- RP Mod
- Active Posts:
- 367 (0.25 per day)
- Most Active In:
- Mega Man X (127 posts)
- 21-May 09
- Profile Views:
- Last Active:
- Member Title:
- RP Mod
- 26 years old
- January 13, 1987
- Website URL:
Posts I've Made
Yesterday, 08:09 PM
19 May 2013 - 06:43 PM
26 April 2013 - 09:19 AMA major issue with your argument is how your examples stem from an entirely different context; you're referring to finalized and marketed games from many years ago, not games cancelled mid-production. Apples and oranges; it's uncommon for such dated contents to be used for anything other than ports, re-releases or informational purposes (and the occasional easter egg). Capcom at least takes no issue with Archie Comics adapting stories from Super Adventure Rockman and other licensed games, and Archie has to send the scripts directly to Capcom for approval before the issues are even drawn.
However, the current point of discussion is whether the existing Rockman Online materials could still be used if development was resumed by Capcom or another company, not how Capcom manages their old assets. As it is, there is no indication this option was entirely out of question; in fact, NeoWiz did consider transferring development to affiliate GAMEON Studio in wake of their restructuring. They had not even released their promised beta, which suggests the project was nowhere as far along as it could - or should - have been. Even under the assumption the original engine could not be reutilized by another party, they still had a set of graphics, sounds, animations and other related resources to work with internally or otherwise.
Obviously it won't happen now, but there is currently no basis to claim the alternative was inviable, and Capcom's general unwillingness to explain their corporate decisions publicly does not help matters; the cancellation could've resulted from entirely different factors for all we know.
25 April 2013 - 09:57 AMInti Creates also produced Mega Man 9 and Mega Man 10. Would Capcom not have secured the assets of those sequels simply because they outsourced development? And you seem to be ignoring Rockman Xover, which is Capcom made and freely uses Zero and ZX assets (from battle memories to actual stages, enemies and bosses). They have access to those resources and are entitled to use them as they see fit.
Neglecting to use assets produced under a license does not implicate lack of ownership or possession. The games Capcom outsourced meet the criteria of works for hire, and under US copyright law (as well as Japan, the United Kingdom and Australia), works for hire are generally owned by the commissioning party; in this case, Capcom. Assuming that Capcom (or any copyright owner) does not secure the materials they legally own (whether the products hit the shelves or not) is erroneous, barring explicit evidence to the contrary. If Capcom was passionate enough about releasing Rockman Online, they certainly had the means to do so; why they chose to pull the plug instead is anyone's guess, although there is room for speculation based on NeoWiz's recent upheavals and Capcom's history of avoiding perceived "risky" investments.
25 April 2013 - 08:34 AMI don't see Capcom assuming control over Zero or ZX series assets either, being a different studio as well.
Except they do.
"©CAPCOM CO., LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED"
And then there is Rockman Xover.
It very well could be a Business kind of thing, a contractual thing, devs not familiar with another studio's code/engine/etc and therefor professionally declining it (I'd rather not have a MegaMan done how Duke Nukem: Forever was), etc. I doubt it is a simple "It isn't our work so we will not continue it." kind of thing.
Reasons notwithstanding, it's erroneous to assume that Capcom has no bearing on the future of their licensed properties.