Capcom: Next-Gen Development "Eight to Ten Times" More Work

[Cybylt]

I choose to interpret this as...

"We're still getting used to the new systems, and until we refine our process and narrow it down, it will be 8-10 times harder than building on the old system (because the old system had been around long enough we had a better understanding of it)"

Makes sense to me. Pretty much the same thing I've heard from any person in anything ever, when moving to new gear. 'It'll be tricky while I learn the ins and outs'.

But looking around, maybe Im being too reasonable?

Nah, Capcom can't so much as sneeze these days without people losing their shit over it or otherwise blowing it out of proportion.

 

[JagermanXcell]

"If we create games the same way as before, we won't be able to give our fans what they want..."

Since WHEN in all of current gen have you done that?
By that logic you'll be working 8 to 10 times harder making games look shinier but play like crap.

Why am I even digging into this.... this is Crapcom we're talking about.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

In my opinion, next-gen consoles should be used to make things easier, at least for now. You don't have to push the limits of what the new consoles can do; that's the excuse they started using a couple of years back on the current generation. If these new consoles are going to be around for seven or eight years, you can't get the most out of them right out of the gate.

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

Excuses, excuses. Capcom haven't been relevant in years, so all of this just kind of sounds like they're trying to find a fresh way to justify their historically slipshod development process.

Here are some tips, Capcom. Drop Lost Planet, drop Resident Evil, stop making Street Fighter a paid expansion series, get rid of your obsession with QTEs, and come up with a few new, original IPs. Maybe after all that you'll return to being the respected company you once were.

 

[Vivi22]

Does anyone else get to thinking that Capcom's obsession with QTEs is a desire to keep players from missing those whiz-bang next-gen-graphics setpieces?

Obsession with QTEs? They have four IPs (Devil May Cry, Resident Evil, Asura's Wrath, Lost Planet) out of dozens that have any at all, Asura's Wrath was developed by CyberConnect2 and two of those didn't even have QTEs til they were outsourced to western devs.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you trying to say that the QTE's aren't really Capcom's fault? Because they still have the final say, and they implemented them in the RE series (RE4 to be exact) before any of the other series adopted them. And the reality is, these games made up the majority of their major releases this generation, so while they have dozens of IP's that don't have them, they also haven't been releasing games for them recently so they're not relevant. Nor is it relevant that some of those games were outsourced.

 

[Rad Party God]

So... keep building the games for 360 and PS3, port it and up-res it? That actually sounds like more work and forgets that they might want to phase out the old stuff to advance their options in development. Yeah they've ported to pc before but it doesn't make sense to port up to new consoles when the explicitly stated goal is to start using those new consoles as a baseline. Wouldn't be surprised if this Panta Rhei was based off of MT Frameworks anyway.

Plus all of the complaints kind of ignore that at the end of the day it's still new architecture for them to work with. The article itself seems to be ignoring the entire existence of GPUs.

I've read somewhere (I can't be arsed to find the source) that Capcom's original plan with it's previous engine (MT Framework), is to build up their games for a PC and then scale it down to properly fit a console's needs, that's part of the reason why Capcom's ports on PC are absolutely brilliant (notwithstanding the actual quality of the product itself).

I never meant that they need to build the games for either the 360/PS3 first and then port them, I meant that they should do exactly what they've been doing before, use their same engine, build it up for PC/Xbone/PS4 and if they're arsed to do it, then port them to 360/PS3.

 

[vagabondwillsmile]

I'm not sure if I count as a fan, but here is a summary of what I want from you, Capcom:

1) A refined sequel to Dragon's Dogma

2) Megaman Legends 3

3) A proper Breath of Fire game(not an "Easy touch type online RPG")

That's pretty much it. Please get on that ASAP.

Preach man.

OT: When I saw that the new Breath of Fire installment was going to be a flash game on a phone, my heart sank. We are barely two months into the life cycle of the two newest consoles and Capcom wants to tap out their abilities right out of the gate with inflated budgets, unrealistic expectations of returns, and over-complicated programing. Why can't Capcom just put focus back on making a fun game - not graphics spectacles of epic proportions, not franchise warping rip-offs of other games to broaden their install base, not dumbed-down insults to beloved stories - just games that are fun to look at, fun to listen to, and fun to play (a faithful BOF adaptation on the 3DS with pixel, art or simple stylish modelling, and they wouldn't be able to take my money fast enough, and I'm sure I wouldn't be alone in this thinking).

To me the best things that Capcom has made in the last few years has been RE Revelations, Monster Hunter, and the Phoenix Write (I haven't played DMC yet so I can't speak on it). Those games are magic, and they are on the least powerful systems of the generation; and Monster Hunter Tri in particular sold better than its projection, where RE 6 did not meet is projection. So, I would argue to Capcom that MOAR POWARRR clearly isn't the key ingredient to success. If Capcom could just look at why those games work, compare it to why their ridiculously expensive ridiculously demanding titles don't work, and change their business model accordingly, and finally, work to genuinely understand their audience (without putting down any group that makes up that audience in interviews and the like), I think they could be immensely successful.

I sincerely wonder if the stock-holders, and board of directors, and executives - all the suits - have way too much control over the creative process. Maybe there are a bunch stiffs that don't give a damn about games desperately trying to increase their profit margins in a counterproductive way without even realizing it. As though they poured all this money into getting their development team to make RE more like COD because that's where the big payday is these days. And then they don't know why it didn't work - even going so far as to blame the audience [I'm merely speculating].

I have a hard time believing that guys actually working to make the games are calling those kinds of shots and giving themselves this kind of headache.

I don't know. I went on a tangent, maybe. Don't destroy yourselves. Please be great again, Capcom.

 

[Trishbot]

You know, it wouldn't be so hard if they could reel back their out-of-control development and budgets.

They had over 600 people and spent missions on the kitchen-sink approach to Resident Evil 6 and it cost them.

Imagine if it was, oh, just two campaigns (mostly similar), with a few select enemies, in only ONE single focused environment, without any major setpieces or quicktime events or lots of time spent developing, coding, testing, and implementing online co-op and competitive features nobody really asked for, with a simple barebones plot and lots of focus spent on atmosphere and mechanics over flash and style...

Congratulations. You just made Resident Evil 1/Remake.

 

[Snotnarok]

BS, they've been developing for PC before and even if they're ports, they have higher res textures, higher enemy count, smoother framerate and better visuals overall.
I say PC specifically because that's what these new consoles basically are, mid/low end gaming PCs and developing for them should be much easier than say the PS3.

I don't know what the deal is with capcom, they're pushing out a lot of BS lately and it's shocking they've been allowed to continue.

 

[Ipsen]

Hey, have some of you people who dismiss the game industry's strive for optimal graphical fidelity as a pointless endeavour considered that the primary reason this is happening is because their metrics tells them people want increasingly high-fidelity games? Sure, the general opinion among the most "hardcore" audience seems to be that fidelity is of secondary or even tertiary concern, but that's really not the majority opinion. The first thing a game will be taken to task for in the eyes of its potential audience is its graphics, and that's why you have seen such a disproportionate focus on polycounts over aesthetics.
I don't agree with it, and it's generally acknowledged that it risks undoing the AAA game as we know it, but don't act as if this is just some foolhardy ambition the industry has assumed for frivolous reasons.

My idealism is kicking in...o_o

Maybe it's time big companies stopped using 'metrics' to determine the values of their consumers? ...I really don't know how big devs like Capcom are satisfied with their impression of the market (ohritemoney); it's an age of social media, and while a good portion of feedback is verbal literal waste, I hold that there's still a positive message to take from consumers addressing big devs' work. I'm more inclined to think that they work so hard for stockholders, and so much on...something, that they have no time to hold an ear to the walls of the market.

I'm also harboring an inkling that perhaps a more efficient art direction would save the bullshit of overpowered graphics (which ups the chance of...overpowered bugs). See, the struggle for photorealism is only effective when there's something subtly off in the game world, and games don't do subtle well (at least, Capcom isn't ticking any boxes on that list). They do say there's beauty in simplicity; compare....I dunno, Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker with RE6[footnote]Far be it for me to decide which was harder to develop for, though. I like to think LoZ:WW was easier to develop than something approaching photorealism like RE6 but that's a harder comparison than I'm putting on. Just try not to look too hard into the comparison, maybe?[/footnote]? One has a simple aesthetic, but it's easy to see the appeal, without any of the gameplay effort or immersion lost. RE6...might be gripping?... If that's your first zombie game.

Case in point, Capcom, DON'T try so hard. Or at least, if you are (like, 8-10x, and honestly, I'm optimisticly optimistic about that statement), put it in something that's NOT graphics, please?

 

[Cybylt]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you trying to say that the QTE's aren't really Capcom's fault? Because they still have the final say, and they implemented them in the RE series (RE4 to be exact) before any of the other series adopted them. And the reality is, these games made up the majority of their major releases this generation, so while they have dozens of IP's that don't have them, they also haven't been releasing games for them recently so they're not relevant. Nor is it relevant that some of those games were outsourced.

I wasn't saying that they don't have a say in it, I was simply saying the mechanic doesn't pop up enough that you could call them obsessed. And not recent or major? Dragon's Dogma alone is the fastest selling new IP of its generation and was in 2012, that's still pretty recent. Monster Hunter is a franchise that triples console sales in Japan and had releases in 2012 and 2013. Street Fighter is a massive franchise and a staple of the corporation. None of them have QTEs.

Hell, there were even two other Resident Evils released in 2012 (and one was later remade for home consoles) and 2013 and while Revelations didn't get the pre-launch press 6 did it's been received by critics and fans as a return to form for the series.

I've read somewhere (I can't be arsed to find the source) that Capcom's original plan with it's previous engine (MT Framework), is to build up their games for a PC and then scale it down to properly fit a console's needs, that's part of the reason why Capcom's ports on PC are absolutely brilliant (notwithstanding the actual quality of the product itself).

I never meant that they need to build the games for either the 360/PS3 first and then port them, I meant that they should do exactly what they've been doing before, use their same engine, build it up for PC/Xbone/PS4 and if they're arsed to do it, then port them to 360/PS3.

Isn't that what everyone was doing at the start of the gen? Either way, it sounds like the idea is to use the new consoles as the baseline, so a new engine (that's probably a modified MT Framework) removes work in the long run. Rather than making micro-adjustments over time as they slowly work out the system, they put a lot of work into it at the start and that allows for easier development for the next 7+ years.

In the end, Capcom's a bit weird, for a company that shines in mid-budget titles, they really try too hard to have the image of a massive AAA publisher.

 

[Therumancer]

More PR bullshit. If devs can make them for PC it should be easy enough to scale it down for the consoles.

To use an analogy, the new console generation is like going from a small car to a slightly larger car. Sure there's some slight adaptation to be made but surely it's not like they're going from a moped to a dump truck in one go.

Your right about the PR, but I think are otherwise too optimistic.

What it seems is going on here is that the devs and publishers want to tell everyone how much more difficult it is to make the new generation games, as a pre-amble to pushing to hike up the cost of games yet again, as well as to present an excuse for cutting corners and gouging. It shouldn't be surprising that one of the devs at the front of the pack to start talking about the difficulty is Capcom, as it's one of the greedier companies out there and one of those that has gotten constant criticism for making people pay to unlock alleged "DLC" that is already stored on a disc that was bought and paid for.

This goes hand in hand with other claims we've seen over the years with companies like Square-Enix defending their turning the "Final Fantasy" games into increasingly linear affairs, and not being able to remake "Final Fantasy VII" or anything on that level with current generation technology due to it being "too hard for the current technology, and would require too many resources and too much time" I can't remember how they stated it.

The point about PC games and how it's taken consoles this long to even really start achieving parity is an old one and winds up being sidestepped when it comes to these discussions about prohibitive amounts of effort and man hours, which are eye rolling when you see PC games that did what console games were being expected to do beforehand.

I imagine we'll see the typical pattern, complaints about everything that goes into the new tech from different companies used to justify at least an attempt for an industry-wide price hike, probably followed by news about development studios laying off tons of people despite the price hikes allegedly being there because they needed to
hire more people to do all that work....

At the end of the day the new technology wouldn't be being used unless it was better than the previous tech and could actually do more for the same amount of effort or less. That generally does not stop the industry from making excuses especially when their past, when it was more about the games (even if money and profit was always a factor) than it is today, is brought up and compared to what they are currently churning out.

 

[Baresark]

These statements are made because they are trying to prepare you... it's a preemptive excuse for their future failures, at least for the next couple of years. This is the issue with Japanese companies in general, even with Japanese gaming. The fact that video game consoles have traditionally always had customized architecture has actually been hindering companies like Capcom from making the most possible money. Going all the way back to the 8 bit era when Sega and Nintendo released their first entries into videogames, each company has had to design custom hardware. That means ground up development for cross platform games, which is why only the biggest games around were cross platform. You spend a year on a game for the NES, you spend another year of man hours on the Master System version. It was like that through the 16 bit and the 32 bit eras as well. Hell, it was like that only till this newest generation of consoles. Now we have a gaming scene that is growing even larger and the trouble of designing for 3 platforms that are different is almost completely negated unless they want to implement platform specific features (such as Kinect). But now they are saying it's harder? I mean, it's always hard at first. But gone are the days when proprietary architecture requires you to employ multiple equally large teams just to ensure you get the same experience across platforms. You can literally design it for a single architecture type and have small teams that specialize in the subtle differences for each platform.

But, Capcom is clueless above all other Japanese companies. They literally fear the PC and any architecture like it. It defies reason. But, that is Japan in general. A basically non-existent PC gaming sector. And now that it's all like PC's, it's making them afraid. I hate to say it, but that isn't even Capcom's real problem. The problem is that they aren't producing quality products like they used to. I mean, besides their fighting games, pretty much most of what they do has some huge failing which hurts it quite a bit. They are literally sitting there and talking about graphics. That is it. More man hours for prettier games. Why do I say that? It's simple, giant games are already being produced last generation. They don't need to make the games bigger. The scale wasn't what hurt Lost Planet 3, the fact that it was a shitty game hurt. Hell, it didn't even have the graphical fidelity of other games on those same systems. The Witcher 2 was prettier than any game they ever developed, even on the 360. And a lot bigger than most things they have done.

They are just... terribly clueless at this point. I mean, the last game they produced that really fantastic was Dragon's Dogma. Now, they could take a sequel to it and put it on all the newest gen platforms and PC. They could even use the MT Framework engine still.

But no, they are going to sink ridiculous man hours into developing a new engine rather than concentrating on making actual good games.

 

[Something Amyss]

Now if only they'd put that eight to ten times effort into making the games playable and enjoyable, instead of just prettied-up retreads of old, bad ideas.

And we'll probably only get about a tenth of the effort anyway.

 

[itsmeyouidiot]

Maybe they could try developing for the Wii U instead? Hey, I can dream.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

"but it's clear that heightened game quality leads to a rise in the number of man hours. The amount of work involved in making games for next-gen consoles is eight to ten times greater than what is required for the current generation of consoles."

Yet all those devs BEGGED for the new gen to boost their sales.
So no use in whining now. They should start whining when they realise mobile has margins and profits a billion times "AAA" has (or do we have to call it AAAA from now on?).

Stopping being cynical for a sec;
if he could deliver on his promise of truly new games... that would be stellar!
BACK to cynic: Yet, how will it be new when PC's have been this powerful for a long time? :\

 

[Kenjitsuka]

Capcom: "The production of the high end polished graphics took up so much time we actually had the chance to develop a great, working story for that game"

/sarcasm

^_^

That'd be awesome.

But sadly, more like: Capcom: We fired all those story types like... 3?, no, 4 years ago. I'm sure they haven't gone to another medium by the time we'll want to hire them again for a few months next year for the sequel, though! "

 

[Dragonbums]

Oh capcom, you suck, you really really suck.

If it truly requires that much more work then you might as well throw in the towel now.

Because we all know you can't possibly make that kind of work profitable, if you're even able to do that amount of work.

I'm surprised by these reactions. I'm pretty sure there was an article over the summer with a other dev saying the same thing. So it isn't just capcom.

 

[cikame]

I understand it's complicated getting all the effects and scripts of everything running all at the same time in an interactive world and not have it explode, but i'm not sure what the differences are going to be this time around.
It seems mostly graphical, the new Infamous is just like the other games but with more horsepower behind it, Forza 5 is Forza 4 with more polygons and some online systems which could have been done on 360, the new MGS seems to be coming along fine, and while it looks like it's probably Konami's most expensive game to date i feel like that's more to do with using Holywood level actors, face capture and having a large and detailed open world. I don't feel like that is largely necessary for a new MGS game but it's what they decided to pursue.

It wasn't long ago Capcom made RE6, i feel like that game is technically accomplished, the new engine will allow them to do more, i'm just not sure they need to.