Rumor: Resident Evil 4 to blame for no Capcom in Brawl
by Scott Jon Siegel 
{ Feb 4th 2008 at 6:00AM }
Kotaku has reportedly spoken with insider sources at Nintendo, who claim that the lost exclusivity of Resident Evil 4 caused Nintendo to reconsider the inclusion of Capcom characters in Brawl. RE4 was originally meant to be exclusive to the Gamecube, but concerns over sales led Capcom to release the title on PS2, and later on PC, with additional content.
While Nintendo has the right to be peeved about the broken exclusivity agreement, the addition of Capcom's franchises to the Brawl lineup could have only benefited Nintendo, and created more hype for the title (if that's even possible). While we're a bit unsure whether to buy into this rumor, if true then we can only hope that Capcom and Nintendo kiss and make up in time to offer some new characters as downloadable content (hey, we can dream, can't we?).
Update: Slight factual error corrected; Capcom announced the PS2 version prior to the release of the Gamecube version. [Thanks, 2bit]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Dr0ooo @ Feb 4th 2008 6:09AM
That upsets me so much about Nintendo; those pretentious jerks.
KushielsScion007 @ Feb 4th 2008 7:06AM
Oh yes...Nintendo is so pretentious...
danny. @ Feb 4th 2008 9:33AM
Like how they only like bands no one else has heard of and all their favorite movies are in french or in black and white and they think the only viable professions are social work and public defense...
GreyFox @ Feb 4th 2008 2:39PM
This sounds really petty for a company to do so I'm kind of doubting it but then again the Japanese put loyalty above everything so I guess it makes some sort of sense. Still stupid though.
Chris @ Feb 4th 2008 6:19AM
Dont blame ninty, get a A++++++ title suppose to be a exclusive then capcom turn around and say 'screw it, lets milk re4' however megaman would be kinda cool
joshua @ Feb 4th 2008 8:07AM
Capcom didn't do it just to mess with Nintendo's head. It's because the game didn't sell on GameCube. RE exclusivity on GameCube was probably the stupidest thing Capcom could ever have done with that franchise.
bm @ Feb 4th 2008 8:43AM
"It's because the game didn't sell on GameCube."
Hahaha, what? Dude, don't just grab arguments out of thin air.
Joop @ Feb 4th 2008 9:12AM
bm,
From a numbers perspective, good sales on the GC were the equivalent to mediocre sales on the PS2. It sold well considering the GC's install base, but that's not the same as selling well financially.
It's a shame that the Wii-release didn't help bury the hatchet.
Todd @ Feb 4th 2008 11:01AM
@joshua-troll
Wow. Have you forgotten the exclusive Resident Evil Outbreak game for the PS2, with Internet play? That didn't sell well, and since then, the servers have been shut down.
bm @ Feb 4th 2008 11:14AM
Joop: it sold 1.6m on the Cube, 2m on the PS2. So that's bullshit. And don't tell me "Oh well nobody bought it on PS2 because everybody already had the other version" because that would be contradictory to your assumption that it didn't sell well on Nintendo's platform at all.
It sold well on the Cube. The end.
B1gC72 - PSN: KillaKornbread @ Feb 4th 2008 6:27AM
i dont get it. Snake has been on multiple consoles and so has Sonic in recent times. why couldnt they put RE4 characters in anyway? was it the broken trust or something made them sour? im confused.
oh well, itll be a great game with or without Capcom characters though i would love to see some kind of DLC (besides the user-created levels) but im not holding my breathe on it.
Psaakyrn @ Feb 4th 2008 6:44AM
Because the creator actually begged Nintendo?
Dopple Boppler @ Feb 4th 2008 6:45AM
Basically Capcom promised five exclusive GameCube titles, and all of them but one either went multiplatform or were canceled, with Resident Evil 4 and Viewtiful Joe being the biggest deals out of these. So it's not so much that they were multiplatform, just that they were promised to be GameCube exclusives and then Capcom changed their minds.
Personally I'm not buying this rumor. Plus everyone who wanted any Capcom character aside from Mega Man seemed to miss the point of third party characters being in Brawl in the first place.
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Feb 4th 2008 7:15AM
well MGS: Twin Snakes actually stayed exclusive to the big N
Nigeria @ Feb 4th 2008 7:42AM
The Twin Snakes was a Konami game developed by Silicon Knights. There was no Capcom involvement.
No Capcom characters is no big loss.
The consumer will appreciate Sonic more than Megaman or Leon or Viewtiful Joe(???), that's my opinion anyways.
FidliousWong @ Feb 4th 2008 9:45AM
Actually, they promised the Resident Evil series to be exclusive, and that shot them right in the foot.
RE0 sold horribly
REmake was passable sales at best
RE2, 3, CV ports were all horrible sales to the point where Capcom just let them become collectors items.
RE4 was their savior but considering how well the Gamecube exclusives were selling in the past, I don't blame them from going multiplat. After all, RE:CV was supposed to be a Dreamcast exclusive.
And if Nintendo fans wanted the Capcom 5 to stay exclusive, they should have thrown more love at Viewtiful Joe, PN 03, and Killer 7. But I guess Capcom forgot to include fucking Link to move copies...
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 4th 2008 12:06PM
PN03 Was a short and easy game, that wasn't nearly as fun as it was billed to be.
And honestly the REmakes, while beautiful, were stillborn because that style of play in original RE games had already lost its luster. More action oriented games had already appeared on the PS2 before the GC even launched. Personally, I believe the REmakes would have done badly regardless of the platform they were exclusive to.
WC @ Feb 4th 2008 8:21AM
If there really was an agreement broken, Nintendo would be doing a LOT more than leaving Capcom out of SSSB. Lawsuits come to mind.
No, I'm sure Capcom lived up to their agreement but Nintendo mistakenly thought the Capcom games would not be worth porting after the agreement ended. In other words, Nintendo understimated Capcom's games.
It's seems to be pretty typical of Nintendo to dismiss third party games as important there days.
Geist @ Feb 4th 2008 10:41AM
It doesn't sound like a contractual agreement was broken, more like a couple high-ups from both companies met as equals and friends and planned it out, then Capcom went "yeaaaaah screw that."
ck @ Feb 4th 2008 7:08AM
Am I the only one who doesn't care? I mean, the game's going to be great - and no amount of Leon Kennedy or Megaman will make it greater in my estimate. It will just mean the next iteration of the franchise will get those characters.
I think I will be too busy brawling to even think about this "problem."
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 4th 2008 7:21AM
Doubt its true, but then, wouldn't be suprised if it was, Capcom has a way of decieving people, now there is nothing wrong with going multiplat or exclusive depending on what the company decides to choose, but if you build up hope and keep telling people, 'ITS EXCLUSIVE! ITS EXCLUSIVE!' Then suddenly punch them in the nose and make it multiplat or even switch consoles completly in Monster Hunter's case, it pisses people off.
Capcom makes Dead Rising exclusive to 360 and doesn't moan about crap about it being too expensive or rubbish, they make monster hunter for PS3, and suddenly, despite having RE5, Lost Planet and DMC4 on PS3, they moan that Monster Hunter Exclusive is too expensive or something stupid like that. Now imagine Monster hunter had remained on PS3, maybe even gone multiplat, it would probably be even more fun then that of RE5, DMC4 etc, considering its an RPG and with the great graphics of PS3 and 360 it would look superb, nothing wrong with it being on Wii, but I'm pissed there is no PS3 or 360 version of the game to oogle at ¬_¬
Capcom has seriously let me down. Thier credibility in my books is dwindling.
FOXHOUND @ Feb 4th 2008 8:16AM
Well, their credibility(and common sense)went out the window when:
» Clover was dissolved(devs of OKAMI, GODHAND, and VIEWTIFUL JOE)
» Shinji Mikami was 'downgraded'
» Noritaka Funamizu(sp?), Nin-Nin, and Akiman weren't given proper control and guidance of all things STREET FIGHTER released since SFA2(save for SF3)
» The ridiculous direction of ROCK/MEGA MAN games
» No attempt(thus far)to try to recapture Marvel licensing for a possible MARVEL VS CAPCOM 3 now that Marvel's no longer with EA
» No STRIDER, RIVAL SCHOOLS, DARKSTALKERS or even POWER STONE sequels
...truth be told, I'm not impressed nor hyped for SF4 anymore. :\ Save for the obvious graphical difference, it's giving me that "budget title" SF EX feeling about it thus far.
flameofdoom666 @ Feb 4th 2008 8:24AM
I disagree. Capcom is one of the select few I still have faith in. Square seems to only be able to make Final Fantasy and/or Dragon Quest games, and spin-offs. Capcom can make a damn good new IP. I just like Capcom games a lot.
FOXHOUND @ Feb 4th 2008 8:46AM
meh, Squ'enix... I agree on that one. My hope is that FFXIII(and it 3 versions of the game)are a better hook that the previous game or a knock of the Advent Children angle.
As for Capcom and new IPs... while they definitely *don't* have the most new IPs year in & out; of those released, I admittedly do like when they do take a chance and release new stuff.
Pendras @ Feb 4th 2008 7:44AM
Well, at least there's still Marvel vs Capcom for your Mega Man/Jill Valentine fixes.
Btw, want to steal powers? I hear there's this guy named Kirby...
FOXHOUND @ Feb 4th 2008 7:56AM
If I recall correctly, I think the supposed "exclusive" titles were:
VIEWTIFUL JOE
RESIDENT EVIL 4
PN 03
...and then two titles that didn't even get past conceptual stage. Of those mentioned above, PN03 was easily the weakest one - nice idea, piss-poor execution.
flameofdoom666 @ Feb 4th 2008 8:27AM
Your wrong. It was called the Capcome Five. It was 5 exclusive GC games, and 4 eventually came out, and only 1 was exclusive. They were:
P.N.03 (this is the only GC exclusive),
Viewtiful Joe,
Killer 7,
Resident Evil 4,
and Dead Pheonix (cancled).
If I was Nintendo, I would be mad too. Capcom said something and didn't do it.
bm @ Feb 4th 2008 8:55AM
Hey, eff you buddy, PN03 was awesome. :(
Co @ Feb 4th 2008 9:24AM
"bm: Hey, eff you buddy, PN03 was awesome. :("
You do not speak anymore.
FidliousWong @ Feb 4th 2008 10:40AM
And Nintend fans promised something they didn't do...
Like buy the fucking games...
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 4th 2008 12:10PM
"And Nintend fans promised something they didn't do...
Like buy the fucking games..."
PN03 was garbage warmed over. Viewtiful Joe and Killer 7 are niche titles at best, and the last was canceled.
RE4 sold like hotcakes.
Mr Khan @ Feb 4th 2008 4:26PM
Aye, pointing to Suda 51's stuff as an example of why 3rd-party-on-Nintendo-platform stuff sells poorly is like making a case for Nintendo 1st party titles selling poorly by pointing at every console Fire Emblem to date
Its a niche title. But No More Heroes is downright mainstream compared to the insanely niche Killer 7
bm @ Feb 5th 2008 1:43AM
"You do not speak anymore."
No YOU shut the fuck up. :(
It was a great game and anyone who disagrees just didn't play it properly.
bigsofty @ Feb 4th 2008 8:04AM
This game series sucks ass any ways... Zzzzz!
Nigeria @ Feb 4th 2008 9:35AM
Your attempt to troll is disappointing.
Try harder.
PyrosNine @ Feb 4th 2008 8:31AM
Capcom has been going down the drain lately anyway, with a lowering amount of quality and number of games. Instead of a bunch of quality spread out nicely, we're seeing only one or two quality games popping up out of them at a time, and nothing else, making it very easy to point out how much everything else sucks.
As for Megaman, I always assumed he was sorta tied up at the moment. I mean, they could always be making another Capcom Vs series, so what would be the point in Megaman having another Cross-Company fighting romp?
32_Footsteps @ Feb 4th 2008 8:25AM
I could see it being a possibility. Video game companies have histories of being petty over minor slights.
As for why non-exclusive games didn't hurt Sonic and Snake, keep in mind a couple things.
1) Sega and Konami never promised that the series in question would go exclusive.
2) The titles that *were* promised as exclusive to Nintendo consoles stayed that way.
You know the saying "Be careful who you step on when you go up; they'll be the ones kicking you on the way down"? Nintendo is following it, and yes, it's to the detriment of the fans.
Dakara @ Feb 4th 2008 8:34AM
I only remember one thing. The creator or someone in Capcom said that if RE4 was on any other system, he'd cut off his own head...I'm still waiting.
Zsavior @ Feb 4th 2008 8:44AM
Seriously I don't blame Nintendo, one bit. It is amazing that these 3rd parties still refuse to support Nintendo but in return expect Nintendo to cater to them. I am not naive enough to not understand that Nintendo is a business, like any other business they should reward people that are loyal to them. Capcom ported their games over to another system in fear fine, but there should be no complaints when Nintendo doesn't look to benefit them in their games.
Second Brawl is still an Amazing title I have no reason to be disappointed. Before RE4 came out companies and gamers were telling Campcom the Resident Evil series was dead, after it came out on GC and people saw how good it was capcom decided to milk it after Nintendo openly welcomed their ideas and supported a series many thought wasn't going anywhere.
I also love Capcom, they make good games, and they will support anybody if they see there is a profit. But maybe if they had supported Nintendo more Clover wouldn't be a distant memory.
Aberu @ Feb 5th 2008 8:46AM
Well all the years of Third party companies being muscled around by Nintendo's lockout chip and exclusivity contracts to monopolize Sega out of the picture, I don't see why you equally wouldn't blame these companies for not jumping on the bandwagon to develop for them just because they are Nintendo. God that was one hell of a run-on.
baby sea tuna @ Feb 4th 2008 8:50AM
You'd think if Nintendo was genuinely upset with Capcom, they probably wouldn't have bothered releasing RE:4 on the Wii, right? The only fault I find with Capcom here was deciding it would be a good idea to release one of their (if not their most) high profile exclusives on a platform that had such shitty third-party support. Shame too, since RE:4 was better than like 85-90% of the other games on the GCN.
Hell, RE:4 Wii is better than like 85% of the games on that platform too...
Zertoss @ Feb 4th 2008 9:11AM
Nintendo has pulled this kind of crap before, isn't that right, Squaresoft?
Killer Loki @ Feb 4th 2008 9:19AM
I find it amazing that when Capcom announced that 'Devil May Cry 4' wasn't going to be a PS3 exclusive and going to the 360 - all you idiots were on here laughing your asses off. Yet when Capcom does the same thing to your beloved Nintento - you want blood and claim that Nintendo has every right to be pissed at Capcom.. Bunch of hypocrites you NintenBots are. The console business has changed, while all the systems will have their exclusive titles (for now) it's just more profitable to release your games on as many platforms as possible, there by spreading the development cost across each platform and not just one. All games should be multiplatform as far as I'm concerned. How much more money would have MS made had the 'Halo' franchise been on other consoles, same goes for 'Final Fantasy', 'Jak & Daxter', 'Ratchet & Clank', 'Mario' and 'Zelda' just to name a few..
Zsavior @ Feb 4th 2008 9:46AM
Here is what I find sad, that when it is a thread that has nothing to do with your beloved Sony you still find a way to bring it up. Listen nobody cares about the PS3 nobody is trying to attack it, attacking Nintendo fans won't help you.
So stop trying to flamebait people. This is a discussion about Nintendo reaction or lack of towards Capcom. If you still harbor anger over DMC4 sorry that had nothing to do with Nintendo, take your anger else where.
P.S. It was Xbox360 fans laughing at you and saying MGS4 was next, but you want no piece of them I bet.
ThornedVenom @ Feb 4th 2008 9:43AM
I think there's more to the story.
Think about it, if agreements were set between Nintendo and Capcom, the Street Fighter floodgates of hell would reach Brawl.
Adv2k1 @ Feb 4th 2008 9:47AM
THis is old school interpersonal japanese politics.
Capcom screwed nintendo and nintendo got revenge.
I am guessing Sega and Konami will be getting royalties for Brawl and that slight % of sales money will BE HUGE for a game THEY DID NOTHING IN, so its pure profit.
If Capcom would of waited and allowed RE4 to be 'exclusive' it would of helped sales allot. Maybe a month before release we heard about PS2 version, and any people who would of bought the game and maybe GAMECUBE because of it, totally said "SCREW THAT I'M WAITING FOR SUPERIOR PS2 VERSION" so that was the key.
If RE4 PS2 edition wasn't on the horizon sales for Cube version would be very different. I like this rumor this is Nintendo playing hardball and I like it
Vidikron (FU) @ Feb 4th 2008 10:46AM
But Nintendo loves the gamers!
paragraph @ Feb 4th 2008 10:55AM
Lost Planet, PS3, Need I Say More?
Has capcom released anything 'wow' worthy in the last few years? I think not... it's not Nintendo's Fault that RE4 Flopped on the GC... it's Capcom's for putting out a bad game...
It all comes full circle though, there is RE4 Wii Edition...
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 4th 2008 12:16PM
Yeah, flopped. If "flopped" means sold to 7% of the install base, vs 2% on PS2, yeah, it flopped.
I wonder what the combined RE4 Wii and RE4 GC sales are. I bet its alot higher than any other 2 platforms combined.
ejamer @ Feb 4th 2008 10:55AM
Revenge? You guys is silly. :)
Nintendo lives for profit, and so does Capcom (and Sony and MS, and just about every other company). Video games are all about business - don't ever forget that! These companies exist to earn money and NOT to do their fanboys a favor.
Apparently the numbers didn't work to make Megaman appear in Brawl, or to let GoldenEye appear on XBox Live, or to let Halo appear on DS, or to keep DMC4 or RE4 as console exclusives. Ego might play a part, but maxing out the bottom line is the real goal - and that's purely business, nothing personal.
Who can say if Nintendo's profits increase enough to justify adding Capcom characters this late in the development cycle? After all, more additions would delay the release date even further. And which way should the supposed payments be flowing: to Capcom who is licensing out their key characters, or to Nintendo who is offering visibility in one of their Wii-exclusive megahits? (This is much like the Halo 3 advertising campaigns, where MS actually earned money by allowing advertisers to use the Halo brand in some cases.)
That said, it is a pity. I'd love to have seen a Zack & Wiki tag team option in Brawl... but that's probably just me.
@Killer Loki:
Don't be so naive. MS would earn a ton of sales by porting Halo to other platforms... but how much would they lose in the long-term by whoring out their console-defining game experience? Same goes for popular Nintendo and Sony franchises.
Unless you drop out of hardware entirely like Sega did, there is some validity to keeping high-end games as console specific options.