just to try to further hide it..... and that's just the start. And then immediately after, they seem to be planning to do it AGAIN. Because they know they CAN. And this all is JUST recently; they've actually been a pretty nasty company for years now.

All of it makes me really glad that I generally dont take an interest in their games ANYWAY. I've no interest in Monster Hunter anymore, not since it went to Nintendo platforms, and I couldnt care less about basically anything else they make. SFxT is the first Capcom game for me to play in a LONG time, and is likely to be the last.

Well Freestyler was wrong, with a game, you expect to get everything for you money. Well, you do. You get everything that has been planned to go into the retail version. What capcom have done (AND LOADS OF OTHER COMPANIES DO TOO, is they are basically charging to make your game a little bigger. I wouldn't say the house toilet analogy was fair, more like you've just bought a house, everything works fine, you don't need anything else, but for an extra £XX you can have X% more garden.

Again, whether the DLC is on the disc or not makes no difference to me. It's DLC, yes; but you still have to download an activation. I mean, quicker download speed! I guess this is similar to Sky Movies, where you get loads of movie channels, but still you have to pay extra to watch the best movies. Sky movies is fine after all, but still gotta pay extra for the extras, even though, they're there.

What you're overlooking is the state of the games industry, how many players will be wnating DLC in 2/3/6 months time? a fraction, in truth its rediculous to even think DLC in a years time will work. Unless its for the big games, such as Gears, Halo COd etc.
How many will want DLC as soon as they've completed campaign? Wayyy more than those in months time, and if people want dlc in 6 months time, then great it will still be on the market place.


Not saying what Capcom has done is right, but for the short term it makes sense until they restructure, and re-aim.

[pratty]

how many players will be wnating DLC in 2/3/6 months time?

This is a fair point. But how many players want DLC at all?

I'd rather have games complete from the start. I'd prefer not to to even have free DLC if it can be avoided, if the content isn't a genuine afterthought then why not just put it in the game from the start? I suppose the counter argument to that might be that some content isn't ready by the time of release, which is why DLC on the disk is hard to excuse.

[retrojc]

how many players will be wnating DLC in 2/3/6 months time?

This is a fair point. But how many players want DLC at all?

I'd rather have games complete from the start. I'd prefer not to to even have free DLC if it can be avoided, if the content isn't a genuine afterthought then why not just put it in the game from the start? I suppose the counter argument to that might be that some content isn't ready by the time of release, which is why DLC on the disk is hard to excuse.

No you're right, I get that companies releasing dlc on your disc then making you pay for it is bad, but I'm not against it either.

Just the changing of times really

[pratty]

how many players will be wnating DLC in 2/3/6 months time?

This is a fair point. But how many players want DLC at all?

I'd rather have games complete from the start. I'd prefer not to to even have free DLC if it can be avoided, if the content isn't a genuine afterthought then why not just put it in the game from the start? I suppose the counter argument to that might be that some content isn't ready by the time of release, which is why DLC on the disk is hard to excuse.

No you're right, I get that companies releasing dlc on your disc then making you pay for it is bad, but I'm not against it either.

Just the changing of times really

It's funny because I'm while against DLC, I'd be more happy to pay even more for extra content if the content is substantial enough to be considered it's own game.

For example if Nintendo announced Super Mario Galaxy 3 with 10 paid-DLC levels I wouldn't like it. But instead of Mario Galaxy 3 DLC, they just released a full sequel (Super Mario Galaxy 4) a year or so later with 60 levels or whatever, then I'd happily pay full price for that.

Now for all I now, all 60 levels for SMG4 could have been ready by the time SMG3 came out, so if anything all DLC does is highlight that content is being held back.

[ShadowNeku]

What you're overlooking is the state of the games industry, how many players will be wnating DLC in 2/3/6 months time? a fraction, in truth its rediculous to even think DLC in a years time will work. Unless its for the big games, such as Gears, Halo COd etc.
How many will want DLC as soon as they've completed campaign? Wayyy more than those in months time, and if people want dlc in 6 months time, then great it will still be on the market place.

It depends on the nature of the game though. If you're playing a huge RPG then its understandable to release content many months after release since your player base have probably experianced about 75% of the game by that point or are just reaching the final stretches of the main story. For much shorter games (platformers, action adventures) id say under 2 months is an appropriate time for post release DLC. That way its still fresh in your mind and you're "in the zone" still.

Konami as an example did a very poor job with the Castlevania: Harmony of Despair DLC. Released in the summer, it was a very short game based on grinding on the same 5 or 6 maps over and over for loot drops and levelling spells and i was done with it after about a month. From what i remember it was around 3 or more months later they decided to roll out extra maps and characters which were WAY overpriced. I downloaded the extra maps when they went on sale but i barely played them really as id already invested my energy into the game 3 months prior and had moved on to other stuff. I imagine many others didnt even notice they were released, let alone bought them.

[Fightersmegamix]

I don't think including DLC on the disk is a bad thing, it just creates the wrong impression. People always assume the content is being withheld but the reality is that games are much more expensive to make these days. For £40 you get X, if you want Y as well you pay a little extra, the choice is yours. They could include everything from the start but then games would be retailing for £60. Everyone complains about 5 hour campaigns and an emphesis on multiplayer but they still expect to pay the same prices as with the PS1. Something has to give. I'm sure most developers calculate how many games they expect to sell and allocate a budget. The DLC only gets made because they will get extra money, if it wasn't DLC it wouldn't exist.

As for nintendo they can afford to take a non DLC stance when all of their games sell millions and they have all the advantages of a first party publisher. DLC would certainly have helped with the dry spells on the wii, some extra mario kart tracks would have been great.