Capcom defends Resident Evil 5 DLC charges

[James]

sorry but when a company says "it's optional it doesn't change the game you don't have to buy it" it's just BS becausethey want you to buy it that's how they make they're moneyThis is just Capcom feeing the need to defend it's 'clean' image when someone called them out on bullshit same thing happened with the SFIV CE lies which was the last straw for me which is why I'm not buying any of they're DLC/CEs because they gotten a habit of lying and making bullshit excuses for themselves when it comes to them Hell Namco made some pretty outrageous DLC for Soul Calibur IV and Tales of Vesperia but I'll support they're DLC/CEs because they don't lie about it and make bullshit excuses for themselves trying to play the 'good guy' when people call them out on it.

As I said, don't buy it if you don't want to. Who cares what Capcom wants, you have the final decision, not them. And also, complaining about DLC but then confessing to purchasing Soulcalibur and Tales of Vesperia DLC? That's an embarassment. By the way, punctuation and spacing are your friends.

Thank you Captain Corporate! Now think of it as a consumer, especially with the fact that the content was finished BEFORE the game's release. This isn't the case with such developers like Valve or say Monolith that's releasing brand new maps for FEAR 2 free of charge.

It's as ridiculous as Namco's charging to Yoda and Vader as DLC even though they're basically on disc.

I am thinking about it as a consumer and I'm just happy that content that might've been scrapped in the final release is being released and I'm being allowed to play it. All these idiots are complaining that the DLC is meant to be "on the disc" and was "finished" before the game's release. That being said, it probably needed tweaking and finishing prior to the game's release, hence why it was held back. And for such a low price, I am not gonna complain. Though I suppose you sole-PS3 owners are used to playing unfinished or unpolished games, right?

As for FEAR and Valve, I am almost certain most of Valve's DLC did not make it to the 360, and FEARs map was ONE MAP, not a whole new mode (or two).

[ValentineKnight]

I cited Namco as an example because they like Capcom are charging for dlc already on the disk(and fyi I have never bought TOV as I lack a 360)The difference is that Namco doesn't feel a need to defend it's DLC when people say it's ridiculous

[Umon Daisuke]

I am thinking about it as a consumer and I'm just happy that content that might've been scrapped in the final release is being released and I'm being allowed to play it. All these idiots are complaining that the DLC is meant to be "on the disc" and was "finished" before the game's release. That being said, it probably needed tweaking and finishing prior to the game's release, hence why it was held back. And for such a low price, I am not gonna complain. Though I suppose you sole-PS3 owners are used to playing unfinished or unpolished games, right?

It's in the strategy guide and is being released in the same month as the game's release. Never has there been a time when writers are given beta codes with bugs (let alone extra content that doesn't make it through). The assets used are in-game ones too. If they offer new areas, then I stand corrected but that doesn't seem the way. Capcom just wants to make extra money on the side; not sure why it's hard to get that through.

If it's on disc, we'll know from the size of the download too. As for your PS3 comment, leave it in the appropriate flame war forums because it was neither clever or witty (I'm sure the Xbox camp cheerleaders will enjoy it). Don't make assumptions either.

[James]

Your ridiculous attempts to jump through hoops in an attempt to defend the PS3 makes the really think otherwise.

Never has been a time when writers are given beta code with bugs.

Have you written a Strategy Guide?

[Umon Daisuke]

Your ridiculous attempts to jump through hoops in an attempt to defend the PS3 makes the really think otherwise.

Have you written a Strategy Guide?

What so-called ridiculous attempts exactly? Jumping through hoops no less. My PS3 preference is no different than your 360 one, except that I bothered to pick up both versions despite giving away my 360 (and still have access to it).
To answer your question, I've known a few well known authors from Prima and Brady over the years, some of which I still keep in touch so I'm not pulling stuff out for the sake of argument.

Bottom line remains that the DLC's are not free to garner more revenue. Given what they are, I'm not a fan of the move, but if they were to charge a bit more and add more assets (new maps), I'd be happier.

[Rombie]

Occassionally guide authors will be given pre-finished builds for guides, some of which will appear in guides themselves. I easily remember Konami dicking a bunch of magazines and guides by providing different builds than the finished release titles for both Metal Gear Solid and Silent Hill in 98 and 99 as a great example. Silent Hill in particular had a large number of items in entirely different areas.

The builds I've heard or seen defiently aren't always bug free finished product either. A lot of the time I've heard from two or three authors, one of which I know Umon knows as well, being given full debug units with the game loaded to a hard drive beeing provided to allow guide authors to write them in enough advance of the release. And they usually have a number of days literally to finish the project. I don't admire the job, but I do give kudos to people who write as much content as they do for a guide in less than 2 weeks.

James, I don't get why the console's e-penis debate has anything to do with the DLC content. Your comments are just as horribly bad as any console fanboy on the PS3 side because clearly while a large number of 360 titles which are/go multiformat look better on the 360 because it was the lead platform, there have been some also the other way as well of late, making it very redundant. RE5 is clearly a 360 first in this case and you already have Umon agreeing with this yet you somehow want to put your boot in about the PS3 to spite him for some unknown reason, making you look like a childish prick about it all. Good one.

In regards to the DLC content itself, I'm not entirely sure what my final thoughts on it is. I'm not impressed by the fact it was clearly a part of the original build, but that said it's not the EA level of feature where you pay just to unlock content - especially stuff used online, which is very crap.

[James]

James, I don't get why the console's e-penis debate has anything to do with the DLC content. Your comments are just as horribly bad as any console fanboy on the PS3 side because clearly while a large number of 360 titles which are/go multiformat look better on the 360 because it was the lead platform, there have been some also the other way as well of late, making it very redundant. RE5 is clearly a 360 first in this case and you already have Umon agreeing with this yet you somehow want to put your boot in about the PS3 to spite him for some unknown reason, making you look like a childish prick about it all. Good one.

I was just sick of Umon being so pro-PS3 and so anti-360 in other cases and with the release of RE5 there's a lot of pointless defending going on. And then the smart ass CAPTAIN CORPORATE comment was just icing on the cake. Sorry if you think that's not childish and I am. I'm glad you've shown your true colours about me in that regard.

[MeganGrass]

To continue my rant from a previous post in this thread...

BioHazard 4 - Alienates certain fans of the series, due to a huge parture from original gameplay. PS2 version is released, thus beggining a "console fanboy flamewar" that rages even today. CAPCOM eventually makes A LOT of money from the initial and multi-console ports.

BioHazard 5 - Console flamewars exist from the get-go due to the fact it is an intial multi-console release. DLC content (using data already present on disc) is announced, with a pricetag - console flamewar *somehow* persists, alienates even more fans of the series, and pits fans against each other who are sick and tired of CAPCOM's money scheming bullshit.


Name-calling and defending one's video game console of choice is really childish, no matter who you are. There's noone to blame about these flamewars other than CAPCOM themselves, really. They knew, that despite the game running best on 360, they were going to release it on the PS3 as well. There is in no way they could deny beforehand that flamewars like this would happen. (I personally own the PS3 version, but even I can't deny the fact that the 360 version is superior).

The real "icing on the cake" here is the obvious - we have to pay for DLC. I'm sure I speak for most when I say "i'll pay for it, but i'm not happy about it". Bottom-fucking-line, we're talking about CAPCOM here. I'm particularly confused as to whether or not they even give a shit about their fans, but the fact remains - they love money, and they're gonna do whatever it takes to obtain more of it. Just look at it this way, people, atleast we don't have to pay $60 for a disc that contains this DLC content... oh, wait... nevermind. ;)

[Rombie]

I was just sick of Umon being so pro-PS3 and so anti-360 in other cases and with the release of RE5 there's a lot of pointless defending going on. And then the smart ass CAPTAIN CORPORATE comment was just icing on the cake. Sorry if you think that's not childish and I am. I'm glad you've shown your true colours about me in that regard.

I need a roll eyes for this... here goes...

Yes Umon's "Captain Corporate" comment wasn't exactly non-childish, I do agree. However it was a direct response to you, and you alone... unlike your comment, which while the underlying comment was intended for Umon, actually lumped numerous people rather than just him in one pot. See where I'm coming from here?

As I said already it stems from the fact that while neither of you see eye to eye on this DLC was the real issue... you instead dragged into it an outside quibble regarding console superiority... stemmed by discussion on a game that ironically, for once, you both agree about being better on the 360.

If you can't see anything silly in that like I can, then fine. And if you think by me calling you out on that, I seem to have some personal opinion on you otherwise then that's fine too... which FYI, I don't, but you probably don't care anyway. In any case I've been around too long to care about accidentally offending someone on here these days.

[A-J]

so that DLC huh ..

[Umon Daisuke]

I was just sick of Umon being so pro-PS3 and so anti-360 in other cases and with the release of RE5 there's a lot of pointless defending going on.

Funny that I've never made any anti-360 comments at all be it HERE or elsewhere in these forums, and if I did I would neither deny it or be subtle in any way as I do with other matters. But I haven't, and we're in the realm of fiction now so perhaps you should stop making conclusions out of thin air. I have defended the PS3 from a time to time however, but that's a far cry from your claim.

If saying that the PS3 version is more than playable despite the well known issues is pointless defending, then that's quite funny, especially that I called certain PS3 parts to be comparable to a beta version. I even said that Dot's initial demo comparison stands in the final version.. so what were you expecting exactly? A pic of me licking a 360? Perhaps a sentence then: The 360 version is superior. "For you doubters out there, pay attention to this analysis: http://www.digitalfoundry.org/blog/ "

The "Captain Corporate" so-called hurtful name calling had nothing to do with platforms either. If that little joke actually hurt you then I'm not sure what to say other than... Good thing I jokingly didn't get a bit vulgar like I do in other cases. Though like yourself, I do have a few other words in mind right now for you

Yes Umon's "Captain Corporate" comment wasn't exactly non-childish, I do agree.

Shut up Rob

-----

Looking over this now, just what the f was this? Deja vu to the old GameFAQs days.

so that DLC huh ..

What about it? I hear they waste your time upon purchase. That much I can certainly guarantee.

[Harry Mason]

That's pretty stupid that Capcom is charging for DLC..if your a Monster Hunter Freedom 2 fan then you know that the PSP's DLC was free..

They should have included the DLC charge in the retail price if anything.

[Alexia_Ashford]

At the end of the day, it's down to personal preference. I own both, and I prefer the 360. It's what I'm used to and feel comfortable with. There are also those who prefer the PS3. Fair play to them. There's nothing wrong with liking the PS3, I like it because I can watch Blu Rays on it, and get exclusives when I need to. It doesn't matter what console someone prefers.

I'm just glad we're getting DLC for RE5. I'm not bothered about paying for it; it's Resident Evil after all. I stopped caring for chucking out lots of good money after RE a LONG time ago. Like, 1996 long time ago.

[xfactor]

I just came across this point. Sven over at Capcom-Unity board said this:

'm sorry guys, but this is the part where I have to call "BS". RE5 is well worth every penny of $60. A huge game, with tons of replay value, loads of unlockables, new weapons, co-op, mercenaries mode, etc. If any game warrants its price point, it's RE5.

Prior to the announcement of the Versus mode, no one complained they weren't getting their money's worth with the initial release because it packs TONS of value because it is an amazing game. So if people were already satisfied with what the package had, when we offer MORE, why is it people feel they've been somehow cheated? If you don't find value in our secondary offerings, the choice is simple, don't purchase it. If you do find it valuable (and we hope you do) please do buy it and enjoy it.

Secondly, whenever we do PDLC, that content exists with its own budgets, it's own profit and loss analysis with its own forecasts. If it didn't, that extra content wouldn't have been put into production, because it did not fit within the production budget of the base product.

The content that is shipping in the full game exists within its own budget. The content shipping afterward (regardless of how close to release it is... because the goal IS to have it release relatively closely to the base product's release) exists within its own budget. To try and have it release in a timeframe that is relatively close to the initial release, development starts well before the base product is on the shelves. There's no other way to keep it within 3 to 6 weeks of the initial release (which is the goal).

And again, for those people looking at this anew, the DLC in question is not an unlock on the disc.

http://www.capcom-unity.com/ask_capcom/go/thread/view/7371/13988776/How_come_ye_released_an_incomplete_game_Capcom&post_num=3#278355779

[Vector]

$5 for four new gameplay modes(Slayers, Survivors, Team Slayers, Team Survivors) for a game that I'm already playing to the bone(almost 30 hours in just five days)? Absolutely. Are you kidding? It's a no-brainer for me. Five bucks, so what. If it was $10 I'd probably raise an eyebrow but, $5 is fine by me. I love the game too much to not buy the DLC. It's a day one purchase for me.