ZTGD Article | Capcom Fires Latest Shot in War Against Used Game Retailers

Michael Futter Writes: As the war against used game sales heats up, it seems that gamers are the ones caught in the crossfire. When EA announced their “Project $10″ initiative to get a slice of the secondary market, gamers were in an uproar. (Some of you may know “Project $10″ better as a now common feature in new games: Online Passes.)

The most recent escalation by Capcom makes EA look like a knight in shining armor by comparison. Capcom confirmed today that copies of Resident Evil: Mercenaries for the 3DS will have a single save file for the life of the game card. That save file cannot be erased or altered in any way. Not only does this mean that anyone buying a used copy will have some or all of the game already completed, but you cannot even loan the game to a friend or share with a sibling.

The story is too old to be commented.
coryok3439d ago

dont blame capcom... blame nintendo. nintendo gives out tools to developers, developers can choose to use them or not. sure, not buying this game and telling capcom why might make them not want to do it again, but instead, not buying a 3ds and telling nintendo why might make nintendo not allow developers to do this anymore.

lodossrage3439d ago (Edited 3439d ago )

No, I'd blame capcom rather than nintendo. Whether nintendo makes the tool available is their business. They aren't telling companies to use them. Capcom came to that decision on their own. THEY CHOSE to make use of the feature on their own accord. Same thing when capcom did that DRM thing to Final Fight on PSN to stop game sharing. Nobody is twisting Capcom's arm to do these things.

Leonesaurus3439d ago (Edited 3439d ago )

First of all, I'd like to start off by saying I'm no fan of Capcom and their business choices, however, I adore the games their creators make.

I also hate that whenever Capcom does something controversial, Resident Evil always seems to become their meat shield.

With that out of the way, I have to side with Capcom on this one (yeah, HUGE fucking shock). They <<<<<LOSE MONEY>>>>> on used game sales, its a proven fact.

Think I'm a lying asshole on some stupid forum? Fine, fair enough, go ask them yourselves. Or better yet, ask ANY developer out there and see what they think?

I'm buying my game new today, and I'm gonna beat the living shit out of it like I did RE4 and RE5 (single player and mercs).

I'm not a game selling person, so I don't have to make anyone deal with my cartridge overwhelming anyone.

But people going ape shit over this is nowhere near as sleazy as the $5 bullshit they pulled on us time and time again in the pass.
_____________________________ ________________

Besides, what Capcom game, that has a beaten save on it (with multiple file choices) has ever stopped anyone from playing through the game again, playing the mini game modes, starting a new save file slot, and so on?

-Resident Evil
-Dino Crisis
-Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney Series <-- (Bought used and beaten and still enjoyed the hell out of it playing through the already unlocked cases).
-List goes on...

PaladinXII3439d ago

So far, Capcom is the only publisher to take this step. To the best of my knowledge, this functionality (or removing the necessary feature to delete saves) would have been possible on any cartridge/card-based hardware. Do you have a link that indicates this is a new feature in the hardware?

coryok3439d ago (Edited 3439d ago )

any developer could have done this, but they would have to have clearance by their respective platforms beforehand. you cant make any game do whatever you want and release it on a platform, the platform has to accept your game

youre right capcom is the first to do this, out of thousands of games spanning many years, this is the first time that its happen, and it happened on a nintendo platform.

nintendo has already started going down the road of limiting saves to limit how many people play a game, all pokemon games have only one save space... maybe theyre softening everyone up for when they start letting publishers sell save spaces.

picture this: you buy a game and it has one save space, you start playing and then your sister wants to try playing the game but cant without a save space so what do you have to do? you have to buy dlc that unlocks a save space so your sister can try playing the game also

its a very real possibility now that everyone has internet everywhere they go and it'll never be possible without support from the console manufacturers. im against every type of save space limiting and im always going to blame the console manufacturers for it because theyre the ones who can put a stop to it.

PaladinXII3439d ago

Pokemon games have ALWAYS only had one save spot. Show me a new, first-party game that is using the same oppressive technique.

Just because Nintendo allowed Capcom to do this, it isn't an indication that they are in favor of it. You're making a huge leap in logic and, unfortunately, you're argument falls short of landing on the other side.

coryok3439d ago

just because pokemon games have always had one save spot doesnt make it any better. theyre the only console manufacturer so far to use save game management as a way to get people to buy more of their product. if it catches on it will be on every console

nintendo letting something happen is indeed an indication that they want it to happen, at least that they want it to happen more than what would happen otherwise. nintendo doesnt just let people do things that it doesnt want to happen. they choose whats best for them and they do it. in this case they decided that it was best for them to let them do it, theyre supporting it. actions speak louder than words and nintendos actions show that they would rather let publishers use this kind of tactic to sell more games than not

contra1573439d ago

With developers crying out over two yrs ago about what gamestop was Doing to their sales , nothing changed , gamestop isn't suppose to sell a new title used for 5-6 months . But gamestop dont care . I knew if they didn't stop, this kind of technology was to be formed.

PaladinXII3439d ago

Since when is Gamestop not allowed to sell a used copy of a title for a set period of time after release? I'm seeing lots of "facts" being bandied about with no substantiation.

If this was really Nintendo's doing, wouldn't you expect that first-party titles would all carry this limitation?

Hicken3439d ago

It's an attempt at curbing the buying of used games. But there's a problem with this approach, just as there's a problem with companies complaining about used games, at all:

Not everyone who may want to play your game thinks it's worth that full retail price. And there's already a no-return policy in the case of new games for most retailers here in the US. If you open it, it's yours, even if it sucks.

That aside, Capcom doesn't lose money when somebody buys a used game. They just don't make any; there's a considerable difference. Besides, there's no way in Hell I'd pay full price for a game 7, 8 months after it came out.

Show all comments (14)