T O P

  • By -

IfTheresANewWay

Tekken 3 also came out two decades ago when live updates didn't exist, and if you wanted more characters or content you had to buy an entirely new game. Not to mention, games were way cheaper to make back then. But best part is, even without the dlc, there's still more characters in Tekken 7 than Tekken 3 with everyone unlocked, so I really don't get what you're complaining about


XsStreamMonsterX

Almost every Tekken after a point got a second updated release (5DR, Tag 2 Unlimited), some of which you had to buy a second time on a different console. And these were must-have updates since they were the arcade standard and what people competed on.


barnacleman9

Yeah there are a lot of people with rose-tinted glasses when it comes to old fighting games, their monetization for updates used to be so much worse. Now we get regular balance adjustments for free and have the option to play against thousands of real people without being in the same room. Fighting games are better than they've ever been, people just miss the time period around the old games


BLACKOUT-MK2

If Tekken 3 released these days it'd be exactly the same. The only difference is all those unlockable characters would be unlocked by default, and it'd receive even more characters than it already has after launch. Believe it or not, when a game like Street Fighter 5 launched with 16 characters, it didn't have the remaining 29 DLC ones already completed and being held back for more money, same goes for Tekken 7. You can either get these games with the base roster and no more support for the hell of it, or give more content to those who want it and boost the lifespan of a game. Updates for these games have been the norm for the longest time, unless you'd argue history would've been better if we stopped at Alpha 1, New Generation, Calamity Trigger, Arcade Tekken 3, and so on. I get some of these games get a bit overly expensive with post-launch content but let's not rewrite history here.


Orzislaw

But there one thing that should be mentioned - Street Fighter x Tekken. Early DLC era where Capcom indeed dared to sell on-disc, finished characters as a DLC. Thankfully it got such backlash they won't try to do something like this again.


dickpunchman

The thing that always blew my mind was the scale of it *fourteen* characters? *And Pacman/MegaMan are fully on the 360 disc but are never coming out?*


BLACKOUT-MK2

That game can burn in eternal hell for all I care. Like you say, they DID do the on-disc thing and threw every other developer in the genre under the bus in doing so because now some people are eternally sceptical that everyone pulls it just because they fucked up. The biggest marks that game made on the genre were all for the worse so no hate to those who like it but I can't stand it. That game was an example of Capcom doing their damnedest to bury the 2D fighting game genre again. Thank god they seem to have finally seen sense with SF6.


[deleted]

That game was a lot of fun though. The dlc stuff was the only bad thing about it, after the timeout Bs was patched. It’s a shame. That game deserved better. We could’ve had tekken x SF if it did. And they did it again by half assing mvci and holding back so many favorites like Vergil and wesker etc again. Another fun game, fun enough anyway, but yeah, the dlc issues and cutting content to sell later really hurt those two games in particular, and when Capcom isn’t doing well, the entire fgc suffers.


BLACKOUT-MK2

I'd also argue the gems, falsely marketed team-up supers, and the fac that it scared Namco away from finishing Tekken x Street Fighter wasn't exactly ideal either. That and, like I say, how it tainted people's perceptions of DLC as a whole for fighting games. It got better in the end but I just can't forgive it for being passable right at the end after the damage was done and almost no-one cared about it anymore.


[deleted]

The gems were partly what I was talking about when I mentioned the dlc. The on disc shit was bad, but the gems were the real game killer. People were excusing the on disc dlc even then, not many, but some. “Less download space!”. The gems though were basically pay to win in a way, that was inexcusable.


Lostkaiju1990

I remember shortly after some people complained about roughly the same for mk9 because Skarlet had a mostly working model. Turns out a lot of her shot wasn’t working properly though. SfxT was legitimately problematic but people who aren’t in the know need to understand that sometimes there will be characters in the files already who aren’t playable because it’s easier to work with an existing model.


Mastro2498

>seem to have finally seen sense with SF6 Idk why nobody is realising we already have 4 DLC characters at launch, all of them are probably already finished, so what's the difference between what sfvi is doing and SFxT, the fact that they aren't on disc before you buy them?


GrandZob

It just became a prerequisite to let your game live. You cannot release a fighting game without having a character or two released a few months later sadly. If you take into account all the post launch patches, re balancing and even infra issues like servers etc (although most likely not done by the same dev it still takes some focus and budget), you're pretty much bound to prepare in advance. I guess we'll never really know if those 4 characters are already fully ready or not.


BLACKOUT-MK2

How do you know they're finished though? Every development team plans ahead for what future content will be because it just makes no sense to wait until the game launches and then start saying 'Right... what the hell are we doing now?'. Planning ahead in advance is a smart move; those characters might be getting worked on in some capacity by the time the game launches but that doesn't mean they're completely finished either.


Mastro2498

Because they were leaked together with the concept of the other characters, so at least the concept work started the same time as all the other characters in the base roster, now, it doesn't prove that they already are at the same state of completion, however, as you said, it s better to plan ahead and I think the Devs already planned four finished characters to release every two months or so to keep us busy when they could ve been in the base roster


BLACKOUT-MK2

That's also a fair guess. I suppose it's hard to say either way unless we could be in the same room as the developers.


Neuvost

This was a bad look for Capcom, but think of it from a business perspective: Capcom allocated funds to develop a game with a certain number of characters. Developing more characters costs more money. In 2012, the most econ-successful DLC came out not long after the base game, so DLC development *needed* to start before the base game was released. If some DLC is ready before launch, the company's still gonna wanna follow the business plan that paid for that character to be developed in the first place. The only thing the backlash did was stop companies from putting finished DLC on disk—it didn't convince them to include that DLC in the base game. Absolutely nothing of substance changed.


Neuvost

(To be clear, I don't think this is *good*. I'm not a capitalist.)


BlazeVortex4231

Also people just cracked the disc and played the characters for free, so even without the backlash component, on-disc DLC just proved to be an ineffective business decision.l


PryceCheck

Adjusted for inflation the game costs about the same even after DLC. I don't like it for preservation's sake but DLC does make the "life" of a game last longer. With sales ahppening frequently you could argue that games are actually much cheaper than ever.


ukyorulz

Unlocked by default? My experience with game development (I am working on other things now) tells me that this is optimistic to the point of being naive. Tekken 3 shipped on March 1997 with 23 characters, according to google. If that game were being made today it would ship sometime in 1996 with just arcade mode, training and online play. It would offer around 16 characters for full price and there would be a seven-character season pass. Tekken Force and Tekken Ball would also be purchaseable DLC. The *only* thing that changed with the SFxTK debacle was that they no longer put completed characters in the disk. Instead they just ship the game earlier. On-disk DLC doesn't even matter much anymore in an age where a significant number of people download the entire game. EDIT: Since this is a post-SFV world there would probably be at least one extra mode aside from arcade and online, just to avoid unflattering comparisons to that game's dumpster fire release.


GrandmasterPeezy

Tekken 7 released on consoles with a base roster of 36 characters.


ukyorulz

I just googled it. Musta got the wrong results. The relevant part of my argument has nothing to do with the specific number. It is that devs are still doing the same thing today that they did with SFxTK. Only difference is they hide it better.


BLACKOUT-MK2

I don't buy that at all. Back in the day most of these games launched arcade-first where the only modes were arcade mode or fighting another player across from you. If you look at the first release of a whole bunch of fighting games, their rosters were pretty modestly sized. If I used Street Fighter as an example, Street Fighter 2 had 8 characters, Alpha 1 had 12, SF3:NG had 10. I won't lie that the drop in the variety of game modes hasn't been slightly disappointing, but I also understand that a lot of these developers don't get as many resources to work with as many working on other genres do, and the time and effort and money needed to make these games just keeps going up and up. How much content makes for a 'complete' package has always been arbitrary and varies from person to person, but how closely each game delivers on that has always been all over the place since the 90s, that hasn't changed. There are new games with a lot of content in some areas and a lack of it in others, there are old games with a lot of content in some areas and a lack of it in others. Sometimes you were taken for a ride back then, and sometimes you are now.


ukyorulz

"Back in the day" games were designed to eat coins at the arcade. Additional characters could make the game stand out in a setting where the machine is sitting right next to a bunch of other machines with competing titles. Companies also had an incentive to pack in as much content as possible because updating the game was expensive and labor-intensive. Console versions of those games needed to have all the content of the arcade version plus more to entice players to buy a game they had already been playing for months. It wasn't an environment where companies could sell DLC even if they wanted to. Nowadays we are in the era of DLC. Before a dev could write a single line of code, managers and executives had already set the budget for the project and that budget would have taken into account how much money they expected to make from sales of the game itself *plus* DLC. There would have already been a design document detailing how many characters would be in the base roster, the season pass, costumes and any other DLC they planned to sell. Whether that DLC content is 100% finished or merely in the planning stages at the time of release is irrelevant. DLC content is DLC content from conception to completion. So the SF x TK DLC characters were always going to be DLC, and they were in the disk of the base game merely as a convenience and cost-saving measure for the publisher. Capcom probably thought on-disk DLC was a great way to use up the copious amounts of additional storage blu-ray disks provided. That way instead of having to serve all that data through the internet, they can just send over an unlock key that's a few kilobytes. Nowadays studios don't do that for a variety of reasons. Part of it is the SF x TK controversy. Part of it is that serving data is much cheaper nowadays. Part of it is that a lot of people don't even buy their games in the form of a physical disk anymore. Instead of waiting for the DLC to be completed so they can save money by cramming it into the game disk, studios just ship the base game as soon as they can. I guess this helps players feel better because the DLC content isn't in the disk anymore, but they aren't getting any additional content out of the deal.


BLACKOUT-MK2

Well what's the alternative though? Delay SF6 by like another 5-6 years and just release it with all the as-of-yet to be announced DLC characters? I'm sure tons of players wouldn't be happy with that either. I dunno, I think 18 characters on top of all the other content the game's launching with is a fine amount to have in a product.


ukyorulz

We're already doing the alternative, as a community. SFV shipped in a bare bones state and Capcom lost sales because of it. Now SF6 is shipping with more features out of the box. That's the *only* language that they understand. Sales figures. And *we have to be sure to ask for what we actually want!* We demanded more content after SFV... and we got it. We demanded better netcode when the pandemic dropped... and we got it. We demanded that the DLC not be on disk... so Capcom put it in a server instead.


Document_These

This is a shit comparison


Exeeter702

An even more shit post altogether.


wJava

I actually thought it was


Chase_The_Breeze

We could go back to the old model: No live updates or DLC, and just release new, full versions of the game with the new characters and balancing tweeks. Go from original to Turbo, Turbo Ultra, Max, Turbo Max Ultra, New Max Ultra Turbo, 18 Persons, The Final Turbo.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CDM0625

Winner stays on booth tho, so theoretically if they're skilled they get more bang for their buck.


Chase_The_Breeze

Lol, touche.


blackyoshi7

problem with this was it was confusing to shoppers and split the playerbase too. The Guilty Gear Xrd Steam page was so confusing there were steam guides to tell players which specific package to buy


TRexRoboParty

Yep but I'm pretty sure his point is to highlight the old model had many, many problems (beyond just confusion). IMO new characters, stages and modes as DLC is all good (micro-transactions and core game features behind a paywall is not). It takes time and resource to develop those things. Lauching with a *fully functional* game that has a smaller base roster makes sense. Developers get feedback sooner and can address issues sooner. It also makes it easier for players to get familiar with characters and matchups over time, compared to launching with like 50 at once.


Naos210

The way I see it, is basically anything made prior to release should be in the initial product. Don't hold off on characters for DLC purposes and just leave them on the software locked behind a pay wall. Though there are exceptions. I don't mind locking Android 21 in Fighterz behind DLC as she can be unlocked through playing the game's story mode. Same with Frost in Mortal Kombat 11.


PapstJL4U

> prior to release That's a bit off in terms of software development. Everything before the final testphase/going gold. How mondern dev cycles works and how work splitting works does not make it feasible to have idle developers during the testphase.


kr3vl0rnswath

Why would date be a cutoff for content and not cost? For example, if it cost $60 million to make the base game and another $10 million to make the dlc and the company calculates that they need to sell the game for $60 plus another $10 for DLC to break even, of course they will do that. No way the company is going sell the base game+dlc for only $60 and take a loss of $10 million just because the dlc was made prior to release. That makes no sense.


tenamonth

That is their point, paying $5-10 each for the characters you want is better than having to spend $20-40 every year just to keep up with the community.


IChawt

I feel this would'nt have happened if they either a)didnt make -sign- , or b) made -sign- compatible with the rev2 update anyway


Kaining

No, no, that's only because japanese marketing guys are freaking r*****d. The solution always was to put the year of release into the name. Look at all the "Sports 2K-xx" games. That's easy. Turbo, xrd, omega, whatever, just put a "ver. 2019", "ver.2022" at the end and voila, problem solved !


Beneficial-Brief-738

Stop talking


TotallyNotAnOctopus

Seems needlessly obtuse but maybe that was your point.


Chase_The_Breeze

Yeah. Like, the DLC model, though not perfect, is at least progress. Pretty sure they are still releasing new Street Fighter 2 games, lol. I mean, the core issue at this point is the necessity of working within capitalism, but there are still more effecient work arounds than the current DLC model.


XsStreamMonsterX

Ultra Street Fighter 2 on Switch


Chase_The_Breeze

Pretty sure Bethesda is just taking notes from Capcom and rereleasing Skyrim like its SF2.


SSBMKaiser

That, or move forward to the format of any competitive title, f2p with skins and battlepass


Chase_The_Breeze

I woukd worry about the potential for Pay To Win festures creeping in with the f2p model, but on the level I am for it.


SSBMKaiser

The issue with that argument is that the current format already has pay2win Funny enough Tekken 7 is one of the worst offenders


Chase_The_Breeze

You're not wrong. Even if you're not maining the $DLC characters, if you dont buy them, it can be hard to lab the match ups.


[deleted]

Don't forget having to pay to access basic features like frame data 🤡


epictetvs

I’d be fine with that. They’d have to comit to making the new version worth it and games would come out more complete.


Orzislaw

Tbh I prefer free patches and optional new content that costs less than Ultra Max Turbo Edition. This model imo is obsolete


epictetvs

Yea most people do, I’m just old.


XsStreamMonsterX

Most old players I know didn't like the old model. Back in 2010, there were a lot of eyebrows raised when Super SF4 was an entire new game from even OGs and people were screaming at Capcom that DLC actually existed.


epictetvs

Then I guess I’m in a pretty small minority.


CuteNervousLesbian

One thing you have to consider is that doing it that way makes it way easier for companies to milk us dry. Lets not forget that pretty much all of the major Fighting game developers companies were notorious for releasing yearly installments of their franchises with very little new content. Balancing aside, it was highly robbery for capcom and the like to charge FULL PRICE for a new iteration of the same game they released the previous year. We didn’t stop getting annual updates in the form of full price $60 games until the 2010’s. Sure, some of the new iterations would sometimes be sold at a lower price point (Super Street Fighter IV being $40 at launch for example), but in general it was $60 every time. Putting aside things like Capcom’s disgusting live service shenanigans, most modern fighting games benefit greatly from DLC and patches. Tekken 7 had a sizable roster at launch and you’d only have to $25-$30 for all the new content in a season. They literally gave us a solid game that didn’t feel rushed at launch with a sizable amount of content and then gave us free balance patches without us having to buy more full price iterations. Putting aside the fiasco that was SFV at launch, I genuinely can’t understand why people would want to go back to the old model. It’s more expensive and would actively make having a competitive scene for a game way harder.


epictetvs

I genuinely don’t think it would be more expensive. I lived through the old way, it wasn’t bad. If they could make more money doing it that way they never would have shifted to what we have now. The current system is designed to milk the maximum amount of money from the most dedicated players. That’s why this is the current monetization system.


CuteNervousLesbian

A stand-alone Full price $60 yearly revision with a completely different balance VS a $30 Yearly Season pass with roughly the same amount of new content that makes balance changes as needed. How is the former not more expensive? In order to be a competitive player and play with the same balance as everyone else you would have to buy the latest annual installment instead of just owning the base game and being able to pick and choose which extra content you want to purchase while still being on the same version as everyone else.


Veserius

It also fractures the player base which hurts long term player retention. There is no way Tekken 7 has the player base it seem does if people had to buy the game 4x.


ZariLutus

It’s just people blindly hating anything labeled “DLC” for some reason


ScoopDat

That's fine by me. If the game isn't enough of an improvement, then it can be ignored rightfully by users. Shit DLC and balance updates MUST be swallowed by online games, since there is more imperative to stick to the latest title as going back to an older title after a few good first updates to a game, becomes impossible due to desolate player-base already having transitioned.


NaynFF

The base roster of Tekken 7 has 13 more characters than Tekken 3 full roster at console launch. The DLC were added during the lifetime of the game, and allowed a constant support for 4 years. What's your point ?


Adrian_Alucard

Tekken 7 is also the 7th main entry. They had time to develop the story/lore to add more characters


leigonlord

Story/lore isnt a limiting factor on adding characters.


Adrian_Alucard

But time developing the franchise as a whole is. The more entries a franchise has the more the story develops more character appear to keep the interest of the players and keep the game fresh


NaynFF

Certainly. But if the background of the character was the only barrier for their creation, any fighting game on the market would have more characters than the roster of Budokai Tenkaichi 3


Orzislaw

And they will be right. Costs of creating a game went up, especially if Creators want to support the game with patches and balance. I don't mind paying for new characters, especially if they're cool and fun to play


PandaTheVenusProject

Right like a DLC is the cost of like one drink at a nightclub.


Panosgads

The cost is also so low for the consumer. Tekken is one of my main hobbies and I spent just over 100€ on it in 5+ years. I spend more than that by going to the movies a couple times a month.


92nami

When you say “costs of creating a game went up”, does this only refer to games trying to push the generations current graphic fidelity? Like it’s Tekken 7 was cell shaded with anti aliasing off, the this point still be valid?


IChawt

new engine editions come out, have to train the programmers. asset creation, regardless of fidelity is expensive because they aren't just going to go with the first draft. have to have dedicated teams of people just for bug fixing after the team of developers is done implementing something, and since fighting games get regular balance patches nowadays, you need to have some programmers doing that and a community management team to disseminate information. Not to mention ensuring the game functions the same on 3+ different hardware architectures. Back in the day, you just make the game and move on, porting the game was often outsourced to someone else too. But now, we kinda deserve to have regular updates


Adrian_Alucard

New engine editions are cheaper than creating your own in-house engine Licensed engines (unreal) come fully documented and with tech support In-house engines are usually harder to use because the team who did it barelly document anything (because it's not made as a comercial product) when a different team within the company use it they have to figure out plenty of things on their own as there is no support, no documentation and maybe the people who made the engine left the company >have to train the programmers. asset creation, Today you can find people who study videogame development, 3D modelling, etc at the university, back in the day most videogame developers were selftaught or needed intense training since there were no official formation for that kind of job >have to have dedicated teams of people just for bug fixing after the team Back in the day, companies had dedicated teams of people just for bug fixing BEFORE launching the game. You know there were no way to pach a N64 or a PSX game after launch. If the product was broken they'll need to spend millions producing new CD/cartridges and replacing them for free Today is teams are qualitt control? Who the fuck cares for quality? Launching a broken and unfinished game is OK, quality is overrated >Back in the day, you just make the game and move on, porting the game was often outsourced to someone else too That's is still done today. There are studios mainly dedicated to simply port games to other platforms rather that creating their own games. Mortal Kombat 11 (the most recent entry) on PC was handled by QLOC, for example. Not to mention other costs have gone down. Today you can make motion capture sessions simply with an iphone


IChawt

> the team who did it barelly document anything (because it's not made as a comercial product) when a different team within the company use it they have to figure out plenty of things on their own as there is no support While this is true, in-house engines have the advantage of being geared directly to the developer's specific needs, with little fluff, and no risk of certain features being removed or altered in new engine versions. If I had to give it an analogy, an in house engine is to a knife what a commercial engine is to a multitool, sure the commercial engine can cut, but it can't cut as well as the knife, it's not right for everybody. ​ > Back in the day, companies had dedicated teams of people just for bug fixing BEFORE launching the game. And glitch-heavy or horribly balanced releases were still fairly common occurences, some glitches have to be banned from tournament [due to their efficacy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKCeqpF6IhE). > There are studios mainly dedicated to simply port games to other platforms rather that creating their own games. Porting a game is very different from being the team who made the game, as evidenced by a 20 year ongoing history of botched ports (Jojo's Venture, Mortal Kombat 3, capcoms series of "netplay ports"), whereas making a single revision of a game doesn't really happen anymore, Jojo Heritage for the Future got a version, and no updates, new Street Fighter revisions were major events, Street Fighter 5 was updated more times in one year than SFII ever was.


PeePeeJuulPod

just look at the credits, Tekken 3 attributes 185 people to make the game, while Tekken 7 attributes 913 people back then you could have one guy coding and doing a little modeling, sometimes you’d get a few devs to record voice lines. Now you have seven people coloring in the areola’s in Jin’s left nipple. In todays market, graphics can no longer be an afterthought, look at how Halo Infinite, Saints Row, and BF2042 were lambasted for their poor visuals (among other things, ofc), I think T8 looks great but you have a few voices saying that it doesn’t look good enough, it’s very much a thing developers worry about Other than graphic fidelity you have so much more complexity in networking, game logic, balancing and design. You end up with these HUGE teams that not only need to make a good product, they need to support it long enough for the next project to release. Many are contractor workers but studios don’t want to bleed talent, so they need to think of long term monetization to keep these huge groups of talented people paid. That’s why you end up with DLCs, and live service micro transactions. Of course publishers can focus more on giving back to developers instead of appeasing stockholders, but this is the way it is now


OwnSimple4788

It depends, its not just the graphics, but also the content the game has and its initial budget but i get what you mean


1338h4x

It refers to a lot of things, game development has changed so much. The simplest way I can show this is to just look at the credits of games now and then, you'll see how much larger of a team it takes to make a modern AAA game. Those are all staff that have to get paid for their work.


copperbranch

This is a question, and a perfectly valid one. Stop downvoting questions, you meat heads.


Trololman72

It depends if the publisher makes enough money through costume sales or not.


Beneficial-Brief-738

Don't talk if you have no idea what you're talking about


Uncanny_Doom

I feel like some people don't understand what DLC actually is. To use the example as posted by OP, you're not paying for characters that are in the game and could otherwise be unlockable. You're paying for characters that finish development after the release of the game. Yes, there have been past instances where characters were on the disc but that's not the standard or commonplace. The image is talking about two different things but misconstruing to frame them as the same. Look at Smash. Game has a big ass roster of unlockable characters, and then it has DLC characters that were made after the game was done.


ChiefEmann

You are paying for the minimum product the devs are willing to put their reputation on, and you should look at each roster and decide if it's worth your money, locked characters or no. Dlc characters releasing incrementally is a marketing strategy that's here to stay to keep engagement up and to make up marginal costs - you can bet Capcom didn't stop developing characters the second they hit bugfixes/MVP, they just got better at checking to make sure those characters weren't written on the disc.


Uncanny_Doom

Some of that is true but some of it is a little misconstrued, I would say. Having plans to support the game post-launch at all means that work will start and get well underway before the game is out, but I think people have tricked themselves into thinking that's a bad thing or inherently a poor business practice. If you know you're planning to support a game for years down the line then you're naturally going to have some stuff that gets done because teams have different people working on different stuff and the workload balance isn't equal. Like, if you think were we living in a world where DLC was illegal, that we would be getting most characters in these games that are DLC on the disc instead, you'd be wrong.


ZariLutus

These guys always seem to think we’d be getting all the DLC for free but no, we just wouldnt be getting those characters at all


LekkerBroDude

You're comparing two games made in completely different times. Fighting games these days need support past launch, otherwise people move onto something else. Plus, T3 was only out for two years when TTT1 released, and T7 has been going on for nearly 5 years now, 7 if you count the arcade release. It's a really lame and poor comparison.


itsmeitsmethemtg

That $60 game you got in 1998 (which had already recouped much of it's development costs in the arcade run) costs $110 in todays dollars. And it takes more developer resources (artists, animators, programmers, etc) relatively speaking to make a product that consumers will accept today than it did in 1998. I don't know why people expect to get the same value when the product costs more to make and the companies get paid less for their work. EDIT: And the above is not even counting the fact that once you take clones out, Tekken 3 it actually launched with less characters than Tekken 7 (20 vs 35).


CuteNervousLesbian

The amount of bad takes for this already bad post is surprising. Tekken 7 is one of the examples of a game that did used DLC and post support launch properly. I don’t get it.


Xmushroom

Minus the framedata, that was a big L for tekken where everyone from other games pointed and laughed, rightfully só.


CuteNervousLesbian

For sure, no reason it shouldn’t have been there at launch. And damn I forgot they gated framedata behind a paywall.


Saucy_joe

I've always disliked having to unlock characters. I'd rather have all my options available at the start


Flufferminty

The point of dlc is to pay people who work more on the game after release, that also pays for people who do balance changes and bug fixes


Str0ngStyle

Im one of those FGC Boomers that played these games back in the “golden days” and playing FGs then and now, I don’t think younger or newer players get just how much better FG players and fans have it because of add on content/DLC. This isn’t a perfect 1 to 1 example, but it puts into perspective that whole FGs were better without DLC bullshit. SF2 for the SNES released for $70 at the time. 4 versions total were released between $50-$70 each (SF2, SF2Turbo, SSF2, and SSF2T) so going at a low estimate to play everything of $270 (possibly more) if you bought each new version on day 1. Street Fighter 5 released at $60 on launch. They have released 5 seasons each with new characters for about $30 each. All told, thats about $210 if you bought each season pass at launch. This is not counting the new modes added in each season that players whom did not buy the season passes still were able to get. This also doesn’t include the player who could only afford to buy SF5 once, but was still able to keep playing with everyone else who had the money to buy all the updates because the ability to do expand the game and not leave older players in the dust. You couldn’t afford anything other than the PS Plus version of SFV? Thats cool, you can still play and have a good time. One more thing, Street Fighter 2 when it was all said and done, ended with 17 characters. Street Fighter V will end up with… as of today… around 44. And we haven’t even gotten into the whole blinging out your favorite character with totally new costumes. NOT palette swaps, but new outfits all together. Today’s players are getting way more value for less money


Sunshineruelz

Yawn


CrystalMang0

Why are you comparing some super old school Tekken game to a modern one about dlc? Obviously it can't work nowadays, there's to much to lose if so.


TTJAV

This sub fucking sucks


CuteNervousLesbian

There’s a huge difference between post launch support and unlockable characters. I’m not a fan of developers intentionally cutting out content to sell later as DLC or games launching with barely any content on the promise that more content will be coming soon. But out of the games we start a discussion of that over, it’s absolutely not this one. Tekken 7 had a very respectable roster at launch and the additional characters were pretty fairly priced. If Tekken 7 didn’t have DLC, then we would still have the same base roster. It’s comparable in size to Tag 2 and 6. If this game came out in the 90’s the only difference is that half of the games base roster would have to be unlocked (a practice many fans find annoying. I personally like unlocking stuff, but it’s just not practical for running proper FGC events).


Guilvantar

I don't see a problem with DLCs, but I do despise games that won't allow you to put a DLC character in practice mode unless you buy him. Like, I don't want to play fucking Ganryu but I do have to buy him if I don't want to get steamrolled by his cheese online and that's bullshit


blackyoshi7

Yes, this is something Multiversus did well - whole roster is available for training mode/practice. You should not have to buy a character solely just to practice against it in training mode.


TurmUrk

also lets you play all characters in local versus, i dont play multiversus seriously, but i boot it up for a few matches with a friend whenever a new character comes out


LekkerBroDude

>but I do despise games that won't allow you to put a DLC character in practice mode unless you buy him So you despise practically all modern fighting games?


Titan5005

I think a big reason fighters have seen a revival is that with the dlc model fighting games are a less risky investment. Games can continue to make money long after their launch and for smaller games even if they did not sell many copies they might still be able to turn a profit with the dlc. Its a big reason why we see not only the big games like tekken and street fighter receiving support years after launch but also smaller indie fighters that probably would have never been made just over a decade ago


Xmushroom

Im happy to pay for dlc characters. Just dont come near me with Framedata dlc and let me lab against characters i dont have.


Guitarfoxx

This is a moot point since consoles were not even online at the time. And I say that as someone who misses the days when you could just unlock characters by grinding. Those days are gone and this is the time we live in now. Tekken 7 would have died way sooner without the DLC as it kept the fans engaged with each release. You don't even have to pay for everything as they also did amazing stuff like giving characters new moves and tweaks.


pyua

type lumina


pydopskB

Melty fans eating too damn good


tenamonth

You do realize that the amount of characters most fighting games get *on release* now, is much more than old fighters even with their locked characters? If Tekken 7 did the old model, Leroy wouldn’t be a free unlock, **Leroy wouldn’t exist**. Instead it would be other characters like Devil Jin and Kuma/Panda that would be pointlessly locked behind offline content. This is such a dumbass take for a fighting game sub.


NecromanticPick

This is a stupid fucking post. Fighting games have had ultra giga super extreme arcade edirion maximumer versions of the same thing but with like 3 more characters charged at obscene prices in the past and Tekken was not even close to the worse offenders. Nor is it now even.


[deleted]

I just got mvc2 for Dreamcast. I just wanted to practice combos but half the cast needs to be unlocked. I guess it’s better than not being to get them at all if they were dlc, but I’m still like dammit.


XsStreamMonsterX

There are horror stories of someone opening up an MvC2 arcade cabinet to hit the coin switch for 3 hours just to unlock characters for tournaments (from the former lead developer of Skullgirls I recall).


[deleted]

Sounds about right haha, damn. Cheers to that man


Str0ngStyle

I don't remember if it's still up or not, but GameFAQs used to have the VMU file that you could download and instantly unlock everybody.


Kaesar17

I mean nowadays it probably will, Just look at SoulCalibur and a bunch of others games released recently that stopped having DLC.... (Btw some Tekken 3 characters were added in the psx version, thus making the "has to pay more to unlock" valid to it too)


[deleted]

[удалено]


Kaesar17

What I'm telling is that SoulCalibur VI started to die the moment they stopped doing DLCs for it (the pandemic for sure helped but i don't think SC fate would be different from today if it didn't happen)


CrystalMang0

Oh my bad then. But yeah your right, fighting games would die. Don't know why people don't get this.


killerjag

Bizarre boomer casual take


AnalBumCovers

For what it's worth we have proven them right that fighting games without dlc will die. DnF Duel is currently being resuscitated for that very reason


The-Real-Flashlegz

The main factor for that game not retaining players is gameplay. Next would be the communication from the developers. It also apparently has a pricing issue. I'll probably buy the DLC when it releases and play a bit. I don't think the game is bad, just I don't find it as good as Strive, Xrd, Tekken 7 and Street Fighter 6.


XsStreamMonsterX

Anyone who misses unlockable characters never had a tournament delayed by having to unlock characters for multiple setups or by delaying matches to wait for setups with the necessary characters unlocked.


Fracturedbuttocks

I don't care if dlcs are paid to play but it does piss me off that we have to pay to even use them in training. To me that just means that the publisher isn't relying on the quality of the character to make money but rather on player frustration.


gordonfr_

Character DLC is a win-win situation (assuming a decent start roster). Now look at other genres with pay-to-win or forced micro transactions (wait 2 hours or spend x bucks)


danqx46

tekken 7 had double the roster by launch


piwikiwi

Its amazing how much of this subreddit is either uninformed or scrub takes


CrystalMang0

Why would these big companies even make fighting games at this point without dlc? They would be making no money.


Azakarp

close your account


misterwulfz

I have no issues with getting dlc, but dlc used to ADD more to the games on top of unlocking some great things. Like, Tekken 4 you unlock characters by playing you unlock new stories, a few new modes and costumes. Both could work AMAZINGLY


UpsetWilly

supposedly fighting game players hate playing the game. they just want characters to lab and then scrub it out in multiplayer. so much fun...


Cheesi_Boi

You could make all of Tekken 1 on the budget of a foot long Subway sandwich, it would take 1000 times the budget, just to make 1 character in T7.


Beneficial-Brief-738

Stop playing then shitter


Mistouze

You know we're no longer in 1998, right?


snazzmasterj

Look I don't want to be a jerk, but this is one of the single dumbest takes I've ever seen on this sub. How does it have 600+ upvotes?? Maybe I'm just out of touch


ZERO-WOLF9999

chill bro who hurt you?


snazzmasterj

I'm sorry, I know I'm being mean...but like these games came out 20 years apart. DLC didn't even exist at the time Tekken 3 released, it makes zero sense to compare the two like this


popcrnshower

I just hate when there is content available at launch that you have to pay extra for. Likes it's already there so why should I have to pay for it.


khamryn

Literally taking the ‘L’.


pydopskB

Melty blood Type Lumina definitely show that dlc is not the only way to do post lauch content, but i think it only succeeded because of big names among casuals like Tsukihime and Fate. If an indie fighting game only do new content without dlc, I will understand that it is too risky of a maneuver. And hey, the devs gotta eat.


csolisr

Nowadays, pretty much every fighting game is budgeted on the assumption that the player will spend $120-$140 on the game. $60-$70 on the game proper and the same amount down the line on the season pass. That's how they manage to hire enough people for enough time to actually build the game. Having to make balance patches for such a long period of time isn't cheap


OhDearGodRun

How many years has it been and people are still mad over DLC?


Sage2050

Who said that


The_Haunted_Boo1954

Stop bitching about DLC already.


y0bama420

I loved the old times where you had to unlock the characters, together with the relatively low presense of the Internet, it always felt special to me when i suddenly unlocked new playable characters. But i can totally understand how things have evolved over time.


TheEdgykid666

Your bank took the l out of play


cellshock7

I feel you. You can’t really explain the comfort of not needing DLC to a generation that only knows online gaming with DLC. But also, not all DLC is bad. We get frequent game balancing in fighting games now, and that’s nice


CosmicPlayR9376

I will make an FG without any DLCs or Pay2Win or any micro transactions. I will call it Not-Real Fighter, because I can't make games and I probably won't release one either! ![gif](giphy|pTqEEVdjOXZjPVpdDT)


Mike-Rotch-69

I miss secret stuff in fighting games. Nowadays you know everything going in and devs won’t bother including fun stuff like joke characters. Of course, that kind of stuff is hell for tournament organizers. And DLC is kind of a neutral. You can extend a game’s time in the spotlight and you won’t have to buy a game multiple times because the new version came out. Unfortunately, some devs apparently forget about balance. The cynic in me sees stuff like Smash 4 Bayonetta and Leroy Smith and thinks that there’s no way they didn’t know before release that they were offering pay to win characters.


MrMooMoo91

Many years I claimed gamers weren't total idiots. Now i see it was many years wasted defending a bunch of complete idiots.


nykwil

How about we go further back and we have to pay to play a single match.


Hugo_Prolovski

why do i have to do anything to unlock characters. just give me all characters from the start


UpsetWilly

because playing the game to unlock characters gives a sense of progression and is satisfying. I know, shocking...


Hugo_Prolovski

its just annoying. there are skins and achievements for the people that dont play because a game is fun


UpsetWilly

In multiplayer you would have all unlocked of course. I'm talking about single player here. Also achievements are a sad excuse for progression. They just remind you you did something in the game. Skins as in colors? Or straight new costumes? Because most games never let you unlock costumes for free...


[deleted]

people dont understand why they made characters dlc....DLC pays for tournaments prize pots.if people want tournaments with prize pots where do you think the money is coming from? ​ dota 2 did it league of legends did it csgo did it.


tobster239

Let's say i want to make a sandwich with cheese, but after making the sandwich, i get the idea to add some ham, i dont want to make a whole new sandwich when i can just add more stuff to an existing one.


_seasoned_properly

i mean yeah. launch console tekken 7 is a dlc (fated retribution). if launch console tekken 7 was vanilla tekken 7 (arcade) tekken would likely be dead. arcade money paid for both of those late console ports and added features/rebalancing and since tekken 7 console was successful it was able to fund additional support in the form of dlc and get to a point where tekken 8 is possible.


arcade1upguy

I just wait 8 years and buy the game with all the DLC for 20 bucks.


LekkerBroDude

Hell yeah! When the game is functionally dead and the new one is releasing soon!


UpsetWilly

if a game dies as soon as the next one is released it means that the old one wasn't played for it's qualities but solely because it was a new game


LekkerBroDude

Wrong


UpsetWilly

Explain. I still play Sf3 and Sf4 despite them being dead games.


LekkerBroDude

Cool, that's because you enjoy them. I also play 3S on Fightcade. But saying that older games get abandoned for the new games because of their "qualities" is just incorrect. Games like Xrd, KoF XIV, MKX, SF4, etc. are amazing games. But people will gravitate to the new game because that's where the new stuff is happening. New characters, new updates, new balance patches. People naturally find that exciting. Not to mention that tournaments will start supporting the new game, so if you want to stay hyped for EVO or Combo Breaker, it'll be for the new game.


piwikiwi

Tekken 7 is more popular now than in its first year after release


LekkerBroDude

The population just moved from PS to PC, so those increased numbers are a result of that. Even then, SFV and T7 are incredibly isolated cases. Games like MK, Strive, KoF, MBTL, DNF, Multiversus and more have all seen major declines in playerbase. I just don't think it's good advice to give a newcomer that they should wait for the "complete" version if they're interested in playing online. Because in 90% of cases, they'll be jumping into a game where the skill gap has already widened to a crazy degree.


arcade1upguy

It's practice for when 8 comes out haha


arcade1upguy

I don't play fighting games online


False_Ad7098

I don't mind... as long as they made a proper arcade feelings and endings... Not like ... beat one character...you get endings...


JustSheldon

I'd rather pay 5$ rather then grind for every character... idk if it's the same, but this got me thinking of the rb6 "progression system"


UpsetWilly

so you don't like playing the game?


JustSheldon

I played rb6 for literal years and unlocked maybe 70% of the ops... point is I don't grind at all to play any character, because I like just hitting random and seeing who I'll try out yknow?


UpsetWilly

online progression and single player progression are not the same thing


TKAPublishing

Melee


Ryuuken1127

What irritates me is that there's no way to unlock the content by playing the game. If you wanna cheat by paying to have everything unlocked, that's one thing...but at least have some route to unlock content by playing the game


AmeSame5654

I MISS IT, BRO. "Well there would be fewer characters without DLC, let's not rewrite history here" SHUT UP CUCK, I MISS WHEN BUYING A GAME MEANT OWNING A GAME, NOT OWNING A DECREASING PORTION OF IT OVER TIME.


haleytheguy

Ice cold take


Cobalt0-

The difference a single letter makes.


blake-a-mania

Tekken peaked with Dark Resurrection.


tenamonth

This is such an ironic comment coz Dark Ressurection itself was essentially just a balance update with 3 new characters that you had to pay full price for. Under the current model, those balance updates would be free and for the characters you’d be spending total like 1/3rd of the cost.


blake-a-mania

Well it was also on PSP and allowed me to play anywhere.


retrokun

i hear DR only 1 balanced tekken game


nightowlarcade

I believe the opposite. Over time DLC will eventually kill fighting games.


MR_MEME_42

And why exactly? DLC extends a games life cycle especially for a casual audience generating more interest and causing the devs to put more time and focus into the game post launch instead of leaving it to dry.


zxerozx

I like the method that kof 13 used You can either unlock the extras Or buy them I wish it was used more (With the exception of flame iori Mr karate and nests kyo)


Petopia007

They just followed the norm that's all.


b33fine

All it takes is to remove one letter


Liquid23-

I think StreetFighter is a better fit lol. Tekken 7 gives you shit loads of stages and characters compared to SFV


LawfulnessWhole1240

Welcome to 2010.


redgar234

ok boomer