StrongBlackVine
Banned
True. MK will still sell more on PS4 though.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"Street Fighter V is a PS4 console exclusive" (PlayStation Blog)
- Thread starter JP
- Start date
True. MK will still sell more on PS4 though.
CamHostage
Member
Surprised that, since they were opening up the wallet (or whatever they did to get the exclusive,) Sony didn't try to throw Vita into the deal. SFxT and UMvC were factors for Vita in the early going, although that's been a long time since.
The added effects and lighting are nice, but I do wish the graphical style had broken away a bit more from SF4. I thought maybe they'd age the characters again or do something to make it visually stand out as a sequel. I guess these are the Street Fighter designs now.
The added effects and lighting are nice, but I do wish the graphical style had broken away a bit more from SF4. I thought maybe they'd age the characters again or do something to make it visually stand out as a sequel. I guess these are the Street Fighter designs now.
Yep, that's sega , not capcom. Ive never heard of capcom issuing id claims, especially reguaurding sf until a few days ago. It would be totally counterproductive especially when a few of their games come with the ability to upload footage straight to YouTube
Which makes it all the more weird MKX had nothing new to show at PSX despite being there.
Capcom's desire. They're pushing for the e-sports market. Sony gets to be the premier console at events and marketing will likely focus on the PS4 version.
Just to give you some perspective, there are individual PC games that reach nearly 30m unique players per day.
PS4 and Xbox 1 sales combined are currently significantly less than that.
autoduelist
Member
Except your term, 'not exclusive', means something very different from 'console exclusive' and they are not interchangeable in both directions. So... no. 'Console exclusive' is a better term, regardless of your like/dislike for it, because it actually conveys useful information.
What's also important to note is that Ono struck a deal with 3rd Party Relations and not WWS.
PeregrinSe7en
Member
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
The acceptance that this is not coming to Xbone will be the same as how it was with Bloodborne.
Initially there will be a few people who think this will end up on Xbox before everyone realises Sony is helping with development and that there's no chance of it ever happening.
Initially there will be a few people who think this will end up on Xbox before everyone realises Sony is helping with development and that there's no chance of it ever happening.
TheSadRanger
Banned
Is Capcom really hurting that bad these days that they can't finance the production themselves so the title can be multi plat.
SF is their last big money maker these days and I don't see them locking it to one console unless Capcom couldn't do it by themselves. FFS Street Fighter has been multi platform for over twenty years.
SF is their last big money maker these days and I don't see them locking it to one console unless Capcom couldn't do it by themselves. FFS Street Fighter has been multi platform for over twenty years.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
I don't know where this keeps coming from. Monster Hunter while Japan centric, sells a lot more than your average Street Fighter release. As does Resident Evil, Capcom's biggest franchise at present.
He is correct, though. Most of the fighting game community are always on Playstation consoles.
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
Dang it Gaf who is BRUCELEEROY? IS HE AN INSIDER OR DOES HE WORK FOR CAPCOM OR SONY?!
Ironically PC gamers benefit by having cross play because of this deal.
One of the better insiders afaik
Stone Ocean
Member
If Capcom can lock their best selling franchise - Monhun - to a single manufacturer why is it so weird that they do the same to their uhh 3rd best selling IP.
is simple, want to play it? Buy a ps4 or play it on pc, a mess up deal was what MS did with tomb raider locking that game only to their console
There is no difference.
Crayon
Member
We he talks, motherfuckers listen.
There are a hell of a lot more PC gamers than there are of Xbox One owners, bud.
The fighting game community just chooses the console that runs their respective games the best. Currently the only games running on PS3 are anime (BlazBlue, Persona, etc) and 3D (Tekken. Soul Calibur, etc), everything else, including Capcom, runs on 360.
For current gen it'll be PS again since that's what runs multiplats better.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Awesome.
I mean, insiders have been so on point lately!
He still hasn't cut his head off. I knew the dude was all hype and no follow through.
Canis lupus
Member
GTA 5
Persona 5
Metal Gear Solid 5
Halo 5
Street Fighter 5
All we need now is DMC5
(2008 was the year of 4)
Persona 5
Metal Gear Solid 5
Halo 5
Street Fighter 5
All we need now is DMC5
(2008 was the year of 4)
TheSadRanger
Banned
Maybe not the subsequent versions of SF4 that came afterwards but I would bet that base SF4 sold more overall worldwide than the last version of Monster Hunter or RE6.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Maybe not the subsequent versions of SF4 that came afterwards but I would bet that base SF4 sold more overall worldwide than the last version of Monster Hunter or RE6.
http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/business/million.html
Monster Hunter 4 sits at 4.1 million sold.
Street Fighter IV sits at 3.3 million sold.
Resident Evil 6 sits at 6 million sold.
Note: Monster Hunter 4 has only been released in Japan and those sales don't include 4G which we know has shipped over 2 million units in Japan since its release in October this year, and will be released in the US/PAL Regions sometime early next year.
Now I pose the question that Stone Ocean asked. If Capcom can make their second biggest franchise completely exclusive to Nintendo systems, then what's stopping them from making their 3rd best selling franchise exclusive to PS4/PC?
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
I think that's a mistake... lately pc's seem to have the best of both worlds. If things continue like this who needs to buy consoles...
notworksafe
Member
Wrong. Try again!
Maybe not the subsequent versions of SF4 that came afterwards but I would bet that base SF4 sold more overall worldwide than the last version of Monster Hunter or RE6.
Base SFIV sold 3.3 I believe, RE6 sold 5 million and Capcom expected 7.
Stone Ocean
Member
To add to this, Vanilla is the only version of SF4 that sold over 2 million copies as far as reports go.
LordBaztion
Member
I doubt the game was at any moment at the risk of stop develoment unlike Titanfall, probably Capcom designed a small team for preproduction. During that time Sony approach them and proposed to speed up production by finnancing the project and securing the exclusivity. So, the game entered in full production before time thanks to Sony.
So, the intervention was unnecesary, like Tomb Raider but helps to make the finnancing softer for the IP owner, like Tomb Raider. While the time of the intervention is in prepeoduction, like Titanfall. Of ourse, this is my speculation, it is up to you to decide if the intervention in the development process is good or bad for the industry. I stick to the idea, that intervention in a game development process is always good good because publisher, developer and platform holder benefits while a portion of the consumers are perjudicated. But the deal shall not prevent the IP owner to take the game to other platforms because that needesly harms the consumer.
At for the case in particular, I think crossplatform play is a consequwnce of the exclusivity rather than a cause and that the exclusivity doesn't include the Super and following versions.
So, the intervention was unnecesary, like Tomb Raider but helps to make the finnancing softer for the IP owner, like Tomb Raider. While the time of the intervention is in prepeoduction, like Titanfall. Of ourse, this is my speculation, it is up to you to decide if the intervention in the development process is good or bad for the industry. I stick to the idea, that intervention in a game development process is always good good because publisher, developer and platform holder benefits while a portion of the consumers are perjudicated. But the deal shall not prevent the IP owner to take the game to other platforms because that needesly harms the consumer.
At for the case in particular, I think crossplatform play is a consequwnce of the exclusivity rather than a cause and that the exclusivity doesn't include the Super and following versions.
yeah that's a good thing. i bought the ps4 to play games!
It's a good thing when your device does less rather than more. I bet you own a flip phone too
SeventhSon
Member
I don't know if they are exclusive, but I'm sure they will come on the original disc anyway.
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
thank you!
Canis lupus
Member
The smartphone couldn't kill the consoles, but the pc will? Lawl. 99% of the console population (everyone outside gaf), don't give a crap what game comes to pc.
SeventhSon
Member
So is this a moneyhat? I need to know whether to shame Sony.
Stone Ocean
Member
It wasn't at risk of stopping development, it just wasn't being developed to begin with.
If the game was being made anyways why would Ono go on record twice to say he didn't have the resources to do SFV?
Most tournaments will run consoles still. Much easier to organise and transport.
For home use, anything goes. Even for competitive players, since their sticks will work on PC I believe. A number of big players actually prefer PC to begin with anyway.
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
There is a lot of misunderstanding in this thread. SF5 is a Capcom game, not a SCEJ game. It's third party. Capcom is a publisher with their own internal and external development, they might develop it in house or give it to Dimps like they did with IV.
Sony Japan might be offering support for the game (testing, planning, and maybe some tech assistance) but this isn't like Bloodborne, which is a SCEJ game being developed externally. And it's certainly not "Capcom giving Sony the license to make SF5" as some people seem to think.
Because Ono loves to play around with his fans.
Sony Japan might be offering support for the game (testing, planning, and maybe some tech assistance) but this isn't like Bloodborne, which is a SCEJ game being developed externally. And it's certainly not "Capcom giving Sony the license to make SF5" as some people seem to think.
Because Ono loves to play around with his fans.
PeregrinSe7en
Member
it's a good thing when you buy a games console that focuses on guess what...
the games
the extra stuff is icing on the cake.
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
Cyber Caesar
Member
Tekken was also a small community in 1996, in 1998 it took over market share dominance from Street Fighter. Tekken was the new kid on the block. It can be debated right now that Tekken is larger overall in size when compared to SF.
Missing the point entirely. A gaming PC and a console barely have a distinction because they both are capable of the same things with the same controllers. Except one does it better than the other. Of course they're damn well in competition
I don't reckon there will be super/ultra editions. Instead they'll release patches/updates to bring players back (similar to league/dota). They've managed to bring the online community together across two platforms, they don't want to then fragment it with different versions of the game.
Do you have any proof of this at all? All we have is Ono not getting a budget/resources for SFV and then announcing they were looking for people for a new fighting game around the time Sony did those "hadoken cabs". SFV wasn't in risk of being stopped because, from what we know, it never even STARTED.
RedAssedApe
Banned
not in mindshare. all the big tournaments have SF as the main event. Tekken is still on the undercard