Capcom Defends RE5 DLC Pricing

[Ago Iterum]

It's their product, they can do what they want. You don't like it don't buy it. It's only £3.60 or something.

I think it's quite funny how some people seem to think they're owed stuff beyond the original contents of the box.

You don't get it the contents of the box SHOULD include the damn multiplayer. It's funny how you can just toss 5$ away on something as totally greedy as this bull your the reason why this asinine quest for money actually works

You dumbass, don't you get what he's saying? He's absolutely right! If they had said "There will be a free multiplayer mode" and then charged for it, fine, get angry. But that's not the case, the online mode is an extra feature. Resident Evil has never had an online mode before, think yourself lucky you get it for this cheap!

 

[DaxStrife]

Resident Evil versus mode...

lol

I thought Resident Evil games were already versus games... you know, humans versus zombies?

I guess Capcom has the right to charge for an extra feature, but it's the timing that makes it suspect: this was released way too fast to be something they just came up with after the game's release, so it must have been under development for the original release. They probably couldn't finish it in time for the planned release date, so they chose to release after and charge for the privilege.
Still, it's rather unkind to fans to feel the need to charge for this just because it's something new to the franchise... they're already charging for a new game, aren't they? It's almost like they're saying making the game wasn't that hard, but making a new game mode was.

 

[oliveira8]

It's their product, they can do what they want. You don't like it don't buy it. It's only £3.60 or something.

I think it's quite funny how some people seem to think they're owed stuff beyond the original contents of the box.

You don't get it the contents of the box SHOULD include the damn multiplayer. It's funny how you can just toss 5$ away on something as totally greedy as this bull your the reason why this asinine quest for money actually works

Whoa, calm it down there newbie. This is the nature of business. Companies see a new way to make money, and they take it. Would you rather these companies didn't bother making the extra content, and released the products without them? Because you can bet Capcom wouldn't have bothered putting on multiplayer otherwise. I'm willing to bet it's something of an afterthought. And yet if people want to play it, they'll pay for it and there's little you can do to stop that. Clearly, a lot of consumers don't care about spending a few points on something fun, so who can blame Capcom? I myself will be downloading the content.

Valve makes tons of extra content for their games and they dont ask for money...I still doesnt understand the point of paying for DLC. Like someone said for the PC theres tons of mods and people do it for free and at best they get a "Thanks dudes!" from the comunity. And sometimes when the planets get aligned they might get hired!

 

[jebussaves88]

Valve makes tons of extra content for their games and they dont ask for money...I still doesnt understand the point of paying for DLC. Like someone said for the PC theres tons of mods and people do it for free and at best they get a "Thanks dudes!" from the comunity. And sometimes when the planets get aligned they might get hired!

1. This is why Valve are generally liked more than most other companies.
2. Thats the difference between PC's and consoles. It's all well and good that there are people out there who make mods and stuff for free, but if people like myself are still prepared to pay for extras from time to time, then whats the big deal? And besides, Valve don't usually release more than the odd map or a patch, or Lost Coast which is finishable in 5 minutes anyway (though the free release of the Survival Pack is admirable)

Point being, whilst Valve and a couple of others give away content quite liberally, we shouldn't expect the same of others. It's easiest for Valve, because they are constantly working with the Source Engine anyway, so any fixes they do for Left 4 Dead or Half Life 2 Ep 2 could potentially be progress for thewir next project anyway. On the other hand, most other companies work with different engines all the time, which makes constant delivery of new and free content illogical when compared to the benefits of simply moving on to the next thing.

 

[dorm41baggins]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm seeing this more from a glass half full perspective. They developed a play mode that, given the nature of the series, is likely to have limited appeal - if it doesn't just suck outright. Then, rather than include it in every copy of the game and build the development cost into the basic price everyone pays, they release it as a separate add-on that only the people who really want it will have to pay for.

Sounds like a good trade-off to me. As someone who's only interested in the single-player content, I'll save money.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Throw in a couple fake chopped up bodies and Im in

 

[ironfist86]

Capcom Defends RE5 DLC Pricing

"Although Versus mode makes use of the assets that exist in the game, the functionality is not currently in the game and is above and beyond the initial scope of Resident Evil 5," a Capcom representative told MSXboxWorld [http://www.msxbox-world.com/xbox360/news/article/9524/Capcom-defends-Resident-Evil-versus-mode-pricing.html].

So, basically Capcom is saying that because they are the ones with the limited scope, they are going to make their customers pay for it. Yeah, i guess that sounds about right.
Or they are liars, and planned this all along, which also sounds about right.
Who wants to play a Resident Evil versus mode anyways when there are so many better ones out there?

Resident Evil versus mode...

lol

Agreed. haha

 

[oliveira8]

Valve makes tons of extra content for their games and they dont ask for money...I still doesnt understand the point of paying for DLC. Like someone said for the PC theres tons of mods and people do it for free and at best they get a "Thanks dudes!" from the comunity. And sometimes when the planets get aligned they might get hired!

1. This is why Valve are generally liked more than most other companies.
2. Thats the difference between PC's and consoles. It's all well and good that there are people out there who make mods and stuff for free, but if people like myself are still prepared to pay for extras from time to time, then whats the big deal? And besides, Valve don't usually release more than the odd map or a patch, or Lost Coast which is finishable in 5 minutes anyway (though the free release of the Survival Pack is admirable)

Point being, whilst Valve and a couple of others give away content quite liberally, we shouldn't expect the same of others. It's easiest for Valve, because they are constantly working with the Source Engine anyway, so any fixes they do for Left 4 Dead or Half Life 2 Ep 2 could potentially be progress for thewir next project anyway. On the other hand, most other companies work with different engines all the time, which makes constant delivery of new and free content illogical when compared to the benefits of simply moving on to the next thing.

What about the Medic/Pyro/Heavy/Scout pack? The DoD:S game engine overhaul and map pack. And maybe someday when CS fans stop bitching around, the graphics overhaul for CS:S. And you mentioned the L4D survival pack.

Also is not like Capcom is a poor gaming developer, they could have given this DLC for free cause its coming so soon you wonder why it wasnt in-game already. If it was released 6 months after or later it would have made more sense. Maybe Capcom spended those 6 months making this new mode. But instead they release it weeks after and gives the players the sensation this mode was already prepared to be shipped out along with the game.

I can give you an example of Empire:TW in which they cuted the Grand Campaign multiplayer part of the game and are going to re-patch it later when they are done testing. And its free. See they could have kept their mouths shut about it, come 2 months after they announce it as DLC and put a price over it, and people buy it. But did they? No. They said that E:TW would have GC multiplayer but it wasnt going to be released as part of the game, but instead it would be patched later for no price.

And yes E:TW is a complete new engine like RE5 yet Creative Assembly decided to give that part of the game for free, on a later stage.

 

[pha kin su pah]

Its $5.....

Don't want it? don't buy it.

=_=

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Its $5.....

Don't want it? don't buy it.

=_=

It's on the game disc, you just pay 5 dollars to unlock it.

 

[Vern]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm seeing this more from a glass half full perspective. They developed a play mode that, given the nature of the series, is likely to have limited appeal - if it doesn't just suck outright. Then, rather than include it in every copy of the game and build the development cost into the basic price everyone pays, they release it as a separate add-on that only the people who really want it will have to pay for.

Sounds like a good trade-off to me. As someone who's only interested in the single-player content, I'll save money.

They're already charging the going market rate of $60 U.S. They wouldn't have gotten away with charging any more, since this is pretty much the market decided rate of new games, aside from the collectors editions that a lot of companies spew out. Adding in the already functional VS. mode and delaying the game wouldn't have cost them that much more money, since it's obvious it was already pretty functional at the time of release. It's not the fact that it's an un-needed feature, or that it's only five dollars, it's the fact that the component was probably already completed or close to it when the game shipped, and now they're trying to get more money for it. Yes it's fine that they're trying to make money, but as a consumer you have to stop and realize that you're paying this company to make games, and if they start charging for things that should've or could've been in the game to begin with, then you might want to show them that you're not ready to get screwed over just because you enjoy their products. This is why I prefer PC games, companies will charge for full length mission packs, but any updates or patches to the core game are free.

 

[ProjectileVomit]

In any case, I doubt versus mode will be successful for a Resident Evil game. Competing to see who has the most points in Merceneries might work. But it sounded too boring. It's just like a shooting gallery. Death match most certainly will not work. Since the concept of strafe-n-shoot is thrown out of the window with if the player can not move while shoot.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

This is a pretty bad habit that Capcom have been taking on as of late.

They did the same thing with street fighter. About a week later they released costumes as DLC, when they EASILY could have implemented all of it or delayed the launch date and did so. I have a strong feeling that the characters they are claiming to put in have probably been developed already.

They are also supposedly doing it for Monster Hunter 3, charging wii points for online play, as they are doing it for Monster Hunter G.

They have really been getting greedy and a tad lazy, in my humble opinion. Nothing in that article told me that they couldn't have just implemented versus mode before launch.

This was one of our fears a long time ago concerning DLC, people, and now it's happening.

 

[Snotnarok]

It bothers me heavily that game companies are now charging extra money for content that's already on the disc, it's become so common and annoying. There's no excuse for it, they're already charging $10.00 more per game and now they add in another 10 bucks to unlock something that was already made, put on the disc and shipped with the game? It's unreasonable and stupid, there is no defense for it, games never did this and "they didn't have the technological ability to do so earlier" doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Team Fortress 2, a game that's been out for ages gives out FREE updates that not only fix gameplay but add in new ways to play with new guns, new levels, new gameplay modes and new abilities. They make new updates all the time that were not on the disc and they charge for nothing, not patches, updates, new weapons not even playing online.

It's just a way to get more money, and they'd probably be better off saying that rather than everyone calling them out on it.

 

[jakefongloo]

Call of duty
battlefield
rainbow 6
fable 2
halo
left 4 dead
team fortress
star wars battle front
lord of the rings conquest
gears of war
to human
chrome hounds
C&C
N+
tenchu z
HAWX
castle crashers
and a shit ton more

"free" (excluding the xbox live fee) online play and ability, now why the hell capcom should i pay for yours? go ahead i have time sales pitch it to me.

They feel none of them are as good. They also feel the game itself is more than worth the price of the full game.

oh yah i forgot. heh Sorry capcom i'll sit in a corner and be quiet plz let me know when you want me to bend over

 

[jebussaves88]

Call of duty
battlefield
rainbow 6
fable 2
halo
left 4 dead
team fortress
star wars battle front
lord of the rings conquest
gears of war
to human
chrome hounds
C&C
N+
tenchu z
HAWX
castle crashers
and a shit ton more

"free" (excluding the xbox live fee) online play and ability, now why the hell capcom should i pay for yours? go ahead i have time sales pitch it to me.

They feel none of them are as good. They also feel the game itself is more than worth the price of the full game.

oh yah i forgot. heh Sorry capcom i'll sit in a corner and be quiet plz let me know when you want me to bend over

Ok, private messaging me a rant isn't going to get you anywhere. If you're gonna say something, have the balls to say it in public. I called you newbie, because you are obviously new to this forum, and clearly carry a level of aggression which isn't usually welcome.
Secondly, the point I made about Sonic earlier was to someone else who brought it up, not everything revolves around you.
Thirdly, if you're not going to buy the game anyway, then why do you care? Surely the only people who have grounds to complain would be people who planned on buying the game expecting free multiplayer, which until the day the premium content was announced was no one. Anyone planning on buying the game was doing so for co-op and single player, and potentially mercenaries. If people want the extra coding or whatever that allows multiplayer once all that is done and dusted, then £3.60 really isn't too taxing now is it? So seeing as you didn't plan on getting the game anyway, and therefore see this as a place to vent your rage and corporations making money or whatever, your opinion on this matter is somewhat less important than those who were actually planning on buying the game, for who dissappointment might actually occur.