Capcom sucks

[Darxide]

I'll throw in my 2 cents. I don't work in the industry, though I've worked as a game designer for indie/homebrew projects (I run an Internet startup).

I'd like to skip some of your points (all analysts are crooks, large companies don't know what they're doing), because I think they're a bit too extreme.

I don't think your statement that Microsoft has a bad business model is accurate.
You need to look at the bigger picture.

Yes, the Microsoft gaming division lost a lot of money. And that is because they have made a huge investment in making the Xbox 360.

Now let's look at some facts. For the past decade, Microsoft has been looking for a way to bring a multimedia device that would give them a foothold in people's living rooms. They tried to bring the PC there. They tried making PCs more game-y. And they kept on failing.

Looking at the Xbox, and looking at the 360, you cannot say that Microsoft has not succeeded at getting in people's living rooms. They have a very strong position in gaming, which they did not have even 8 years ago. Microsoft is a company that can afford to spend those amounts of money, in order to develop something that will potentially open new markets.

So, the Xbox brought them gaming. What about Live? Well, Live was a huge investment as well.
What did Live bring? It was the first time mainstream users would use online feature on a console. And I know some guys will counter-argue that the Dreamcast did it first. Sure it did. But it wasn't mainstream. It didn't have critical mass, and that's why it tanked. So, Live was a big investment, and with that they brought a full ecosystem. It wasn't just about having one game connecting its users together with one feature:
easy match-making
easy access to demos
easy player to player communication, by text, voice and video
easy sales for indie games
DLC
achievements

I mean, this company single-handedly introduced a lot of those things to your average joe, integrated in a mainstream console. Moreover, Microsoft is recouping a lot of their costs with this investment.

If you look at the 360, Microsoft's investments have been very successful:
The Xbox suffered a complete hardcore image, with only american games, and mostly multiplatform, non-exclusive games. Microsoft changed that image pretty well.

Mass Effect, Bioshock, GTA4 L&D have been extremely successful exclusives.
Live was developed further and created new and large revenue sources.
And the company's image really benefited from them throwing money at games like Rez, VOOT, Death Smiles and Ikaruga.

How can you seriously claim these are bad business decisions from them?
What better way would you suggest for this company to create a dominating position in a new market for them, and generate more money?

[Darxide]

I also have a separate point. It's regarding the DLC.

Zzz, I understand your perspective on DLC. I'm not fond of the idea of paying for features we usually get for free.

That said, I actually think the opposite way.
In most games, I see DLC as a small way to give gamers an extra dose of what they like.
New tracks, new costumes, whatever.

I don't think there's anything wrong with developers offering to work more to support their users and give them new features.

I actually think DLC is the way to go for the future of arcade type of games.

I would love to pay for more Rez levels. I would love new ones in Ikaruga. I'd love a definitive version of Ridge Race, where I can buy all the track from all the games, and get graphics upgrades every year.

I would pay for those new features. It's less risky for the company to create additional content for existing IP, if there is a demand for it of course.

I'm very enthusiastic about the fact that games are becoming more and more customizable that way.
Maybe I don't wanna pay to have Fei Long in my game. Can I pay less for that? Can I buy an "SFA Characters Pack" for my SF4?

I'd much rather see one game, one community of players around that game, and the same type of gameplay, extended with new possibilities, than something new each time.

[neomerge]

Who thinks this is the next thread to get locked?

[zzz]

Mar 15, 2009 14:13:34 GMT -5 Darxide said:

I don't think your statement that Microsoft has a bad business model is accurate.

Microsoft's XBOX division has lost them 8 billion dollars. That is the very definition of a bad business model.

You need to look at the bigger picture.

There is no bigger picture. I repeat: The XBOX line has lost Microsoft 8 BILLION DOLLARS.

Now let's look at some facts. For the past decade, Microsoft has been looking for a way to bring a multimedia device that would give them a foothold in people's living rooms.

They've been doing that for a lot longer than a decade.

They tried to bring the PC there. They tried making PCs more game-y. And they kept on failing.

I get where you're coming from, but you're making a mistake in assuming they were trying to turn Windows into a video game platform.

Their strategy was actually to gradually over time turn Windows (and, thusly, PCs themselves) into multi-media centers.

There's actually a whole hell of a lot more to this, and it's directly tied to the creation of the PlayStation. I could go into more detail if you're interested.

Microsoft is a company that can afford to spend those amounts of money, in order to develop something that will potentially open new markets.

What markets? Video games? They're losing billiions in that market, so that can't possibly be it.

So, the Xbox brought them gaming.

I guess that is what you meant. I'll refer to my previous statement. XBOX hasn't brought them anything but lost cash.

Moreover, Microsoft is recouping a lot of their costs with this investment.

If you look at the 360, Microsoft's investments have been very successful:

They've lost 8 billion dollars! They haven't recouped jack! That's hardly successful.

Live was developed further and created new and large revenue sources.

What revenue!? See the above statements.

And the company's image really benefited from them throwing money at games like Rez, VOOT, Death Smiles and Ikaruga.

Image can't get you out of the red, man. Image can't pay the bills, and it can't get you your job back when you get laid off because your dumbass employers are sticking with a product that has lost them 8 billion freaking dollars.

What better way would you suggest for this company to create a dominating position in a new market for them, and generate more money?

It hasn't generated any money. It has only lost money.

How can you seriously claim these are bad business decisions from them?

Do you see this?



That's 1 million dollars.

Now imagine 8,000 of those. Now imagine setting them all on fire. That's what the XBOX has done for Microsoft.

If an employee did that then they would (at the very least) be arrested and fired. Yet Microsoft wants to make a third system! That's like if, rather than firing the employee who set all your cash ablaze, instead you gave them a promotion and a raise. That is a completely INSANE business model! No company that has any idea what the hell they are doing would ever do something like that. Yet Microsoft marches on.

[zzz]

Mar 15, 2009 14:29:39 GMT -5 neomerge said:

Who thinks this is the next thread to get locked?

There were some really inexcusable spiteful comments early on in the thread, but since then it has turned into one of the most intelligent discussions we've had in recent memory. I say keep it open.

[Justinzero]

As long as we can keep an open mind to others views, I don't see why this thread shouldn't stay open. This crap happened in the Earthbound thread, and its really annoying. If other members want to be snotty children, do it through a PM, and keep the public conversation mature.

That being said, ZZZ I don't think its really completely fair to fault Microsoft for loosing all that money. Everyone* is loosing money, its the current economic trend, so its almost expected. I will agree, had they put out a decently built console, and a much more acceptable PC OS, they would have probably made more, but at the end of the day, Microsoft as a gaming company receives much deserved respect. Personally, I have been scorned too many times by the company, but you have to give credit where credit is due. They took the reigns from Sega, did a much better job, and really helped create a better, more profitable, environment for Western gaming development.


* I know some companies made a profit, but comparatively its a small percentage.

[zzz]

Mar 15, 2009 16:08:34 GMT -5 Justinzero said:

That being said, ZZZ I don't think its really completely fair to fault Microsoft for loosing all that money. Everyone* is loosing money, its the current economic trend, so its almost expected.

This has been going on at Microsoft since they started their XBOX division. It's not a recent thing. The XBOX lost 4 billion and the 360 has lost another 4 billion on top of that.

Also, what you're talking about has nothing to do with "economic trends". But that's a seperate issue...

I will agree, had they put out a decently built console, and a much more acceptable PC OS, they would have probably made more,

I wasn't talking about any PC OS. The XBOX division alone has lost 8 billion dollars.

[derboo]

Hmm, Microsoft always stated that they we're looking towards years of investment before expecting to turn any profit with their gaming division. In early 2008, news stated that exactly that started happening (Reference for example: www.joystiq.com/2008/01/24/the-xbox-turns-a-profit/)

[YourAverageJoe]

Mar 15, 2009 14:29:39 GMT -5 neomerge said:

Who thinks this is the next thread to get locked?

o/

Now, I have a very limited experience with DLC, the most I had was downloading stuff like the Community Bonus Pack for Unreal Tournament 2004 as well as some of the stuff in Megaman 9.

The UT2k4 stuff was free, the Megaman 9 stuff wasn't, and I still don't understand why.

The CBP consisted of excellent material, albeit made by consumers, which overall was of excellent quality. Whereas the stuff I downloaded for Megaman 9 was Protoman Mode, which let me do stuff that I had ASSOCIATED with the very image of Megaman and his games. But while I paid for one and not for the other, I really wish it had been the reverse.


PS: Final Fight Guy. FINAL FIGHT. GUY.

[PooshhMao]

This'll probably derail the thread even further, but I've been involved with Microsoft (unvoluntarily) for the largest part of my life as an IT freelancer. I'm not very familiar with the Xbox 360 (I do have the previous model, gotten very cheap, modded to be used as a DVD player), but I can tell that all of their software products are OVERFLOWING with illogical, politically motivated design choices.

Alright yes, so gaining and keeping market share is something every company wants to do, none of them do it so blatantly as Microsoft.

They sure as hell aren't interested in providing the best possible product for end users.

Thanks for reading.

[pkt]

Mar 15, 2009 15:03:15 GMT -5 zzz said:

Microsoft's XBOX division has lost them 8 billion dollars. That is the very definition of a bad business model.

That's not much of an argument, since you seem to have "overlooked" a minor issue. You say DLC is teh devil, because Microsoft isn't earning enough cash, but fail to show how they'd be making more money otherwise.

[xerxes]

I think most of what the pro-DLC opinions are saying is absolutely true. There is something behind a lot of them, however, that is being left unsaid.

1. Games are extremely expensive to make / Nobody is making money now.

This is obviously true. Newspapers are writing about this recently, mostly about how this is related to the game industry adopting Hollywood's model despite it working for neither industry.

Games are pornographically expensive to make because these developers/publishers insist on making pornographically expensive games. They're not stupid—these games sell like crazy. But since the model is based on outdoing what you and the other guys did last year, this inevitably began costing more than it could bring in.

B. DLC expands the profit margins and shelf-lives of these games.

How could it not make more money? The development budget accounts for everything that's made, and I'm guessing with RE5 and its ilk, it was all made at the same time. As for how long it keeps a game "alive," this kinda depends on what the DLC is and when it is released doesn't it?

So long as the business model is Like Last Year But Better, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you release DLC anymore than a few months after the disc came out. Avoiding this, what we have left is the You Paid For The Game But Didn't Get The Whole Game Here Buy This Now situation so many people seem to hate.

III. DLC gives gamers more of what they want.

Here, the problem is the exact opposite. Nobody has any clue if they want RE5 death matches. They already took a risk on buying the disc, why ask for more blind faith than that?

What's cool is that DLC is the answer to both problems.

Make games with long-term in mind: Emphasize (and save $$ on) unique look and feel rather than just slopping on another layer of HD gloss. Make games that don't really "end," that reek of possibility. Show the gamers everything that can be done, so they know what they got.

Then use DLC to give everyone more of what they already liked, what they want more of anyway. Dribble it out slowly, and if possible, wait to design the stuff until AFTER you know what people like about the game, what they want to change. MMO's operate on that principle, people seem to dig those.

Great games like Street Fighter and such, those should go on for years. Instead of releasing the inevitable super hyper turbo fight-gasm SFIV on its own, make it DLC.

[Deleted]

The worst DLC I'v seen was for DOA Xtreme 2. You can only get Achievements in that game by purchasing all of the swimsuits for each character. That would cost 15 million with the in-game currency. On top of that, you have to get all of the swimsuits for the other girls for the rest of the Achievements. With something like nine chicks and 15 million a piece, it's nigh-impossible to ever truly complete that game.

Tecmo's solution was to offer each girl's set of outfits for $5 a piece. That doesn't sound like much, but keep in mind that each girl has to buy all of her own suits, then all of the suits for all of the other girls in the game. Then you also have the optional accessories, pool games, jet skis...All told, a guide over at XBox360Achievements.org states that it would cost $7.4 million in REAL WORLD DOLLARS to have a "complete" collection for this game.

Compared to that, Beautiful Katamari's not so bad. Also, I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet, but one of the Achievements for Fable II requires you to purchase Pub Games. That's pretty lame, but nobody's holding a gun to your head. Missing that one Achievement isn't going to magically cause your 360 to explode.

On the topic of Capcom itself, none of their recent DLC decisions have bothered me that much. SFIV will still function perfectly fine if you choose to not pursue the extra costumes. Personally, I've bought all the ones that have come so far, and fully intend to get the last one when it's released next week. Why? Because I'm a hardcore gamer and $5 a week is not an issue to me. Yes, it only feeds the problem, but it's my choice. RE5's vs mode falls into the same category, but I won't be getting that particular DLC. As others have stated, RE games are not built for competitive multiplayer experiences, so it's not a loss for me to not pursue that avenue.

On a much broader note, I hear a lot of people saying that modern games don't appeal to them anymore. I've been hearing this argument since the 32 bit days, and I'll never understand it. Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, No More Heroes, Valkyria Chronicles and a whole slew of other titles all stand as proof that modern games can deliver the goods. Saying that things were better "in the old days" really just makes people sound old. Things were good back then, and they're still good now. What makes each game "good" has always been a matter of taste but as the industry grows, the audience should grow, as well.

Finally, I never would have guessed it from the articles he's posted on the regular HG101 site, but zzz is clearly a troll. It's one thing to voice your opinion, or to even disagree strongly. It's a whole other deal to treat every dissenting viewpoint like a nuclear holocaust. Feel free to speak your mind, man, but don't attack others for having a different opinion.

[YourAverageJoe]

Mar 15, 2009 17:56:19 GMT -5 @jasonx said:

Finally, I never would have guessed it from the articles he's posted on the regular HG101 site, but zzz is clearly a troll.

...It's funny how much that statement makes sense considering zzz's posts in here. But then, that raises the question of why he's putting so much EFFORT into this thread, as a great big part of successful trolling is not really putting much effort into it beyond the first post.

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2009 18:10:40 GMT -5 YourAverageJoe said:

...It's funny how much that statement makes sense considering zzz's posts in here. But then, that raises the question of why he's putting so much EFFORT into this thread, as a great big part of successful trolling is not really putting much effort into it beyond the first post.

Just as all farts stink, not all of them smell the same. Trolls can start flame wars and retreat, or they can set a fire and keeping adding fuel to the blaze.

I really do love nerds, but it seems that a lot of them have issues with feeling empathy and recognizing socially acceptable limits.