Capcom Says On-Disc DLC Is For 'Easy Compatibility,' File Size

A whole bunch of Street Fighter X Tekken fans contacted us over the weekend to complain about what appeared to be on-disc downloadable content in the fighting game, which comes out tomorrow for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Some gamers have outspokenly criticised the idea of on-disc DLC -- after all, if content is ready in time to be included on a disc, why would a company charge extra for it? Publisher Capcom is no stranger to this controversy; rumours suggested that on-disc DLC was also packaged with the horror game Resident Evil 5 several years ago.

Capcom addressed the controversy on its Capcom Unity website this afternoon:

By including these 12 characters on the disc, the idea was to ensure easy compatibility between players who do and do not choose to download the characters when they arrive as DLC. For example, not buying costumes in the Street Fighter IV series means you will not see the costumes when playing another person who did buy them; on-disc characters avoid this issue and allow everyone to participate in the update without additional patches or hiccups. The update also saves on file size - instead of a massive download, there will be a much smaller unlock that brings the new content to the surface.

This move also furthers our desire to avoid a "Super" version of the game down the road. Everything you need to enjoy this game for months (and years) to come will be accessed by the retail disc available this week. When the DLC update does come, it will inject new life and excitement into the game by unleashing 12 new fighters into the wild.

Street Fighter X Tekken: 12 new characters coming to consoles, PC this fall [Capcom Unity]


Comments

    i'll bet $10 they have another edition of this game out in a year.

    That is probably one of the stupidest sounding excuses i have heard in a while, whilst completely sidestepping what people are actually complaining about.

      +1

      Oh capcom... never change. You provide me w/ more lulz at your inept attempts at hiding your shoddy practices =P

    This is outright stupid, it's like buying a pizza and not able to get the 3 last pieces unless you pay more for them. In reality, that can't keep doing this, it's just not the right way to do things, unless you plan to give them away on release date instead of milking more money on an item the customer has already purchased.

    Is the game still worth buying without the DLC? If so, then they owe you nothing. They created a game worth buying, and then they made more stuff for it. When they made the extra content is irrelevant.

    It's not dissimilar to complaining that the car retailers charge extra for leather seats (The seats were available when the car was manufactured, why weren't they included by default in all cars?).

      But the leather seats are actually IN THIS CAR - just you can't use them

        Well no, because the real cost of what you're paying is for the license to use the software and content on that disc. Buying the game is like buying the base model car. If you want extras, they cost extra.

          These people supporting DLC in the comments are just making things worst in the long run for consumers.

          Let me walk through the chronology of DLC arguments.

          At first it was - "Don't charge us for ANYTHING more than the disc!"
          But all that changed.

          Then - "DLC is acceptable but should never be anything more than cosmetic changes, all gameplay content should already be on the disc"
          But all that changed.

          Then - "DLC can be game altering content but it should never interfere with the gampleay of users who did not buy the DLC"
          But all that changed.

          We have cut developers way too much slack on DLC. People don't even find it ludicrous anymore that an entire roster of fighting characters have to be bought outside the game! We are moving towards a shitty future of being given a disk a free, but for EVERY character you want, you pay for.

          We should stop making DLC out to be a "luxury" item outside of the actual game. In many cases now it IS part of the actual game, only locked away until we pay for it.

      Jordaan, you have obviously missed the point, when you purchase an item, you the customer, own everything in it. It's like they're scamming us.

        That's nice, but that's not how software works. You own the physical disc. You license the right to use the software contained within.

        In this case, the license you get for paying for the retail copy of the game includes the characters they give you by default.

          We all understand the ownership of license here, but it's not compatible with consumer thought patterns. The outrage is justified, anybody here is mad about this (including me) feel like they deserve access to this material due to the fact that it was already delivered to them and have provided apt comparisons.

          I don't know about others but I DON'T WANT software on a *disc* that I do own, without the license to access it.

            As I originally said, the content that Capcom have included without DLC unlock codes is what they consider to be a full game worthy of purchase. If you disagree, then be outraged about that.

            If they released two versions of the game to retail, standard and premium, and the advantage of the premium edition was that it came with more characters, almost nobody would be complaining. Yet for some reason, people have this misguided idea of being ripped off because Capcom have gone with "Buy the standard at retail, unlock the premium by paying the difference whenever you want". It boggles the mind.

              +10000 to this

              I really don't get the hate towards having the DLC on the disc. Would you prefer to have random matches "desync" like in the recent Mortal Kombat debacle? That game's multiplayer was useless for a few weeks after the DLC was released due to to different players having different combinations of DLC characters and costume packs and it sucked, even though I know nothing about it because it banned in Australia and I have obviously never ever played it.

              Of course I made no disillusions about being mad about "feeling ripped off" because there are staggered elements of a finished game. But really the issue of on-disc DLC specifically is attributed to the fact that somebody is given something they can't access/open/use whatever until they just pay more.

              Yes you're right,if Capcom released a "normal characters edition" and "special all the characters edition" then this argument would disappear and revert to only the first part of my reply: Those editions would then stand or not be able to stand on their own with their pricing. Which is par for the course and something we deal with everyday.

              If people want to pay the premium then sure why not, but don't GIVE me that premium and then go "Oh wait that's premium and you didn't buy it I should just lock that for you."

                Why not? It doesn't affect you negatively in any way if you choose not to buy the DLC, and if you do, it saves you a download and a bunch of compatibility issues.

                If it wasn't announced that the DLC was on the disc, you'd likely never know, it's not an intrusive thing.

                Your comment on whether the standard or premium are capable of standing on their own makes no sense. For the end consumer, it's the same thing (pay $X for standard, or $(X+10) for premium. Meanwhile, more of the profit for the luxury addons goes to the developer, rather than the supply chain. Consumers are in no way negatively affected, and the developers are at less risk, with more profit, which will encourage them to make more content (which in my mind is a good thing).

                  You don't seem to understand how consumer frame-of-mind works, not a bad thing since it does vary and you're entitled to your opinions, but you did show confusion about how somebody could be mad about this and I'm trying to explain it even if you still think it's stupid.

                  In terms of a negative effect, you're seeing it. People are upset, feel as if they're being ripped off and having the expectations defied. Also the more companies that do this successful will eventually iterate such systems to a degree to squeeze as much money as possible out of the consumer. We've had plenty of articles about it here: Where we'd have to pay huge magnitudes higher to get what many consider to be the "full game" than what we used to.

                  Also we'd find out if it was hidden on the disc. Whole game characters are not a 1mb download these days.

                  Individual unchangeable products have had to stand on their own merits since their inception. When I argued about the divide between a 'special' and 'normal' edition I meant EXCLUSIVELY in those editions. You would have to decide if what was in each edition was worth the asking price and that would be the only way to get it. You could argue that that's archaic, but I saw nobody complaining 15 years ago.

                  In terms of money going to the developer, nobody should care about this, it is a bonus. You pay money in exchange for the game. That's it. Which is what this is all about: The consumer mindset. Most consumers probably won't feel too bad about playing a game multiplayer and encountering somebody who has a character they don't have, or feel bad that their game has to download content that they have not bought and therefore won't access. What they feel bad about is actually forking money over in the very first instance for a an incomplete game or for a game that has completed but locked out content already in it. License or not, we feel ripped off for actively being given something of which the only difference is that we need to pay more for it.

          If that were correct, then my license should allow me to play the game on any format (eg. having purchased the license to Monkey Island, I shouldn't have to pay full price for the re-released version so that'll work on current generation hardware).

          Additionally, should the disc containing the licensed software were to become damaged, I should be able to have a replacement for the cost of the disc (+labour+postage) rather than having to buy the entire license again.

      It's more like they included the leather seats in the car but they put big black garbage bags over them so you can't see or feel them unless you pay extra.

        The car comes with adequate seats. If you want luxury seats, that costs extra.

        The game comes with an adequate number of characters. If you want a better cast of characters, that costs extra.

          Gonna have to agree with Jordaan here, at least generally.

          On disc DLC is probably better than Day 1 DLC, because both are made for release, but you don't need to download it. Having it on disc is hardly a taunt, like some people claim, because they don't openly advertise that it's on disc, nor does the game ever go HEY HEY BUY THIS.

          So then it comes down to a discussion on Day 1 DLC. But here's the thing: DLC is really the same as expansion packs, just released in smaller pieces. You can pick and choose what parts you want. Work on an expansion pack begins when the main game is done, and you probably could release quite a bit when the actual game comes out.

            "DLC is really the same as expansion packs, just released in smaller pieces."

            And that's where the comparison ends, because all that naff like *on disc* and *day 1* dlc is not at all like what expansion packs were all about.

            If it were an expansion pack, the game wouldn't fit on the disc but I get where your coming from and I partly agree with you. People don't like having something already in their hands and have to pay extra for it, do you get where I'm coming from?

          If we're going to do analogies..

          This would be more like buying a 3 Seater car thats perfectly useable and fine w/ a 4th seat right there for use but is blocked by a wall or whatever until you pay the extra money to take the block/barricade down... or get an A8ehm* "indendant shop" *ahem* to do the same thing to the wall so you can have a full 4 seater =P

        "License the right", *giggles* So you think that the company still owns the content in an item the customer has bought, well, good luck keeping that away from hackers. All I'm saying that it's a completely stupid idea, unsecure as well, not so cost effect now is it? It would be better to keep it as a downloadable DLC instead of buying something that has content in it to not be yours.

    How stupid is Capcom. If Mortal Kombat can make the game compabitle with DLC fighters why can't Capcom games? Because Capcom doesn't want to give anything for free MK just gave free alt costumes that were also used to allow DLC fighters vs non DLC fighters.

      That's not the point. They CAN make it compatible with DLC fighters, it's just easier for everyone to include them on the disc. Having them as characters separate from the disc just means that you have to download a bigger file when you buy them, and that people who don't buy them also have to download a big file in order to play online, whether they want the characters or not. That's the ONLY difference between this and normal DLC characters.

    But... that's not what people are complaining about! Stupid Capcom!

    I don't like RE5 being used as an example. The game already had Mercenaries mode, yes, but the multiplayer just added well, multiplayer. Like adding multiplayer to Skyrim that some people have done. You're just playing on the same area.

    Although this "DLC" is rather stupid. Avoiding a "Super" version? Those versions are mainly there to change the overall system to the game (as much as I would like to not defend it). A "Super" version isn't just DLC content.

    What's strange is that they're offering them as Vita exclusive characters and then making them DLC for the console.

    Just.. I don't understand. First of all, it defeats the entire purpose of version-exclusive characters because they're not exclusive anymore, are they? Secondly, on what planet is it okay to charge extra for the characters just because you got the console version? How does that make any sense at all?

    It seems like even the arguments for on-disc DLC slip the net here.

    Vote with your wallets. if no one pays for on disc or day 1 dlc then they will stop doing it.

      Yeah, let's do better, let's not buy DLC at all. Ever.

      League of Legends, I refuse to buy your DLC. I mean, the character's data files were included in the last patch I downloaded, why should I have to pay to unlock them? They're already on my computer!

        ^(The above was Sarcasm]

          You are beyond help.

          grow up

            @jordaan

              I don't see why he needs to grow up.

              As bad as it sounds, the fact that the files are in your possession don't automatically entitle you to use them. People are completely fine with compatibility patches for fighting games, and that's really all this is.

          Sarcasm or not, I certainly would support not buying any DLC, ever.

        No need to act like a dick. I'm not against DLC at all, but there's a world of difference between DLC in a free to play game, and DLC in a full-price retail release.

    Forza and Burnout Paradise include a free patch when DLC comes out, so you could see other people using the DLC.
    It was optional, rather than a forced update for all which is awesome.

    If you didnt have the patch, you'd just see a plain black car.

    This to me is ridiculous. Paying extra for alternate consumes is just scabby. The fact that the DLC is already on the disc makes it a whole lot more scabbier. Since when have any of the past street fighter or tekkens ever done this. They have always been achievement items. Like someone said - vote with your wallet.

    This kind of practice is what makes me stay away from fighting games.

    So, FGC, sack up and don't buy the bloody game. Capcom know that they can get away with reaming you, and will continue to pull this shit until sales convince them otherwise.

    I love the line "This move also furthers our desire to avoid a “Super” version of the game down the road"
    Yeah right, I'll wait for 'Super Street fighter X Tekken Complete Arcade Edition+Alpha' in the next 6 months before I pick this up.

      If it happens, then it would be amazing, because all they would have to do is release the same disc, but simply provide a code in the box for the DLC.

    This argument is ridiculous. As much as people would like to think otherwise, games are made on a budget.

    If the budget covers fourty-three characters, that's all you're getting. That's a bit unfortunate for people who like characters that didn't make it in. If only they could find some way to fund more characters...

    Like it or not, DLC works on a seperate budget to the main game, with the idea that the extra money they've spent making them can be recovered from people buying the DLC.

    The fact that they're ready in time to put on the actual disc makes no difference to whether or not they should be free. Capcom are running a business, whether you like it or not.

      I disagree in this instance, especially since this is a fighting game, they made the game and the DLC at the same time, they took the time to make sure (assumption) that all the characters were balanced, etc.

      The argument could be made that this game should have been out last year, if they weren't stuffing around with the extra 12 characters, the game hasn't been significantly delayed for consoles (aside from Vita, but I personally think that was only done to entice double dipping later this year as I feel one version PS3/PSV would have suffered if released at the same time), their budget covered the development time. Otherwise if their business model is based on selling DLC to break even and/or make a profit, then they are doing it wrong.

      There will be some tuning I'm sure after release, but effectively there is no major development for the game post release, so anything sold through DLC isn't really covering any major costs, this is just an instance of trying to justify making a regular game sell for $130-$140 (AU Prices) in today's market.

      And let's not get started on the whole Gem situation!

        On your comment regarding their budget covering development time, you're really missing the point there. Budgets cover a certain amount of people working for a certain period of time. Extra people can be put to work on the project for the purpose of making DLC characters, but extra people cost extra money.

        They expect to make money on the base game, without DLC. They need to make a certain level of profit on each game they develop to justify making the thing in the first place.

        The more you eat into that profit by adding more and more characters to the game, the less room you leave as a buffer in case of poor sales, or extended development periods (delays to work on the game) due to variables that can't be predicted.

        In all honesty, fourty-one characters (including Toro, Kuro and Cole) is a LOT of characters, no matter how you look at it. To say that characters aren't worth paying for simply because of WHEN they're developed is wrong.

        My initial reaction to the roster was "damn, no Cody." Capcom are giving me the option to play Cody, and I'm willing to pay for the privilege of playing him.

        I can't complain that they're giving me the option because I don't HAVE to buy any of the DLC. The game will work regardless of whether or not I do, and I'll have fairly close to half a hundred characters to play without any extra outlay.

          "They expect to make money on the base game, without DLC."

          Exactly and if no one buys the DLC, are they still making a profit? If not, then their development model needs to be changed. As I stated, my opinion on this situation is the DLC was made in conjunction with the 'base game', the base game they are trying to sell will ultimately cover the cost of the development (which included DLC).

          So they are technically in a position to give the DLC away for nothing, but we know they won't. I know they are a business and the idea is for them to make money, but this is just profit hunting.

          I never stated that the asking price for the content in the base game was too high, just their excuse to sell a game for an inflated price. It's great they are giving the customer a large roster, but as an experimental crossover maybe they didn't need to make a game with 50 characters, would people have been pissed with only 30 in total?

          One thing for sure, when Tekken X Street Fighter rolls around we can expect the exactly the same thing all over again.

            Not every game made is a success, financially. You need a healthy profit from your successful games so that you can absorb the losses if one of your games falls flat on its face.

            I can't blame them for "profit hunting" as you call it, because their operating income was down 47.2% in the 2011 financial year. There are no guarantees the sales from the base game would cover the development costs, and to assume otherwise would be stupid.

            You have to view the DLC and the core game as separate products. The profits from Skyrim (for example) have more than likely covered the development costs of the first expansion pack, but they're not going to give it away for free any more than they're going just fire their money into the street with confetti cannons.

            Would they lose money on Skyrim as a whole if they released a free expansion pack? No. But what they are losing is the amount of profit they pump back in to make the expansion pack, and that's a totally unnecessary loss.

            In much the same way, I'm sure Capcom COULD just keep developing free characters for the game, but doing so is just more cost they're not making anything from. Given their reduced profits as already mentioned, that's a terrible idea.

            "I never stated that the asking price for the content in the base game was too high"

            ...You're admitting they're giving you enough content for that price point, but begrudging them their right to sell you more? As an optional purchase, it changes absolutely nothing unless you want it to.

              As I've mentioned, this is my opinion of this single title and I haven't mentioned other instances of DLC with other games.

              I do believe there are instances where there are assigned teams to make DLC and obviously they have a budget, but like I mentioned, in this case I believe the whole complete game was developed at the same time for a single budget and it's simply a case of content restrict.

              Also never stated that I should be getting free content, just they hypothetically could do it, perhaps share some goodwill to the consumers they continually fleece with constant game revisions? Burnout Paradise and the publicity did exceptionally well from the fair chunk of free DLC that EA/Criterion gave away.

              The difference with Skyrim is that even though the DLC would have been planned for early on, work on it probably didn't start til near the end of Skyrim being complete, that DLC was also still being made and not sitting on the disc everyone already has.

              Finally, just on the CAPCOM numbers, I think they would hold more water if they weren't in comparison to their previous financial year, which according to CAPCOM were record breaking...

              http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/news/html/e110506c.html

              Also, still believe there will be a "Super" version!

    What people are mad about is that this stuff is finished and on the retail disc already. This isn't content that came 1 or 2 weeks after launch or that is still being worked on but something we have technically already payed for. Now they will no doubt want to charge us more money to unlock content that they have already sold us. If it's on the disc, it should be part of the game. There is no excuse for cutting out content of the game with the entire idea of charging people for it. That's a huge dick move.

    It's Capcom though and don't they have a record of pulling moves like this? Think I remember reading that RE5 had some DLC on the disc too you had to buy to unlock. You aren't being cool to your customers when you do stuff like this and many people take offence.

      There's a perfectly legitimate excuse, if they couldn't cover the costs of adding the extra characters without charging extra for them.
      It doesn't matter if they're released on the disc or 6 months down the line, they still cost money to develop, and there's still only so many they can sell you before they start to lose money on the whole deal.

      The games we work on at work we think about the DLC long before the game is released, we try to set the system up to handle it, and if the artists have time to cram a few of those assets in that's even better.
      We have our budget for the game, and a budget for the DLC. If we can get enough people to work on both at once it just means you get access to it earlier.

      It's so funny how some people feel such entitlement to the characters on the disc, forgetting how the developers are entitled to, you know, money for the work they do.
      These characters are extras on top of the base game, if the base game isn't good enough for you then don't buy it. But don't whinge because you bigger games for the same price.

        I'm sorry... I dont buy it...

        This sounds like "we're not ready for it yet but we managed to fit 90-99% of the content for the "extra" characters on your disk but don't worry you can unlock it later on for small price when we send the 1% code to unlock it"

        How can you *NOT* cover the cost if THE CONTENT IS ALREADY ON THE DISK. What did little fairies decided to magically work on the DLC content for free while it was in production? And they wont get paid until the DLC anouncement arrives? So your meaning to tell me in the grossly unlikely event that no one buys DLC your budget for the entire project goes broke? Because work effort has already been put on DLC but "we cannot afford it at release date"? Either thats grossly incompetent budgeting or your pulling our leg to snag extra cash on sales at a later date.. i go for the latter.

        Had it actually been an full downloadable add-on you could pay for later down the line then yes your current argument would have more credibility. This is flat out releasing a finished product and witholding content unless you pay for more.

        You can call it "self enitlement". I call it my right as a consumer to get the *FULL* product I pay for.

          Exactly. If the budget is there to make those characters already, then it is part of the game budget - just because you split part of it off and call it 'DLC budget' instead doesn't change a thing.

    Pay to win in its simplest form. Any serious player who opts out of paying extra will be at the massive disadvantage because they dont get to work out the ins and outs of dlc charcters hands on. Capcom knows this and feels they can get away with it (which they will, again).This will only change when tournament organisers work up the courage to ban dlc characters outright (which will never happen).

    My solution.
    Stick with Super Street Fighter IV and never buy into Crapcoms crap again. Leaned that lesson the hard way.
    They will not get a dollar from me until they have learned their lesson.

    12 characters as DLC is just too much, but will i still buy them? yes, eventually, because i could never handle not having 12 characters which i may play better as (especially alisa, as i played her in tekken 6).

    it sucks, but bussiness is bussiness, what i don't understand is how capcom would think the files wouldn't be found if they are on the disc...

    I think the anger comes from the fact that the greed from Capcom is too apparent. We all know companies care about profit, but as consumers we also want to think companies value their customers, and at least attempt to cover money making strategies with a veil humility. Consumers will happily pay for DLC that has been given time and effort (eg undead nightmare dlc).

    Putting DLC on a disc presents an outlook that achieves nothing but expose greed and to an extent, the contempt that capcom is showing its consumers. The content is there. The work was factored into the end product. No extra work post going gold was made to the game. No extra effort....yet they segregate consumers of the final product for money.

    That is what is most annoying. Just my opinion.

    Many other games (Crackdown, Mortal Kombat, Fable) have already used a simple solution to get around that. Just provide a free download that adds the data for the extra content, and give a free costume or two for the free users as incentive.

    As for the file size, these are characters for a fighting game, not Shivering Isles. I'm sure anyone using the internet for gaming can manage the 100mb or so download (going off MK sizes).

    I remember a time when fighting games had extra characters you could.... you know.. unlock by playing the game

    Marvel VS Capcom 2 did this, so did Tekken 2 - when did this practice stop?

    The simple fact is that the budget was already there to create these characters - if they didn't think they could recoup their development cost at retail, then they should have been more selective about which characters to include in the game. Normal (or I guess now, 'old') practice for DLC development is based on early sales, as you then have some guide as to how much new content is worth developing. If you've already budgeted your *entire* DLC strategy at the very start, then you're really just splitting off part of your game budget for the express purpose of gouging consumers.

    Regardless of the semantics of budgeting, my biggest issue with this sort of crap is that they charge far more for the DLC characters than what those characters would have cost to produce (taking the price of the game, engine, environments, and all its existing characters as a baseline) - 10~20% of the retail price of the entire game per additional character?? To get the full roster, you have to pay two to three times the price of the original game?? There's no justification at all for that - its a blatant money grab.

    This is why I've stopped buying Capcom games at launch - we all know the eventual 'ultimate' version will be coming along in a few months, and probably cheaper than the original version to boot. (and even that's no guarantee - look at Shuma and Jill in UMvC3...)

    I have no issue with DLC in games when there's value for money on offer - hell, offer me an 'unlock all characters for $10' option and I'll probably cave - but as it stands, I'm just not going to buy the launch version of the game at all. See how that works Capcom?

    I like DLC, it has given me all the characters I wanted that weren't on the original roster. (5 of them!) I'm not gonna bitch, because I'm damned happy.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now