Macross007 Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 "As of December 11 2008, Capcom has released a new crossover fighting game titled Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, which features characters from both companies' properties. Characters such as Ryu, Chun-Li and Megaman on Capcom's side; along with Eagle Ken of Gatchaman and Casshern of Neo-Human Casshern on Tatsunoko's side. Capcom has stated that the game will "probably not" be released outside of Japan due to Tatsunoko's licensing issues. Capcom USA is working hard to deal with licensing issues." Link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_fighte...2002.2C_2008.29 Just showing you how Tatsunoko does business the Robotech way. Quote
Gaijin Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) " Just showing you how Tatsunoko does business the Robotech way. Here we go... Yes, Tatsunoko should have never licensed their stuff all these years. If they hadn't you'd be playing Wii TvC. Please. Import it son. Edited February 27, 2009 by Gaijin Quote
Macross007 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) Here we go... Yes, Tatsunoko should have never licensed their stuff all these years. If they hadn't you'd be playing Wii TvC. Please. Import it son. I'm not interested in buying the game. I have already enough fighting games in my collection right now (Dead Or Alive 4, Virtua Fighter 5, Soul Calibur IV and now Street Fighter IV. Next target : TEKKEN 6. ). I am only interested in showing to other Macross fans how Tatsunoko "deal" with licensing issues and how Macross is not the only victim of Tatsunoko business practices. Edited February 27, 2009 by Macross007 Quote
jwinges Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 If you want to play TvC just get a wiikey2 soderless and just DL it. Not my type of game but supposedly it works fine. Quote
polidread Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 oh, we here in the Philippines have access to this nifty novelty fighting game. looks good, plays dumb. Quote
Roger Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Right now a company (not Sandy Frank) owns the rights for Gatchaman outside of Japan and are planning on making a big movie out of it. That alone is justification for Tatsunoko to discourage foreign distribution of the game. I'm sure some of the other characters in the game are licensed by other entities. Quote
Gaijin Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 I'm not interested in buying the game. I have already enough fighting games in my collection right now (Dead Or Alive 4, Virtua Fighter 5, Soul Calibur IV and now Street Fighter IV. Next target : TEKKEN 6. ). I am only interested in showing to other Macross fans how Tatsunoko "deal" with licensing issues and how Macross is not the only victim of Tatsunoko business practices. They can do whatever they want with their property. It's theirs. Quote
JB0 Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 I'm not interested in buying the game. I have already enough fighting games in my collection right now (Dead Or Alive 4, Virtua Fighter 5, Soul Calibur IV and now Street Fighter IV. Next target : TEKKEN 6. ). I am only interested in showing to other Macross fans how Tatsunoko "deal" with licensing issues and how Macross is not the only victim of Tatsunoko business practices. Yes, it's TOTALLY Tatsunoko's fault that no one knew these things would be worth money in 20 years. NOBODY else has ANY troubles. Quote
Save Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) I am only interested in showing to other Macross fans how Tatsunoko "deal" with licensing issues and how Macross is not the only victim of Tatsunoko business practices. I'm not trying to knock you but you are way off base. Just because it is a Tatsunoko anime does not mean they own 100% percent of the property. Anime since almost the dawn of anime time anyways is co-funded by television networks and music companies with out these two big hitters there wouldn't probably be any anime made at all. It may say Tatsunoko Pro but in the fine print they are in bed with other companies as equal rights holders more or less. Many times these partner ships go south and nothing can never be produced animation, cd, to toys after the original production. Examples in Japan Candy Candy and Go Lion. This same thing happened to a much smaller degree years back when Virtual Fighter was ported over outside of Japan. The Japanese version had a secret character PEPSI MAN. At the time there were PEPSI Man commercials but only in Japan so they did a tie in with Sega of Japan. If you have PEPSI Man he needs theme music and a design these elements cost money. PEPSI and the parties involved would need to be paid more if it was ever exported. Other parts of the world don't even know who this character is but there were a hand full of Sega player that complained about getting screwed out of PEPSI Man not being in the game. The Tatsunoko vs Cap game if everybody gets paid and there are no ill feeling it can be brought over. Only it will cost more than it cost to make the actual game for a Japan release. The Macross ordeal isn't even the same ballpark, it isn't even the same league it isn't even the same sport. What I can tell you about Tatsunoko is that there are plenty of Mospeada garage kits people have made in hopes of selling them at Wonder Festival and other events but for the past four years Tatsunoko continues to ignore their requests for one day sales licenses. The only non-corporate person to get a license is Nandy who is making the Proto-Mospeada bike and helmets he was selling at Wonder Festival but I guess he got it due to Aramaki's involvement in the project. Rumor is the licensing department at Tatsunoko does not want to hassle with the paper work to issue the license for fan made kits. Now that is something to be mad at Tatsunoko for. Edited February 27, 2009 by Save Quote
yellowlightman Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 I am only interested in showing to other Macross fans how Tatsunoko "deal" with licensing issues and how Macross is not the only victim of Tatsunoko business practices. Except, you're not doing that at all. Tatsunoko "licensing issues" in this case doesn't mean fighting over licenses a la Macross, it means they have 30+ years of cartoons under their belt and a ton of different series all with different licensees and distributors in the U.S. Quote
Keith Posted March 1, 2009 Posted March 1, 2009 Lol, I posted the same thing over at the AOD boards a month ago when the topic of Sandy Frank losing Gatchaman came up Quote
taksraven Posted March 1, 2009 Posted March 1, 2009 Yes, it's TOTALLY Tatsunoko's fault that no one knew these things would be worth money in 20 years. NOBODY else has ANY troubles. I think that the BBC is the organisation that has to win the prize for a total lack of foresight in regards to the future value of a lot of its programs. The BBC had stupid policies of wiping or destroying film/tapes of many of their early programs to: a) save storage space, b) Free up videotapes to be used again (they were relatively expensive at the time) and c) To avoid paying actors further royalty fee's for rebroadcast of their programs. As a result, hundreds of episodes of programs, many dearly loved such as Doctor Who and Dad's Army, were destroyed. One of the saddest parts of the story goes that comedian Peter Cook discovered that his BBC programs were being wiped so he went to the length of offering to replace the tapes himself out of his own pocket so he could keep the shows himself. the BBC said no to him. Taksraven Quote
JB0 Posted March 1, 2009 Posted March 1, 2009 (edited) Oh my... That's.... probably one of the worst cases around. Go BBC. Edited March 1, 2009 by JB0 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.