Stone Ocean
Member
Of course they would, it wouldn't be the first time. Where is the new Devil May Cry, perchance?
Gamespot: Yoshinori Ono talks DLC, Beta Woes and Xbox One Fans
- Thread starter Rymuth
- Start date
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I wanted to say that Sony funding this game is probably why it is still sticking with more traditional(as opposed the service model) and even abandoning the re-release strategy, but I have no proof of that. I think it id likely judging by their current and upcoming output though.
That would be great if true. If it looks like REMAKE(as opposed to Resident Evil 6) I don't think I would agree though.
TheSpoiler
Member
Man, the salt is still heavy with some people. Ono is capitalizing on it hardcore.
I hope your PC is a good one, pizzacat. Though it doesn't take too much to run.
And yeah, that was one of the reasons. They apparently didn't want to do that between PS4, Xbox One, and PC.
On the topic of other Capcom fighters, having your budget covered by Sony is a good way to put that money elsewhere. Plus, Unreal 4 is helping out development times as well, so let's see some Capcom Versus shit.
I hope your PC is a good one, pizzacat. Though it doesn't take too much to run.
And yeah, that was one of the reasons. They apparently didn't want to do that between PS4, Xbox One, and PC.
On the topic of other Capcom fighters, having your budget covered by Sony is a good way to put that money elsewhere. Plus, Unreal 4 is helping out development times as well, so let's see some Capcom Versus shit.
How so? If you want to point out hypocrisy then show examples.
I think we'll get another but maybe not until 2017 or so. They asked Matt Dahlgren if "Capcom Fighters Network" was implying that there would be another, non-Street Fighter fighting game this generation and Dahlgren's answer was kind of coy. I doubt it's Darkstalkers or Cyberbots or whatever but if they can get another Vs. game going I'd expect that.
Jawmuncher
Member
The Skullomania bit was the best part.
Come on dude...
Don't talk about console preference or hypocrisy on GAF when you've made a fool of yourself in several threads spewing numbers from anecdotal evidence only to make some huge company's game's sales not look like shit.
Every RoTR thread on this forum. I remember the E3 one which was 100+ pages to be a prime example.
boredandlazy
Member
Individuals?
I think DS is dead and I doubt they'd do much work on MvC4 without getting the ink dry. Pretty sure DC is firmly in WB's camp too.
I don't think we're seeing much this gen to be honest.
So you're saying every single person that said something in those threads are making a conflicting statement now... Ok.
Edit - beaten.
Not look like shit? I was trying to give a more accurate representation, which still made Halo 5 look terrible. Don't put words in my mouth.
You got to when the company has a fan-base on the other console or otherwise the other games could be potentially affected.
Stone Ocean
Member
There is no "hipocrisy". The situations are completely different. It's not about the exclusivity per se.
One game was announced a year prior to reveal while also having a reveal with no platforms announced and having released a remaster of the first game on both platforms before, the other was revealed as exclusive from the get go and the latest version of the latest game only came out for one platform..
One had confusing message to try and squeeze more out of the timed deal by making people think it wasn't timed, the other has had consistent messaging that says "it's never coming out on Xbox".
One was exclusive to one platform manufacturer at launch, the other will come out for two different playerbases day and date.
One benefits the game in no way whatsoever, the other has cross play features due to focusing on one platform.
And so on.
One game was announced a year prior to reveal while also having a reveal with no platforms announced and having released a remaster of the first game on both platforms before, the other was revealed as exclusive from the get go and the latest version of the latest game only came out for one platform..
One had confusing message to try and squeeze more out of the timed deal by making people think it wasn't timed, the other has had consistent messaging that says "it's never coming out on Xbox".
One was exclusive to one platform manufacturer at launch, the other will come out for two different playerbases day and date.
One benefits the game in no way whatsoever, the other has cross play features due to focusing on one platform.
And so on.
That's hardly a good excuse especially when the second game and the spinoff went multiplatform.
There are all sorts of opinions in this threads. Personally I think the "every game needs to be on my platform" complaints are childish, but I still think the RoTR deal was stupid.
This is because they bet on the losing horse and I doubted TR would be enough of a draw to keep the sales going.
Capcom has stated this game would not be happening now if it's not for Sony. Even if this is not true they still went with the more successful platform, didn't have the PC release pushed back and I feel the majority of the SF fanbase will pick thier platform for it or buy an additional one.
There's no hypocrisy here, I just think one business decision is better than the other. Publishers can put out what they want on what they want and if I want it bad enough I'll drop the cash. That's how it's always worked, not sure why people find this to be a sin now.
Stone Ocean
Member
And Street Fighter 1 wasn't initially on anything that is played today, what's your point?
TheSpoiler
Member
I think some people need to learn what hypocrisy actually means and not just "someone who doesn't agree with my console warring".
Mr. Nice_Guy
Member
Ono never ceases to make me smile. Also that Skullomania and Xbox bit was gold.
Really looking forward to Fight Money. if it really is as well implemented as they say, I'd like to see if it really does hold people's interest longer. I think the potential is there.
Really looking forward to Fight Money. if it really is as well implemented as they say, I'd like to see if it really does hold people's interest longer. I think the potential is there.
Street Fighter was on Sony first.
Seriously aside from whether or not it's good or bad for business arguments about this are pointless. They are betting you'll have or will buy the platform they are putting it on, it's business, not ethics.
digoutyoursoul
Member
edit: sorry dude I misread
YianGaruga
Banned
I expect Skullomania in 2020 now
do it Ono
do it Ono
What's my point? My point is MS ain't stealing out of Sony's mouth but this exclusivity deal is.
Primethius
Banned
Just a correction, there's nothing I've read that suggests that SFV would have come out around 2018 without Sony. Just that it's the earliest it possibly could have had funds been secured.
There was no done deal there or guarantee of a game, so don't conflate it as such.
There was no done deal there or guarantee of a game, so don't conflate it as such.
TBH even without the exclusivity deal I don't really think they would have released the game on One anyway. I mean the trend for fighters seems to be as such. Guilty Gear, KOF etc. Even Tekken has exclusive PS4 content I think. Maybe they don't consider the sales on xbox as viable enough for a port anyway.
How much did MKX sell on One?
Whatever the case, I can't really fault Ono for telling everyone to buy a ps4 to play the game. The deal is done. If you're a fan of the game you would probably be doing that anyway.
How much did MKX sell on One?
Whatever the case, I can't really fault Ono for telling everyone to buy a ps4 to play the game. The deal is done. If you're a fan of the game you would probably be doing that anyway.
gundamkyoukai
Member
Capcom biggest IP is RE and then maybe MH since it so cheap to make .
We two years into gen and capcom has not showed any of there AAA IP.
Unless someone giving them money .
digoutyoursoul
Member
I'm looking forward to the game myself, it sucks when usual multiplats end up exclusive and I can understand the frustration but it's a business after all
Nobody is stealing SF5 from you. SF5 as it was developed was not planned for XB1 to begin with.
Sixfortyfive
He who pursues two rabbits gets two rabbits.
Stop feeding trolls.
Remember that Capcom shifted focus toward western markets for their last-gen fighting games, and western = console. While Street Fighter IV saw an arcade release, you should recall that that was not the case for either Marvel vs. Capcom 3 or Street Fighter X Tekken. Super Street Fighter IV was also console-exclusive for a while with no promise of future updates to the arcade version. (Remember why the next update to that game was called "Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition"?)
Also notice that SF4 was the first major, popular entry in the series that had a proper release on popular home consoles in a timely fashion since the original Street Fighter II. Think about it. SF2 was ported to the SNES, Genesis (and others) in what was at the time a reasonable timeframe for an arcade-to-home port. The SF Alpha series saw lackluster ports on the SNES and PS1, better ports on the Saturn (which had little mainstream market presence), and was overshadowed at the time by the popularity of 3D fighters like Tekken anyway. Street Fighter III hit arcades in '97 and the Dreamcast in '99, but it wouldn't be until 2004 that it was released on PS2. The game was basically irrelevant at that point outside of the genre enthusiasts. I'd go so far to say that a decent part of the Street Fighter "revival" brought on by SF4 is simply the fact that console development for that game was prioritized to a degree that previous entries were not.
It shouldn't be much of a surprise that they're forgoing an arcade release altogether this time around. It's part of a trend at this point, and Sony might even have some influence in the decision.
I'm not sure Tekken is a great point of comparison when it comes to justifying arcade-centric development, either. That series has fallen off the radar a fair bit since the PS2 days. I'm not going to pretend like I know why that's the case for the mainstream market, but when it comes to the tournament scene, I know it's been a point of frustration that console releases have traditionally lagged so far behind the arcade. Enthusiasm dies down quite a bit when the player-base knows that it's stuck with an entry that's a couple of years out of date. Tekken used to draw big numbers at US events, but it's typically an also-ran these days.
Remember that Capcom shifted focus toward western markets for their last-gen fighting games, and western = console. While Street Fighter IV saw an arcade release, you should recall that that was not the case for either Marvel vs. Capcom 3 or Street Fighter X Tekken. Super Street Fighter IV was also console-exclusive for a while with no promise of future updates to the arcade version. (Remember why the next update to that game was called "Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition"?)
Also notice that SF4 was the first major, popular entry in the series that had a proper release on popular home consoles in a timely fashion since the original Street Fighter II. Think about it. SF2 was ported to the SNES, Genesis (and others) in what was at the time a reasonable timeframe for an arcade-to-home port. The SF Alpha series saw lackluster ports on the SNES and PS1, better ports on the Saturn (which had little mainstream market presence), and was overshadowed at the time by the popularity of 3D fighters like Tekken anyway. Street Fighter III hit arcades in '97 and the Dreamcast in '99, but it wouldn't be until 2004 that it was released on PS2. The game was basically irrelevant at that point outside of the genre enthusiasts. I'd go so far to say that a decent part of the Street Fighter "revival" brought on by SF4 is simply the fact that console development for that game was prioritized to a degree that previous entries were not.
It shouldn't be much of a surprise that they're forgoing an arcade release altogether this time around. It's part of a trend at this point, and Sony might even have some influence in the decision.
I'm not sure Tekken is a great point of comparison when it comes to justifying arcade-centric development, either. That series has fallen off the radar a fair bit since the PS2 days. I'm not going to pretend like I know why that's the case for the mainstream market, but when it comes to the tournament scene, I know it's been a point of frustration that console releases have traditionally lagged so far behind the arcade. Enthusiasm dies down quite a bit when the player-base knows that it's stuck with an entry that's a couple of years out of date. Tekken used to draw big numbers at US events, but it's typically an also-ran these days.
Ivan Amiibo
Banned
LOL the jimmies will be rustled for years over this one LOL
Outrun
Member
Why didn't he say buy a PC? Be honest, it was a shitty answer.
I know it's business, but the last comment was silly. No one is going to move to PS4 just for Capcom, they don't have that power or pull anyone. He should have just decline to comment.
The actual quote is
"[PS3 is] for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else."
It's pretty close in meaning.
This is wrong. I know you like digital. So do a lot of other people. But that doesn't mean you should give incorrect info out to support your viewpoint.
It wasn't going to 40% in the next year. It was in 4 years time. A huge difference
Mr. Nice_Guy
Member
I don't think so. He was just being honest. They have said time and again that it is not coming to Xbox One. Declining to answer would just stir up rumors for no reason.
Because Japanese don't give a shit about PC number 1. Number 2, they want to support PS4 sales in general cause Sony was the one who supported development.
I don't see the point of crying because "wah my preferred platform wasn't plugged! ;_;"
It was a pretty harsh statement, but it was also a response to a question that shouldn't have been asked. Admittedly it was unprofessional IMO though.
It means he wants people to want it and purchase it, even though it's expensive. Changing it to "get a second job" changes it's meaning and connotation which is why it was spun that way rather than people quoting the actual statement.
gundamkyoukai
Member
Not only that Sony is also supporting the FGC .
This year capcom cup has the biggest money pot in fighting game history because of Sony .
And next year will be the same .
ShaperofStories
Member
I just wanted to say that if I had, for some reason, chosen the XB1 over the PS4, and then SFV had been announced, I FOR SURE would have bought a PS4 by the game's release.
I'm just that big of a fan, and I don't think I'm alone. In fact, two of my friends have already done exactly that.
I guess what I'm saying is "never say never." Us crazy fighting game fanatics are out there.
You think someone that wants ... RE7 on Xbox One for example, will have in mind what Ono said about his beloved system?
That is one way to look at it. As harsh as it is, it's better than the RoTR song and dance.
And they supported USF4 to PS4 as well, even when they had no intention of porting it over cause of their lack of budget
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Declining to comment will start up gossip. He squashed it and that was the right thing to do. Whether his choice of words was appropriate is a matter of opinion.
Outrun
Member
Some people will, SF is important for some people.
If he didn't comment, people could start speculating a Xbox One version in the future. This was the best way to cut this. He answered correctly, if you want to play the game you will need a PS4 or a PC.