Svensson: […] It’s not a technical limitation. It’s just additional work (read: cost/time/opportunity cost) and as I’ve said repeatedly, given how long people have been playing SF3 in a form on PC “for free” (in most cases, not legitimately), I’m not sure that’s the best opportunity for us. That said, we’re still considering it somewhere down the line. We’ll see how it goes."*
I’m particularly confused by the second part:
“and as I’ve said repeatedly, given how long people have been playing SF3 in a form on PC “for free” (in most cases, not legitimately), I’m not sure that’s the best opportunity for us.”
So, people showing interest in your game on a certain platform and having the undying love to STILL play it after all these years is a reason NOT to release it on that platform? Is this mind boggling for anyone else?
Yes, people have shown interest in the game on the PC and have undying love to still play it after all these years, but notice that he said “for free” and what he implied by that. The “in most cases” part is just him trying to sugar-coat words; it was not legitimate at all. haha
For it to be legitimate, the player would either have to have a license for the ROM or the arcade PCB. Considering Capcom has no way of checking that, I think saying “most cases” is a guess.
Also, ‘Free’ is really the only option on the PC. There’s no way to pay Capcom to play it there. Criticizing players for using the only option is a little silly I think. I mean, if there was a Capcom supported 3S PC version, then his complaint would be valid, but there isn’t.
I’m not saying it’s false, I’m saying it’s a guess. No one really knows for sure. How am I the perfect example of showing he’s right?
Regardless, let’s say what he says is indeed the case and most people play in a non-legitimate manner. The players are obviously fans of the game to be playing it this far after release. If they had an option to pay for a Capcom supported game, I’m sure they would.
[INDENT=1]“But to the point of PC, it’s not a technical limitation. It’s just additional work (read: cost/time/opportunity cost) and as I’ve said repeatedly, given how long people have been playing SF3 in a form on PC “for free” (in most cases, not legitimately), I’m not sure that’s the best opportunity for us. That said, we’re still considering it somewhere down the line. We’ll see how it goes.”[/INDENT]
Me:
"
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. Am I wrong in assuming that the only way one could feasibly play 3rd strike online for years was through this “non-legitimate” avenue? Building off of this assumption, simply because there was no alternative available to the public (besides…you know…not playing the game), you feel it’s not a good “opportunity” to hop onto that platform? Pardon me for saying so, but that’s a fairly backwards litmus test. Also, would GGPO have even made it to 3rd Strike Online Edition if it wasn’t for people playing the game over Tony Cannon’s GGPO client? (<–Legitimately Curious)
You could have just kept it at “additional work” and I would have begrudgingly accepted that reason. Also, going from the “additional work” angle, is the development team simply unsure about a PC port because it wouldn’t be worth it time-wise or cost-wise? I’m pretty sure there’s a decent chunk of change to be made from a PC version that would net you guys some profit (even in the face of piracy). All in all, It would be nice for the community to know the roadblocks that are in the way of a PC port. If anyone wants to lend their voice towards the prospect of said PC version, by all means be heard in this thread:
My base question from the petition thread linked above is perfectly reasonable. It was slightly frustrating getting a response from some people (including a moderator) how Sven simply saying “no planned PC version” is an answer to my question…which it is not. After asking for clarification (without trying to sound confrontational, mind you) all I got was a list of Sven saying the same thing…yet again.
They’re a company. You don’t work in the industry by the looks of it and you make sweeping assumptions about the company and the state of the market. Don’t be surprised that you’re largely ignored.
Yes…they are a company…and that’s not in contention. And which assumptions are you referring to? If you are referring to my questions concerning the feasibility of a PC version (within the context of cost/profit/piracy), then I’ll remind you that these are points that I am requesting clarification for…nothing more. Would these “sweeping assumptions” be more kosher for you if I did work in “the industry”? Also, nowhere did I say that I was surprised about being mostly ignored. It’s to be expected. All that I can hope for is that at least one other person reads what I have written.
Nowhere did I say it wasn’t an assumption. I opened up that point to be corrected by Capcom if it is wrong. Is it wrong de Bloo? Is it right? That is why I’m opening up my point of view for someone in “the know” to correct me.
I personally don’t think there’s any reason to not release a technically superior version of a game even if people have been playing it for free for a long time.
Well, at the very least it’s not completely out of the question to make a true PC port. I can see why they’re not going through with it for the time being, and we’d all be delusional if we said Capcom was just exaggerating. All I can say is that at least it’s getting a great console port this time. Can’t get too greedy right now.
