Capcom Re-Evaluating Company's On-Disc DLC Policy

Hey and it's only about 5 years too late to realize on-disc, premium "DLC" is wrong! Way to go Capcom!

If it was ready for the disc it should be a part of the game. Simple as that. It is the most egregious way gamers get screwed over. The only thing on-disc that should be locked from the gamer is "online pass" (or more appropriately named 'new purchase') content, special edition content and preorder content.

And let's not pretend Mortal Kombat's f-up is a valid excuse; it's extremely easy to handle it correctly. Two lobby lists; no-DLC in one lobby and DLC-players get access to both lobbies. Or, the better way, since XBL requires a storage space already, make the online require a free DLC file to play against others and then in order to use those characters purchase the 108k unlock key downloads you normally see with on-disc content.

@Cretaceous_Bob said:

In a groundbreaking victory for the gaming community, Capcom takes all on-disc DLC off the disc, makes you still pay for it, and download it too.

Good job everyone.

That's better than how it is now. It's at least mental lubricant for when Capcom bends us all over by being a dishonest company with day-one DLC that was ready before the disc went gold.

2012. Will this also be the year Capcom announces a new Mega Man X developed by...?

So they'll continue to make content designated as post-release content during production, but instead of having it on the disc, we'll download it.

@Winternet: @Winternet said:

@patrickklepek said:

@nohthink said:

I know this has nothing to do with the article but how do you read "Svensson"?

See-ven-sun, I believe.

I don't know much about phonetics, but that doesn't sound right. See? Can't be.

Doesn't seem right to me and I can't figure the logic, IPA:~[si:vənsɔn] (nothink's version)

As a Finn, this name sounds to me a Swede and therefore it should be pronounced IPA:['svɛnsɔn]. You do well to remember that Nordic countries' languages often have practically full sound-letter correspondence and the writing is almost IPA.

  Square-Enix charges for the ending to their Final Fantasy games. 

@Petiew said:

@DarkbeatDK said:

Square-Enix charges for the ending to their Final Fantasy games.

When have they done that?

Final Fantasy XIII-2 ends with a "To be continued" screen and the rest is DLC. Also, "Lightning", the person on the cover of the game: DLC.

Doesn't really matter. All they're doing is removing the content from the disc but you'll still have to shell out a premium to unlock it through a download. Is it less offensive than the RE5 Mercenaries mode being on the disc? Absolutely. But it's the same fucking thing essentially.

It's not just the on disc stuff that's bad, it's holding back content that is already done in an attempt to make a 60 dollar game an 80 dollar game. It's holding back A FUCKING ENDING to sell to you later. On disc DLC is the most vocal problem but it is far from their biggest problem. Anyway, what do I care. I swore off buying Crapcom games the second that Super Street Fighter 4 got announced and the whole RE5: Mercenaries thing. Right then and there I saw what they were doing and I quite clearly said, "No thank you sir."

The thing they need to realize is that the consumer isn't an arcade. Back in the days of the arcade they could sell multiple versions of the same game because the arcade owner would buy it and therefore would generate interest and revenue in their arcade from players. The consumer wasn't taking the hit outside of the quarters which they were probably going to spend anyway. Now they are taking that hit and Capcom needs to be much more careful, and a whole lot less ignorant, in their business decisions. I've also heard them say, "Well that's how it's done in Japan."

Yeah... go fuck yourselves.

Too little too late...After beating the campaign to SFIV and realizing I was only going to unlock "colors" for my character, I was bummed. Discovering alt costumes had to be purchased made me angry. This was not how the older Street Fighter titles were structured and the change is only to push your purchase over $60.00. They haven't added anything "new," they are taking pieces out of their games and charging for them. Unacceptable.

Bought Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 day 1. Didn't even make it to the announcement of UMVC3 before I ditched this title. More pieces missing from the game (do I need to list all the stuff MVC2 had that MVC3 was missing?). I knew they planned to follow the SFIV model before announcing it (common sense) and for that reason alone traded it in and never looked back.

Have not even considered purchasing a Capcom fighting game since. This change or announcement of a change does little to repair the ill will I have toward this company.

@AiurFlux: amen

Technically it makes sense to dump all the finished content into the disc, including DLC stuff. I imagine that it's more practical than stripping the finished retail build of the game from the unfinished DLC content.

Personally I don't see any problem with on-disc DLC, if the game has DLC, I kinda prefer it to be on the disc already. I am more against DLC stuff in general, especially what comes to actual gameplay items in multiplayer games. DLC-characters are generally bad idea and I think DLC in fighting games should be limited to single player content and cosmetic stuff like costumes and customization items.

And I do personally hope that we will get eventually a new disc version of Street Fighter x Tekken with the DLC characters unlocked, like we got also a standalone disc version of SSF4: Arcade Edition.

I don't buy the online multiplayer argument for including DLC on the disc.

When Ultimate Alliance 2 came out, there were free DLC packs you could download so that you could still play online with people who had bought the additional DLC characters, even if you hadn't. Same should apply to all the stupid costume and skin swaps that Capcom insists on nickel-and-diming people for.

I haven't bought a Capcom game since I felt screwed by the quick turn-around between MvC3 and UMvC3. Asking for another $60 for a full disc-based game in the same calender year, (ironically) instead of offering the updates and characters as DLC was too unappealing for me. Compare that to the 14 months between SFIV and SSFIV, which had a significant amount new characters, meaningful balance changes, and a $40 price tag.

I've been on the fence about Dragon's Dogma, but now hearing that there's on-disc DLC makes me seriously reconsider purchase, or at least wait for a price drop.

I don't mind day-one DLC as long as it's actually downloadable, but not on the disc. Games are finished months before they ship because they need to go through certification as well as be manufactured. If the developer wants to use that time to create more content, a la Dead Space 2: Severed, then more power to them. But creating content during the standard development time, putting it on the disc that the player purchases, but then locking it behind a magic pay wall is nothing short of disgusting.

But to chime in on the Mortal Kombat argument. The solution to the problem of players having different versions of the game is not to put the DLC on the disc, but instead to have a more user-friendly way of updating the game. This, in part, will require a more stream-lined approval system between the game's developer and the platform holder (i.e. NetherRealm and Microsoft/Sony). If people are playing the game online, they already have a connection to download the update. At very least, the game should throw up a notification when the player selects the Online Multiplayer option that says, "Yo, if you wants to play the online, you gots to get the patch."

@AiurFlux said:

Doesn't really matter. All they're doing is removing the content from the disc but you'll still have to shell out a premium to unlock it through a download. Is it less offensive than the RE5 Mercenaries mode being on the disc? Absolutely. But it's the same fucking thing essentially.

It's not just the on disc stuff that's bad, it's holding back content that is already done in an attempt to make a 60 dollar game an 80 dollar game. It's holding back A FUCKING ENDING to sell to you later. On disc DLC is the most vocal problem but it is far from their biggest problem. Anyway, what do I care. I swore off buying Crapcom games the second that Super Street Fighter 4 got announced and the whole RE5: Mercenaries thing. Right then and there I saw what they were doing and I quite clearly said, "No thank you sir."

The thing they need to realize is that the consumer isn't an arcade. Back in the days of the arcade they could sell multiple versions of the same game because the arcade owner would buy it and therefore would generate interest and revenue in their arcade from players. The consumer wasn't taking the hit outside of the quarters which they were probably going to spend anyway. Now they are taking that hit and Capcom needs to be much more careful, and a whole lot less ignorant, in their business decisions. I've also heard them say, "Well that's how it's done in Japan."

Yeah... go fuck yourselves.

Pretty sure I played a TON of Mercenaries in Resident Evil 5 just by finish the campaign... and that game had HEAPS of unlockables and two DLC chapters that were cheap and awesome. I think you mean Versus mode, but as Capcom said at the time they had to put in a lot of extra work to get it going and it was only done after the game's new co-op proved popular. It was a big download... there was no on disc DLC for RE5.

Capcom have stumbled lately, but in the past they've been one of the better companies to put extra content in their games. I think it's a company with limited DLC experience fucking up badly. But I wouldn't write them off yet ... I mean DLC is optional and as long as the core game is good I'm ok with it.

@banjie said:

Technically it makes sense to dump all the finished content into the disc, including DLC stuff. I imagine that it's more practical than stripping the finished retail build of the game from the unfinished DLC content.

Personally I don't see any problem with on-disc DLC, if the game has DLC, I kinda prefer it to be on the disc already. I am more against DLC stuff in general, especially what comes to actual gameplay items in multiplayer games. DLC-characters are generally bad idea and I think DLC in fighting games should be limited to single player content and cosmetic stuff like costumes and customization items.

And I do personally hope that we will get eventually a new disc version of Street Fighter x Tekken with the DLC characters unlocked, like we got also a standalone disc version of SSF4: Arcade Edition.

I'm not sure why you'd be against DLC and yet prefer the content to already be on the disc. The problem most people have, is that they're being asked to pay for content they technically already own. Why are we having to pay more for something that's already on the disc we have?

DLC can work, in some cases. Borderlands, GTA IV, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Oblivion are pretty good examples of games that were expanded with good amounts of new content after their release. Essentially just expansion packs. I only have a problem when we're being charged for content that was clearly just cut from the main game to make us pay for it, whether or not it's already on the disc, and that's exactly what Capcom has been doing.

@patrickklepek said:@nohthink said:

I know this has nothing to do with the article but how do you read "Svensson"?

See-ven-sun, I believe.

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@nohthink said:

I know this has nothing to do with the article but how do you read "Svensson"?

"sfensun" I assume.

@patrickklepek said:

Haha, yeah, I think WilltheMagicAsian actually got it right.

I can understand the outrage that people have about on-disc DLC, but the underlying business model isn't going to change just because they pull the content from the disc. Capcom figured that players would pay $60 for 36 characters. They figured that some of those players would pay another $20 or so for 12 more and that would extend the life of their game. Whether they're on the disc or not, many players would gladly fork over $80 to have all of the characters. So how does any of that change if they charge you to download it, or they put it right on the disc and charge you to unlock it?

@skrutop said:

I can understand the outrage that people have about on-disc DLC, but the underlying business model isn't going to change just because they pull the content from the disc. Capcom figured that players would pay $60 for 36 characters. They figured that some of those players would pay another $20 or so for 12 more and that would extend the life of their game. Whether they're on the disc or not, many players would gladly fork over $80 to have all of the characters. So how does any of that change if they charge you to download it, or they put it right on the disc and charge you to unlock it?

It sets a precedent that just because you own the disc you don't own the game. An argument companies say is true, but most gamers dispute. As it stands now, even if you own a disc, there are single player games that will not work unless you "dial home." What happens when these servers go offline? If it's on the disc, you should be able to play it without your platform having to ask for permission. Different scenario, but stems from same argument.

After rereading the article, I find it more likely Capcom is rethinking this model to get the $20 or so from the hackers who unlocked everything free day 1, than to actually please the consumer.

examples of DLC done right...Burnout Paradise & Borderlands. Probably the best two examples.

@WinterSnowblind said:

I'm not sure why you'd be against DLC and yet prefer the content to already be on the disc. The problem most people have, is that they're being asked to pay for content they technically already own. Why are we having to pay more for something that's already on the disc we have?

DLC can work, in some cases. Borderlands, GTA IV, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Oblivion are pretty good examples of games that were expanded with good amounts of new content after their release. Essentially just expansion packs. I only have a problem when we're being charged for content that was clearly just cut from the main game to make us pay for it, whether or not it's already on the disc, and that's exactly what Capcom has been doing.

It's actually rather simple, I like all available content to exist also on the disc. I don't like it when something exists only as a DLC. It's a nice option to be able to download extra content for a game but I personally like to buy that extra content in physical form as a updated retail release. I generally try to think in long-term and don't trust the online services xbox live to last too far into the future so I want content of my games to be as offline based as possible. I think On- Disc DLC is better than full online-only DLC because if the content is in the disc, it can always be hacked open and someday that could only way to access that content.

I don't feel that Capcom has done anything really wrong so far, atleast what comes to their fighting games. Sure, they should had made SF4 more future-proof but fixed that with SSF4. MvC3 had couple of DLC characters but that seemed to be more of an experiment. UMvC3 could had been just a update for vanilla version but for some reason, they went with full-on upgrade that needed a disc release.

And even with SFxT, I don't feel that they're cutting content just to sell it as a DLC. All those DLC characters are atleast semi-finished because that's how far they were when the retail version was ready, not because they were cut from the game to sell them as a DLC. All that was planned probably from pretty early on the development.

Seriously, Vita version of the game will have exclusive characters that you must pay for on other platforms, what's the problem here? And isn't it actually great that those characters are on the disc so people can access them already at this point by unofficial means? Like I said, I just hope for updated disc release for other platforms too once Vita version comes out or at some point later.

Generally, on-disc DLC saves them the bandwidth fees levied by microsoft to patch it in to players that didnt buy it.

So if you buy a DLC character in a fighting game - without on disc DLC, everyone has to download the character in a patch, in case someone online is using it. The alternative is not allowing people who didnt buy the character to be in a match with DLC owners, which splits the community and makes matchmaking take longer.

I can see the reasons for on disc DLC (it saves us memory on our hard drive, saves them money with dlc fees with PSN and Microsoft), but IMO if it was made before the game was finished it should just be part of the game. DLC should be for stuff that was made while the game was already released. This way of doing DLC is just double dipping your consumers. I don't like the idea of setting stuff on the side just to sell it later, DLC is a tricky thing and at times can make us feel like were being cheated.

“We have been listening to your comments and as such have begun the process of re-evaluating how such additional game content is delivered in the future,”

Concerning 'Dragon's Dogma', "The decision to include some additional (but not all planned additional) game content for the game on disc was made at the beginning of the game’s development cycle,”

Capcom just can't seem to get it do they?

The online character DLC problem is bull shit. BlazBlue solved it last year. You can't play the latest version of the MP without downloading a mandatory patch. Don't want to wait? They have separate match making for past versions.

It is that easy.

Instead of us paying for dlc that's already on the disc....just include it in the frakkin game already....FREE!! Thanks

Capcom has gotten woefully out of touch in recent years. It sucks to see the company fall this hard on its face, because they have made my favorite games since I was 5 years old. Even as a big fan, I've felt slighted by things like UMvC3 coming out so quickly, and all the SFxT DLC shenanigans.

Please, Capcom, get your shit together and listen to the deafening roar of disappointed fans.

Disc locked content is crappy. But don't think there's a way of actually solving the problem. Publishers will just make the content DLC, delay the release and pretend they didn't work on it during development of the game. So what have we accomplished? We've only made it worse for ourselves really.

@lokey013 said:

Instead of us paying for dlc that's already on the disc....just include it in the frakkin game already....FREE!! Thanks

What leads you to believe that if DLC revenue suddenly dried up you'd still get all that content they were charging you for but now it'd be free?

Less revenue coming in means smaller budgets, which means less content. The end of DLC isn't going to mean that stuff gets wrapped into the main game, it just means the content that was once sold as DLC will either get left on the cutting room floor or get held for expansion packs or sequels.

@VibratingDonkey said:

Disc locked content is crappy. But don't think there's a way of actually solving the problem. Publishers will just make the content DLC, delay the release and pretend they didn't work on it during development of the game. So what have we accomplished? We've only made it worse for ourselves really.

...and we'll find out about it through twitter or websites such as giantbomb and get po'd all over again. The Capcom name is the only thing that suffers here. Can't see how we've made it worse on ourselves. That is what they would want you to think. The company will stick it to you as much as you let them. Only recourse is to stop buying.

@thefncrow said:

@lokey013 said:

Instead of us paying for dlc that's already on the disc....just include it in the frakkin game already....FREE!! Thanks

What leads you to believe that if DLC revenue suddenly dried up you'd still get all that content they were charging you for but now it'd be free?

Less revenue coming in means smaller budgets, which means less content. The end of DLC isn't going to mean that stuff gets wrapped into the main game, it just means the content that was once sold as DLC will either get left on the cutting room floor or get held for expansion packs or sequels.

As it was and should be. Left on the cutting room floor because it's no good (ie: GoW2, Heavy Rain), or pushed to expansion / sequel because obviously it needs more work to be "good". Can you give me one good example of Day 1 dlc? Most of it is weapon skins, couple extra missions, etc. All stuff that should have been in the game.

Now if you had another team working on an expansion from day one (like what is done with mp components), and it's ready to go day one, I have no problem w/ it...but this is NOT the case.

It's Svensson that's said it, though. Basically worth nothing.

@VibratingDonkey said:

Disc locked content is crappy. But don't think there's a way of actually solving the problem. Publishers will just make the content DLC, delay the release and pretend they didn't work on it during development of the game. So what have we accomplished? We've only made it worse for ourselves really.

Real problem here is DLC that is planned and made during the development of the main game. For some reason people have this crazy idea that everything made during this period should be part of the retail release. It also doesn't help that it's technically not worth the time or effort to remove DLC-stuff from the retail build of the game and that this makes people feel that they have paid for something that they have no access to. Of course in the reality that DLC never was a part of the deal. Retail version of SFxT had all the characters they advertised it to have and by buying the game, you agreed to gain access only to those advertised characters. What's actually on the disc doesn't matter.

Maybe Sony and Microsoft could fix the problems and stop DLC abuse, but generally people need to also have their attitudes checked, companies are making business and things just don't always go like we as consumers want them to go.

@banjie said:

Retail version of SFxT had all the characters they advertised it to have and by buying the game, you agreed to gain access only to those advertised characters.

This is one of the most understated things I have heard anyone say in all these debates. Bravo.

No denying that there is a rampant sense of entitlement by today's audience, but I can also see their point. I'm ok with it in regards to fighting games, especially after the MK debacle last year. There are only two ways around packing some of it on disc (which are done regularly already whenever DLC is actually made AFTER the game has released), a compatibility patch (which they did for MK so you can fight against DLC characters without owning them) or better content filtering/match making. Compatibility patches are significantly easier unless you set up the matchmaking really well from the get go. Some data on disc is really the smoothest way to ensure no hiccups in the future. The only real egregious thing about it is the assumption by the developer that the game will do well enough to warrant DLC in advance, but that is another can of worms all together.

@Hangnail said:

“We have been listening to your comments and as such have begun the process of re-evaluating how such additional game content is delivered in the future,”

Concerning 'Dragon's Dogma', "The decision to include some additional (but not all planned additional) game content for the game on disc was made at the beginning of the game’s development cycle,”

Capcom just can't seem to get it do they?

I don't think there is an issue of not getting it with Dragon's Dogma. It's an issue of that game went gold a while ago and has already been printed and is ready to be shipped to stores and they aren't going to recall them all, destroy them and spend the money to edit the infrastructure of the game and reprint all the copies.

Blah blah blah... all I hear is talk. But until you actually DO something, that's all it is....

Good!!!

IMHO if it's on the disc why is it not included in the price of said game. I believe that most of these problems are occurring due to the inability to push or force content (other then small patches) to the consoles and the limited size of the hard drives in those consoles. If the companies were able to force patches of a meaningful size then maybe I (and a lot of other folks) wouldn't be such a grumpy bastard about how they distribute there DLC. This does not give these companies the right to ship broken games just to patch the hell out of them day one but would indeed ease the problems that most are having with problems not having that stuff on disc.

That's nice, I guess, companies really shouldn't do it, IMO, hope this start for Capcom to redeem themselves.

" Look at Mortal Kombat for an example of how it can all go wrong."

Can someone explain what's wrong with Compatible Patches, in my opinion, it gives consumers options, whether to choose to play/fight against the DLC characters online.

@NautoAceOne said:

That's nice, I guess, companies really shouldn't do it, IMO, hope this start for Capcom to redeem themselves.

" Look at Mortal Kombat for an example of how it can all go wrong."

Can someone explain what's wrong with Compatible Patches, in my opinion, it gives consumers options, whether to choose to play/fight against the DLC characters online.

Because it should be required, or else most people aren't going to bother and do it. Most random matches I've done on MK, I've been unable to use my DLC characters because of how they did it (one DLC per character, horrible). It was just an issue where I was never able to play as the person I bought online.

If capcom keeps doing this i doubt i'll buy their games till it is fixed. i'll just play something else.

To put it short if we all didn't buy their games, it would put immense pressure on capcom to amend their mistakes and if they havent fixed anything (with dlc), or we still have to pay for stuff we have the right for! . then we should not play their games untill they bring the on game dlc out for free. if capcom wants us as customers then treat us like customers not push overs!

@DudeOlav said:

@patrickklepek said:@nohthink said:

I know this has nothing to do with the article but how do you read "Svensson"?

See-ven-sun, I believe.

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@nohthink said:

I know this has nothing to do with the article but how do you read "Svensson"?

"sfensun" I assume.

@patrickklepek said:

Haha, yeah, I think WilltheMagicAsian actually got it right.

You are funny!

Sven, as in Sven, and son as in son.

That clip is really low quality so the actual "v" is compressed down to a "f".

The "f" might help out though I guess it makes the "v" a bit softer, but don't remove it!

And "sun" is kinda wrong, just say "son" which will make the "o" more pronounced. And "son" is actually more correct on many levels since it means the same thing in Swedish, you know a father and son. Although the "o" should be more like the one in "Solar" (was thinking about this because of the solar eclipse happening soon).

Anyway, I am no expert in phonetics, but I know you can do it! :)

So this could easily just mean that they're going to create and sell it to you on Day 1 exactly like they did before, except it just won't be on the disc, right? Would that REALLY make you feel better?