Oh yeah, I was going to say, this isn't exactly *unfair* of MS to do. They currently aren't being supported by a Japanese company for the Japanese market (Sega = US market). If no one is going to support them, they certainly should be able to get that support any way they can.

What's wrong with a level playing field?

Well, they also had a PS2 and a GC wrapped up with it, so who knows.

On a note about Capcom's significant loss of revenue,, The main reason can be traced to the period after the death of Dreamcast to current. Capcom's greatest and overall most profitable games are their outstanding 2-D fighters. These more "genre-specific" games had the ultimate platform to showcase themselves on the Dreamcast. The system packed more texture ram than the PS2, and also had probably THE best arcade stick to ever grace a console. Games like Street Fighter Alpha 3, Marvel Vs. Capcom 2 and a slew of others all made for an incredible 2-D fighter's dream... All in a system that eventually costed under $50 The PS2 had Capcom Vs. SNK 2 which was a sequel to the Dreamcast original, but also brought longer load times, loss of some frames of animation, and no quality stick to use along with it. As for the Gamecube's similar version, it is for some reasons Dreamcast quality, but no apparent choice of a fighting stick, along with a dumbed-down control scheme, make up a pretty sad picture...And give little hope to a legion of fans who were praying that the Dreamcast's 2-D fighting legacy would live on. Plus, the game has been out for only a few days as you realize.

This was submitted by John (who is the bro of "Drexl")

Some very valid points, but at the same time - I think you're being a bit of a Chicken Little shouting that the sky is falling. The acquisition of Rare and possibly Capcom would not create an unfair advantage at all. It's completely fair. How fair was it for Sony to get the Grand Theft Auto series as an exclusive for the next few years as of last May? Before that it was almost certain that it would find a port on the Xbox. What about Resident Evil on the Gamecube? How fair is that? How logical is that? There are tons of people who were "forced" into purchasing a Gamecube so they could play their favorite game... Resident Evil.

Resident Evil is not even the type of game that fits in with the rest of Nintendo's lineup. It's more of a game for PS2 or Xbox folk. Right now the PS2 is the most well rounded system as far as games go. The Xbox favors the US PC gamer and Nintendo favors another type of gamer (politician's smile)... Anyway - the PS2 has all types of games and even though both the GCN and Xbox have all types of games, they are clearly slim pickins in some areas.

You said yourself that the Xbox is currently crippled by lack of software - how is the purchase of 2 companies (one of which hasn't really made hardly any games in the past 2 years) going to all of a sudden turn the tides and make Microsoft a Monopoly on the Game Industry? It's not. All it will do is maybe help them out a little. They're not trying to buy EVERY developer out there. Even Microsoft doesn't have enough money to do that... even if they wanted to. They're just trying to make a few key purchases in order for their console to be a success. There will be a PS3 and probably a PS4. My guess is that Sony will own the next generation as well, but not by quite such a large margin.

Assuming Microsoft was capable of purchasing Sega, EA, Interplay, Activision, 3DRealms, Id Software, Tecmo, etc etc... then they would probably be able to purchase Sony, Disney, AOL Time Warner, Nintendo and then they would just own everybody. We would all wear silver jumpsuits with "Microsoft" embroidered down the sleeves. It seems like that's the impression that alot of you have. Microsoft isn't out looking for world domination. They aren't even looking for console domination - they just want to be another successful console.

I mean - look at their sales figures - they had to lower their projections because the sales weren't meeting expectations. Were they sad? Hell no - they were pleased as punch. As anyone working for Xbox about it - they consider 4 million (as of June) to be a success. If they were looking for world domination, they would've had us all implanted with mind control chips by now.

You say that if MS were to buy up all the developers that no other console could have "A" class games... well, all I hear from Xbox haters is that they have no AAA games as it is. Personally, I think Xbox has plenty of fantastic games. It all comes down to personal taste.

Finally - buying every developer in the world would be a "shoot yourself in the foot" sort of move anyway. You own every developer and so you have every game on your system and since you own the developer, you reap the profits. If you have 9 developers releasing 9 fighting games that are all fairly similar, how are you going to profit? Gamers aren't going to buy all 9 games. Since you own the developers, you're also in charge of paying their salaries. If say 2 or 3 of the fighters you've paid to have produced sell well, the other 6 or 7 tank and it's basically like you bet against yourself. Like going to play roulette and placing chips on every square. It's a gamble that doesn't really pay off... especially if it lands 00.

You guys just seem to be blowing this a wee bit out of proportion.

Trigger you ask how is it fair for games to be exclusive?

it is a standard thing in the industry to work out exclusive games for your console. If MS was just doing this then it would at least be normal.

Instead they really are having a tough time getting exclusives since they would not sell as well on the XBox due to the smaller base so instead they just start buying companies. this is not the same thing at all.

for MS they could afford sadly to buy most of the major developers and have them cease making games for Sony and Nintendo. Neither console maker could get enough money to outbid MS for any company if MS wanted it bad enough.they will not do this. They may however continue to buy developers till they own enough to damage the other consoles although I hope they do not.

It was a rhetorical question, but anyway - where do you think Sony got its first party developers? They purchased them. Same goes for Nintendo. You're worried about nothing. Microsoft has purchased Rare and now maybe Capcom. There's hundreds of developers and I doubt they could purchase enough to damage the other two consoles.. the whole "shoot themselves in the foot" scenario I illustrated...

I think Resident Evil will sell well on any console. Being on the Game Cube is not an issue and it certainly sold fairly well when it came out this year.

However, all the Capcom titles would fit well on the Xbox so if the opportunity arrises Microsoft should buy them.

If you look at the current and future lineup of games, the big weakness for the Xbox is the kind of stuff Capcom could bring them. Not to slight Sega and Namco, but other than Panzer Dragoon Sega has yet to bring a big franchise to the Xbox. Stuff like Shenmue, Jet Set Radio, etc are niche titles that have a limited number of people interested in buying them. Namco has really had little other than DOA that has made a major impact either. With Capcom Xbox would have a much better rounded lineup of games and might give them a real chance to compete with Sony.

I know it sucks for some that don't want to buy every console, but this is the way it is. You are going to miss something if you don't have all three. If Nintendo bought Capcom it would be just as unfair to people that didn't have Cubes.

Another thing to note, MS is not going to be able to just buy up every developer out there. Capcom will take some major money to buy out. I doubt MS would be able to have another oppertunity to grab a developer this big. Thats why they shouldn't pass it up.

Not true. While the Gamecube lineup skews towards more family-friendly material, there is room for all kinds of games. Like I've said before, obtaining the Resident Evil series was a conscious choice by Nintendo to show that in this generation they are open for any kind of game on their console. So far, the lineup for Gamecube has been remarkably varied, certainly more so than the N64 in it's first year.

My point is that nobody wants to see just one kind of game on their console, whether they own an Xbox, PS2, or Gamecube...or any combination of the three.

Thanks Groucho.

I don't think anyone's saying MS is going to buy every company right away. It's just a disturbing pattern. They just bought Rare, they're trying to buy Capcom, and they tried to buy Nintendo and Sega in the past. It's obvious they have no qualms about buying dominance of the industry.

So lets say the Rare sale pays off, and the Capcom sale goes through and pays off as well. MS starts making some profits on the X-box (or X-box 2) and buys another developer or two.'

This could be a cycle that repeats over and over through the years until MS owns enough major developers that Nintendo and Sony have trouble competing as they don't have enough cash to throw around to keep up.

And this is bad for everyone but the very small minority of hardcore gamers who will always own every system on the market. And it could even be bad for them if it basically kills competion between consoles and developers as they're all developing for the same console and already have their bank outs taken care of from the sale to MS. If this happens, the quality of games would drop, and the ratio of crap games to great games would be even worse than it already is.

And, as I've said before, I think buying third parties is bad for the industry, regardless of whether it's MS, Sony or Nintendo doing it. I mean Nintendo is my personal favorite hardware company as I like their controllers the best and greatly prefer their cheap gaming only machine philosophy to MS and Sony's set-top box goals, so from that stand point I'd rather see Nintendo by Capcom. But I would greatly prefer than no one buy them and they remain and independent third party.

I have no problem with third parties entering into exclusive agreements with console makers. That way theoretically gamers on every system can enjoy some of their games, and the developer can maximize the games for whatever hardware the game is exclusive to.

didn't Capcon recently spend millions developing a development platform that allows for the easy conversion of titles across all next generation platforms? Why the hell would they sell out to MS, if they are so well equipped to make games for all platforms? What would be the benefit to limiting themselves to just one?

Are you making up quotes now? First of all, This doesn't really help the topic. Second - people focusing on one little Nintendo comment, you need to stop. I said that because Nintendo games are different from PS2 games and a different type of crowd likes em... I didn't want to say something that people would flip out about because they're so sensitive, so I just left it to your imaginations. Josh - Pot/Kettle.

It's somewhat true - considering how many people bought a Gamecube just for Resident Evil and who would sell it if the series moved to the Xbox - that just shows that the Gamecube has nothing much to offer some fans of RE beyond that series... maybe Eternal Darkness. Anyway - it's not a jab at Nintendo - they do seem to have a decent variety of games on it when you count titles that span all 3 platforms.

I totally agree with you though that nobody wants to see just one type of game on their console. So I guess for my personal feelings, I'd like to see Capcom bought by MS. However, for the sake of the GC, I think they should stay 3rd party.

The people who bought a Cube only for Resident Evil do exist, but they are in the minority. Most people don't buy a console for a single game. [Anecdotal...not actual data]From reading the various boards there seem to be more people picking up Gamecubes for Animal Crossing than there were for Resident Evil.[/Anecdotal]

Anybody who is only interested in survival horror is going to be disappointed regardless of their console choice. That's a pretty limited market.

Nice caveat. I would argue that all three consoles have a nice variety of exclusive titles. I don't think any of them have have completely pigeonholed themselves into one niche or another. Which is probably a good thing, since I don't know any gamers who really limit themselves...most of us enjoy a wide variety of games.

I would argue that the Xbox is lacking in the exclusive department for games like those that Nintendo has exclusivity on... Their purchase of Rare certainly helps and so will the release of Tork, Blinx, and Psychonauts. At the same time, the Gamecube is kinda lacking in exclusive FPS or action games... I'm sure they have something on the horizon to fix that (Metroid). It depends on the type of games you like - if your tastes are fairly specific, you'll tend to favor one console over another which is something that alot of us seem to be doing. I have broad tastes - but my favorites are easily defined and so far the PC is the best console for me, and second would be the Xbox. If my favorite was platformers, I'd be all over the Gamecube.

I'll agree with you that Animal Crossing seems to be hugely popular. It's got me curious.

No one ever answered my question: anything not released for the PS2 is bad for the majority of gamers, no?

You're right. Neither system has a completely diverse lineup, and both appeal to different niches. But there is a good variety I think. If the Xbox only had FPS games and the Gamecube only had platformers, I think everybody would get bored pretty quick...regardless of the quality of those games.

Which takes me back to Capcom. Third-party developers and multi-console games help fill holes in the different consoles' lineup. Capcom produces a lot of different games that appeal to different gamers who own various combinations of all three consoles. If Microsoft bought Capcom out, it would certainly help them but at the expense of PS2 and Gamecube owners. And unlike an exclusivity deal, it would be a permanent condition.

This is different than Rare since they weren't multi-console. They basically went from developing for one niche of gamers to another. A buyout of Capcom would have a much more dramatic effect.

I didn't delete my post quickly enough. I realized it wouldn't help the topic. But since it's too late, I was just making the point that you were expressing how much you hate the cracks at MS and the XBox, then turn around and make one about the GC.

GP: Not if you're of the opinion that competition between consoles is good for gamers

I do have a tough time believing that Nintendo would let such an important 3rd party developer go to the wayside though. I get the feeling this is more rumor than fact.

Or Sony. Like I said up above, I'm sure that IF Capcom were up for sale they'd give all three developers a shot. For the record I think it would be equally bad for gamers in general if Nintendo bought them as well.

{Yawn}

Big companies buy little companies. Then new talent, along with old talent moving around, form new companies. New companies die, grow to little companies, or thrive and become big.

Then, the cycle continues...

*****

Is it really necessary to list every purchased developer by every current big company in just the last decade (such as, but not limited to, Sega, Nintendo, Sony, EA, Vivendi, Acclaim, Activision, THQ) before stating the obvious? MS is not doing anything new.

If one party wants to buy, and the other wants to sell, something ranging from a time-exclusive release to the entire company, that's fine with me. And if I don't want to purchase another machine to follow that exclusive or company, I won't. If I do, I will. Very simple, really.

By the way, if you're complaining about MS using resources derived from one unrelated area of the company to buy developers, be consistent and at least complain about Sony and Vivendi from the above list, as well.

Sony made a huge first impression with Psygnosis games, a company not purchased from their profits from Dracula on Sega CD, and continue to buy smaller outfits to this day; the latest, I believe, being Incog (Twisted Metal Black).

And Vivendi... well just take a look at whose under their umbrella. Talk about purchasing your way into the industry. (Of course, given their current financial shape, it now looks like a series of really bad decisions.)

It wasn't a crack at GC. I was making a point that you took out of context and I said it to be diplomatic and PC so as not to disturb any GC people, but since they assume I'm always going to crack on the GC they just took it that way anyway. So much for leaving things up to the imagination.

What I'm sick of is how it's okay for people to make cracks at MS and the Xbox, but if someone says anything bad about GC everyone flaps their arms and makes a big fuss. I mean - I really don't care - the only reason I take the position to defend against MS attacks is because this is such an anti-MS forum for the most part and I don't think it's very balanced. Do you really think it's okay for someone to clown on the Xbox controller being the size of a watermelon and yet it's not okay for someone to say the Gamecube is made for babies? According to the forum rules, neither is okay. That's why I'm sick of the MS bashing - because it seems to be allowed here and that's unfair. Anyway - if clowning on all systems was okay here, I really wouldn't care what someone said about the Xbox - it's not like I'm in love with MS... and as I've said before, I'm not anti-Gamecube either.

The Xbox is big. Its controller is big. Neither of these things is disputable or particularly insulting. My picture of the portable C64 was a "omg, the xbox is big, lol" joke, ie not a diss at the Xbox at all.

Saying the GC is for little kids is insulting to the mature adults that own and enjoy one, but you've never understood that and I don't expect you to now.

Oh, and do you want indoor photos from my camera? I've been busy & totally forgot about that.

First of all - let's drop this because it's just going to steer this thread off topic more. I don't think the Xbox or the controller is too big, so that must be a personal issue - it's smaller than the N64 controller. I know that GC owners get offended by such a comment - I've always understood that they do. I even stated that we shouldn't make fun of either console. Don't try to make me out like some sort of closed minded freak who can't understand simple concepts. What you're proposing is that it's okay to make fun of the Xbox because it's large (which is somewhat of a subjective issue) while it's not okay to make fun of the GC because it puts out games for kids (which is also somewhat of a subjective issue)... that's a double standard and neither is okay. Ask a moderator if it's okay.

Thanks for the photos - I think you sent me one from indoors - looks good to me. I was actually gonna buy one, but then saw the price.

Okay - back to the topic. Microsoft, Capcom... discuss. Any new articles? Anyone have any actual news?

My choice in this matter and I think most gamers would be for Capcom to stay third party as they are now. I'm looking at this from a worst case though. If its a choice between them ending up like SNK or getting bought out, I choose the buy out.

Hopefully more news will come out soon and we will know for sure. I just don't see Nintendo or Sony being able to match the money Microsoft will pay. MS is much more desperate than the other two. They really need Capcom to give them a stronger presence in the East.

I just picked up SNK vs Capcom for the GameCube yesterday and I will miss playing future games on my preschool age, Barney Purse looking console if they move to the Xbox. Whoops! I mean on my sleek, black, family console. j/k


Seriously, I think this buyout is 50/50 at best. One bad year shouldn't put your company on the sales block. Sega has survived much worse.