When people say no Xmen, does it means no wolverine, cyclop or magneto? Not a single xmen?
More like the Internet eviscerated it, in ways it didn't for USF2
Seriously. The leaks made everyone think we were going to be getting a roster that was 36+ characters big with twice as many newcomers as we ended up with. The actual roster sucks compared to what we thought we were getting from the leaks.
When people say no Xmen, does it means no wolverine, cyclop or magneto? Not a single xmen?
I would say:
1. PR/Marketing
2. Graphics
3. Roster
4. Campaign
5. X-Men & F4
Shit part of the blame goes to Marvel too. Roster wise they are the reason Wolverine, Doom, Magneto, & Storm are not in the game. People can say what they want but it is an undeniable fact that the X-Men characters are the most iconic and popular characters Marvel has.
Come on. Capcom gets so much s*** from Switch enthusiasts because none had a better chance to give decent early support for minimal risk than them. None.
Two retro collections coming that they could have gotten running on the system for peanuts!? Nope. Wonder Boy Switch outsold all other versions, combined. I hope that that hurt at Capcom corporate. Even if Capcom was projecting a Wii U tier flop, there was no reason to skip it, the NES ROMs collection would have outsold the XB1 version no problem.
A 3DS up port of a million selling franchise on Nintendo's systems, one that they had already running on the system for one market, mostly localized and would instantly become the biggest third party game on the system for the first half of the year? Nope. Repeated many times over, to make it clear, Nope. "But please be exited for the game that its releasing on everything but!".
So, what they had for the system? USFII? The game they admitted to be a re-release of a $15 XBLA game for $40, and even went on sale for $3 during the launch week to make the message clear? They had that, and, as per their financial briefing, saved their hides during the quarter. There's that.
I'm sure Capcom learned the lesson, right? Look, they announced a very late port of two last gen games, that came for 3DS, Wii U and even Vita! Exciting! Why announce it as a footnote on a twitter of all places and without any media? Almost as if it is a rush project done to calm investors.
But they just missed the start, right? Capcom is sure to be ramping up Switch development as we speak! Oh, another announcement! A beloved Zelda-inspired game coming at the end of the year! And we even got a trailer, unlike their Switch games that are releasing earlier! Looks like a perfect match for the system and I'm sure Capcom doesn't want to repeat a collections scenario! Wait... not even at a later date statement? A retro Zelda-like not coming to the console that bought Ocean Horn for $15 in 2017!?
But the games are coming! Undetermined titles coming at undetermined dates. They can't tell us what they are, because of reasons. But they are coming...
Looking at the steam sales, I'd say no.Can Marvel get the "but Digital!!!" excuse Destiny 2 got?
Street Fighter V was eviscerated on launch for lacking basic single player functionality.No it didn't. When people saw the initial gameplay footage people thought it was still a ways out and will get better, it wasn't really a big problem until E3. Also the other shoe could drop in many ways with Capcom. There were literally 0 problems with SFV until launch, up until that point it had a lot of good will and hype.
Looking at the steam sales, I'd say no.
Street Fighter V was eviscerated on launch for lacking basic single player functionality.
Monster Hunter World is looking to have a single player comparable at least to Monster Hunter 4.
So no, I'm not expecting the other shoe to drop at this point.
In fairness, we already knew that Super Turbo is a really good game.
Come on. Capcom gets so much s*** from Switch enthusiasts because none had a better chance to give decent early support for minimal risk than them. None.
Two retro collections coming that they could have gotten running on the system for peanuts!? Nope. Wonder Boy Switch outsold all other versions, combined. I hope that that hurt at Capcom corporate. Even if Capcom was projecting a Wii U tier flop, there was no reason to skip it, the NES ROMs collection would have outsold the XB1 version no problem.
A 3DS up port of a million selling franchise on Nintendo's systems, one that they had already running on the system for one market, mostly localized and would instantly become the biggest third party game on the system for the first half of the year? Nope. Repeated many times over, to make it clear, Nope. "But please be exited for the game that its releasing on everything but!".
So, what they had for the system? USFII? The game they admitted to be a re-release of a $15 XBLA game for $40, and even went on sale for $3 during the launch week to make the message clear? They had that, and, as per their financial briefing, saved their hides during the quarter. There's that.
I'm sure Capcom learned the lesson, right? Look, they announced a very late port of two last gen games, that came for 3DS, Wii U and even Vita! Exciting! Why announce it as a footnote on a twitter of all places and without any media? Almost as if it is a rush project done to calm investors.
But they just missed the start, right? Capcom is sure to be ramping up Switch development as we speak! Oh, another announcement! A beloved Zelda-inspired game coming at the end of the year! And we even got a trailer, unlike their Switch games that are releasing earlier! Looks like a perfect match for the system and I'm sure Capcom doesn't want to repeat a collections scenario! Wait... not even at a later date statement? A retro Zelda-like not coming to the console that bought Ocean Horn for $15 in 2017!?
But the games are coming! Undetermined titles coming at undetermined dates. They can't tell us what they are, because of reasons. But they are coming...
Street Fighter V was eviscerated on launch for lacking basic single player functionality.
Monster Hunter World is looking to have a single player comparable at least to Monster Hunter 4.
So no, I'm not expecting the other shoe to drop at this point. There's a difference between healthy skepticism and unfounded cynicism.
Street Fighter V was eviscerated on launch for lacking basic single player functionality.
Monster Hunter World is looking to have a single player comparable at least to Monster Hunter 4.
So no, I'm not expecting the other shoe to drop at this point. There's a difference between healthy skepticism and unfounded cynicism.
Can Marvel get the "but Digital!!!" excuse Destiny 2 got?
These please yes theseWe need more tests capcom. Please bring umvc3 and TatsunokoVScapcom on Switch.
It depends. Any sort of post-launch content pipeline should be approached with the attitude, "How would this be priced as part of a G-Rank rerelease?"My concern isn't what they've shown off thus far, which appears to be quite robust. My concern is how they're handling the content pipeline post-launch and if there's anything to expect in terms of microtransactions beyond the cosmetics that have already been announced, which I feel is much safer to treat with skepticism than to assume that they're going to nail those aspects as well as everything else thus far.
What we've seen suggests a bit more than Tri for the number of large monsters, which is nice. And assuming one more large area, we've got only one fewer large area than Tri, with far more packed into each area.We already "know" (ie. someone told others to keep their expectations in check because some were expecting some really absurd 4-like sums) it won't compare with 4 (or 4U/X/XX). Look more to Tri's totals (~35 IIRC, between big and small). Number of zones total (since each is now much larger) is also probably going to be considerably down.
Not to say that this shrink will matter or negatively impact the title but comparisons to 4/4U/X from a content side of things would not be the type of marketing/image Capcom will want to set.
Key Words: On Launch...... Not prior to the game coming out. It may work out for Capcom with MHW but you never know with Capcom.
When people say no Xmen, does it means no wolverine, cyclop or magneto? Not a single xmen?
USF2 isn't super turbo tho. It's been rebalanced and there are system wide changes like SF3/4/5 style throw breaking.
I'm still shocked he didn't make it in.
Was in every single leak, and seemed like the most obvious choice.
We live in a time where a Nintendo console is better supported by Bethesda and NIS than by Capcom. Nobody could have predicted that last year.
What we've seen suggests a bit more than Tri for the number of large monsters, which is nice. And assuming one more large area, we've got only one fewer large area than Tri, with far more packed into each area.
But yeah, I'm definitely not expecting this to match 4U in terms of the number of monsters.
Right. Only problem I see is that the last half-decade of MH in the west is defined not by Tri (or 3U on WiiU) which very few played, but by MH4U and Generations (X). The audience established is used to a *lot* more content than what MHW will ship with.
It will be interesting to see if the media draws parallels/issues with the drop in content from the most recent mainline entries, or if they reference Tri and give it a pass on presentation.
Even a game that's low content by Monster Hunter standards will have over a hundred hours of single player content. I do think we'll see some complaining about the lack of a difficult G-Rank endgame, if X is anything to go by. But that will be from the hardcore fans who will still be buying and playing World anyway.Right. Only problem I see is that the last half-decade of MH in the west is defined not by Tri (or 3U on WiiU) which very few played, but by MH4U and Generations (X). The audience established is used to a *lot* more content than what MHW will ship with.
It will be interesting to see if the media draws parallels/issues with the drop in content from the most recent mainline entries, or if they reference Tri and give it a pass on presentation.
God damn that's really bad, and it's a shame too considering MVCI is actually a really great game, but man Capcom just really dropped the ball with this one.
I think part of it comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of their audience.Also there are so many problems with the roster. No X-Men & Fantastic Four characters was and still is a bummer but I (along with many others) thought that would open things up for new characters. I thought MCU characters that people know like Daredevil, Loki, & Star Lord would be in. Didn't happen. Then on the Capcom side they got lazy. People just really wanted vets and a few new characters like Leon & Asura. They then basically cut beloved characters like Wesker, Amaterasu, Vergil, & Phoenix Wright. They knew the roster would be limited and instead of just getting the favorites in they kept around Spencer, Nemesis, & Firebrand. People weren't really asking for them.
NRS has a COD size budget to work with.
They dropped the ball, kicked it out of bounds, and into the stands.
I'm expecting the latter. I doubt it'll be an issue for folks
Even a game that's low content by Monster Hunter standards will have over a hundred hours of single player content. I do think we'll see some complaining about the lack of a difficult G-Rank endgame, if X is anything to go by. But that will be from the hardcore fans who will still be buying and playing World anyway.
I think part of it comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of their audience.
There will be three fucking Megaman X characters by the time Sigma lands, more than any other Capcom franchise. Now look at how well the Mega Man X series actually sold compared to Capcom's other games.
Source?
In fairness, we already knew that Super Turbo is a really good game.
Just look at the games. They have some of the best models in not just fighting games but games in general.
Can't say I'm too surprised. MvC:I was a series of bad decisions from a studio that, honestly, I don't think 'gets' why the MvC series is so loved by more than just fighting game enthusiasts.
What baffles me the most about MvC:I is that they were forced into the MCU canon so hard yet most of the character models bare little resemblance to their movie counterparts. Why does Thor not look like Chris Hemsworth? Why does Captain America not look like Chris Evans? Why does Dr. Strange not look like Benedict Cumberbatch? Etc etc. That's not to mention just how bad many of the characters do look.
Of course I know why, it's because they would have had to pay more to use those actor's likenesses, but I'm pretty sure that having the MCU interpretation of each character would have brought in enough 'casuals' to offset that cost. It's not like Injustice where 'Batman' is a well-known figure no matter the incarnation, many Marvel characters are their MCU counterparts in the eyes of most people; Ben Affleck isn't Batman in the same way Robert Downey Jr. is Iron Man, if you see what I mean.
Essentially, when MvCI could have given us this:
It actually gave us this:
Even a game that's low content by Monster Hunter standards will have over a hundred hours of single player content. I do think we'll see some complaining about the lack of a difficult G-Rank endgame, if X is anything to go by. But that will be from the hardcore fans who will still be buying and playing World anyway.
The models in Guilty Gear Xrd probably took even more effort than the models in Injustice 2. That's not a valid argument.