God, I love Street Fighter V. I'm about as good at it as I am guitar – which is to say that I know the major chords, but you can stick your pentatonic scales up your arse – but, like performing a very average rendition of Wonderwall, I'm thoroughly enjoying exploring the basics of Capcom's latest. Cammy's spiral arrow has become a close friend against the dreaded dreadlocks of Necali; Ryu's shoryuken a simple special that even my blistered digits can just about perform. But there's a 'but' coming in this opening paragraph, and I just dropped it like the V-Triggers that all of my opponents seem to be able to predict.
I don't need to say why Street Fighter V's launch is a bummer because you already know. We gave the game a 9/10, and while I wished that we would have waited to see how the launch day servers fared, I fully back that score. This absolutely is a sublime game – it'll comfortably secure a spot in our top twenty PS4 games list, and may even, ahem, rise up it over time – but it's a game that probably shouldn't have released in its current guise. And the most frustrating thing is that, with a bit of foresight and expectation control, this whole thing could have been avoided.
The reason for Street Fighter V's barebones launch is down to the Capcom Pro Tour. For those that don't follow the e-sports scene – and I don't in great detail – the new season kicks off towards the end of February. Considering that Street Fighter V is set to be the centre piece of this year's tournament, it was important to get a game out for people to practice on. And that's exactly what the publisher's done. The problem, of course, is that there are many, many, many Street Fighter fans who aren't pro players.
"The problem, of course, is that there are many, many, many Street Fighter fans who aren't pro players"
So while the scant offering of story prologues, survival, training, and the all-important online and offline versus may be more than enough for the likes of Daigo Umehara to train with, the rest of us have been left twiddling our thumbs. This was most apparent on launch day when the matchmaking was broken, leaving me desperate to play the game but with very little to actually play. So eager was I to enjoy the title that I ran through Survival mode as Cammy several times over. It's a fine mode, but it's not exactly how I imagined spending launch day.
But I feel like expectations are the underlying issue here, and there was a way that Capcom could have got this game out for tournament players – without ruining its reputation in the process. The obvious solution, of course, was a staggered roll out. The publisher could have launched the current game as Street Fighter V: Tournament Edition digitally for $30 or so. It then could have offered an upgrade path to the full game in, say, June – and deployed that alongside the "finished" retail release.
This solves every problem: tournament players have a version of the game to train on, the barebones launch is reflected by a lower price, and casual players can wait for the full version later if they like. In fact, it's so glaringly obvious that I'm bummed Capcom's adopted the path that it has. Take a look at the Amazon reviews, where it's currently boasting a 2.5 star rating, with many customers describing it as rushed. It's the same story on Steam, Metacritic, and even on this site; the game's got a bad name because its publisher failed to manage expectations accordingly.
And this is the kind of thing that sticks. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Street Fighter V will be a more universally appealing game in a couple of months; take a look at the roadmap, and most of the features that people want are set to arrive as early as March. But this is a game that should have a Metascore of 90 plus. This is a game that we should all be going gaga over. This is a game that, at its core, is absolutely wonderful. Capcom, though, with a spate of bad business decisions has failed to rise up – in fact, I'd say that the publisher's f*cked up.
Do you agree with Sammy that Capcom's missteps have undermined what should be a genre-defining game? Was this situation easily avoidable? Are you enjoying the brawler regardless? Rise up in the comments section below.
Please note that some external links on this page are affiliate links, which means if you click them and make a purchase we may receive a small percentage of the sale. Please read our FTC Disclosure for more information.
Comments 60
I love how people talk in the UK!
I'd like to see more single player content, seeing as I don't do online mp. But the gameplay is great.
Yup - f%&&£# it up royally.
Silly silly Capcom. The brands now been damaged with the terrible sf4 launch on ps4 (one reason I didn't preorder sf5) and now this.
@themcnoisy And the heartbreaking thing is that it made a truly spectacular game. Sickener!
Yeah i agree they gone F it up! The funny thing about the metacritic scores aren't even " I'm giving this game a 3 because someone gave it a 10". People are annoyed, hell I'm annoyed I should want to play SFV but now I'm waiting for Super SFV which I'm sure will get a 9/10 user score.
Well at least the rest is coming. Nintendo sold Mario Tennis Ultra Smash last Christmas for $50 and it has hardly any modes at all, and only 1 stadium, cant even play online w/ friends, and there is no talk of improving the game that I've read.
The entire industry has gone so far downhill there is no way back up, they keep making money but we keep getting the short end of the stick. It's miserable, and very expensive. And they wonder why people switch to free-to-start games? Better than $50 for a limited game w/o no DLC or $60 plus $50 DLC. SSB had almost $100 DLC. It's insane.
@Aslanmagic I would like to see more content period. Terrible cast of characters, horrible server , no arcade mode and they screwed up Charlie
@get2sammyb
If you look at the weeks before launch, Capcom had a number of press releases describing upcoming content and DLC. I reckon that they knew internally and from mock reviews that they were going to be somewhat gutted for the lack of content. Which still makes it a bit baffling that they went ahead. They put the 1% (pro players) over the 99% (casuals and wannabes).
Great gameplay, but in a time when people expect more then ever from fighting games, to charge 60 dollars, it's unacceptable.
They needed to have the game out for the pro players in time, but they wanted the launch sales, so no way they would have lowered the initial price. Sadly, with the lack of content those initial sales will be damaged too. You can still find the Collector's Edition in stock on Amazon, while Fire Emblem's sold out weeks ago.
Customers get the companies they deserve.
This is like paying a cinema ticket € 30 for watching just the first part of a trilogy. Have fun!
@Knightsmetal I can't disagree with you there. I think rjejr is right that content is getting limited in many games these days. I don't know if it's because it's so expensive to make a game or not or if they've figured out they can still make money despite short changing people because people will still buy. Maybe if more people start speaking with their wallet (myself included, because I'm guilty) then they'll be forced to change.
SFV could've been an awesome game but Capcom dropped the ball on this one.
I don't really see it as a huge problem. Look at Driveclub. Funny thing is the devs are getting complimented on how well they've turned it around, maybe it's best to screw up a launch just so you look good fixing it haha. But turn it round they have, and it's now a brilliant racer.
Yeah SF5 has had a rubbish launch, and yeah this happens all the time, best thing to do is shelf it for a few weeks and come back to what I expect'll be a great experience, and in future don't buy online only games at launch if this kind of thing upsets you, because it's pretty much guaranteed to happen!
It will be intersting to see how it's selling because despite all the criticism the chances are, it's come from people who bought the game so Capcom won't care because they have a sale. But Steam having a automated refund system may hurt them, which to be honest PSN should have something similar.
@sinalefa EVERYTHING IS NOT ABOUT FIRE EMBLEM! Hahaha. I kid.
Though seriously, I was about ready to cancel my order in light of all the problems but it was too late. I'm glad it happened that way. I got to finally play some SFV last night and my goodness, if it isn't one of the best fighters I've played. It's a shame they botched the launch, as Capcom has something really special here. As @kyleforrester87 said, just shelve it and come back later when the experience is on par for more casual players.
At this point, it goes without saying how bad the launch went. I'm pretty beat up about it, as I'm tired of every major game having glasses half full. I'll still get SFV down the line, but I actually feel glad I don't have a PS4 right now. My major concern is the servers. I expect one blow up, especially launch day, but if it's really common in the next few days or weeks, then the game will have a lot of repairs to do.
@kyleforrester87 Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like Driveclub is an exception rather than the rule. They do deserve some credit for realising they messed up and trying to improve the game, but other games that do this tend to stick to their blueprint before doing anything, if they do anything.
I still don't think launches like this and Driveclub are acceptable though, with that said, here's hoping SFV gets better.
@DerMeister I do agree it's a pain, but these kind of network problems at launch always seem to get sorted out pretty quickly, and the base game is apparently great so people just need to wait a couple of weeks for them to sort it out. Yeah it's not nice paying for the pleasure, especially when you're a SF fan, but I'm sure they'll get it repaired. It would be more worrying if there were technical issues such as poor frame rate etc. as I expect that'd be something more difficult to fix.
Of course if there are still problems in a few weeks or more...
@kyleforrester87 What you're saying definitely has some truth to it, but the (rather sad) fact of the matter is that this industry and its fans love nothing more than to judge something on first impressions. As Sammy's article says, this is a game from a legendary franchise that should have released to universal acclaim. Instead, we've got every site on the net pointing out how the servers are buggered and how the game should be more than it is.
DriveClub is a special case for the most part, and I totally agree (and believe) that Street Fighter V can end up the same way, and be respected for being a title that turned into something great. However, even now, when DriveClub's mentioned, many will still remember it as "oh, that game that was broken at launch" - and that's not something any publisher wants associated with its game.
All in all it's just a massive shame that we're having to write articles like this in the first place!
@ShogunRok
Yeah that's just it really, kind of frustrating as I suspect a lot of the people discrediting the game have not purchased it and have no interest in it either. Fact is networks are going to be a bit unreliable. I got an Apple TV recently, great gadget for streaming when it works properly but it's considered a bit of a failure because it's flaky and doesn't fall in line with Apples "it just works" philosophy. They just can't control all the factors that affect it's performance.
It is a shame you're having to write it, but it'd be worse if these kind of games didn't get released in the first place through fear of brand damaging launches, because when they are fixed they can be a lot of fun. I'm sure these kind of issues will be less common in 10 or 15 years haha.
@Sir_JBizzle
No, not today, but you just wait until tomorrow.... and someday in Europe....
Now, even if this game doesn't have a 90+ on Metacritic, it has an 82 that is not too shabby. So word of mouth could be what affects Capcom here. Work on those servers, and throw something good on March and a ton of people will have forgotten about it.
@kyleforrester87 It is true that those are bigger problems, especially for fighters, but from what I can tell the game has framerate and other things down pat. The concern from me goes to the servers and that weird bug that makes your characters disappear. Seriously, that is the first I've heard of such a thing.
@ShogunRok Truth be told, first impressions are crucial, which to me, is why a bad launch is unacceptable, regardless if the fix is obvious. I know that sounds kinda harsh, but it can make a huge difference. I don't like it when people jump the gun (Something I'm guilty of as well), but you can't screw up that first impression, because that can be all it takes. SFV can totally be fixed, and hopefully before everyone dismisses it as trash.
@kyleforrester87 I tend to agree that the whole server thing has been blown out of proportion. It's being used by many as a platform to criticise the game's other shortcomings, which is a bit tedious. But yeah, when was the last time a big, popular online-focussed game worked perfectly at launch? The only relatively recent game that springs to my mind is Destiny. I think SFV's outages should really have been expected, although that's obviously no excuse for the somewhat lacking single player content.
@DerMeister Well this is it - we all use first impressions as a basis for what we think of something. It's just human nature. Naturally, initial judgements can have big repercussions for any kind of media these days - just look at the Xbox One's launch following Microsoft's crazy comments and plans.
Heck, on a smaller level, look at trailers and screenshots for games. If the first footage that's released for a game looks like crap, people automatically dismiss it - even if it's in the back of their minds. The doubt is already in place, and that's kind of the problem SFV has right now. It's tough to shake off that negativity, even after something finds success.
I say don't launch what you don't have. It looks like a great game in the making but I, as the consumer, have to take it on faith. If they had released a tournament version or a playable beta people would have lapped it up and the word of mouth would be epic. It is hard to lose that stigma of being a bad launch and people will be that much tougher on reviewing what comes out next.
@Rudy_Manchego I kind of see it as more of a case of release it now, so it works properly in a month, instead of releasing it in a month and having to wait another month for it to work properly. Whatever happens we can kind of expect these games to launch with network problems. The kicker, of course, is that whatever happens people are paying for it and have to wait a while for it to work properly and that's very tough to justify. But in fairness I expect they thought it was ready to send out into the wild. I suppose they did as much play testing as they could following beta feedback and limited network testing. And I'm sure this kind of issue will become less common as networks get better and developers get used to releasing this kind of game. In the short term I suppose people just have to be careful buying at launch.
I don't think the servers are as much of an issue as the amount of content priced at 60 dollars. After you beat each 5 minute story mode in under an hour and play around with survival, you have nothing.
Let's not create a Capcom defense force here, they knew what they shipped, and it's solely up to them to right the ship and turn this around.
Actual competitive players make up a very small fraction of the user base, and as a whole, the fighting genre has been growing more content rich with each release (thanks to the guys in Chicago), even series like DOA have followed suit. Capcom forgot who the main audience is.
@sub12 Isn't the extra content coming for free though? I haven't got the game and I'm not too interested in it so I'm not sure what's in the pipeline but from what I've read it's going to be supported throughout this generation? I wouldn't say it's about defending Capcom, but the game seems to have reviewed well across the board with the content available at launch. Yeah it might not be a great game if you like your story driven fighters, but as a multiplayer focused fighter it seems to be a different story. Again, I havn't followed the game much so I'm not sure if Capcom promised something at launch that wasn't actually in the game, or if people just assumed it would be something and are upset that it isnt.
(I've a day off today, so I'm hammering these comment sections haha)
@ShogunRok That is very, very true. I'm hoping SFV can shake off the negative press it's getting and right the ship. I know I'm stressing the importance of a game on launch, but I do believe a game can recover from a botched one. The Driveclub example is a perfect one, and like you said, SFV can end up the same. Admittedly I'm more doubtful about it though, because Capcom can stumble pretty badly.
@kyleforrester87
The game reviewed in the low 80's, if looking at metacritic, which isn't that impressive for a genre defining franchise like SF. The user reviews are in the 30's.
The content, or the modes, will be free, but they have to be smart,.....you just can't promise that and launch with a empty shell, you at least need enough to keep people involved, those that play single player and online, and they totally dropped the ball in that area.
My personal opinion, Push Square had a great review for SFV no doubt,, but in my personal view, it deserves a 6 or 7. The gameplay is there, but the content is not......not for 60 dollars. You review what you have, not what your promised. That's nice that they are working on a short proper story mode for June, but you need to minimally have your bases covered at launch as well.
@sub12 80's isnt too bad. Looking quickly at the lower scores on metacritic it seems the reviewers don't like the fact it's geared toward multiplayer. So again, probably a case of not what they expected. Fair enough, though. I guess the actual number attached to reviews is less and less reliable these days since games are released with content then added later.
@kyleforrester87
When did fighters become online only? Never, it's always been a spread of single player and multiplayer. In the case of SFV, you have a very shallow and short story mode (like an hour for all 16 characters, with no difficulty or options). Survival mode isn't bad, but it's an appetizer without a main course. Some kind of variation of arcade mode is a must, along with VS CPU.
@sub12 So by that logic if a game breaks from the typical blueprint of the genre it automatically deserves lower marks? It has to be reviewed according to its focus, its focus being - from what I can gather - an online multiplayer fighter. If it does that well, it deserves to be reviewed well. Obviously, the issue being, it doesn't do that well at the moment because the networks are flaky as hell.
You can't launch a fighting game with no Vs CPU and basic arcade mode.
You just can't.
And to add insult to injury, neither of those features are slated for a future release. No, they've listed every kind of mode coming EXCEPT a normal Vs CPU and arcade mode.
@get2sammyb great article and I think I was one of those who questioned the timing of the review and you were nice enough to respond to that. Regardless of its current issues I get the impression that it really is a great game and the launch model you suggested sounds pretty much perfect. For me personally it is still on my wish list for when the story mode hits, because I'm more of a sp guy (though Rocket League is a big exception). That and I'd probably just get beat up all the time online. It would be a shame if sales suffered long term because of the launch issues but it is important for other developers to take note as it seems to be becoming a bit of a trend.
@kyleforrester87 yeah completely agree with the Driveclub comparison, speaking of that game the handling has finally clicked with me so I'm finally discovering just how great that game truly is (next up bikes 😃)
@kyleforrester87
I don't buy that at all, first of all SF has never been exclusively mulitplayer, nor was V marketed as such, secondly given all the Capcom press recently about the June story mode, challenges, and other single player related content, they full realize the importance of single player in a fighting game......but they decided to release the game with minimal content.
SFV will be amazing in time, but that doesn't give them a pass for releasing a half a$$ed product.
I slated them for the broken joke beta and people thought I was being harsh, just realistic is all.
Does these mean we'll see a price drop sooner than later? I can't wait!
(^_^ )
@sub12 I can't really get on board with that. Both FF11 and FF14 were objectively reviewed for what they were, online only installments of a traditionally single player franchise. Players are perfectly entitled to be bummed that SF5 isn't more of what they loved, but it needs to be weighed up against what it's actually trying to achieve. Again, I'm not sure it was ever marketed as anything else at launch - you say it was, so fair enough to be honest, it's right that it's getting criticised - or if people just incorrectly assumed it would be something that it isnt.
@kyleforrester87
You seem to be in the vast minority with your viewpoint, maybe your metacritic user review will bounce it up to a 3.6 from 3.5!!!
@sub12 Haha yeah, maybe. Still I'm pretty hopeful people will be enjoying this game in the months to come, sounds like it's got a solid base.
@kyleforrester87
Even if the focus is online, Capcom should have had a plan B, that is why people criticize the lack of Arcade Mode, something so simple and a staple of the series. If no online heavy game launches without server issues, then what made Capcom think they would be the exception?
I know they launched the game earlier because of the pros, which are a minority. If this had Arcade or more single player content, the not pros (don't wanna use the word "casual") would have used that to practice their skills, thus lowering the server strain in the first weeks. But when you only have online everyone floods the servers, hard to believe they couldn't see that.
@kyleforrester87
Yes, as Capcom adds more to it, it has a good chance of being an amazing game. As you said, the foundation is there.
Sammy had the best solution, if Capcom would have marketed the Feb release as a limited SFV online tournament edition for 30-40 bucks, and somewhere between Mar and Jun, release the straight up 60 dollar retail SFV, a lot of this disappointment could have been avoided.......but Capcom wanted that launch money.
My expectations were in line but I kept up with all the news stating that the proper story campaign was due in June and other bits and pieces were out next month. The server problems suck but aren't exactly unexpected with a new game. They'll sort themselves out soon enough.
This release is like what I expect from Hitman when it's out, I have no problem paying now and the game offering me new bits of content over the course of a year. That gives me time to play other games like Far Cry next week and the Division when that's out.
Looks like Capcom said they are "looking into adding a proper arcade mode". According to Forbes.
@sub12 that would be sweet!
It would have been better for the game if it was delayed to atleast early March and also with arcade mode and tournament already in the game. Making them as DLCs is just a greedy move.
@kyleforrester87 but it's a game that probably shouldn't have released in its current guise. And the most frustrating thing is that, with a bit of foresight and expectation control, this whole thing could have been avoided.
That's actually in the article above which I agree with. I haven't played the game but I've supported Capcom through sf1 on the Amstrad, sf2 on the md and snes, alpha on the ps1, sf3 on the xbox, sf4 on the 360 in every iteration. So I personally expect a touch more. I'm average online - managed to rank over C with most base characters in sf4, but I only learnt by playing arcade mode after being stuffed in my first 30 or so matches. If I got beat alot on sfv where do I then turn to? Another game.
Personally I think they should have stuck with ultra sf4 for the pro tour (it still has a huge fan following) and release sf5 in mid June with all single player content ready at launch. Pro players would then have 6 months to train and iron out bugs/glitches in time for the pro tour for 2017 where sf5 would be the premier event.
@rjejr "well at least the rest is coming"
People keep saying this but I'm not seeing it. No arcade mode is coming. No normal vs CPU mode is coming. And that hour long story mode is not on a per character basis either- that's an hour for the whole shebang- all 16 characters.
So ya, THAT'S the real problem here. If an arcade mode and normal vs mode were confirmed coming, and a story mode for each individual character was confirmed coming (or an overall story mode that lasted more than an hour) then I'd be ok. I wouldn't be happy, but I'd be ok knowing it was coming.
Unfortunately that's not the case.
A bummer doesn't begin to describe what happened here. This should've been a fantastic way to kick off the year for PS4. Sony helped out with the funding all Ono and his team had to do was deliver a complete package like it did with all previous Street Fighters. Instead we get one of the most barebones releases ever (the excuse that 'they you prior to release' also doesn't fly) and worse, there is a lot of stupid sh*t happening with the online portion of the game. And then Ono, in his infinite wisdom, makes things worse by suggesting they could've charged for things like the 'expanded' story mode when he knows damn well they already ripped people off for their $60. Gamers are part of the problem because we don't always think before buying, I'm guilty too, the question is, at what point do things change? Because the fact is no matter what game we're talking about there's always going to be that set of buyers who will be there day one, no matter what.
@JaxonH Well, I knew something was coming. The entire industry is going down the tubes I tell ya. I own Godzilla:DAMM, Godzilla: STE and Godzilla:Unleashed. They all have mutliplayer. Godzilla on PS3 has only single player, and on PS4 it has only online multiplayer. And Dragon Quest Heroes only has single player, despite it looking like a mosuo game. And Dragon Quest Builders is only single player despite it looking like Minecraft. The best thing about this is it makes AC:aF look better, but honestly it's all getting so bad. Some day soon God of War 3's $60 for 6 hours is going to look like a bargain.
At least we know that the content is coming. I bought the game with no regrets as I got it for a decent discount, but I'll probably be sitting on it a while before I get around to playing it much.
@kyleforrester87
That's something I've also been chewing on for the past couple days. And it's something that does make sense. Obviously Capcom released the beta, which was online focused. Clearly the online portion was their primary objective in developing SFV. Single player/arcade mode is, when you really think of it, old hat. It was there out of necessity back in the day because online lobbies and such on home consoles didn't exist. So when porting, they had to give you a single player experience to justify the cost.
Totally not saying what they've done with this launch is right, but there are no hard rules when it comes this stuff in an online world now. Besides, when you're done with the single player stuff and learn the moves, then what? Not speaking for all, but I'm pretty sure the majority of replayability comes in playing real life human opponents. That's always been the heart of fighting games. Even in the arcade days.
Just playing Devil's advocate on Capcom's side.
Did people not know what they were buying? I feel like I've known exactly what was going to be available at launch based on the periodic updates by Capcom.
@turtlelink
Not all of the criticism is coming from people who bought it. Beyond that, Capcom telling people 'we're releasing a half complete (if that) game for $60' doesn't make it acceptable when looking at what other games in the genre have done.
Tempted to just wait on Tekken now.
@SanderEvers You might be surprised, almost 10 million more copies of Tekken games have been sold than Street Fighter games. Tekken has quite the lead on being best selling fighting game series ever.
@Gamer83
Tekken - 45.6 million
Street Fighter - 36 million
Mortal Kombat - 32.5 million
Not taking into account Street Fighter 5's sales as it's only just released. I'll probably get both. But the lack of modes on release among other issues has made SF less of a priority for me at the moment. All seems very messy and not at all customer friendly.
@kyleforrester87 I can see your point. I guess, as a consumer, I feel that the ability to patch games or add content post release has meant that publishers are trying to make this practice more acceptable to consumers. If you go back over ten years, a game released with no content or broken was going to bomb. Now, because it can be amended post launch, they probably weigh up the costs of missing a release date with poor word of mouth.
In my day, things were different (old man grumble grumble).
@Rudy_Manchego You're right, things are different, but isn't it okay that things are changing? Games get more and more expensive with each generation, it's not so hard to understand that developers and publishers would offset some of that risk by making use of the high speed connections that we now have to deliver updates and new content.
Capcom did goof on this launch, but then again it's SF, and a overall solid game. People will buy it regardless.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...