despite people wanting to act otherwise, it’s been documented that Capcom was not in good financial shape back then, would SF V have happened eventually still? probably but it would have come out a lot later without Sony’s funding
[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
this article goes into detail as to why V was exclusive (and why they didn’t think VI would be)
You're correct in that Capcom having financial issues back then pre-MonHunWorld, but we have no proof that the game (especially the most popular fighting IP at the time) wouldn't exist
at all without Sony; in fact, quite the opposite, as
01011001
pointed out. I also remember Ono saying the game was being developed for Xbox One and PS4 but was many years out in 2016, to which people collectively lost their shit because they didn't think SFV would be so far out. What you linked was an opinion piece by Keith Mitchell, without citations or proof, who also goes on to say his opinion that SFV being exclusive was a mistake for the brand. It isn't incorrect to ascertain that Sony helped inject some cash into rushing the game out, but Ono himself as well as other Capcom brass, when asked why the game was exclusive, stated the reason being "vision" and "unity."
Was he correct about it being a mistake? Well, the game was rushed out in such an abysmal state that it almost killed the IP (and even though it became successful and grew legs due to brand strength, the initial few years were so rough that the game bombed via critical (reviewers) reception and Mortal Kombat became the de-facto most popular IP in the genre. Ed Boon couldn't have been happier at the timing.
The early release of SFV actually hurt the franchise more than it helped, but Sony wanted their own fighting game to combat Killer Instict because PSASBR flopped (which was stupid as Microsoft didn't take KI seriously, but it was popular in the FGC at the time I suppose) and needed it out as fast as possible. Very reminiscent to CoD; no need to create a competitor in the genre when youve failed to do so, just assosiate the most popular IP in the genre with your brand.
it would have released maybe a year later, maybe 2 years later, but it would have happened.
the article you linked says how Capcom was already planning SF5 and already committed to the concept of it being more of an eSports game before Sony ever was involved.
sure Capcom might have had to postpone the development until their financial situation stabilised, but to say SF5 only happened thanks to Sony is simply ridiculous.
Fighting games are very easy to make compared to most genres, and Capcom was making way higher budget titles during the time SF5 was in the planning phases that were also way more risky.
not a single DMC game sold as many copies as Street Fighter 4 did. in fact DMC1-4 combined sold about as many copies as the Street Fighter 4 games.
10.9 Million copies had been sold of DMC 1 through 4
SF4 and it's updated versions sold about 10 million units.
yet Capcom in 2013 developed a reboot of DMC...
so insinuating that they didn't have the funds to make SF5 is ridiculous.
what was the case was their focus wasn't on making SF5, and Sony's money made them do it sooner, that's all.
Bingo.
The thing I find fascinating are how certain fanboys crow about SF5 being needed to be funded, but constantly use Dead Rising as an example of a moneyhat (when Capcom have gone on record to say that Microsofts involvement with the IP are the only reason the games keep being made as they seemingly don't give a shit about the IP), Titanfall (when Respawn AND the EA CFO had to write a letter and publicly address the reasoning behind the exclusivity, even throwing Sony under the bus), or even the
new one in this topic, Bayonetta, to which Kamiya have verbally stated 2/3 wouldn't exist
at all if Nintendo didn't fund them. There's so many examples to use for MS/Nintendo moneyhats (RotTR? Resident Evil 4 GameCube? etc.) but the people talking about these while at the same time defending SFV are a sight to see. Edit: Cognitive dissonance, yadda yadda.
