Capcom Defends Locked Content in Street Fighter X Tekken

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Yes, Capcom, there is a difference between downloadable content and content that's already on the disk. If you're going to attempt to charge for content that's already on the disc, at least admit that's what you're doing; don't try to make it look like you're working around your dickery.

There is a distinction.. locked on-disc DLC was done when the game was completed, burned to the disc, then sold, but charges you extra to unlock what you effectively already paid for. At least with "real" DLC they can make a bullshit excuse like Bioware did with From Ashes and say it was made after the original product was complete but while all the fine-tuning for distribution was going on.

What they're effectively doing is selling you a house, but that house has a locked room. You have to pay extra the key to get into that room of the house you already paid for.

"Real" DLC is you buy a house, then later you buy a shed or something which is then affixed to the house.

The fact Capcom is trying to blow smoke up our asses and say those two things are the same should offend gamers to no end. They think you're that stupid to actually swallow that garbage.

Foolproof:

Kmadden2004:

Foolproof:
So by your logic, deleted scenes in a movie is tantamount to theft.

That's not really an apt comparison.

There is a difference between a filmmaker removing scenes that are detrimental to the overall quality of the finished product, and a publisher deliberately locking away content on a game disc with the express motivation of charging an extra 10-15 to unlock it later.

To run with the new car analogy that another poster has used here, it's like your dealership charging you 5% extra for the key to the trunk.

Except once again, you're going back to the retard tree by mixing up a neccesity and an extra. Use of trunk is not use of Cody from Final Fight. They are not comparable.

My car analogy is still the only good one - its a complete extra that could not be considered a neccessity for your experience, you aren't forced to buy it, there was never a single second of deception about what you would be able to use without extra payment, and without the feature it is still worth your money. Four key similarities between my analogy, that yours utterly fails at.

Whoah, whoah, whoah, there, buddy. There's no need to throw the r-word around there.

For a start, is it really necessary for a car to have a trunk? I mean, yeah, a car needs an engine, wheels, pedals, etc, but is a trunk really a necessity? No, it's not, the fact that there are plenty of trunkless models of cars out there just shows that it is an extra. It's a common extra that's taken for granted, sure, but it's an extra nonetheless. Is it nice to have a trunk on your car? Yeah, sure it is. Does it alter the driving experience for some people? Sometimes. But is a trunk necessary? Not really.

Now, these extra characters aren't a necessity, sure, but they can alter the gaming experience for some people, and they are already there on the disc. Labelling these characters as premium downloadable content is a deception (or, at the very least, a big middle finger to Capcom's consumer base), as you're not actually downloading anything, you're just buying a key to unlock something that is physically attached to the product you've already forked out a fair bit of money on.

With that in mind, my comparison hold more water than you give it credit.

Odd. Why didn't Capcom just claim that the reason for the data being there was so that online interactions are able to cross over. You know like how Bioshock 2 did it. The only reason Bioware couldn't get away with that one was because Javik was limited to single player.

At least it stops them from looking like viewing their customers like morons.

You done fucked up, Capcom. Can't you just admit that you done fucked up?

Edit: Just out of curiousity if we pirate Street Fighter X Tekken (not that I'm going to, I'm not, my pc is a PoS anyway) we'll get those locked characters for fweeeee?

DVS BSTrD:
THIS is my problem with On-Disk DLC: I don't think it should be free, I think it shouldn't even exist! If we accept paying extra for content that had finished production AND testing soon enough to be included with shipping, we're essentially giving them a blank check to withhold as much of the game as they please. If they produce bonus material at a latter date I'll pay for it, but if it's included on the disk it should be included in the game. No gimmicks!

I can see your point and I don't necessarily disagree. But it would lead to developers stopping doing anything once the game hits its finished feature set and then starting up again once it goes gold rather.

DVS BSTrD:
THIS is my problem with On-Disk DLC: I don't think it should be free, I think it shouldn't even exist! If we accept paying extra for content that had finished production AND testing soon enough to be included with shipping, we're essentially giving them a blank check to withhold as much of the game as they please. If they produce bonus material at a latter date I'll pay for it, but if it's included on the disk it should be included in the game. No gimmicks!

Exactly. Next thing we know, we'll be paying $60 for the first "tutorial" level of our games. If we want the real thing, we'll be forced to shell out $10-$15 for each level.

I propose that we stop this bullshit before we miss our chance.

DVS BSTrD:
THIS is my problem with On-Disk DLC: I don't think it should be free, I think it shouldn't even exist! If we accept paying extra for content that had finished production AND testing soon enough to be included with shipping, we're essentially giving them a blank check to withhold as much of the game as they please. If they produce bonus material at a latter date I'll pay for it, but if it's included on the disk it should be included in the game. No gimmicks!

Just this.

DVS BSTrD:
THIS is my problem with On-Disk DLC: I don't think it should be free, I think it shouldn't even exist! If we accept paying extra for content that had finished production AND testing soon enough to be included with shipping, we're essentially giving them a blank check to withhold as much of the game as they please. If they produce bonus material at a latter date I'll pay for it, but if it's included on the disk it should be included in the game. No gimmicks!

I second this. The only problem is that they do this in order to keep from having to go through the reevaluation thing with the rating board and prolong release dates. It's nice that they get to continue working on it during that time but they shouldn't put that data on the disk itself.

I have no problem with DLC, in fact I love content that's made after the games release (I have downloaded my fair share of DLC) but having you pay for content that's already there is just greedy and makes no sense. How the fuck did they expect people to react to such a cheap cash grab?

Capcom... I am dissapoint... you're seriously getting closer and closer to my boycott list, along with ActiBlizzard, EA and UbiSoft (except Rayman Origins, wich is the ONLY good game they've released in the last 7 years, this generation, or at least the only one I'm interested in and it doesn't have DRM).

Why is everyone so mad about Disk Loaded Content? I mean you pay for the disk or the download then you pay for the Disk Loaded Content, then maybe new stuff will come out as Downloadable Content (DC for short).

DLC is just DC but on the product you already paid for usually mostly ready to play/use.

I though we all knew Capcom liked to nickel and dime us. DLC just means buy when game is cheaper to adapt to games that you know will come with a ton of dlc. Keeps the games at a decent price too.

To think this could all be avoided by just not putting it on the disk, oh well I suppose we can't expect all game publishers and developers to be smarter than my dog. (She finishes her whole game and 1 year of dlc before shipping her games, but doesn't mention dlc until 1 month has passed after release and it all must be downloaded)

wow this is some stupid horseshit. balls to outright say it i suppose...but nonetheless

there is a reason i have a ridiculously huge backlog of games...publishers, my wallet isn't budging a single cent with practices like these. Hell, if I ever get massive amounts of money, I'll probably end up supporting CD Projekt red with it, just based on principle alone.

I'm defending forcefully penetrating each chairman of Capcom anally.

There's no effective distinction between forcefully penetrating them, and spiking their drinks and doing so with their passed-out bodies.

I don't feel that I need to explain exactly how stupid Capcom is.

blackdwarf:
when i pay my sixty euros, i pay for all the work that is finished so far.

Actually that's not true. You pay for whatever is offered by the company. They could put the entire game on the disc and charge you only for the intro cinematic. It's their choice; it's their product. As a consumer, your choice is whether or not to buy.

Y'know what?

I don't care what Capcom says in this.

They are wrong. Just.. wrong.
If there is a god, and I'd be able to ask him if this was wrong, he'd say: "how did you get my number?" and then hang up on me, but he'd definitely agree with me that it's wrong.

Seriously, it just boggles the mind how anyone can even justify Capcoms logic. Pay for content you've already bought. It's the greatest perfectly legal SCAM yet!

Yes, a SCAM. They are SCAMMING you for more money for a product you've already paid for. Money changed hands, you got a disc. They can pretend that it's a "licence" and that you don't really own the game, but once again, they're WRONG! It's YOUR disc! You can do whatever the hell you want with it! That's why re-selling it back to the shop works so well. It's a physical item! Deal with it!

In that exact same sense you are ENTITLED to what is on that disc. You have a RIGHT to access the content on it, because that is what you PAID FOR.

Unless there's a nice big warning text on the box saying: "Game disc contains stuff that's not included with your purchase. We're just lending it to you because we want to save bandwidth costs when and if we decide to let you buy it, and by signing a document agreeing to these terms you accept this deal. Otherwise, put the box back on the shelf NOW.", you have a right to access that content using whatever means you see fit.

Just like in that analogy earlier in the thread about the car, I would have the goddamn right to pry open the f*****g trunk if the asshole salesman didn't give me the key for it.

phew... ok, I've calmed down now.

But seriously, how much are we going to let them get away with? Don't buy this. I know it'd moot to ask it, since most sales are done to people who have no idea, but every little bit counts.

I...I just....I just don't know how Capcom did it, but they just past EA as my least like game corporation I know of. This is honestly just bad, and the fact that since it will still sell so more companies will start doing it is what rubs the salt in the wound. Well I guess my wallet will never give anything over to either EA and Capcom now. Which is a shame since before this I was on a bit of neutral ground when it came to Capcom, neither hating nor loving them, at least till now.

If you don't like their practices, don't buy their games. For those of you who have the game already, don't buy the DLC. If you want to play the characters on the DLC, then wait for a hacker to tell everyone how to unlock them and play them for free. It's not theft if they give it to you.

I'm actually impressed at Capcom's balls. It takes real guts to draw an artibtrary line about what a full game experience is when other companes try and shove in as much content as possible.

See, the thing about DLC is that it's an acronym. It's not just code for 'stuff we can charge people extra for later', the letters actually stand for something. That would be DownLoadable Content. As such, in order for it to really be DLC, you have to actually be downloading something. If the content's already on the disc, then it's not DLC, it's just making people pay twice for something they already own.

Wow, that's just pure evil. I mean... day-one dlc was one thing...but this is a whole 'nother level of just greed. Why did the Board agree that this was a good idea? Wouldn't this just make your customers hate you even more?

Is this going to follow the practices of the other two fighters as well? Wait for the loyalists to buy it first day and then sell everything at once for a cheaper price later on and hope the loyalists decide to buy it a second time?

I'm so glad you guys shelved Powerstone. You can't ruin my good memories of that little bundle with your horrible practices.

Considering that I've had a hard-on for the idea for a Tekken/Street Fighter crossover since before one was ever announced, it makes me wonder how angry I'd be about this if I wasn't actually a bigger fan of Tekken than Street Fighter. I imagine I'd be goddamn infuriated as opposed to simply angry.

I await Tekken X Street Fighter with intense eagerness. Even ardent Capcom defenders can't argue that Namco doesn't pack the Tekken games with more content for a lesser price than Capcom does with Street Fighter. That's just straight-up fact.

I await thy sweet fight-nectar, Namco.

I just love the "but it's funded separately" defense.

Why, as a consumer, are you even concerned with how it's funded. Your TV may have been funded separately from the remote but that isn't a consumer issue is it? This is just Capcom giving some BS explanation and gamers actually letting them get away with it.

The slippery slope that came with the beginning of DLC; we're atleast half way down the slope now and many gamers are pretending we haven't slid at all.

It'd be nice if Corporations weren't actually greedy bastards and instead would actually make games for gamers, not money. It'd be nice if developers/publishers would stop taking advantage of gamers and instead work at using this generation of gaming to further the medium.

It'd also be nice if I could fly and shoot laser beams from my eyes. I think that has a better chance of happening.

Instead I wish that gamers would actually grow a spine and stop supporting companies that rip them off, and that reviewers would grow a spine and maybe call out the corporations for doing said greedy things.

Until that happens, we are stuck with developers/publishers trying to nickel and dime their sheep as much as they possibly can...

I'm sorry, but no. You're essentially telling people that you think it's okay to make them pay full price for something they're not gone to get fully, so you can sale the rest of the game to them later.

I'm okay with DLC made after the games budget was spent on the main game, and now they're using money not from the budget to make DLC for the game. Fine. But if you're screwing people over to nickel and dime them for content that you made with the budget for the game you're selling, then you're just a greedy ass.

But this is Capcom, rip off artists at the finest.

No, it really doesn't. I think they're completely missing the point.

It's not a question of delivery method. Fans probably don't care much how DLC is available. If they can't see why people are upset, that's a huge problem.

Someone should probably remind Capcom what DLC stands for because I don't think it means what they think it means.

Related note. Crap like this worries me because it totally blurs the line even more than crap like day 1 dlc does of what you actually pay for what you get a game. We've gotten to a point where a developer can literally arbitrarily decide that this piece of the game isn't essential to the game which allows them to charge extra for it, regardless of anythin.

It is makin me worried where the game industry is rushin towards at this point. I'm not one of those doomsayers who think the worst that can possibly happen will happen, but it is definitely a greater possibility now than it was five years ago.

Is anyone really surprised that Capcom is actually doing this?
After what they did with Residelt Evil 5 CO-OP play that they charged for?

As if Sfxt wasn't shitty enough. Just trade in your copy and get KOFXIII or wait for SkullGirls. Be a man! Expand your fighting game horizons and play a real fighter instead of giving crapcom more of your money for Timeout x Locked Content.

Shitty excuse for an anti used market strategy. Sadly it's nothing new.

blackdwarf:
when i pay my sixty euros, i pay for all the work that is finished so far.

So by your logic, deleted scenes in a movie is tantamount to theft.[/quote]

no, because deleted scenes are not created to add to the movie later. they are there because they were finished in montage but cut, because of length or story issues. not cut to be sold later on.

I'm inclined to agree. The game's packed with content right out of the box, definitely worth the price of admission. Fact is, nobody would be complaining if we didn't know the DLC was on-disc, because this game is phenomenal.

The only gripe I have is that the extra color palettes are DLC for some reason as well. We know they're on the disc, and Capcom confirmed months ago that they were going to be free... So why lock them in the first place? Why not have them available out of the box if there's no intention to sell them? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I seriously don't get why people complain when dlc is already on the disc, if dlc came out after a game had been released without already being on the disc would you pay for it? if yes then what does it matter if it's on the disc, that just means a smaller download and if you wouldn't
buy it why should you care, at the end of the day dlc is just that downloadable content

If it ain't downloadable, it ain't DLC, it's just locked content. MMOs do it, just stop calling it DLC.

If you don't mind, I would like to answer those who don't see a problem with this.

"Downloadable content (also referred to as DLC) is official additional content for a video game distributed through the Internet. Downloadable content can be of several types, ranging from a single in-game outfit to an entirely new, extensive storyline, similar to an expansion pack. As such, DLC may add new game modes, objects, levels, challenges, etc. to a complete and already released game."

Bolded for the operative words. I'm one of those people who wouldn't have had a problem with ME3 Day one DLC if it sincerely couldn't have been programmed on the disc on time. But since it was, I voted with my wallet and ended up not playing ME3.

From what I understood from the second I bought my first game is that I'm exchanging money for the entire coded experience for me to enjoy. They make a product, I give them the money for it. What Capcom needs to start explaining to us all is why is this a good idea?

If I'm paying full game price for a product that isn't completely available to me, why am I paying full game price to begin with? They admitted to not giving me the full experience, so I am unclear as to way I have to play for a incomplete product.

I'm sure the argument will go: "Well, it is a completed product, you just have to pay extra to get it all." My question that I'm sure a lot of us would like answered is why? What is the benefit to me, the consumer, the sole reason why these people can stay in business, that they give me a completed experience but tell me I have to pay more than full price to get it all.

Capcom, simply put, why are we giving you full price money for an incomplete gaming experience... and more for content that is simply not additional?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here