Capcom Reveals Ultra Street Fighter II Sales Figures, Is Still "Evaluating" Switch Support

Dumbest... Thing... Ever

I'd like to see some original games from Capcom and not just ports. That goes for all 3rd party publishers.

Testing MH XX in Japan only isn't going to give a worldwide picture. Just 22% of USF2's sales on Switch came from Japan. That's a potential 78% they're ignoring.

Erm, Capcom, just bring Monster Hunter XX to other regions, then see how you do!

@MegaTen You'd have a point, if their games actually did bad on Nintendo consoles.

Monster Hunter will obviously crush it in Japan.

If coming is anything to go by monster hunter xx is going to tank in Japan.

Bear in mind, this is also a company that did the following as a way to make more money:

Lets spend more money to produce a game that will be away from the international and domestic markets where the series found greater success, away from the larger install bases in said domestic market, and THAT will make us more money.

Genius Capcom. Its a gamble but lets see how MH World goes.

As for THIS little tidbit...really guys? How many tests are you going to give us?

And worse off...its Japan only. Great way to see how the console as a whole does isn't it?

This sounds more like conservative wording than a retraction of previous statements.

Either way, I do hope we get something like a Mega Man Collection 1+2 on Switch in the near future. Sadly, Capcom's more current games aren't really something that catches my eye (but I'd love to be proven otherwise).

5 years later:

"The Nintendo Switch seems to be doing very well, and we look forward to further growth in its install base (it has only 40 mln users now - please understand). Beginning with this delicious port of Resident Evil 7 Nintendo Switch Ver. for Japan, we are evaluating how we will support this platform in the future."

Never change Capcom, never change.

@ricklongo Agreed. A Mega Man collection would be great for this year.

Personally, I just hope they announce something for us western fans on Monster Hunter + Switch.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE I'd like to see Nintendo up their 3rd party relations game. That goes for everyone at Nintendo.

SPEND. MONEY. Sony and MS have figured this out.

Capcom: "Buy our overpriced Street Fighter II port or we won't support the Switch!"

Gamers: "Ok, done. So what games are you going to bring to the Switch?"

Capcom: "None, basically."

"We must release a few games to see what money we make" releases ports of old games available on several other systems. "Hmmm, well the sales are okay..." Well done, Capcom.

@gatorboi352 That's what I've been saying all along. If they aren't willing to port the game, cover the expenses. It can't be that much for a port, and it's better than having nothing at all. Long term investment is what I would call that. If the games are on the system, the people will come too. It's a chicken and egg situation right now, someone has to give in first, and I doubt it's the consumers.

At least the system is selling well though.

Capcom, please just announce MHXX localization already. If you don't Nintendo, please do what you have been doing for the past few years and announce said localization during a Nintendo direct.

What a poopy thing, releasing a over priced port and acting like "Let's think about it somemore after you all bought this". Why is it on us to buy a game to show there is interest. It's the same issue with the WiiU, release old overpriced ports and acted shock no one wants it.

Ahh, Capcom. Not that XX won't dominate charts....but...they're still "evaluating"... not sure WHAT they are evaluating there.

@gatorboi352 I'm not sure that's a healthy mode for the entirety of the industry to be in. Yeah, Sony's everybody's sugar daddy in this business (until they decide to disappear you, then they just cut off the tap), and MS has tried to match them in that game (though they're realizing endless spending on bribes isn't netting rewards so they've retracted to their safe space of funding mostly online shooters and sports games.)

But is it really a healthy industry when no "independent" large publisher can fund their own works and is just dependent on funding from platform holders?

What I'd like to see Nintendo do is more like the Rabbids project. Co-fund/develop unique exclusives with the big publishers rather than just pay them to bring their PC games to yet another system. It massively increases their own development capacity, keeps the budget almost all internalized as though it's 1st party, gives them tons of Nintendo-only games, and gives the big publishers a real chance to tap the Nintendo market that they've always lacked. It's a win-win-win. Hopefully Rabbids will do very well to encourage that.

@NEStalgia 100% agree on co deving stuff. It makes me question how these big publishers can sustain themselves at this point.

Not much to think about, just release MHXX here in the West. Wasted time is wasted money.

@NEStalgia Great point on the co-dev stuff. We really need more games like Mario + Rabbids on the platform.

Feels like Nintendo has too much going on atm with stock issues, apps, 1st party games, snes mini. I hope we'll see more efforts like Mario + Rabbids get announced in the next 1-2 years though.

@bezerker99 Part of me wants to believe it's already in the works for early 2018. I think that the reaction to MH World skipping Nintendo platforms was loud enough to trigger some action on the XX port front.

This is just a classic example of mealy-mouthed corporate speak. It doesn't matter what Capcom say; judge them on what they do. USFII, all said and done, was decent, and the sales reflect that. Now MHXX and RE Revelations are on the way. Switch install base continues to grow. The support will continue to grow accordingly.

I don't understand, Sega is able to bounce back from mediocrity, so why can't Capcom do the same?

Seriously Capcom you still don't know what your purpose in the Switch is? It's simple just make games for it unless you want to join the Pachinko craps like your other arcade buddies (Sega, Namco, SNK, and Konami).

@AlphaElite Capcom: Well okay then, have Resident Evil Revelations 1+2 since we did skip 2 on the Wii U....

Is every Capcom game on Switch going to be a "test" game??

All I do is laugh every time I hear this. It's how I cope with things.

Oh, Capcom...
Please don't be a Backstabber...

"...the company is waiting to see how Monster Hunter XX performs before deciding what content to bring to Switch."

Um, Monster Hunter is going to be a smash in Japan like always. Why are you doubting it Capcom?

Couldn't be more excited about RE:Revelations 1&2 coming to Switch. They're two of my favorite REs. They just don't have any other bombs to drop at this time. No big deal. I'll certainly occupy my time with portable remasters/releases of great games while they prepare the real support for Switch. Carry on my wayward sons.

@westman98 Ever since the Super NES, I feel like almost every third parties on Nintendo system is a test game. You see them come and go but never stick around.

I just love how Capcom says "Beginning with MHXX...", as if USF2 didn't exist...despite the fact that the investor asking Capcom the question literally referenced the success of USF2.

It also directly contradicts their "preparing multiple Switch versions of software" statement they made a few days ago, whereupon ResiEvil Revelations 1+2 for Switch was announced immediately after.

Could've been Street Fighter 4 or 5. Why the hell 2? A 25 year old game that everyone have already bought AT LEAST once. That is your flagship title? You gotta be kidding me

Well, Capcom, you could start by localizing MHXX...

Thats quite some decent numbers.

Now Capcom imagine what a brand new games would sell!

Get cracking!

Oh and bring Monster Hunter XX to the West. I don't want it; but I'm sure a hell of a load of other people do.

They should've released Disney Afternoon Collection at the same time as on other consoles and evaluated how well that did, being on a more level playing field and not a late-to-the-party port like everything else they have planned for Switch..

@NEStalgia I'm all for co development stuff, but why is it an either/or thing with Nintendo? Co-dev AND bring the big 3rd party hitters. Imagine Destiny 2 on Switch, who wouldn't want that? Or hell, at this point, just Madden and Call of Duty. People play those games en masse.

Nintendo's own hardware decisions coupled with quirky 3rd party relations has them where they are at today.

That's the moronic Catch-22 that Nintendo fans have had to contend with for the past twenty-one years: a different set of standards than the competition. If Capcom has flop upon flop on Xbox or PS4, they'll still support those platforms throughout their respective lifespans. If their games die a quick death on Switch, that compromises any future support. What sucks is that Capcom wants it both ways: they crap out lazy ports of old games, charge a king's ransom for them, and then expect them to sell as well as the AAA titles that they release on competing platforms.

It'd be nice to see developers actually care about what Nintendo is doing, to the point of being above trying to make a lazy profit. Just because Switch can't handle PS4/XBO-level games, that doesn't mean that you can't dedicate resources to give it it's own unique library! Gamers will support what you're doing, but they're not going to be taken advantage of.

Stull holding out for the DRAGON'S DOGMA re-release. I played the demo on 360 and loved it, but have yet to properly settle in. I would love it if the Switch became the go-to system for RPGs.

There isn't a lot I actually want from capcom anyway these days. I'd really like Marvel vs Capcom which I think is a distinct posibility. After that Street Fighter 7 and Devil May Cry, that's about it really.

I refuse to buy games I don't won't in order to support future releases. I'm not buying an overprice Street Fighter 2 game that I already own in many different forms. I'm also not buying mediocre Resident Evil games with the promise of future releases if they sell.

I would also like to add that Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate sold over 1 million copies in NA & EU. Over 4 million worldwide!

Monster Hunter Generations also sold over 4 million worldwide!

I don't understand the hesitation. Also, if Nintendo was going to front money to make a 3rd party game happen on their systems.....it should be Monster Hunter!

@gatorboi352 Yet every system Nintendo puts out that does well is weaker hardware or equal specs compared to other consoles of that gen. Hell the PS2 was the best console of its generation, and has the worst hardware compared to the gamecube. It's companies trying to mitigate cost in ports and with how much they say to need to sale to make even it's a tough choice. But then you have stuff like where Gearbox wouldn't port Borderlands 2 to the WiiU because they couldn't figure out how to use the touch screen. Which how Capcom did the second screen with MH3U feels like a fat load.

@dkxcalibur But we need Monster Hunter to he more western to draw people in.

@Arehexes I'm not just talking about weaker specs. Take the voice chat situation on Switch for example. Or the mini-DVDs on the Gamecube. Or the cartridges on the N64.

So, Capcom is testing the Switch's ability to move units on two things:

1. A phoned-in port/remake of a game that's almost 30 years old.
2. A long-awaited installment of a long running franchise... that's only releasing in Japan... where Switch consoles are notoriously in short supply.

Call me crazy, but shouldn't Capcom be looking at what successful companies are doing on the Switch?

@dkxcalibur

Exactly! I'm sure that I'm probably taking it too personally (haha!), but I feel like they are basically dangling a carrot on a stick, and I feel like they are disrespecting/exploiting Nintendo fans by doing so. "Hey, we'll CONSIDER supporting your platform of choice if you buy this $40 port! Oh, you did? Okay, then buy the Resident Evil Revelations compilation and then we'll CONSIDER supporting it further!" It's total bs! How about this, support gamers and they'll support you!

That doesn't sound like a "test" so much as them evaluating what games to bring next. Just a vague, conservative statement for shareholders.

In other words, they're being just as stupid as always, move along.

@Arehexes The last 2 releases have drawn in more than double what the SF2 remake will.

It might work out though. I believe the Switch XX release will sell in Japan so this might be something we all laugh at a couple years from now!

@Aozz101x O_O I didn't know the original english dub was scary.In the italian dub his voice sounds normal.

A dumb company. Nintendo players have always supported Capcom just as well, and for some games, more so than Xbox gamers. But lets just keep giving the middle finger to the Nintendo userbase. Freaking stupid.

@BanjoPickles They'll probably release that Resident Evil game in late October or Early November and then cry when Switch owners don't buy the game.....because they're buying Mario instead! Why don't companies strategically release games!

@Yorumi Zelda MH would actually be pretty cool. Though in some ways that's what BotW does with Lynels and the armor system anyway. But I can't see that not being huge even if only in Japan

I think Nintendo uses more outside studios than we think about. Not as high profile as a direct collab with a big western publisher like Rabbids. But if you watch the credits there's often credits to Bamco, Koei, and a few other select partners they seem to have frequent contracts with. In a way a lot of 1st party games are co-devs with Bamco and Koei, but with Nintendo in control rather than a cooperative effort. Takahashi gave an interview a few weeks ago where he was asked about Nintendo's studio size vs Ubisoft, and he talked about how it's smaller if you consider only on site personnel, but similar size if you factor in the outside studios they contract with. I think that aspect flies under the radar a lot.

@gatorboi352 When we're talking about funding development, it has to be either-or. Or at least for everyone but Sony it does. If you're pumping money into multiplats, you're funding your own competitor's success. If you take that same money and pump it into co-dev work, you're creating exclusivity. Yeah, Sony runs tons of their own studios, 2nd parties AND pumps endless money into 3rd parties that mostly benefit themselves as the largest platform. But they've always been a media publishing company first and foremost, and have always excelled at monopoly status in that field (Sony BMG more or less IS the RIAA, and their chokehold in Japan is challenged only by Avex which specializes more in live presentation with publishing as an offshoot.) Microsoft infamously has pulled back on 1st and second party almost entirely ("Exclusives aren't that important" -Phil Spencer), trying to court the multiplats instead for the money. Valve/Steam, more or less stopped making games entirely (HL3 Confirmed?), and Nintendo focues on first party and maybe can focus more on co-dev. But pumping that cash into multiplats is almost like paying Sony for them. Sony's the only one pushing on all sides because they've framed their company around it. The thing is I don't see the "over-budget game funded by sugar daddy Sony" a viable long-term thing for the industry. One straw is going to be the E.T. that breaks the camel's back. Sony will, at some point, likely get arrogant enough to give less and demand more.

@SmaMan Success has never been Capcom's strong point.

@dkxcalibur

That's a good point. I just bought my Switch a week ago, and Mario was the main reason why! That is not a game that you A). use to evaluate sales, or B). release with anything above conservative sales expectations.

Honestly, I would have been far more excited to have an HD release of Resident Evil 4 on the go!

Capcom... open your eyes or close your doors.

So Capcom has to make their latest point utilizing Monster Hunter XX ironically, and on top of that point, isn't west-side. So, my takeaway here, and actually since the first time Capcom opened their mouths about the Switch, is that they are waiting for the Switch install base to grow. If Switch is nearing 4mil, then I'm assuming the next "marker", if you will, is probably 10mil. Then Capcom will likely do another re-evaluation, and THEN, they will likely give Switch something actually riveting or anticipated. Problem is, with all this wait-and-evaluate going on, Capcom either won't be releasing a big NEW gun on Switch until 2019 at the earliest, maybe even 2020, or they may skip big gun releases all together on Switch, which I hope is not the case. This is mere speculation as I won't even pretend to understand Capcom's ultimate Switch plans.

"a very statement"?
What does that mean? >__>'

@Yorumi You made some really great points in your reply to @gatorboi as well.

I think if Rabbids sells well it could be something of a turning point in those efforts and set a strategy for them to rely on more. One big problem the 3rd parties have with Nintendo, business wise, is that they generally haven't seen great sales on their multiplats on Nintendo, for a lot of reasons, but one is that a lot of people that pick Nintendo do so out of rejection for that type of content on other systems, or because they already have other systems and buy Nintendo for content different from that. Business-wise, for EA, Ubi, Acti, looking at Nintendo it may seem like an untappable market uninterested in their product. The chance to co-dev with Nintendo gives them access to those licensed IPs, which gives them direct access into the Nintendo market they otherwise seem unable to reach. Were it to work it would actually be a LOT more symbiotic a relationship between studio and platform holder than Sony's role as the Central Bank of video games (which, it should be noted, banking/insurance/financial services is one of Sony's biggest money makers....they know what they're doing in that role, it's not an accident they effectively became a lender for video game publishers.)

@Yorumi "if you ask me nintendo needs to pursue the alternative. Maybe they won't be the most popular console out there doing that but there is an under served market."

Maybe this is the direction they need to go. However, it loses me as a consumer, which is unfortunate. I've been a Nintendo adopter since the NES when i was 6 years old.

@NEStalgia well no, because aside from co-dev you can fund timed exclusiveness. Sony is making a killing on this over MS this gen.

"Download first on PlayStation!" can't count how many times I've seen that the last few years.

All I want is to be able to play the Mega Man series on my new console. Maybe the first few Resident Evil games would be nice too. I'm not willing to purchase RE revelations or the Monster Hunter franchise which looks fine for people who aren't me to earn that oppurtunity. I bought Ultra Street Fighter II because I love street fighter games. My support extends to me buying games I love with my limited funds and companies need to understand most people shop like me. There's only a few hundred people worldwide on a quest to have a complete Switch or Capcom library or willing to purchase whatever token game they suggest to "show interest". Guess I'll have to settle with owning the Megaman franchise on NES, SNES, Gamecube, 3DS, Wii U, the NES classic, and my modded Xbox. Have the RE remake on Gamecube and RE Veronica and 3 on Dreamcast. Also the Wii Chronicles games.

I returned USF2 within a week for a full refund at EBGames. IMO it's actually a pretty rubbish version when taking into account the price and the main features that are meant to warrant it. There are no classic bonus stages, way of the hadou or whatever it was called was not fun, and dramatic mode (?) or 2 vs 1 was only like 3 rounds. I'm sure the tightened mechanics are nice but if you strip away all the supposed bells and whistles, the price is absurd.

Honestly, I'd like to see the Switch continue to succeed despite Capcom. While I like many of their past games and like to see them at least support Virtual Console, I don't support their attitude regarding pricing or how half-hearted they're currently acting over the switch.

@Angelic_Lapras_King
@SanderEvers

Capcom: "I see you guys like ports of old games....."

Mega Man is dead, Street Fighter and MvC is niche, Resident Evil only had one good game, 4, and its been ported to death. Why do you people even care about Crapcom?

Only makes sense for Capcom to support Switch if they can develop games and make enough profit to be worth their time. They can port games between Xbox, PS4, and PC and make good sales. Those same games will not work on Switch due to hardware limitations or until they can develop a way to get more power out of the Switch. It is hard for a company to support that going forward unless they are guaranteed huge sales.

@AlphaElite my exact thoughts!

@AlphaElite and given how many REs were ported to XBONE and PS4, gonna be tons to come on Switch....

@whodatninja It'll never be 5. Sony funded that much like how Nintendo funded Bayonetta 2. Unless Sony has a change of heart, it'll never be on other systems other then theirs and PC....

Capcom look at this list here!
Please make new version of these games here.

1. Viewtiful Joe 3
2. Marvel vs Capcom Switch
3. Power Stone 3 💎
4. MegaMan Legends 3
5. MegaMan The Complete Legacy Collection
6. Monster Hunter Switch

Just go for it!!!

@Yorumi Definitely agreed! I'm not a fan of multiplat overall. It's not what it was back in the day. Most of these games are what were really PC exclusives for the longest time. After the XBox came out it merged into the console world, and honestly both PC and console got a lot worse at that point. Though PS4, moreso than PS3 has enough console exclusives that I find it worthwhile (though I never seem to actually USE the thing in favor of my Nintendo consoles), between the Sony 1st party stuff and Persona 5 it's worth it. Maybe DQXI if the Switch version goes astray but I'm counting on that on Switch. For a few years they forgot what made PS fun but the past year and a half they've kind of found themselves again.

@gatorboi352 "timed exclusive" is such a weird thing. Few players seem to be too interested in the timed exclusivity. (Technically Nintendo started the whole timed exclusive thing with the NES, but the time was like a mandatory 2 years ) Sony does effectively use that to play at being the central lender to the industry. But paying for exclusivity, even timed, is even worse than paying to obtain the game. Nintendo (and MS) would have to outspend Sony on those bids. And neither company seems to be too inclined to do so these days because Sony can justify so much money on that. Sony's really situated themselves as a central bank for the industry. Further, for the publishers, it only really works when it's the biggest platform. They do it for XBox IF the game fits the XBox audience and is sure to sell best there, but who would want a timed exclusive on Nintendo even if they could outbid Sony? IF next gen, XBox outsells PS, it will be XB that has all the timed exclusives, because that whole process is kind of a victory lap for the biggest platform. "We're the biggest market for you, so take this hush money and exclude everyone else!" Doesn't work if you're not the biggest market.

@WhiteTrashGuy If they put dragon's dogma on the switch (give us the MMO while you are at it Capcom) I'm gonna cry tears of joy. I've resisted all the other ports of that game but a switch version would be day one for me.

@gatorboi352 Voice chat feels like a update to allow Bluetooth headsets will help. The mini disc and carts are I/O which counts as a spec. But both systems did things the competition couldn't. The N64 had the ability to have better textures compared to the PS1, and the GC was powerful compared to the PS2. Given how the ports from GC to PS2 seemed to have turned out.

Flock off, Capcom. Specially if we are going to have an Umbrella Chronicles situation again.
This "test game" situation sucks big time.

@Ryu_Niiyama
Me as well. I wanted SKYRIM so bad on the WiiU that I held of on it as well. Can't wait for that, but DRAGON'S DOGMA'S combat systems are amazing. A perfect mix of stat based and reactionary combat.

Yeah, right.

Capcom has grammar school report card standards over Nintendo.. I know it's necessary considering they are on a tight budget and want their every business practice to mean something especially for good. I guess this will always be the case for Nintendo. As tedious as it sounds in one perspective or another.

This is where I "Aha!" at all those who disagreed with me about this last time!

@Yorumi You mean well and ultimately we're on the same team but I disagree with some of the stuff you post. I think 3rd party companies invest a lot of money in the engines they use and they want to get the most out of that investment. I don't think it has anything to do with trying to control the market through forcing small developers out. I think the Indie scene is bigger than it's ever been and many have proven that they can be very successful. Remember, Minecraft started out as an Indie game; so did Rocket League. The budget on indie titles are smaller so they can make just as much profit as the big boys if their game becomes a success because they don't have as much overhead.

I also think you're wrong about the Wii U library. I think the library is very strong and there is enough great games on that system to justify the purchase. I think the Wii U's problem was at launch with the confusion and the fact that it was an under powered "home" console. The Switch is a hybrid and that's what makes it special. I currently own a PS4 and Switch but I can tell you right now, I would pickup Monster Hunter on the Switch over the PS4 for the mobility alone....graphics be damned.

I doubt Capcom will even be here in 5 years. They should sell their franchises to companies who care or would make more use of them. Its even funnier that they think their opinion matters like it used to.

The mighty have fallen doesn't even begin to cover their problems right now.

The switch will never see a new capcom game, only ports for a few years then they will say goodbye switch

I would love ports of 3rd Strike, Ultra 4 and either a port or sequel to TvC...and MvC:I (we might get a port of 3 though).

Marvel vs Capcom 2 please!!

@NEStalgia @Yorumi Good posts throughout this thread...

I don't agree with begging for games by throwing money at third parties and yep I find the whole "AAA" model vile. If they spent more money on gameplay and less on visual fluff we'd all be a lot better off and we wouldn't end up with things like Mass Effect Andromeda. I really hope that E.T. scenario does play out.

@EDF If the ports include Okami, I'm good with that.

@Yorumi Spot on. People love to hate Konami, but you have to hand it to them, they're the only big publisher that had the guts to fire their money sucking leech producer and can the AAA series he ate their lunch money with.

Irony of all ironies he works for Sony now, and they're making money on Bomberman and giving out free DLC

@Sentinator There's some truth to that when you consider, even beyond their other financial woes, that right now their two flagship series, SF and MH, have their new outings primarily bankrolled by Sony....it seems kind of Clear Capcom can't fund their own projects anymore.

@Yorumi Like I said, we're on the same team but when it comes down to it, I don't think it's a bad thing that some of the big developers are pushing the limits with graphics. Some of those games turn out to be gems. Now like you, I can look past the graphics and not judge a game solely on the graphics, but it's not a bad thing that companies like Guerrilla Games are pushing the limits and creating state of the art engines.

Not all game with good graphics are short games with only limited content.

Back to that Wii U library discussion. Maybe it's just me but I really thought there were enough games on the system to justify it. Okay, maybe it doesn't have as much as other systems but judging on it's cost and the games available I don't see how having games like Mario Kart 8, Smash, Mario Maker, Splatoon, Tropical Freeze, Bayonetta 1 & 2, Pikmin 3, Super Mario 3D World, weren't enough. Maybe I play games longer than the average gamer but those games provided me and my family with hundreds and hundreds of hours of gameplay.

@NEStalgia That Konami comment is ridiculous. That big money developer made that company a ton of money! The Metal Gear series was Konami's second biggest selling next to the Winning 11 series that has way more games released in total. They will have big regrets about that firing at some point in the future.

Oh and that Bomberman game is selling for $39.99 which I think most people will say is about $10-$15 more than it's worth.

@NEStalgia
Yeah okami was a great game, I would like to see a compilation of their old school scrolling beat em ups, especially the ones they only released in Japanese arcades

@NEStalgia So basically you're telling me you believe that rumour that Sony paid for MHW?

I could have named more but I named the ones I personally played a lot. I never said it's better or worst then another system....that was all you. I just said it had enough quality titles to justify the purchase. Personally it was worth it for Kart and Smash alone for my family. The other great games were bonuses.

I agree the N64 library was great.

@NEStalgia Lets look at whats happened this gen.

Microsoft paid them to make Dead Rising.
Nintendo paid them to localise Monster Hunter.
Sony paid them to make SFV.

If MVCI and MHW flop they might not have a lifeline left. Is that a good or a bad thing though?

@Sentinator
I'd argue a good thing, because it's feeling like gaming is getting more and more bloated. Budgets are increasing because hardware makers/consumers want the best graphics. We don't raise the price of games so the number of units moved increases. So publishers of these bigger titles use methods to suppliment their RoI. And gamers complain about that demaining more for honestly less. Maybe if Capcom implodes it will be a wake up call.

@Grudgebearer Yeah, little reason to NOT believe it. I mean it's not an industry secret Sony throws money at gaining partial-to-full exclusivity, it's their business model. Considering Sony already has such a relationship with Capcom for SFV, it doesn't take a lot of presumption to extend that to MHW when coupled with a rumor that was credible in all other respects. I'd be more surprised if it weren't true than were. Most of that "rumor" clearly came from inside leaks....high level ones at that.

@dkxcalibur Kojima spends money like an out of control gambling addict. He doesn't even try to pretend he doesn't. MGSV did turn a profit, somewhat to Konami's own surprise, but I wonder how profitable it would have been had it not been fairly well publicized to be the last real Kojima MGS. The cost of making that game was extreme, and the high sales, great as they were, and were indeed profitable, weren't all THAT profitable after the expense he put into that. There's a lot of OTHER things that are fair to loathe Konami for (the treatment of the rest of Kojima's staff, for example), but the axing of Kojima himself, perhaps if the other publishers would be so bold the AAA spend-a-thon would burn out before it burns the industry out.

@Sentinator Indeed! MVCI will probably do ok because Marvel is at one of it's peaks in general right now, and not sure about MHW...their own estimates were pretty low on sales, so either it costs a lot less to make than it looks, or someone else is footing a steep chunk of the bill (namely Sony) and willing to take a loss.

@NEStalgia Then you also believe the rumour connected to that which says there's a MH coming to Switch, one built from the ground up?

There was no last time, it was some moron's misinterpretation on NeoGAF. Do your research before you throw your half hour of typing up so you're not blatantly lying and misinforming your readership.

@Grudgebearer Yeah, that seems pretty likely as well. And may or not be related to the "we're evaluating after XX" statements as well. That said, I'd also be surprised if the Switch MH were to be localized outside Japan. If I were to be placing bets, it's that Sony did pay for World, Capcom did go behind their back and decide to do a Switch MH as well, but likely only for Japan release while they try to push World in the West on the bigger platforms in the West. Though localization could be one of those "evaluating" positions considering how well the Switch is selling in the US.

@NEStalgia So basically this: https://twitter.com/Nibellion/status/876363766157410304 ?

@DJKeens What Capcom has become this gen:

@MegaTen I'd start with MH, in more than just Japan, but that's me.

I would say RE:R coming is a good indicator. I will be buying that for sure.

Capcom and Konami were two of my favorite childhood game companies between nes and snes. They just make me sad now.

It's mind-boggling that they would use the sales of a port of a 25+ years old game to gauge the market, to begin with.

@NEStalgia
Nah your statement don't stack up, why would Sony pay for mh and then have it release on Xbox, don't add up to me, if Sony paid they would have made sure it was a exclusive worldwide

@MegaTen
Exclusive, Never gonna happen, it's ports ports ports all the way for switch or multiplatform releases

Bring Dragon's Dogma Dark Arisen to the Switch too!
Hey Capcom, you hear me! Take off the Cap and start to Com-municate with us!

Does anyone need Capcom ?

If they don't localise Monster Hunter XX to the west they're nuts.

@NEStalgia Yes but Kojima made more Metal Gear games then just MGSV....those other Metal Gear games sold over 40 million combined! We'll see what Konami is able to do without him and what Kojima is capable of without Konami.....we shall see.

I don't think you're completely wrong. Maybe they do spend too much and maybe that money could be better spent in other capacities.

@Tibob I do! I love classic and modern Capcom games. Why would you not want them in the picture???? The more developers the better. Especially ones who make Monster Hunter!

@dkxcalibur
I'm not against Capcom publishing games on Switch. I'm just saying we don't "need" them : there's plenty of games already, and I'm sure I'm not the only one getting tired of the "Capcom trying to figure out if they want to make games for us" drama !

@00Wyvern If things check out, then only Nintendo can convince Capcom to localize XX, because it implies that Capcom was never planning to from the start, and when they intervened during that Gamespot interview, to say "no plans" instead of a straight and honest "no" then 't was but PR talk.

Only time can tell, what in the sea of rumours and silence proves true in the end.

@Tibob I know what you mean, Nintendo has the best 1st party games. Games that can keep a gamer busy for a long time. For this reason alone, I honestly thought the Wii U was a great system. The big games for that system had awesome replay value. However, if there's one 3rd party developer that Nintendo can't lose, it's Capcom. I would make the argument that the Monster Hunter Series was a system seller in Japan for the 3DS and could do the same thing for the Switch. I personally could live without Capcom's other huge series (Resident Evil, Street Fighter, Capcom Vs Marvel) despite really enjoying them, but I draw the line with MH. That's a must. IMO, Nintendo should have thrown money at Capcom. In Japan, the MH series is one of the biggest. It will often compete with Pokemon over there. Plus, the fact that it's been growing larger and larger in NA & EU with every release on the 3DS.

On a side note: Capcom should do Power Stone 3 for the Switch. That game could do really good on the system and the mobility and local multiplayer setup would be a great platform for that series to make a comeback.

@Yorumi That last paragraph: Things can change.

Debating trading my copy of Ultra Street Fighter 2. I wanted to try it, I like the idea of having it on my Switch, but I'd be much happier if it was Street Fighter IV or Marvel VS Capcom. I've got the old Super Street Fighter 2 on Wii U and it was much cheaper. Its still the same old game to me, even with the new visuals.

@Yorumi True, but if they gather a big enough install-base, those games could find success enough to merit inclusion on their own. Time will tell.

@Yorumi Which is what they're doing, if I'm correct. But the biggest issue the Switch and it's owners have right now, is devs being on-edge due to Wii-U, historically low third-party sales on Nintendo consoles, and the mentality that's tied to it, that being Nintendo console = Nintendo IP. Meanwhile the Switch owners, I'd nearly begin to think, are being punished for their console of choice. They are to prove their support while being subjected to water-testing and evaluations while PS4 and Xbox One get it no questions asked.

I think this chain needs to be broken before we can get anywhere concrete in this.

@Yorumi But they kind of are doing that already. Snipperclips is one such promising project, and Rabbids is IP collab. I mean FE: Warriors is that to an extent, and I'm sure there's more like this coming.

Games built from the ground up for Switch will look, and play, best, or games ported in the way that Virtuos is doing right now. Personally, I'm 2 for 2, as in 2 Nintendo games, 2 third-party games, and I've had no complaints of those third-party games, both being ports.

That said, I'm also not expecting third-party multiplats, or much of anything really. I'll take what comes, when it comes.

@Yorumi Even if it's p2p after the match is going on they still need servers for validations, matchmaking, etc. Basically to help you get going and validate your build of the game.

So it's not like they are charging us to turn our switch on, but it's not THAT much of a load that would completely justify charging for it.

But it is a industry standard whether we agree or not, and good infrastructure costs money, so I'm ok with the annual charges starting 2018

@Yorumi I'm sorry. I really don't mean to start a fight or anything, but I disagree with you concept of "pure p2p"

I am an experienced developer in the communications area, a p2p infrastructure as you imagine is just not really possible, even if it was, it wouldn't be that efficient to be commercial on this scale. There's always something on the background facilitating p2p.

But anyway, I respect and understand your point, specially regarding 3rd party software, although I don't think it's that simple of a matter.

Personally, I'll pay for something that works great and that's what my experience with online Switch has been so far. I know that a good infrastructure at this scale is hard to do right and costs a lot of money, so I don't mind paying.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong about all this, hard to tell. But for now, I'll stick with what I know about the subject and have fun playing Splatoon 2

@Yorumi You're just thinking of peer to peer after you know which peer to connect to. There's a lot that happens between the time you join a lobby and the best selection of peers for you to connect to is presented to you. And that doesn't happen by magic (and not via p2p as well, in case you believe that).

You have a fine definition of p2p, just not of the whole picture for online communications. Again, I apologize if I come up as rude, in case you're also from the software area and understand all this, maybe you're a lot more experienced than me, we never know. I'm just talking with experience on a lot of systems that take advantage of p2p.

@Yorumi "The thing is I've built matchmaking servers. It's kind of incredible how little processing power is needed for match making."

How many users in the systems? Is it more than 5 million? How many concurrent users? Have you performed load testing/stress testing? Also, it's not only about matchmaking, data like statistics needs to be retrieved and updated. That can put a lot of workload on the server if there are a lot of concurrent users.

I have a lot of experience in designing and directing the development of server applications. I can say that it is neither easy nor cheap to support a lot of transactions and concurrent users. Strange problems like slowing down without apparent reasons occur when a lot of users concurrently use a system. If your systems have less than 10,000 users, it's likely that you have never come across issues like this.

@electrolite77 Profit, aye. But passion and love for one's work also matters. If you're just cranking them out, they ain't gonna be any good.

@Yorumi The number of concurrent transactions depends on the total number of users. If your system has only 10,000 users, it's likely that there aren't many concurrent transactions. If your system has more than 1 million users, that's another matter. A high number of concurrent transactions can put a lot of workload on a server. It can also consume a lot of memory.

By the way, a system with a relatively low number of users can have a high number of concurrent transactions, but usually it's not the case.

We want Dragons Dogma! Come on Capcom... you've released PC version... it would be running fine on Switch! We need more RPG games from 3rd parties

@Yorumi You should stop assuming that you're the only one in the world who understands things and others who have different opinions than yours don't understand how things work.

Most transactions are short-lived. I wasn't talking about continuous connections. If there are a lot of concurrent transactions requesting matchmaking (or anything), it can put a lot of workload on the server. You can try using a load test tool to test your servers.

@Yorumi Not sure what you're trying to say. It's not about it costs the consumers or not. That's another matter. I explained that matchmaking or any transactions can put a lot of workload on a server if there are a lot of concurrent transactions. I was talking about the technical aspect. As I said, it's not only about matchmaking. Retrieving and updating statistics can slow down a server when a lot of users request it at the same time. I've seen a server become unresponsive because of a single unoptimized SQL query. Of course, the developer who wrote that query tested it before the web application was deployed to the production server, but he didn't find any issues because he didn't perform a load test. Supporting a lot of concurrent transactions isn't easy as you may think. That's all I want to tell you.

@Yorumi It was an example to highlight the difference between a single transaction at a time and a lot of concurrent transactions.