It started in SvC, so blame SNK.Did Ono have a lot to do with TvC? If so, do I blame Zero's multi-game reign of terror on him?
No actually, although he worked on the game's sound. Ono actually didn't have any direct oversight or production credit over TVC or MVC3, he headed SFXT and MVCI though.Did Ono have a lot to do with TvC? If so, do I blame Zero's multi-game reign of terror on him?
The Ono Era of Capcom fighting games actually covers two console generations.Street Fighter IV is the only one I loved unambiguously. The rest had too many problems for me to fully embrace, whether I enjoyed them overall or not.
This generation was the first flat-out bust for Capcom fighters since the 16-bit era.
The least popular of opinions, but SFxT has so much potential. Everything about the game itself oozed with hype once the 2013 patch came out. The combos were amazing, the mixups/pressure/set ups we're crazy to watch, even the gems could make things more exciting. Watching the game at its highest level is a rare treat that I often go back to.
It was just bungled by (admittedly warranted) community outrage at the DLC practices and a boring meta game at launch.
If you love competitive fighting games, you owe it to yourself to watch the Grand Finals set at Final Round between Sethlolol Vs Infiltration.
If anything, I'd argue they improved their DLC distribution by adopting season passes with SFV, at least regarding characters & balance patches. Any form of DLC that splits the player base is not a good idea. Not to mention that $6 is pretty much the norm for character DLC in most fighting games these days.Street Fighter IV. Capcom got super greedy with overpriced DLC after the SFIV series and it impacted my enjoyment of the other games.
It's the norm now because they made it the norm. SSFIV had 10 new characters plus new stages and cost the same as a SFV season pass (less at many retailers). The costume DLC in SFV saw a whopping 500% increase in price, with 1 costume being the price of a costume pack in SFIV series.If anything, I'd argue they improved their DLC distribution by adopting season passes with SFV, at least regarding characters & balance patches. Any form of DLC that splits the player base is not a good idea. Not to mention that $6 is pretty much the norm for character DLC in most fighting games these days.
Fair enough on the costumes, I'll give you that. But the Super expansion also required you to buy an entirely new game, which wasn't a good move back then & shouldn't be tolerated today. Even with AE & Ultra, they locked balance updates behind a paywall. Thankfully, even ASW got the memo & moved to doing season passes.It's the norm now because they made it the norm. SSFIV had 10 new characters plus new stages and cost the same as a SFV season pass (less at many retailers). The costume DLC in SFV saw a whopping 500% increase in price, with 1 costume being the price of a costume pack in SFIV series.
Looking at non Capcom fighters and you also realise Capcom fighters are skeletons for content, but they all still charge extra for costumes etc while other games usually give you one alt for free even if others cost more. MvCI had a £25 character pass and a £25 costume DLC day 1. That a £100 game and it not even close to the content of other fighters.
Not sure if I misunderstood, but SFV didn't have DOA-like microtransactions, and I'm not sure what's your definition for that.I like SFV, I absolutely adore the animation efforts in the game, but it was handled so badly for a long time. Just avoid that + the DOA-like microtransaction traps and the game would've been a so much more appealing, compelling, complete, no nonsense product.