• 62 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for turbomonkey138
#1 Posted by turbomonkey138 (5288 posts) -

So the new street fighter game Street fighter 5 was announced that the game was to be exclusive on the PC and PS4.

Don't you think this is a really backwards way of marketing? I understand there is real competition between the two consoles. But it blows my mind that a company like Capcom,that financially is not doing amazingly, would sign a exclusivity deal with Sony. Surely they would make more money if they were multi-platform?

Sometimes Capcom you really rustles my few remaining jimmies

Avatar image for corevi
#2 Edited by Corevi (6796 posts) -

Sony is apparently paying a significant portion of the development costs. Also it's going to be on PC as well if you want to play the game but not support exclusivity deals no matter the circumstances.

Avatar image for aegon
#3 Posted by Aegon (7301 posts) -

Didn't Ono say something about Capcom not having enough money to fund the development of a Street Fighter sequel? I feel like I heard that recently either on the bombcast or somewhere else.

Avatar image for turbomonkey138
#4 Posted by turbomonkey138 (5288 posts) -

@corevi: They are paying development costs? So its not a timed exclusive. Its legit a sony exclusive now?

Avatar image for joshwent
#5 Posted by joshwent (2897 posts) -

I am 100% anti-exclusivity when the console manufacturer isn't playing a producer role, as it only does a disservice to gamers at large. But in the case of a franchise like SF, it at least makes a lot of sense.

Japan is the market they're catering to, first and foremost, and they have been a PlayStation dominant region since the PSX. Now that the PS4 is also the market leader worldwide (even if it's a pretty narrow and fluctuating margin), they have a greater incentive to stick with Sony. Not to mention that attempting to lure in casual fighting game players on the XBOne has been made pretty undesirable by the success of Killer Instinct. Basically, why would they spend all of the money to bring the game to the lesser selling console where people can already satisfy their general fighter urge for free, when instead they can get paid by Sony for saving that money in the first place?

Avatar image for corevi
#6 Posted by Corevi (6796 posts) -

@turbomonkey138: They straight up said it will never be on a Microsoft console at the Playstation Experience.

Avatar image for aetheldod
#7 Posted by Aetheldod (3914 posts) -

Money is tight with Capcom so this makes sense , also without the extra cash (if indeed sony is pony up the cash) SFV could´ve been made way later than now (we are talking years here) so probably this move alllowed them to move up the development for a couple years , also I mean isnt the exclusivity deals what makes consoles interesting? Also the game will come out on Pc so it is not as tight as other deals anyway.

Avatar image for roninenix
#8 Posted by roninenix (213 posts) -

@turbomonkey138: I keep hearing/reading things on how Sony is not paying for a timed exclusive deal, but is actually paying/helping on the development side. Them(Sony) saying that it is not a timed exclusive, but a console exclusive leads to that being the case of Sony actually bringing SFV to fruition. Think of it like the Nintendo/Bayonetta situation, SFV wouldn't have been made without Sony's help. Though, I still honestly believed it would've been made anyway without Sony's help somehow, but just later than sooner.

Avatar image for adequatelyprepared
#9 Posted by AdequatelyPrepared (2522 posts) -

This is literally the same thing that happened with Bayonetta 2 and Nintendo. Capcom didn't have the money to make SFV right here and now, and Sony was willing to fund part of development. It just wouldn't make sense for Sony to help develop a game that will also come out on a competitor's console.

Additionally, Microsoft really doesn't like cross-play for whatever reason right now. Even if SF5 came to Xbox, no way would there be cross play between all three platforms, just between PC and the PS4.

Avatar image for turbomonkey138
#10 Posted by turbomonkey138 (5288 posts) -

Street fighter has always been a multi platform game. I'm just not convinced this is the direction capcom should be heading. But if cash is tight then i understand the deal.

I don't have to like it however.

Avatar image for starvinggamer
#11 Posted by StarvingGamer (11517 posts) -

Street fighter has always been a multi platform game. I'm just not convinced this is the direction capcom should be heading. But if cash is tight then i understand the deal.

I don't have to like it however.

The question is which would you like less, SFV as a Sony/PC exclusive in 2016, or SFV maybe coming out in 2022 after Capcom has dissolved and the IP has been purchased by Ubisoft.

Avatar image for turbomonkey138
#12 Posted by turbomonkey138 (5288 posts) -

@turbomonkey138 said:

Street fighter has always been a multi platform game. I'm just not convinced this is the direction capcom should be heading. But if cash is tight then i understand the deal.

I don't have to like it however.

The question is which would you like less, SFV as a Sony/PC exclusive in 2016, or SFV maybe coming out in 2022 after Capcom has dissolved and the IP has been purchased by Ubisoft.

As bad as things seem to be for them i highly doubt street fighter would ever get sold.

Avatar image for bargainben
#13 Edited by bargainben (500 posts) -

Capcom's had a couple bad years in a row and couldn't afford themselves to fun a new SF, the main guy on the SF team tweeted as much, the real surprise to me is Sony not just buying the company wholesale. They have a bunch of medium tier IPs that could fill out the Vita which has like no games coming out for it right now. This game could be a litmus test for Sony to see if they want to buy out the whole company, which at this point would be Street Fighter, Resident Evil, Dead Rising, and a bunch of things Capcom forgot how to make. Playstation Allstars 2 could actually not suck. Problem is Sony wouldn't know what to do with the IPs either, end of the day. They capitalized on xbone's hubris but that doesn't make them an intelligent manager of properties. It might just be easier for them to buy out exclusivity funding deals for the handful of big budget things Capcom does and not worry about how to make a good Megaman game or bring back Darkstalkers or whatever else people want from Capcom that they can't afford to do right.

Avatar image for sanj
#14 Posted by Sanj (3247 posts) -

Word on the street (you know, that street where they have all the street fights) is that Capcom had no budget or resources to make an SFV game any time soon and Sony stepped in. Not only that, but there were a few news articles this year to the effect of "Capcom up for sale?!" or "Capcom going bankrupt?!". They've got problems over there.

Avatar image for civid
#15 Edited by civid (869 posts) -

Both Square Enix and Capcom doesn't seem to have the slightest clue on how to market or probably budget their games these days, so handing the keys over to someone who is at least A BIT more capable seems like a sad but obvious choice.

Avatar image for turbomonkey138
#16 Posted by turbomonkey138 (5288 posts) -

@civid said:

Both Square Enix and Capcom doesn't seem to have the slightest clue on how to market or probably budget their games these days, so handing the keys over to someone who is at least A BIT more capable seems like a sad but obvious choice.

This

it makes me quite sad

Avatar image for sethphotopoulos
#17 Edited by SethPhotopoulos (5777 posts) -

@turbomonkey138 said:

@starvinggamer said:

@turbomonkey138 said:

Street fighter has always been a multi platform game. I'm just not convinced this is the direction capcom should be heading. But if cash is tight then i understand the deal.

I don't have to like it however.

The question is which would you like less, SFV as a Sony/PC exclusive in 2016, or SFV maybe coming out in 2022 after Capcom has dissolved and the IP has been purchased by Ubisoft.

As bad as things seem to be for them i highly doubt street fighter would ever get sold.

Capcom as a whole might. If Capcom doesn't stay alive to that point it's possible we would have a THQ situation.

Avatar image for humanity
#18 Posted by Humanity (18589 posts) -

I still find it incredible that Capcom would not have the money to put out a Street Fighter sequel yet they can find the funds to make Resident Evil Revelations 2.

Avatar image for yummylee
#19 Edited by Yummylee (24646 posts) -

@humanity said:

I still find it incredible that Capcom would not have the money to put out a Street Fighter sequel yet they can find the funds to make Resident Evil Revelations 2.

Revelations 2 is a cross-generational budget game, and is technically a spin-off at that. Street Fighter V on the other hand is obviously looked upon as the next big step for Street Fighter. They're not relatable at all.

Avatar image for liquidprince
#20 Edited by LiquidPrince (17073 posts) -

How about consider that if Sony hadn't stepped in, their might not have been a SF5 at all. Capcom isn't doing amazing financially, so it makes a trillion times more sense for them to make the game with Sony rather then say Microsoft, who has sold like, what, three consoles in Japan? You should be more annoyed at something like Rise of the Tomb Raider, where the only reason it's exclusive is because Microsoft put money on the table to make it so and Square/Eidos (who isn't doing terribly financially) took it, because... money.

Avatar image for humanity
#21 Edited by Humanity (18589 posts) -

@liquidprince: Actually Square isn't doing so hot financially either. It's not like their games have been hugely successful as of late. Not to mention that they publicly stated their disappointment in the Tomb Raider sales. So who knows, maybe they didn't want to go all in on a sequel to a game that according to them didn't sell very well (although the numbers looked pretty good from the outside looking in we have no way of knowing how much they actually spent on it).

@yummylee said:

@humanity said:

I still find it incredible that Capcom would not have the money to put out a Street Fighter sequel yet they can find the funds to make Resident Evil Revelations 2.

Revelations 2 is a cross-generational budget game, and is technically a spin-off at that. Street Fighter V on the other hand is obviously looked upon as the next big step for Street Fighter. They're not relatable at all.

Cross generational means they have to split assets to produce 4 versions of the same game, whether it be all internal or nextgen versions inhouse and lastgen versions thrown to a port house. They could have saved money by not producing a sequel to a generally average reviewed game and had their teams working full force on two versions of the next Street Fighter - a game that will continue paying them dividends for years to come unlike Revelations 2 that will be a one and done sort of deal for many people. While the cost of Revelations 2 might not be as sizeable as it would have been for Street Fighter it is still a huge resource sink for what will probably not be a very big return as historically the Resident Evil franchise has been losing appeal even among the hardcore fans. I'm no game developer but it seems like crafting unique environments and AI behavior for a full campaign is just as costly, if not more, than what it would cost to create the next Street Fighter.

It is incredulous to think that throughout the years Capcom were releasing all these things on the side and not thinking about starting up work on a sequel to the biggest fighting game franchise in the world. They probably could have been working on it but for whatever reason chose not to - probably in favor of milking it dry with super/ultra editions. As neither of us can know for sure all we can do is speculate, as no one but Capcom know if they really couldn't have made it without outside help. I'm with Jason on this one though and am pretty sure this is simply a case of Sony waving a fad wad of cash and not some hail mary move that helped make the next SF a reality.

Avatar image for jazz
#22 Posted by Jazz (2365 posts) -

Looks like you don't know that Sony are pretty much paying the development costs.

*reads down page*

Yup, there you go.

I can understand it's frustrating for those who only have Xbones but it's better than no SFV at all. Capcom have done so many stupid things over the last 10 years or so this really doesn't even compete. Also crossplay between ps4 and PC is pretty cool.

I'm with Jason on this one though and am pretty sure this is simply a case of Sony waving a fad wad of cash and not some hail mary move that helped make the next SF a reality.

Yeah..no. They would continue to iterate on IV rather than work on V if that were the case. They just don't have any money at the moment thus all the rereleases/remakes/rehashes/rererere. Capcom would rather work with Sony over Microsoft anyway due to the way that MS generally treated Japanese companies in the past. Other than that Sony hardly has wads of cash to throw around compared to MS..it's just that MS are putting their money on KI as an alternative. I think we all know how that's going to pan out.

You could, you know..buy it on PC? It's hardly a real 'exclusivity' deal like Sunset Overdrive or Killer Instinct. I want to play both of those games but there's no way in hell i'm buying an Xbone. Shit I sold my PS4 because I thought it was a waste of time too given I have a competent PC.

Avatar image for agentboolen
#23 Posted by agentboolen (1995 posts) -

@turbomonkey138: don't worry just wait 6 months and you can just get Super Street Fighter 5 for the Xbox One.

Avatar image for super2j
#24 Posted by super2j (2136 posts) -

@turbomonkey138: That game was not going to be coming out anytime soon if ever unless Sony did that. They basically pulled a Bayonetta 2...

Avatar image for steadying
#25 Edited by Steadying (1905 posts) -

@aegon: He did say that, and not even that long ago.

Avatar image for humanity
#26 Posted by Humanity (18589 posts) -

@jazz: People say this with such conviction. I'm not going to argue the point because as I said, no one knows for sure, and it's pointless to go crazy defending something I can't even prove. That said it would be completely ridiculous if this is actually the case, that one of the biggest developer/publishers in Japan has no money to develop a sequel to one of their flagship series.

Avatar image for viking_funeral
#27 Posted by viking_funeral (2881 posts) -

It's pretty sad that a company that has Monster Hunter, Street Fighter, Mega Man, and a host of other popular franchises is that cornered financially.

Is it better than nothing? I don't know. Jason (or was it Jeff?) was pointing that the combat hasn't shown many differences yet, despite what people first believed, and as a casual fan of the SF4 the style looks mostly the same. I really hope they have a bunch of new ideas tucked away, but I am skeptical at this stage.

Avatar image for jazz
#28 Posted by Jazz (2365 posts) -

@humanity: So you'd suggest that they'd rather cut out all Xbox sales and pay a large amount of the income from sales to Sony because of 'Sony waving a fat wad of cash' rather than develop a game on their own and take all the proceeds from both markets.

Well...I guess that depends if they needed the cash injection now and how much it was, but I highly doubt it. Doesn't make any business sense in the long term...but this is Capcom so lord knows what they were thinking. It has also been essentially stated that it would not have been made, at the least 'at this time', without Sony's support.

TBH it's probably a mixture of everything and I doubt we will ever really know, but whining about it is pointless.

Avatar image for kindgineer
#29 Posted by kindgineer (3102 posts) -

Being mad that a company took a deal (regardless of intent or reasoning) for money is like being mad at a newborn crying for a bottle.

It simply makes no sense.

It's pretty sad that a company that has Monster Hunter, Street Fighter, Mega Man, and a host of other popular franchises is that cornered financially.

Is it better than nothing? I don't know. Jason (or was it Jeff?) was pointing that the combat hasn't shown many differences yet, despite what people first believed, and as a casual fan of the SF4 the style looks mostly the same. I really hope they have a bunch of new ideas tucked away, but I am skeptical at this stage.

Unfortunately; Monster Hunter, Street Fighter, and Mega Man are all games that have either already seen the pinnacle of their lifespan, or are games that refuse to let go of a lot of "Japanese" game mechanics that just don't work for the audience majority here in America/Europe.

Street Fighter is a fantastic fighting game; I don't think anyone could argue that. However, with the release of several obvious "expansions" to the original Street Fighter IV, you have to imagine what that looks like outside of the core audience. It seems desperate, and from having experience in this matter, extremely intimidating.

Monster Hunter is a completely different monster (see what I did there?). I don't think Capcom knows what to do with that franchise to make it more acceptable to a western audience. I absolutely love the idea of Monster Hunter, but boy does it feel wonky. The controls are shaky, and a lot of the way the story/direction works is very obtuse. While it's okay for these things to exist, it's a major player in the reason it hasn't caught as much traction here in the west even though the market has proven people want to play it.

Mega Man is the game I was referring to when I mentioned "already seen the pinnacle of its lifespan." Mega Man never caught on to me, but I know plenty of people who grew up with the franchise and swore and oath to it. That time has passed. It's a franchise that can no longer please its fans, and a franchise that is required to stick to it's roots too closely or risk its identity. There are always plenty of people willing to give a new Mega Man a shot, but obviously not enough for Capcom to think its worth their time, effort, and money.

Avatar image for professoress
#30 Edited by ProfessorEss (7961 posts) -

@humanity said:

@jazz: People say this with such conviction. I'm not going to argue the point because as I said, no one knows for sure, and it's pointless to go crazy defending something I can't even prove. That said it would be completely ridiculous if this is actually the case, that one of the biggest developer/publishers in Japan has no money to develop a sequel to one of their flagship series.

I would like to see some sort of proof for this too. I'm not gonna argue it either, but I'm certainly not going to believe it simply because Sony/Capcom PR said so.

@redefaulted I'm with you on complaining about it. I don't care if Sony's developing the entire game, or if it was a straight up money-hat. A deal's a deal, it's nothing new.

Avatar image for john1912
#31 Posted by John1912 (2504 posts) -

Street fighter has always been a multi platform game. I'm just not convinced this is the direction capcom should be heading. But if cash is tight then i understand the deal.

I don't have to like it however.

If you bought a last gen TE fight stick you prob want PC anyway as they dont work on the new consoles. So bullshit they wont work out some drivers. They usually blame MS/Sony for that but it works in their favor in making buy updated ones.

Avatar image for flstyle
#32 Posted by FLStyle (6591 posts) -

So the new street fighter game Street fighter 5 was announced that the game was to be exclusive on the PC and PS4.

Don't you think this is a really backwards way of marketing? I understand there is real competition between the two consoles. But it blows my mind that a company like Capcom,that financially is not doing amazingly, would sign a exclusivity deal with Sony. Surely they would make more money if they were multi-platform?

Sometimes Capcom you really rustles my few remaining jimmies

That's all well and good but we don't have neither the full facts of Capcom's internal workings nor the full facts about the PS4 SFV exclusivity. If I were to add my own guesswork to the pile, you say that surely they would make more money if SFV was multi-platform but where do you think this $500,000 prize money for next year's Capcom Pro Tour/Capcom Cup 2015 has appeared from?

Avatar image for y2ken
#33 Posted by Y2Ken (2931 posts) -

I don't like exclusive games if they can be avoided, because everyone should be able to play the best games. But in a case like this where it seems the choice was either it comes out on Sony (+PC) only, or it doesn't come out at all, I'll take the exclusive game over the non-existent one every time.

Avatar image for flaminghobo
#34 Posted by flaminghobo (4787 posts) -

I'm well aware of the rumours and speculation that Sony has funded the development costs of Street Fighter V but has anyone found any solid proof of this?

With regards to SF V's exclusivity, it's a shame from a gamer's perspective but at least there will be a PC version. I would probably do the same thing in Capcom's shoes given their primary audiences, competition, and financial straits. I just hope Capcom can pull back and return to their glory days. DmC: Devil May Cry was fantastic but it's the first good/great Capcom title I've played in years aside from Street Fighter.

Avatar image for alkusanagi
#35 Posted by AlKusanagi (1647 posts) -

There's also the part where only 8 people in Japan own Xbox Ones, so Japanese companies have very little incentive to develop versions for it.

Avatar image for rafaelfc
#36 Posted by Rafaelfc (2243 posts) -

Apparently Capcom would not have been able to get Street Fighter V done without external help. This seems to be all on the up and up.

As opposed to Rise of the Tomb Raider, which was ANNOUNCED as multiplatform and then got money hosed into exclusivity.

There is a big difference there.

Avatar image for zeds_dead_baby
#37 Posted by Zeds_Dead_Baby (87 posts) -

*RING*RING*RING

Capcom: Hello?

Sony: Hiya Capcom, it's Sony here.

Capcom: Oh, hey, what's up?

Sony: The usual, trying to turn a profit and all that. Jeeze the market in Japan has been tough this year, hey?

Capcom: Huh, tell me about it. We can't even afford to develop our money in the bank IP to help turn that market around.

Sony: You don't say? Hey, here's a thought, there are no PS4 fighter exclusives yet and our console is lagging in that area. A new Street Fighter would be money for you guys, right? And a new SF on the PS4 would help us sell consoles everywhere but especially in Japan. What if we helped with development costs?

Capcom: Are you serious?

Sony: Of course, it just seems to be too mutually beneficial to ignore. What do you think?

Capcom: I think let's break out the saki! This is going to be great!

Sony: Of course, I would need this to be Sony and PC only, no Microsoft.

Capcom: Micro-who?

Sony & Capcom: Ahahahaha...

Sony: Ok, talk later.

*HANGS UP*

Sony: Show me the MONEY!!!!!!!

Capcom: Show me the MONEY!!!!!!

Avatar image for fredchuckdave
#38 Edited by Fredchuckdave (10824 posts) -
Avatar image for i_stay_puft
#39 Posted by I_Stay_Puft (5574 posts) -

All about the money man. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours sorta deal. Ain't the first time to happen with playstation users getting blocked out of Dead or Alive 3, 4 and Virtua Fighters 5 for a significant chunk of time.

Avatar image for humanity
#40 Posted by Humanity (18589 posts) -

@rafaelfc: no matter what moral acrobatics people wish to perform along the way, the end result is very much the same.

Avatar image for chaser324
#41 Posted by chaser324 (8642 posts) -

Until Capcom figures out some way to get their own financial situation in line, it seems like these co-publishing deals with platform holders are going to continue to be a big factor in what they're doing.

Moderator
Avatar image for gaspower
#42 Posted by GaspoweR (4899 posts) -
@y2ken said:

I don't like exclusive games if they can be avoided, because everyone should be able to play the best games. But in a case like this where it seems the choice was either it comes out on Sony (+PC) only, or it doesn't come out at all, I'll take the exclusive game over the non-existent one every time.

Also we don't have all the facts but I think the way that Spencer mentioned about this and saying "business deals happen" and they don't actually do all of the kinds of deals that ends up their way suggests that Sony ended up giving Capcom (or maybe Ono paritcular since he's responsible for Street Fighter) a much better deal with the prize pot for the next Capcom Cup and cross platform multiplayer for both PC and PS4.

The only question left for me now is if whether they can get the net code working for cross platform MP to work properly. If anything, since it is being developed for both simultaneously at least the PC version isn't going to get shafted.

Avatar image for rafaelfc
#43 Edited by Rafaelfc (2243 posts) -

@humanity said:

@rafaelfc: no matter what moral acrobatics people wish to perform along the way, the end result is very much the same.

Well, one game was going to come out no matter what (maybe the developer would have to spend more of it's own money, but it would happen either way). The other one could take years to even come out, or maybe not even exist in the current generation of consoles.

To me those seem like different end results.

Avatar image for belegorm
#44 Posted by Belegorm (1848 posts) -

While it does suck for people who committed to the Xone and don't have a capable PC, you have to admit that it'll be pretty cool to have compatible online multiplayer between the PS4 and PC. If it were coming out on the Xone, either that wouldn't happen, or people on Microsoft's platform wouldn't get the benefit of playing with people on PS4 and PC. My main problem last gen with SFIV was that I had a PC and a PS3, a combination that worked for most of the games I wanted to play exclusivity-wise, but with SF4 most people I knew played only on 360 so I couldn't play with them online, and my PS3 stick wouldn't work on 360. Part of the reason I've taken more to KOF, as at tournaments they play on PS3 and at home people like the PC version.

Avatar image for yummylee
#45 Edited by Yummylee (24646 posts) -

@humanity: The first Revelations HD port came out on practically everything besides the Vita (and now ironically enough Revelations 2 is doing the same, except the 3DS... also Wii U), sold over 1M copies and was considered a success. Though while Revelations 2 looks better produced, it's still a far cry from what you'd expect to come out of their studio visually speaking, so it's hardly being developed with the full muscle behind Capcom. And that it's also an RE game (RE5) that still stands as their best selling game of all time, I think that thusly adds another notch as to why they would be willing to risk it.

Plus, people still really like Street Fighter, whereas many have fallen off of Resident Evil. So it's understandable why they're thusly trying to win some back over with RE4's new PC port, the remake remastering, and Revelations 2.

Avatar image for thehbk
#46 Posted by TheHBK (5672 posts) -

@corevi: You would think Capcom would have enough money to cover development and recoup it back from selling it on the Xbox One. They either don't have faith the game would sell well enough on two consoles or don't have enough faith in the game to take the full financial risk which you would think would be low for a game like Street Fighter

Avatar image for liquidprince
#47 Posted by LiquidPrince (17073 posts) -

@humanity: Even if that was the case, Rise of the Tomb Raider was already well into development when Microsoft stepped in and made it exclusive. Street Fighter hadn't left the ground until Sony stepped up. That's the main difference I think.

Avatar image for humanity
#48 Posted by Humanity (18589 posts) -

@rafaelfc: The end result is that in both cases one entire demographic will be excluded from experiencing the game based on exclusivity lockouts. Except that in the case of Microsoft they've been known to use timed exclusives on multi platform titles while Sony has historically clung onto things they help co-fund. The end result is that Sony was pretty smug during the Tomb Raider stories claiming how they would never lock out multiplatform games with exclusivity while in the end they are doing the exact same thing, because it helps push units and apart from the Playstation division Sony as a whole is bleeding money left and right. So we can sit here and talk about theoreticals of when or if SF5 would have come out, things we will probably never know with any certainty beyond pure speculation, but what is very clear and certain is that XBO owners will not get to play the next Street Fighter for a while - a series that has a much deeper roots and much bigger relevance than the new Tomb Raider reboot, and which has been enjoyed across the globe on multiple platforms for a long time now. So with all respect to your speculation about the possible future or lack thereof for Street Fighter, honestly I'm sure it is one possibility, I think the end result is actually quite similar.

Avatar image for rafaelfc
#49 Edited by Rafaelfc (2243 posts) -

@humanity said:

@rafaelfc: The end result is that in both cases one entire demographic will be excluded from experiencing the game based on exclusivity lockouts. Except that in the case of Microsoft they've been known to use timed exclusives on multi platform titles while Sony has historically clung onto things they help co-fund. The end result is that Sony was pretty smug during the Tomb Raider stories claiming how they would never lock out multiplatform games with exclusivity while in the end they are doing the exact same thing, because it helps push units and apart from the Playstation division Sony as a whole is bleeding money left and right. So we can sit here and talk about theoreticals of when or if SF5 would have come out, things we will probably never know with any certainty beyond pure speculation, but what is very clear and certain is that XBO owners will not get to play the next Street Fighter for a while - a series that has a much deeper roots and much bigger relevance than the new Tomb Raider reboot, and which has been enjoyed across the globe on multiple platforms for a long time now. So with all respect to your speculation about the possible future or lack thereof for Street Fighter, honestly I'm sure it is one possibility, I think the end result is actually quite similar.

I don't think you can ignore the circumstances though. Take Dead Rising 3, Capcom did the same thing they are doing with Street Fighter V. They probably shopped around behind the scenes to secure financing and made the exclusivity deal with Microsoft in that case. I don't think that is morally objectible or wrong, it is a part of business.

I do agree that is unfortunate that a lot of people won't get to experience the game, but it's understandable.

If Capcom had announced Street Fighter V as a multiplatform game, Sony said it was a timed exclusive, Sony execs went on record saying they couldn't lock the IP because that would be crazy and then at a later date announced they were in fact, locking up the IP for a fat stack of money like what happened with Rise of the Tomb Raider, then you'd have an argument.

Avatar image for kishinfoulux
#50 Posted by kishinfoulux (3328 posts) -

Don't worry you'll get either Super Street Fighter or Ultra down the line. Also this game may as well be Street Fighter 4.5. Looks pretty lame.