Sigh... I just wish this thread would die... You can't compare price... not even on the same console... Both had single player story mode... both had mercenaries... included in price... the features i mean... if you think it's too short that doesnt change that it had the same features... im sure it costs a bit more to buy equipement to develop on 360s and ps3s than ps2 and gamecube... i know how development works... im sitting at my desk staring at a game in development right now... people do directly profit...i promise... bonuses and such.... being multiplayer devs vs single doesn't matter at all in this conversation... they both can work on dlc...jdnoth said:1. RE5 is a significantly shorter than RE4. So it isn't really the same single player features. On top of this; Resident Evil 4 was released for £40 rrp (http://www.gamershell.com/news_19159.html). Resident Evil 5 on the other hand has a release price of £45 without the DLC (http://www.game.co.uk/search.aspx?platform=11271&s=resident+evil+5&sort=itemOrderasc). And finally, they are both estimated to have had development cycles of around 4 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_4#Development http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_5#Development). Ya *****, who da juggernaut?Ladie Au Pair said:1. Resident Evil 5 Already launched with the same features that Resident Evil 4 had... and to be honest more features when consider that you could do co-op and multiplayer on Mercenaries. (This does not cover your thoughts on whether or not those features were up to your standard.) So the multiplayer here was extra, and should not be compared to something like Halo where multiplayer is a standard feature.jdnoth said:Edit/Addendum:
Just take a second to think about how far this could go. Capcom are basically charging extra money for the multiplayer mode. How long until we have to pay extra money for Halo, Timesplitters or Killzone multiplayer?
This isn't add-on DLC either. DLC is consistently developed and released after the actual game, in an effort to add to the game experience and keep the franchise going. The RE5 versus mode was developed in parallel with the main game. They are just splitting up the game and selling it in pieces for a profit.
.
2. As someone in the industry... DLC is consistently developed DURING the production of the full game... It happens all the time. When they release it doesn't give you any indication to when it was actually developed. And you still aren't addressing that fact that the game and DLC were done at the same time and put on the same disc doesn't change the fact that both sets of content have their own development teams, their own budgets, their own profit forecasts.... The sixty dollars price covers the full game development. The five extra dollars you pay covers the DLC development. It's two separate price tags for two separate pieces of work. Not paying for downloadable content would just be like not paying a set of developers, and that's not fair
2. Untrue. Bethesda, for example, documented the development of their Fallout DLC after the game was released. Same with Little Big Planet and Metal Gear Online. Even if this isn't always the case, then Capcom are still carrying on an abhorrent marketing ploy. Which isn't much better than pioneering it. The people who made the versus "DLC" have their wages paid by Capcom. In no way do they directly profit from this. And all of the different parts of a development team are broken up into different little departments. People who make the multiplayer aspects of a game always work with a degree of independence from the single player devs. Unless the programming team is small and they have to multi-task.
If you really are in the industry you simply cannot be serious about what you have said so far.
i am so over this thread. i can't even form complete thoughts or capitalize or proofread. im going back to work.