Capcom VP explains RE5 multiplayer development, calls complaints 'BS'
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Mar 16th 2009 at 6:11PM } 
Although Capcom had previously responded to the flack it's received for the $5 charge on the Resident Evil 5 "Versus" DLC, a VP for the publisher has had enough with all the complaining and is calling "BS." Christian Svensson, VP of strategic planning and business development, explains on the company forums that people are getting plenty of bang for their $60 and says that if people don't see the value in the secondary offering that, "the choice is simple, don't purchase it."
Svensson goes on to explain that paid DLC at Capcom has its own budget, with its own profit and loss analysis. He emphasizes that without this method, the Versus content wouldn't exist in the first place, because it "did not fit within the production budget of the base product." He continues that to hit the sweet spot of DLC releasing within 3 to 6 weeks of initial launch that development on these products starts before the actual product hits shelves.
Although the whole situation definitely has some debatable points, Svensson certainly hit the nail on the head when he said if consumers don't agree with what Capcom did: Don't buy the product.
[Via Kotaku]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Mr Khan @ Mar 16th 2009 6:15PM
Ah, sven. Never too busy to insult the fans of his company, nor to make himself seem more important than he actually is.
Roger @ Mar 16th 2009 7:45PM
Why can the "fans" attack the company for what their doing but the company cant fight back for what the "fans" are doing? I also don't see how he was making himself look more important than he is, it just seems like a bitter comment.
Vidikron @ Mar 16th 2009 8:35PM
@Roger
It's generally not considered a good business practice.
offday @ Mar 16th 2009 8:44PM
I'd love to hear his explanation on why the other 99% of games out there release with the multiplayer included.
Patrick @ Mar 16th 2009 8:56PM
Well maybe if these "fans" weren't so stupid as to require a lesson in free-market economics, such remarks wouldn't be necessary.
I'd rather have the DLC made available and the option to purchase it, as opposed to it not being available at all. A lot of these whiners would be perfectly fine if there wasn't any DLC offered for RE5. And let's face it, there's been a lot of bitching about RE5 in recent weeks.
Mr Khan @ Mar 16th 2009 9:14PM
Its more a commentary on Sven himself, than this particular instance. His haughty manner of dealing with fans is normal: he moderates the Capcom Unity forums.
pete @ Mar 16th 2009 10:20PM
Capcom:
Say goodbye to your fans.
TheWatchmen09 @ Mar 16th 2009 11:11PM
The holier than thou gamers on Joystiq don't seem to understand the fact that they're bitching only matters to themselves.
The MAJORITY of people are relatively sane and don't give a crap if this is $5 and understand that if they don't like the price they DO NOT (I REPEAT) DO NOT have to buy this DLC.
Just another reason for people to complain about RE5 which if anyone is rational will admit is a great game.
And vidikron I normally don't try to converse with you but why exactly is it bad business practice? This whole, "the customer is ALWAYS right" belief system is absolutely retarded.
In this case the consumer is NOT right. Customers have no reason to complain about this DLC. It's all just bitching for the sake of bitching. And Capcom has every right to fight back and defend it's products.
phinnvr6 @ Mar 16th 2009 11:23PM
Yep, thats why I'll continue to play Killzone 2 online. The graphics and gameplay blow this game away anyway. Although the single player RE5 is definitely fun from what I've played so far.
Vidikron @ Mar 16th 2009 11:58PM
"And vidikron I normally don't try to converse with you but why exactly is it bad business practice? This whole, "the customer is ALWAYS right" belief system is absolutely retarded."
I personally don't buy the "customer is always right" bit either, but most companies would refrain from making blanket statements like saying that all your customers complaints are "BS". I shouldn't even have to explain that. In fact, at many companies saying something like that would get you fired, and for good reason.
And think customers have a legit gripe here. This is an obvious lazy cash grab. The DLC doesn't even contain any new assets at all. And this follows right on the heels of selling overprice alternate costumes that are already on the SFIV retail disc. That's absurd. I agree that we're free to simply not purchase the DLC and I'd imagine that many people are going to do exactly that, but I also think customers have a right to voice their opinions on the matter. Despite how foolish I think you are, I'm actually rather surprised that you would not only be defending Capcom, but actually trying to make it sound like we shouldn't even be complaining.
offday @ Mar 17th 2009 12:30AM
No one's bitching about whether or not they have to buy the DLC. Any idiot can see that you have two choice: buy it or don't.
People are bitching because capcom feels they have the right to charge consumers for something that has been included with 99% of games since the beginning, and done much better. I can guarantee that.
Roto13 @ Mar 17th 2009 12:39AM
"The MAJORITY of people are relatively sane and don't give a crap if this is $5 and understand that if they don't like the price they DO NOT (I REPEAT) DO NOT have to buy this DLC."
Yeah, great, whatever. Except there's still content being withheld from me. I don't HAVE to buy Street FIghter costumes, but I shouldn't have to pay extra for them in the first place, they should be included in the $60 I (hypothetically) paid for the game.
eNrique @ Mar 17th 2009 12:47AM
I don't know about you pete, but I'm sure a lot of people as well as me said goodbye to capcom long time ago; when their biggest names left*
*Shinji Mikami (God Hand, Resident Evil), Hideki Kamiya (Devil May Cry), and Atsushi Inaba (Okami, Viewtiful Joe).
AoE @ Mar 17th 2009 1:15AM
@eNrique,
I say this as a longtime capcom fan... you left at the wrong time. I mean don't get me wrong I understand following specific people throughout the industry, but Capcom is releasing higher-quality product than they have in quite some time. They've released a string of excellent remakes of their arcade classics, a few fantastic new games (seriously... Dead Rising is fun, but Lost Planet... wow don't get me started on how much I love this game). Needless to say it's worlds better than the last generation, when it seemed like their stock-and-trade was selling hits collections with no improvements, just repackaged versions of games we bought a decade earlier, and shitfests like DinoCrisis 3. I assume you stopped paying attention when Clover was axed? If so, you've been missing Capcom's return to greatness as a developer/publisher.
eNrique @ Mar 17th 2009 1:51AM
Yes AoE, I stopped paying attention a long time ago, but that doesn't meand I didn't play the games mentioned in your comment.
And IMO, Dead Rising was the only thing "remarcable". Lost Planet was mediocre at best, and the remakes/ports (RE4 Wii-Ps2, Okami Wii, PSN/XBLA games) are just, well remakes.
And just to think that everything was caused due to stockholders pressure, makes me wan to cry.
I really miss the old Capcom.
.
Erluti @ Mar 17th 2009 9:10AM
It's totally sad how people think they deserve free stuff.
It takes a lot of work to create content, even if they don't have artists making new art assets. There's still plenty of code to write, and with multiplayer there's play-testing and balancing to go with it. And it's a valid point that if it isn't in the scope or budget of the original project, they could have not polished the game and hacked on this bonus content. Or they could do the sound business practice, and make a good game and then use a different budget (the DLC budget) to create bonus content that can also turn a profit.
And I know a million people said it before me, but "If you don't want it, don't buy it." That's how capitalism works. Products people pay for will continue to be made and priced at what people are willing to pay for them. That's the whole reason boycotts work.
jimi hendrix @ Mar 17th 2009 2:05PM
Take Metal Gear Solid 4 for example they gave the ONLINE VS MODE FREE not only just ONE versus mode but several types of battles for it as well. If Capcom gave it for free (like Burnout and MGS4) then LATER charged for the "premium" DLC content that goes with it then it would be understandable for Capcom to charge money for it... right?
to me I believe "Prove your worth" so I can be INTERESTED in buying DLC
MGS4 and Bunrout had the 'smart' way of approaching their customers without calling "BS".
Capcom wants to charge for DLC that is simple? I mean come on look at SF4... do you seriously have to charge money for ONE extra costume for each character?
stupid moves Capcom STUPID MOVES
Brad Lee @ Mar 18th 2009 10:32AM
For those who don't know, the phrase "the customer is always right" is not supposed to be a literal statement. The idea behind the phrase is that you should always at least act as if the customer is always right.
For example, if a customer at your restaurant complains about his/her meal, it's better to say "Sorry sir/mam, we'll get you another one." By giving the customer a free meal to make up for the shitty one, you're preventing that customer from going to one of the many, many, many other restuarants in the future. In the end, taking a dive on the cost for the meal will more than make itself up if the customer continues to eat at your restaurant in the future.
This is a horrible PR move on the part of Capcom. People that are pissed about this charged DLC (myself included) will feel insulted by these statements, which very may well push us away to the many, many, many other video game series out there.
Capcom is really walking on a thin line for me right now, the only thing holding that line up right now is Dead Rising 2. The free costumes in the first game were unnecessary, but a wonderful "thanks for buying!" statement on the part of the developers, and it gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling on the inside. It's a good thing SF4 wasn't really my thing, otherwise the ridiculously overpriced alternative costumes would have pissed me off more than they did. But now, as I play RE5, I feel the game is lackluster at best, and that co-op doesn't fit the franchise. Alternative modes of play in this "Versus" DLC could have added more opportunity for the game to convince me to buy, but since it's $5, Capcom can go fuck themselves.
Everyone seems to be forgetting a very important aspect of business: image. While free DLC costs companies money, the DLC increases customer loyalty and significantly improves the company's image.
To put this all into perspective, however, I know Halo 3 charges for new map packs, but imagine if they charged $5 to unlock the Capture the Flag game mode. Wouldn't that piss you off just a little bit? Even if the mode of play wasn't in the original budget?
James Troughton @ Apr 7th 2009 3:16PM
Fair play. I won't be buying this, and it's nice to see a publisher hitting back at the "fans". I don't see the worth in VS mode, as I know I won't play it more than once or twice. Therefore I won't be purchasing it.
Longhorn4Life (PSN MariusElijah) @ Mar 16th 2009 6:16PM
I will buy it used and buy the DLC that way it will only cost me $60, Second this is all BS is not that we dont like your product is just the practice of how your treating DLC shouldnt continue.
xFenixKnightx @ Mar 16th 2009 6:40PM
Exaaaaaactly! +1
Gamefly tells me I can "KEEP IT" for only 48.99, AND I have $10.00 worth of Gamefly dollars. $45.00 for a brand new game including MP DLC isn't too shabby. Stop complaining people. Dont like it dont buy it!
Deeznuts420 @ Mar 16th 2009 6:54PM
not everyone has gamefly though ( I do...just sayin :P)
xFenixKnightx @ Mar 16th 2009 7:10PM
Still, go used. High profile titles no matter how good they are always get used copies in store quickly.
Longhorn4Life (PSN MariusElijah) @ Mar 16th 2009 8:17PM
After further thought the controls still bother me so "PASS"
*waits patiently for RE6*
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 8:57PM
Well... to play devil's advocate for a moment... Really it's not like there's ever been multiplayer in a resident evil game before. The series has a over a decade worth of releases, none of which have a multiplayer feature... and now that they announce that they're offering an add-on one at an additional cost people act like they're fucking EA and raping their customer base for things that should rightfully be in the game. I can understand where Capcom is coming from, and frankly agree; the complaint is total BS.
That being said I am not going to be getting the add-on myself as Resident Evil is a series with over a decade of history, and none of that was multiplayer. It's not a series I have ever turned to for any kind of competitive element, and I somehow doubt they could possibly implement one good enough to make it worth playing, in light of how many excellent titles there are out there built around the competitive element.
devilsei @ Mar 16th 2009 9:43PM
AoE...
A little game callled Resident Evil: Outbreak 1 & 2 would like you to come visit so they can snack on you.
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 9:46PM
@devilsei,
Well, I stand corrected then.
Latin_Trident @ Mar 16th 2009 6:17PM
Not saying that I will threat him or anything, but when he finds the heads of his marketing group (people who price products) distributed at the company parking lot, he may take back what he said.
Dartmerc @ Mar 16th 2009 6:51PM
Are you SERIOUSLY complaining about $5? Don't buy it if you don't want it. What do you really expect, that software companies are going to bend over and give everyone everything for free? It'd be nice, and it's cool when it sometimes happens, but you can't honestly expect that to be the rule rather than the exception.
Latin_Trident @ Mar 16th 2009 7:13PM
What do you mean just $5!!! Are you nuts! Either you work for Capcom or you got money!
Listen, people who have used PCs for gaming know the benefits of it including several discounts and FREE DLC. What I don't understand is why you feel you must defend Capcom. I own a console and if I paid for all the DLC for my 12+ games, than I would be paying about $60 which would in a sense cover the cost for buying another game (several if they are used). This is just like GOW 2.
Let me put it to you this way. This is like going to a Chinese restaurant and having a meal but they charge you $1 extra at the end of your meal for your fortune cookie when it should have been included with the meal. Or if you want to be picky, the tea or water they give you at the beginning of the meal.
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 9:10PM
@Latin_Trident,
First of all your suggestion that a marketing exec of an entertainment company shouldn't be shocked to find the heads of his slaughtered employees in the parking lot because they chose to charge $5 for a piece of content to be used with one of their games is rather offensive. You're suggesting it's okay for people to be killed because they don't entertain you for the price you want to be entertained for?! I hope this is just the overraction of youth, but you really should be ashamed, that is a truly HORRIBLE thing to suggest.
Now, as for you "FREE DLC on PC" argument? 1 - let me suggest if you find the PC gaming world so much more agreeable, stick to that then; it's far better than suggesting people get killed because you don't agree with pricing schemes. 2 - I am not super familiar with PC gaming, so I assume you can provide an example of the last time a AAA PC title released a totally free add-on to a title that added two (or more) entirely new modes of gameplay. I assume there is an example out there since you point to PC game DLC as an example of why this is highyway robbery. Okay, time to man up and prove your point, what was the last AAA PC title released that gave away DLC that introduced 2 new modes of gameplay?
Dartmerc @ Mar 16th 2009 9:27PM
I'd have to assume that the PC DLC statement is in regard to games like Team Forteress, and possibly COD4. COD4 pc only received the map pack free because Nvidia sponsored it and threw a couple of dollars or some sort of kickback to IW. IW only created the maps because they could charge for them on xbox and PS3, they were simply looking for some way to get them onto PC without completely giving them away.
Valve games have excellent support, they go above and beyond the standard patch bugs and glitches approach, and continually add new content, in order to keep their community from moving on. Obviously this approach is void for a single player console game.
I wouldn't call it earlier, but I'm now confident to say Latin_Trident is a dick.
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 9:36PM
Yeah, I assumed so as well... which is why the argument doesn't hold water. Team Fortress wasn't an add-on to a AAA title, it was a fan-produced mod for a popular title. Lots of AAA PC dlc is, as you pointed out, underwritten by companies like NVidia. And as for Valve, they really do go above and beyond the call of duty... but I don't think even they have released 2 new game modes, for an existing retail title, for free.... Latin_Trident's argument just doesn't hold up when actually examined.
And agreed, Latin_Trident is a dick.
Vincent @ Mar 16th 2009 9:50PM
I'm not a PC gamer, and I don't even like PC gaming, but Latin_Trident is right about quality content coming out for free on PC games. Diablo 2 had a LOT of that. And more recently, Fallout 3. The GECK update, to be precise. Look into it =)
And we don't even need to go after PC gaming. Look at Burnout Paradise! We got an entire new game thorough 2008 with all those updates, and they were all free
Sion @ Mar 16th 2009 10:41PM
Like the guy said, It wasn't in the Budget. Its only 5 dollars and its for people who want it.
Do you work for free? No, And nether did the people who worked on the DLC.
Is it fare for them to work on something and not get paid? No.
So I just don't get whats the Argument anymore. Everything in the Entertainment Industry cost money to do and not many people will do it for free.
It comes down to this, Do you want to play more then RE5's Story mode?
If you do then buy it.
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 11:01PM
@Vincent,
Lol, Bethesda is one of my very favorite developers, I'm well familiar with the GECK. I would argue that it doesn't count for a few reasons: 1 - no developer who has released modding tools has charged for them (as far as I know, feel free to correct me). At the very least Bethesda never has, and has always included the construction kit in the final release of their RPGs. 2 - GECK is a modding tool and not an addon to the game as such, it doesn't add any new content or gameplay modes.
Regarding Burnout Paradise... I must agree this is one of the best examples of developers supporting a release out there right now. However, it's disingenuous to say that all the updates have been free. They did add a new mode of gameplay (Party mode), much like capcom is doing here, and it costs $10... twice what Capcom is charging. If you add up all the other DLC they've released (assuming you buy the discounted packs, not individual bits, and not including the bullshit content unlock code) you're at an additional $28.50. And I realized that most of the paid DLC has only come in the past few months. But still $38.50 of DLC content is nearly double the price of the game new in stores right now (I am pretty familiar with all of this because I recently got the game for $20 and then spent $38.50 to get all the DLC bits that weren't free... Party mode is a blast btw).
Heimbachae @ Mar 16th 2009 6:17PM
HEY, sssssvvvveegngeneegenbongson!! not everyone is stupid like me. i must say though i'm not buying into this. sorry bud.
ps360owner @ Mar 16th 2009 6:17PM
well i got this game and all i can say is this.it was worth every penny i paid for it.i think the game is awesome i was like alot of people who thought the controlls were really crap but i went ahead and got the game anyway and its awesome.but i dont agree with the paid dlc should be a free update.
AsherR @ Mar 16th 2009 6:19PM
I'm kinda torn on this issue. Being in the software (not gaming) development industry, I understand if they decided to add this later and it was out of scope.
However, Valve offers a TON of free content. But Valve's structure probably helps them offer that free content. Hopefully, their sales numbers will help to convince more companies to offer free DLC.
In the end, if you don't buy it, then they won't likely do it again. Capcom is a fairly smart company. EA stopped doing as much of that BS they did a few years ago it seems and actually started offering higher quality DLC.
Metalfr3ak @ Mar 16th 2009 6:32PM
Gotta Agree on EA here. The Battlefield:Bad Company Players got a nice little helping last year with a free game mode and a free map pack. And all the other goody features the game comes with.
Ghen @ Mar 16th 2009 6:46PM
I like companies like Valve that seem to make games for gamers to enjoy first and make profit second. Since the first point is guaranteed in their method of business the second comes naturally.
Companies that fight for every nickel and dime that they can get make me sick. Capitalism, yeah sure... but company image should count to something.
SoCoolCurt (PSN: KillaKornbread - XBL: SoCoolCurt) @ Mar 16th 2009 6:52PM
i understand where he is coming from and the whole scope of the game thing but i just can't get down with the offering paid content in the 'sweet spot' of 3-6 weeks after the games release. if it's something they were working on during the normal development cycle then it should be free. if it's something that's an after thought that they think up down the road, then they should feel free to charge for it. i'm all for continued support of your games post release (and if you wanna charge for it, go right ahead), but what i don't like is developers cutting parts to charge for later, which is what i'm seeing here.
Sir Buzz Killington( The Artist formerly known as Jakka) @ Mar 16th 2009 6:53PM
Different business models.
Valve DLC tries to hype up the game and push more copies hence the elaborate class update build-up + free weekends that always cause 1000% sale spikes.
Now on consoles, the only devs that even remotely approach this model are Criterion(however they do have a habit of releasing overpriced car pack for every free update), while all others try to directly profit from the DLC by nickel and diming, causing shit like this.
Dartmerc @ Mar 16th 2009 9:28PM
SoCool, the 3 - 6 week sweet spot is pretty obvious, a large percentage of players move on from a non-competitive title after that.
Dr Jeckyl and Mr ESC. @ Mar 16th 2009 9:32PM
With Ea's new take with quality DLC and new Ips is hard not tolove those guys.I'm buying the sequel to Dead Space and Bad Company.
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 9:42PM
@SoCoolCurt,
Really? IS that what you really see here? Which was the last Resident Evil game you played that had any kind of VS multiplayer? I mean you did play one, right? If you're seeing that Capcom has cut out parts of their game to charge for them later, that implies that the parts were there at some point to be cut out. So I'm really curious because I thought I'd played all of the Resident Evil games over the years. Please tell me which one I missed, which one it was that had VS multiplayer. Or were you just jumping on the internet-douche complain about all dlc that is not free bandwagon?
AoE @ Mar 16th 2009 9:48PM
er... foot in mouth. It seems there was an online RE game that I didn't play. Sorry for jumping down your throat dude. It seems I was the one hopping on the internet-douche bandwagon today >_
jimi hendrix @ Mar 17th 2009 2:23PM
@ Ghen
Take Metal Gear Solid 4 for example they gave the ONLINE VS MODE FREE not only just ONE versus mode but several types of battles for it as well. If Capcom gave it for free (like Burnout and MGS4) then LATER charged for the "premium" DLC content that goes with it then it would be understandable for Capcom to charge money for it... right?
to me I believe "Prove your worth" so I can be INTERESTED in buying DLC
MGS4 and Bunrout had the 'smart' way of approaching their customers without calling "BS".
Capcom wants to charge for DLC that is simple? I mean come on look at SF4... do you seriously have to charge money for ONE extra costume for each character?
stupid moves Capcom STUPID MOVES
Jack_Jackington @ Mar 16th 2009 6:19PM
IN YO FACE potential customers
lasersanchez @ Mar 17th 2009 2:05AM
You're not really a customer if you're not paying.