Capcom Won't Make Resident Evil Save Data Mistake Twice

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Capcom Won't Make Resident Evil Save Data Mistake Twice

image

Capcom will likely give players the ability to erase game saves in future titles after the controversy over Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D.

When players noticed that game saves couldn't be erased in Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D, a theory emerged that it was Capcom's effort in the fight against used games. Though Capcom denied the accusation, it says that it probably won't make the same mistake again.

The premise of the theory was that nobody would want to buy Mercenaries 3D used, because they would only be able to play someone else's game and not their own. We all know that's pretty much no fun at all, even if a title has replay value. Some retailers are even denying Mercenaries 3D as a trade-in.

In a live chat, Capcom VP Christian Svensson explained that future titles will allow players to delete their saves. He reiterated that there was no "malicious intent," but added: "I think it's also fair to say that in light of the controversy it's generated, I don't think you're going to see something like this happening again."

It's not like Mercenaries 3D is the first cartridge-based game without the ability to erase game saves, but it's extremely rare in my experience, and these games usually don't have the name recognition of a Resident Evil title. Being able to erase your games from a cartridge is something you could do all the way back on the NES (and earlier?), and I'm pretty sure it might even be written into the Constitution. At least gamers have shown Capcom, and every other developer, that this is not the proper way to fight used sales.

Source: Capcom Unity, via Gamasutra

Permalink

He reiterated that there was no "malicious intent," but added: "I think it's also fair to say that in light of the controversy it's generated, I don't think you're going to see something like this happening again."

Translated from corpspeak to human: This was a really good way for us to screw consumers and make more money. I'm sorry we got called out on this, let me pretend it wasn't on purpose.

Bewteen this and always online required DRM for console games its like Capcom is having a contest with Ubisoft to see who can screw customers more.

I think it was a bad idea to start with but i'm really enjoying The Mercenaries and it didn't stop me buying it.

So does this mean that when the game doesn't sell and batch #2 of the cartridges are made that they will take this function (or rather, lack of a function) out?

Tom Goldman:

It's not like Mercenaries 3D is the first cartridge-based game without the ability to erase game saves, but it's extremely rare in my experience, and these games usually don't have the name recognition of a Resident Evil title.

This whole "no save erase" thing is an entirely new concept to me and I've been playing since the nes. What other games had this nonfunction, anyone know(not counting high score erasing, plenty of games don't allow clearing that)?

At least gamers have shown Capcom, and every other developer, that this is not the proper way to fight used sales.

There is no proper way to fight used sales. Hands off.

Hear hear. What a shockingly bad decision from Capcom to start with. You could never lend it to a friend for a start. Even for a hermit like me who probably wouldn't lend it out it'd be inconvenient. I use more than one save slot for one playthrough in case I make a mistake and have to backtrack, I wouldn't be able to do that with this game. Sounds like Revelations won't be the same, thankfully, and that's the one I'm looking forward to.

Game companies already have a viable way to get rid of the used game market, and that's digital downloads. It has been proven to be successful, at least for non-preordered games and special editions.

Too bad the assholes at Microshit feel the need to quadruple the going rate for their proprietary hard drives, because god forbid they allow you to use your own. And you can't even get more hard drive space on their newer consoles.

Why the hell don't they do any QA? All they do is waste their time, money and piss off people.

Fronzel:

At least gamers have shown Capcom, and every other developer, that this is not the proper way to fight used sales.

There is no proper way to fight used sales. Hands off.

I dunno, more benefits to people who pre-order or who buy new such as free posters, keychains, other knick-knacks, would be a good way for brick and mortar stores.

For digital distributors they could do like the makers of STALKER did; when STALKER: Call of Pripyat launched, it came with a discount of $15 from the first day of sales onwards if you owned the previous titles in the series. It was a big pat on the back to not only purchasers of new--rather than used--titles, but also a significant "thank you" to fans for sticking with the series. Which is a rather impressive thing, considering normally the most dedicated fans are the ones paying the most, when they buy day one, with new copies (not used), before all the sales and discounts hit.

Though the bitch fit the save thing for this game caused was largely unwarranted, at least Capcom is a company that listens to it's 'fans'.

Podunk:
Though the bitch fit the save thing for this game caused was largely unwarranted, at least Capcom is a company that listens to it's 'fans'.

This >_>

The argument that this was to combat used sales didn't make sense. Granted, there doesn't seem to be a real point to the way this game handles saving, but if they wanted to cut down on used sales, it would have been something closer to "Project Ten Dollar".

-Dragmire-:

Tom Goldman:

It's not like Mercenaries 3D is the first cartridge-based game without the ability to erase game saves, but it's extremely rare in my experience, and these games usually don't have the name recognition of a Resident Evil title.

This whole "no save erase" thing is an entirely new concept to me and I've been playing since the nes. What other games had this nonfunction, anyone know(not counting high score erasing, plenty of games don't allow clearing that)?

You...You do realize that that's the case here, right? That the only thing the game 'saves' is high scores? It's an arcade-style game. (There may be some unlockables, I guess. All Resident Evil games have a few super weapons, I think.)

Besides, most of the old games I played as a wee bean sprout didn't let you delete the save file. The only one I can remember by name is Dragonball Z: Supersonic Warriors, but yeah...it's not new, and it really isn't rare once you get back to the days when handhelds were just starting to get big.

Actually...this isn't new to me. I have a few Nintendo DS games that don't have "erase game file" options; they are the RPGs I own. Those games are the "Etrian Odyssey" games. But yes, I can see how this would be another cog in the bull$hit anti-used game sales machine.

Why the fuck would anyone care?

What would you lose by playing someone else's game? A few arbitrary achievements? Select "new game" and off you go. I can't believe people are getting so worked up about this.

"won't make the same mistake twice"

Unfortunately, Capcom, you are the only company that did it once.

While we are on the subject of Capcom not making the same dipshit mistake twice...
NO MORE 9 SLOT INVENTORY FOR RESIDENT EVIL YOU RETARDS! Stick with the attache case for the love of god!

Treblaine:
"won't make the same mistake twice"

Unfortunately, Capcom, you are the only company that did it once.

TBh, although Im enjoying it, capcom seem to have cut corners throughout the whole of the game.

My friends think its so they can focus on revelations

Good that they got it out of their system now and not do it on a good game.
Also, this is Capcom. All they do is repeating mistakes, so we'll see...

rembrandtqeinstein:

He reiterated that there was no "malicious intent," but added: "I think it's also fair to say that in light of the controversy it's generated, I don't think you're going to see something like this happening again."

Translated from corpspeak to human: This was a really good way for us to screw consumers and make more money. I'm sorry we got called out on this, let me pretend it wasn't on purpose.

Bewteen this and always online required DRM for console games its like Capcom is having a contest with Ubisoft to see who can screw customers more.

You forgot the rest: We probably won't do it again, unless we can figure out a way to sneak it past yu consumers, because you are all criminals.

Is it just me, or is Capcom playing a game of poke the bear with a stick lately?

I've said it in previous threads, and I'll reiterate here. I LIKE this idea for Mercenaries. Because all Mercenaries is is a HIGH SCORE GAME, like in the arcades of yesteryear. The game doesn't have a story, the game doesn't have a point except to beat previously set high scores. So if I buy used, and somebody has set a high score, I've now got something to beat. I've got incentive to keep playing and getting better until I can beat their score (and if its really good and you can't beat it, lie to your friends and say you set it!)

Yes, this could show companies how to beat the trade-in issue, so that could suck. But so many people were pissed about this because it screwed this game over. Well I think it helped it. I love this idea for games whose only point is to set a high score. If they had carried this over to a story based game, I could relate to the complaints. But for this, I'm behind the idea.

I remember picking up second-hand copies of some N64 games and feeling like a God realizing I have already unlocked everything. Now I don't need to play!! Great! ...oh, wait...

...though granted, I also remember picking up GameBoy games that didn't have saves. You had to write down bloody level codes. So as far as saving on cartridges goes, I'm actually more happy to have a game with saves that you can't delete, than no saves and a cheatbook full of level access keys.

Somehow I don't buy their explanation. The series has already been butchered, and this is just another nail in the coffin.

I remember some N64 games where it seemed like you couldn't delete the save data, but it turned out it just relied on a special button combination when you start the game.

The only reason it looked like you couldn't delete it was because you kind of needed the manual to know what the button combination was.

Other than that, I don't know. I buy a lot of used games, but rarely, if ever sell them again...

And if a game has actual save-data on the game cartridge itself, I'm even less likely to sell it...

>_>

- yeah, so I'm obsessive about hoarding save data for old games. XD

It was a dumb idea in the first place, Capcom. Wouldn't have been better to have a code input (like Pokemon) to erase your game data? Just saying.

Some people complain about a save file problem, they say they wont do it again. Hundreds of thousands complain about the new Dante and they don't give a shit.

Nice Capcom.

"well that didn't work. What's next on the list of ideas? A game where the controller shocks when you take damage... brilliant!"

It didn't work as an idea but lots of ideas fail. Maybe they'll find some more tasteful solution to revenue lost on used game sales in the future.

So, what happens when you beat the game?

A friend of mine who got the game (Even after I tried to convince him otherwise) claimed that it was just like an old arcade game; someone else's scores are saved and you gotta try to delete them by doing a better job.

While I must admit he was partially right, I still don't like that feature. The thing about old arcade machines was that they were meant to be played by anyone. It was a public game. So if the top score belonged to ASS, I probably wouldn't care because at the end of the day, I would just go home and play with my NES. However, RE is not meant to be a public game. It's a console game. It belongs to someone. So call me picky or whatever but I don't want to have someone's records saved on my game.

Yeah, yeah. I know that a saving feature isn't as important as some games, says the old NES lover. But hey, we're all used to that feature now, especially with games that are supposed to be lengthy. Hell, even Portal had a save feature and you could finish the game in 3 hours. So again, that was kind of a dick move. But either way, I'm glad they realized that for some reason or another.

OT: Captcha: It now takes upside down words.

Good on consumers. They only get away with this stuff when they are allowed to. And there are going to be plenty of companies trying things like this, just to see whether the consumer will swallow it or not. Stand firm. The relationship between consumer and game industry has been set for some years now. For the games industry to now try to change it by the back door to benefit themselves more, is rather unfair. Changes that benefit us both, then fine, but this change is a bit one sided and not something that happens with any other product, i.e used cars, music videos etc.

It's quite an ingenious way to fight used sales though. I'm sure it will give some other distributors ideas.

Would I mind? No. I always keep save games for all my games.

Seriously guys, it's Capcom. It's the most Japanese company I know. Someone way on top decides something, it gets done. There may not be any real reason.

Tom Goldman:
and I'm pretty sure it might even be written into the Constitution.

So, that 4th of July huh?

'Likely'

Maybe I'm not seeing this properly, but why isn't this a good way to fight used game sales? I thought it was brilliant.

More money to the publishers and not leeched away to retailers sounds appealing to me, especially since usually the "used" price is only 5 bucks cheaper.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here