Or it could have come to Xbone minus crossplay, like Rocket League just did.

But maybe I give Capcom too much credit.

Rocket League wasn't funded by Sony in any way.

It could come as Street Fighter Alpha 3.

What does that have to do with anything?

One guy said Capcom should have made it multiplat, someone else replied that no crossplay made that impossible. I am just pointing out other game(s) have come minus crossplay to Xbone. SFV could have been no different.

If another Street Fighter game does release this generation, which I doubt beacuse of what Capcom has said up until this point, then yeah that one will probably be multiplat.

It has everything to do with it? Up until this point all we've been told repeatedly is that Street Fighter V has been funded by Sony and will not come to XBO in any form. Until Capcom says or shows us differently that is the only truth we can go by at this point. I don't think Psyonix ever, definitively said that Rocket League will never come to XBO.

They're two completely different situations.

I don't see a SF6 any time soon and I see Capcon struggling. I would recommend Nintendo acquire Capcon not Sony. Nintendo know how to handle there franchises much better.

MS should buy them so then they actually have some sort of Japanesse support. But I really can't see them doing that. Nintendo would be a good company to buy them and have them just work on NX games, like MH on NX.

That really is a good insight, Nintendo would "handle" Capcom, meaning an overbearing management of them as a subsidiary. Whereas Sony are very much hands off to allow the creative process (ala Naughty Dog). 

We could almost visualise a Nintendo-ization of Capcoms Franchises. No lets plays or streams either!

Nah, it's irrelevant, and you seem to be missing the point the other poster was making. Yes, we know Capcom took Sony money for SFV. What he/she was saying is Capcom should have made the game multiplat, in other words not taken the deal. The same thing many here said regarding Squeenix and Tomb Raider. The idea that no crossplay would have kept the game off Xbone regardless of whether there was a Sony deal or not, is entirely debunked by a game like Rocket League.

Anyway it's all 20/20 hindsight.

So on top of having to pay for marketing, tournaments and ALL the development costs on their own, a company that's already super low on capita (they had all of $150 mil in the bank at the time, remember that) would also have to run both their own unique servers for PS4/PC cross-players AND Microsoft's servers minus cross-play, basically allocate all the extra time, work and resources just to give MS special treatment, all because they're too greedy to allow console and PC players to play together. 

No, MS once again shot themselves in the foot with their anti-gamer policies. After all, Capcom couldn't make DS4 multiplat with a lot LESS than that. Remember, this IS the same company that tried to ram the 24 hour DRM, mandatory Kinect and anti-used game policies down our throats, I guess we can add this one to the pile. Sony at least has the courtesy to ACT like they care about consumers (yeah, I know they don't, so spare me), MS makes it no secret they don't give a damn about you, they don't even try to hide it. That might explain why so many people switched from the 360 last gen to PS4 this gen, hmm.

Also, you guys act like Sony had ANYTHING to do with it. Newsflash: they didn't. Capcom went to Sony for SFV, not the other way around for this exact same reason as explained in the article.