Support NeoGAF

[Nyoro SF]

Having been a fan of Capcom for most of my gaming life, I've noticed a trend of Capcom to shift away from their flashy style of development and turn to low budget, cheap work that are extremely safe games during this PS4/XB1 lifecycle that's a far cry from their PS3/X360 work, even when their PS3/X360 work was heavily subcontracted.

Dead Rising 4: Cheap, awful knockoff with a huge quality gap between the first game and this one with interactivity, voice acting, animations, story, pretty much the whole package is just awful quality from start to finish thanks to penny pinching and more.

Street Fighter V: Probably doesn't even need to be explained. The intro video is a low quality piece of junk. The UI looks like it was made in a day. Everything from transitions, to optimization, launching with far fewer features than its predecessor, broken matchmaking that worked worse than SF4 (still does)... I could keep going but just go and find any neogaf thread about SFV from the past year. If it wasn't for DR4, this would be the poster game for investing as little as possible into a mainline game for Capcom.

Resident Evil 7: This game actually looks and plays nicely for what it is (though you might be able to argue that graphics could be better). But there's no denying the overall scope has been greatly, greatly reduced to achieve that. So rather than a "low quality" issue, it's a "playing it extremely safe financially" issue.

Then for the other part of low-budget investment... an extremely high focus on remasters, remakes, ports, and collections to pad the budget. Not going to complain as a fan of those games, but when you show such a huge amount of focus on these, it speaks to me that you are playing it extremely safe as a company.

Then they released the Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite cinematic trailer (the game is releasing this year)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAOgJ9y0Ots

Compare this to the Marvel vs. Capcom 3 cinematic trailer. Not only is is almost three times as long and looks way better... but this is Episode 1, with 4 episodes in total!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni9L4_zKNrM

After looking at the MvCI gameplay trailer which is full of reused animations and shoddy graphical work compared to the MvC3 gameplay trailer which looks absolutely amazing despite amateurs playing thanks to the extremely coherent graphical style, sound effects and more.

Doesn't this mean this MvCI is going to follow the same recent trend of Capcom putting out low-quality junk from all aspects to UI, story, graphics and netcode/matchmaking while banking on people's hype and familiarity? Isn't that pretty much a guarantee at this point? I'd like to hear your thoughts if you think that MvC:Infinite will buck Capcom's trend of investing as little as possible in their games and thus us getting a shoddy product on release.

Refrain from "they're a business, they're here to make money, not a charity" meaningless blabber. "I'm a consumer, they have to interest me" is the viewpoint you need to approach this thread with, since as a poster I'm 99% certain you are a consumer and not an investor in Capcom stock. If you're okay with low quality / extremely safe work just say so, if you're less permissive of it just say so, if you can't tell the difference and don't give a shit just say so.

 

[Neoleo2143]

It's a concern I have. Capcom's been hit pretty consistently with this issue outside Monster Hunter (and Monster Hunter reuses Assets like there's no tomorrow). But like Monster Hunter, MvCI seems to reuse and re-purpose lots of Animations from MvC3 so there's still a good chance that the overall experience won't be dissatisfying.

 

[chaobreaker]

Do we know how Capcom is doing financially? Sounds like they're in trouble.

 

[-Mutsukki-]

While I think you're absolutely wrong about SFV since it has a higher production value than any of those titles and even SFIV, I'm also... kinda glad? The less money company loses over titles the better, since we will then get more varied games and less of the same stuff all year. I'm not sure I would call RE7 low-budget though, just less crazy (which is a very good thing).

The problem with Marvel vs Capcom Infinite is not it's low budget, it's art direction is just really really bad. It looks like amateur work and it's kinda baffling. You can do good stuff with a low-budget

 

[Enilced2]

I didn't realize Resident Evil 7 was out. Where did you get your early copy?

 

[border]

How has Resident Evil 7's scope been greatly reduced? I mean, it's not a bloated bunch of garbage that will take 30-40 hours to slog through like Resident Evil 6, but I'm not sure that anyone really wanted an experience like that again.

P.T.'s scope was a single hallway and it was better than half of the "bigger" Silent Hill games.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

Do we even know if it's Capcom developing MVC Infinite? I just can't be excited about the game because the way they're presenting it doesn't feel confident at all*. Like, there's a new Marvel VS Capcom game coming out, and every time I hear people talking about it, I go, "huh, shit, that IS happening isn't it?"

The two-on-two models and lack of assist also feels kinda weird to me. The series is known for being balls-to-the-wall insanity but something about Infinite just feels oddly reserved.

*That and I didn't care for MVC3 at all and thought TVC was a far better successor to MVC2.

 

[Nirolak]

Well, it certainly doesn't help them.

There are also some big fighting games out this year between Injustice 2, For Honor, Smash Switch, and even Tekken 7.

On the one hand, they're on the opposite side of the year from those, but they'll have to deal with the expectations those games set, as well as all the major Fall titles sucking up all the oxygen in the room during their release window. A lot of games really struggled with that this year, despite high quality, strong brands, and solid amounts of content.

Do we know how Capcom is doing financially? Sounds like they're in trouble.

Their cash pile is fine, but their income is low because they release so little of note these days.

Risk aversion has largely strangled the company's cash flow.

 

[Neoxon]

In terms of visuals, I won't pass final judgement on MvCI until it gets another polish pass around E3 (which is when SFV started to look like how it does now, with the added shaders that weren't there for the 2014 reveal). The art style seems to be going more for an MCU kind of vibe, which makes sense given what we've been hearing about the roster from the likes of Polygon & Eurogamer.

As for the reused animations, just as I've said in the MvCI thread, I'm fine with it as long as it means that we'll get a larger base roster (around 40 or so). If we get something equal to or less than Vanilla MvC3's launch roster, then I'll be disappointed that they reused animations from (U)MvC3.

Do we even know if it's Capcom developing MVC Infinite? I just can't be excited about the game because the way they're presenting it doesn't feel confident at all*. Like, there's a new Marvel VS Capcom game coming out, and every time I hear people talking about it, I go, "huh, shit, that IS happening isn't it?"

*That and I didn't care for MVC3 at all and thought TVC was a far better successor to MVC2.

MvCI is being developed internally at Capcom in cooperation with Marvel Games.

 

[kunonabi]

MvC: is like the one project from capcom that I have faith in. They rushed out an early trailer for Capcom Cup which is far less concerning than rushing out an unfinished game for Capcom Cup like they did with SFV.

 

[Eolz]

I'm really not seeing the "low budget/cheap" work that you're talking about.
I'm seeing a japanese company that can't rely on its own great multiplatform engine anymore, and transitioned to something that western companies were more used to.

DR4 was made by the same devs as DR3, and you can feel it. The focus was probably just on bringing Frank West back and not much more.
SFV wasn't cheap and seem to have gone through some kind of development hell with some weird decisions all around.
RE7 is effectively a gameplay reboot (like RE4 before it), and I doubt it has been done because they couldn't do a game like RE6 anymore...

On the other hand, they turned the company around financially, kept improving MonHun, focused on online a lot (which isn't cheap either) despite Deep Down being stuck somewhere as well. They're just relying more on contractors, like many companies having to make big games on a specific deadline, with the budget for it, but not enough internal staff.

MvCI is going in another direction, but it's not due to "low budget safe" moves. It's due to design choices aiming for something different, just like SFV aimed to be more accessible all while caring only about their hardcore esports fanbase.
If anything dooms MvC, it'll be stupid and weird choices and not learning from the pitfalls of SFV.

 

[HotHamBoy]

It's a concern I have. Capcom's been hit pretty consistently with this issue outside Monster Hunter (and Monster Hunter reuses Assets like there's no tomorrow). But like Monster Hunter, MvCI seems to reuse and re-purpose lots of Animations from MvC3 so there's still a good chance that the overall experience won't be dissatisfying.

Well, actually, Monster Hunter, too. As you said, re-uses a lot of assets and it's developed for a handheld - much cheaper to develop.

 

[Seyavesh]

i mean, ultimately this is one of the major factors that worries everyone even beyond the scope of stuff that enthusiasts are concerned about.
capcom hasn't really shown anything to provide confidence for their direction or proof that anything about their output will have any modicum of quality whatsoever for their recent major "AAA" console releases.
it's hard to say whether it's a matter of budgeting or mismanagement of talent/funds or what but it's a factor that definitely exists.

for marvel 4 specifically it really hurts that i loathe the artstyle, though. i seriously think visually marvel 4 looks like ass in a whole lot of different ways even if the fidelity of stuff like character models is a lot higher than marvel 3. when you look at shit like hitsparks, the effects on char's normals and moves it's really disappointing to see.

wish marvel 3 on pc was out already so i could record iron man's j.H/st.H and cr.M effects as to show the absolutely disgusting difference in quality between them

 

[Ryce]

Then they released the Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite cinematic trailer (the game is releasing this year)...

Compare this to the Marvel vs. Capcom 3 cinematic trailer. Not only is is almost three times as long and looks way better... but this is Episode 1, with 4 episodes in total!

Uh, doesn't it make more sense to compare MvCI's announcement trailer with MvC3's announcement trailer? They're both the same length.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzvE7e94Z_A

And for what it's worth, I've heard that Disney is pumping a ton of money into Infinite. It is not low budget.

 

[FelipeMGM]

Do we know how Capcom is doing financially? Sounds like they're in trouble.

Not swimming in money, or having dough to make a bunch o hefty investments, but they are hardly in trouble.

They are fine, but are playing safe for obvious reasons...

 

[SmokedMeat]

Isn't Disney helping fund the game? I can't imagine them allowing their characters to be featured in a fighting game where corners have to be cut because of a small budget.

 

[Shaanyboi]

I don't understand the complaint about RE7's scope. RE6 (and to a far lesser extent, 5) was a bloated overlong mess trying to accomplish everything for everyone. The series learning some restraint and gaining some purposeful direction is... bad?

 

[shouamabane]

MVCI looks better than MVC3 ever did to me.

 

[KingBroly]

Is RE7 low budget? I think the game looks very 'inspired by the things it shouldn't be inspired by' but I dunno if I'd call it low budget.

The only game I see that could have a negative impact on MVC:I is SF5. If they start plugging something similar to Fight Money and 'get every character for free' you know something is wrong. The farther MVC:I stays away from SF5's monetization/online model, the better.

 

[Anung]

I prefer RE7 smaller scale and more focused approach than RE6's everything and the kitchen sink approach. RE7 having actual vision behind it and a direction is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

And I'm a huge fan of RE6.

 

[Strangelove77]

I'm dreading all the paid DLC and microtransactions. Small roster, missing features, whatever content is there is going to be of shitty quality.
Then paid characters, paid costumes, paid colors, paid stages, etc.
I fear it'll be worse than what they did with SF5. So many people are apparently cool with the method they used for that that they probably don't feel they have to change it. People are accepting of their greed so they'll keep being greedy.

They're going to royally fuck this up.

 

[Jawmuncher]

I think a lot of these budgets are bigger than people are thinking. Budget and quality assurance are two different things.
Also RE7 apparently has as many people working on it as RE6 did, so I wouldn't necessarily say it's cheaper. Rather it's more focused on quality over quantity. I wouldn't call such a genre shift as playing it safe. Safe would have just been making another game like RE4.

Dead Rising 4 had money from MS, and it was a big change for the series to try and grab a new audience. While some corners were cut, I wouldn't say it was a very cheap game to make either. But they definitely did a bit of skimping out on polishing it up.

Street Fighter V was just a victim of thinking that a earlier release off polished gameplay was all it would need. Once again corners were cut, but I don't think budget was an issue.

So MVCI will be fine so long as they aren't cutting corners to make a release window.

 

[Zukkoyaki]

I think it's a wise move on their part especially after their turbulent past few years (since about 2010/2011).

They attempted to go massive blockbuster with huge teams and monstrous sales with Resi 6 and Dragon's Dogma and that didn't work out. Their outsourced projects like DMC and Lost Planet 3 were ill-received. Their significant mobile initiative didn't pan out. Then their big new engine shit the bed along with Deep Down.

It's been rough for them. But over the past year we've seen from their financials, conference calls and such that they're focusing on traditional console games but with much more reasonable budgets and sales projections. For a company like Capcom I'd say this is brilliant since most of their franchises are GAMEPLAY focused without a significant need for high production value. Solid art direction and strong mechanics are all they need ala Street Fighter V.

Obviously SFV had its share of issues but their approach to dicussing MvC: Infinite, lots of solo content, tells me that they're learning and adapting; focusing more on what people really want from their games. Same with Resident Evil 7. Previews have been among the most positive I've ever read and the large majority of fans seem quite excited for it. I see 2017 as kind of a reset for them as they find their niche: Developing fewer games on a reasonable schedule and budget that aren't huge AAA productions but are still strong and hit the right notes for the target audience(s). A lot like how Sega and Namco do it these days.

Edit: Also MvC's art direction is fine. I remember everyone shiting on MvC3's art direction back in the day as well.

 

[Nirolak]

I don't understand the complaint about RE7's scope. RE6 (and to a far lesser extent, 5) was a bloated overlong mess trying to accomplish everything for everyone. The series learning some restraint and gaining some purposeful direction is... bad?

I don't think it's meant to be a condemnation of the game, but a barometer of what they're willing to spend on their flagship video game series.

If the assessment is that RE6 cost $70-$80 million and RE7 cost $35-$40 million, then this might suggest they would cap out at $20-$25 million for something like Marvel vs Capcom, while their direct competition spends $40-$50+ million, and their indirection competition spends $80-$100+ million.

That's not an impossible fight to have, but the basic premise of the thread could be rewritten as "Given Calcom's recent history, MVC:I likely has a notably lower budget than other (fighting) games. Will this majorly impact its sales potential?"

Street Fighter V did really poorly, both compared to its predecessor and the other major games in the genre, so I don't think it's a ridiculous question even if people are excited for Resident Evil 7.

 

[Dabanton]

If anything dooms MvCI it's Disney/Marvel exerting way too much influence and control on it.

 

[Riposte]

I'm not worried about MvC being doomed, because Fox owns him, so Marvel isn't going to let Capcom put him in.

 

[MrCarter]

If they don't update the game only 8/9 months after release like with MVC3 then they'll be fine. DLC should carry them over without the need to buy another disc. A similar (but much refined) model to SFV with fight money might be good too because it's nice to have options for consumers.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

Pray for DMC5

I'm not worried about MvC being doomed, because Fox owns him, so Marvel isn't going to let Capcom put him in.

booooo

 

[Neoxon]

If anything dooms MvCI it's Disney/Marvel exerting way too much influence and control on it.

You mean in terms of the Marvel side of the roster, 'cause we're already seeing signs of that (between the reports of an MCU focus for the roster & no X-Men/F4 characters on Day 1).

If they don't update the game only 8/9 months after releases like with MVC3 then they'll be fine. DLC should carry them over without the need to buy another disc. A similar (but much refined) model to SFV with fight money might be good too because it's nice to have options for consumers.

I'd go as far as to say that I'd like to see the CFN account be shared between SFV & MvCI with one pool of Fight Money to have more interplay between the two games. Plus it's called Capcom Fighters Network, not Street Fighter Fighters Network.

 

[Zaventem]

All the characters will be safe. No randomly throwing in relatively unknown IPs.

 

[User123456]

Strider is probably the lowest budget game they've done in a couple decades and it's one of my all time favorite games. Money doesn't mean quality. In fact, most games that have a ton of money poured into them are super safe precisely because the investment needs to be protected.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

Edit: Also MvC's art direction is fine. I remember everyone shifting on MvC3's art direction back in the day as well.

I still hate MVC3's art direction. It's so bland and soulless.

I'm dreading all the paid DLC and microtransactions. Small roster, missing features, whatever content is there is going to be of shitty quality.
Then paid characters, paid costumes, paid colors, paid stages, etc.
I fear it'll be worse than what they did with SF5. So many people are apparently cool with the method they used for that that they probably don't feel they have to change it.

They're going to royally fuck this up, I know it.

My concern with MvCI is Disney/Marvel exerting way too much influence on it.

There's already a rumour that the roster is going to be heavily MCU-slanted and X-Men are going to be held back from the base game... but released as DLC. We're already dead.

 

[Harmen]

From what I remember reading on gaf, Disney/Marvel is being very picky with who get's to make full priced games starring their superheroes, which is why we haven't seen major releases with them for quite some time. I think Marvel wants to represent quality and I don't think that MvsC will be low budget within it's genre. Furthermore, there is no saying the exact scope of RE7 thus far, right?

That said, I do agree Capcom is playing it way too safe nowadays, but I assume (hope) that this will slowly change once RE7 and possibly MvsC make them some good money.

 

[Neoxon]

There's already a rumour that the roster is going to be heavily MCU-slanted and X-Men are going to be held back from the base game... but released as DLC. We're already dead.

But that's more of Marvel's fault than Capcom's. I'd even argue that Capcom may have been the ones who convinced Marvel to let the Fox characters be DLC at all (if that rumor is true).

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

But that's more of Marvel's fault than Capcom's. I'd even argue that Capcom may have been the ones who convinced Marvel to let the Fox characters be DLC at all (if that rumor is true).

Yes, hence why I quoted the post saying that Marvel potentially having too much influence might be an issue.

Even in MVC3 it felt like the seeds were there for the MCU promotion side of things. Reduced X-Men count compared to the last few games (Cyclops notably missing), a bunch of Avengers positioned more prominently, and Rocket Raccoon at a time when he was a relative obscurity.

 

[MrCarter]

I'd go as far as to say that I'd like to see the CFN account be shared between SFV & MvCI with one pool of Fight Money to have more interplay between the two games. Plus it's called Capcom Fighters Network, not Street Fighter Fighters Network.

This would be a very good idea however I want the CFN and Fight Money model to be worked on and refined before they implement it for both games.

 

[Neoxon]

Yes, hence why I quoted the post saying that Marvel potentially having too much influence is problematic.

Even in MVC3 it felt like the seeds were there for the MCU promotion side of things. Reduced X-Men count compared to the last few games (Cyclops notably missing), a bunch of Avengers, and Rocket Raccoon at a time when he was a relative obscurity.

In that, you're not wrong. In previous games, Capcom had at least some kind of say for the roster (less so for the MvC3 games, but Seth Killian had to beg for the likes of Shuma & Sentinel). With how big Marvel is now (& with Capcom having no Seth Killian-type figure to be persistent with certain characters), I fear that Capcom's gonna be pushed around in terms of which Marvel characters get in.

Though to be fair, the Fox characters made up a large chunk of UMvC3's Marvel side.

This would be a very good idea however I want the CFN and Fight Money model to be worked on and refined before they implement it for both games.

That's the thing, said refinements could work to the benefit of both MvCI & SFV.

 

[Kuraudo]

I fail to see how Resi 7 is safe. The new direction is bold and has divided the fanbase, which Capcom are bound to have anticipated. And on the technical side, Capcom have invested in a brand new engine and research into new photogrammetry technologies. As a whole, the game may not have cost as much as Resi 6, but it's absolutely not cheap and involved a number of risks.

 

[Shaanyboi]

I don't think it's meant to be a condemnation of the game, but a barometer of what they're willing to spend on their flagship video game series.

If the assessment is that RE6 cost $70-$80 million and RE7 cost $35-$40 million, then this might suggest they would cap out at $20-$25 million for something like Marvel vs Capcom, while their direct competition spends $40-$50+ million, and their indirection competition spends $80-$100+ million.

That's not an impossible fight to have, but the basic premise of the thread could be rewritten as "Given Calcom's recent history, MVC:I likely has a notably lower budget than other (fighting) games. Will this majorly impact its sales potential?"

Street Fighter V did really poorly, both compared to its predecessor and the other major games in the genre, so I don't think it's a ridiculous question even if people are excited for Resident Evil 7.

Considering RE6 was slammed to hell for its bloat (and Capcom probably wasn't happy about the bill, either), a shift in direction was all but inevitable for 7. Confined horror experiences have dominated the gaming space in the meantime and Capcom has leaned into it.

Again, I don't see how this at all relates to MvC. SFV is the only comparison I see as making sense since they clearly fucked up their scheduling and didn't adapt to a wildly evolved online fighting community since the release of SF4.

 

[kunonabi]

I fail to see how Resi 7 is safe. The new direction is bold and has divided the fanbase, which Capcom are bound to have anticipated. And on the technical side, Capcom have invested in a brand new engine and research into new photogrammetry technologies. As a whole, the game may not have cost as much as Resi 6, but it's absolutely not cheap and involved a number of risks.

It's not bold it's just them copying current trends.

 

[Dahbomb]

Marvel Infinite is probably going to have some help from Marvel financially, I don't think it will be that low budget.

The bigger concern is with DMC5. If it's not money hatted by Sony then I expect a considerably small budget for DMC5. Reused assets, engines, animations from previous games etc. Hell SFV and DR4 were money hatted and they still made them with a lowered budget.

 

[MrCarter]

In that, you're not wrong. In previous games, Capcom had at least some kind of say for the roster (less so for the MvC3 games, but Seth Killian had to beg for the likes of Shuma & Sentinel). With how big Marvel is now (& with Capcom having no Seth Killian-type figure to be persistent with certain characters), I fear that Capcom's gonna be pushed around in terms of which Marvel characters get in.

I think that's an urban myth to be fair. I doubt Marvel have the power to out right dictate to Capcom which characters get into a game they are developing, both companies have to negotiate in terms of which who can get into the roster before a decision is made. If Marvel pay for development, that's another matter, but we know the title is mostly being developed by Capcom with updated models from MVC3.

 

[Neoxon]

I think that's an urban myth to be fair. I doubt Marvel have the power to out right dictate to Capcom which characters get into a game they are developing, both companies have to negotiate in terms of which characters can get into the roster before a decision is made. If Marvel pay for development, that's another matter, but we know the title is mostly being developed by Capcom with updated models from MVC3.

They more-or-less did just that for the MvC3 games, to the point where Seth Killian had to beg for certain characters. Given Marvel's success now & the reports from Polygon & Eurogamer on the MCU focus, it's likely that Marvel exercised full control over their side of the base roster.

 

[Archtreyz]

I don't care if they reuse MvC2 sprites, as long as the gameplay is good. I enjoyed KoF XIV despite its lackluster visuals. I don't know how the graphical quality will eventually hold up, but for now, my only concern is gameplay.

 

[ColonialHawk]

Nah MvC:I will be fine. It has two big names attached to it, its being developed in-house by Capcom, and they've said in interviews that they aim to bring in all kinds of fighting game players.

DLC wise, idk. Just gonna have to wait for more information. No lootboxes tho, please.

 

[Nose Master]

I stupidly believe they've learned from sfv, but we'll see. They're still fucking up with that game almost weekly.

The expectations are lower for mvc, also. If it shipped without a heavy story mode (just intro and outro panels) I don't think anyone would give a shit.

Training mode, good netcode, and a simple arcade mode are all anyone should expect. Trials patched in, if we're lucky.

 

[KingBroly]

Considering RE6 was slammed to hell for its bloat (and Capcom probably wasn't happy about the bill, either), a shift in direction was all but inevitable for 7. Confined horror experiences have dominated the gaming space in the meantime and Capcom has leaned into it.

Again, I don't see how this at all relates to MvC. SFV is the only comparison I see as making sense since they clearly fucked up their scheduling and didn't adapt to a wildly evolved online fighting community since the release of SF4.

RE6 didn't need four games in one.


SF5 has many fucked up and cheap aspects to it that still persist to this second with shoddy servers and matchmaking. The game is unplayable at certain times of the day with how much the servers sucking bogs the game to a halt. And it's been like that ever since Akuma came out. They continue to take 2 steps back and make 1 move forward with it.

 

[Seyavesh]

remember when captain america was extra garbage in marvel 3 because marvel meddling made it so he didn't have a doublejump like he does in literally every other game he's been in ever
and the reasoning was specifically "captain america doublejumping isn't canon, how does that make sense??"
am i crazy? i definitely remember reading this in an interview with niitsuma or neo_g about how marvel let capcom have more freedom in adjustments and stuff for ultimate, hence shulk potentially having an airdash in the beta builds and other shit like that
anyhow i have less worry about that now since i get the feeling the marvel producer and the capcom producer both being americans who know each other can probably smooth that kinda shit over.

I think that's an urban myth to be fair. I doubt Marvel have the power to out right dictate to Capcom which characters get into a game they are developing, both companies have to negotiate in terms of which who can get into the roster before a decision is made. If Marvel pay for development, that's another matter, but we know the title is mostly being developed by Capcom with updated models from MVC3.

niitsumas twitter actually confirmed that nova in umvc3 was a specific request by marvel to be put in
https://twitter.com/fubarduck/status/814235454417633280

 

[MoxManiac]

remember when captain america was extra garbage in marvel 3 because marvel meddling made it so he didn't have a doublejump like he does in literally every other game he's been in ever
and the reasoning was specifically "captain america doublejumping isn't canon, how does that make sense??"
am i crazy? i definitely remember reading this in an interview with niitsuma or neo_g about how marvel let capcom have more freedom in adjustments and stuff for ultimate, hence shulk potentially having an airdash in the beta builds and other shit like that
anyhow i have less worry about that now since i get the feeling the marvel producer and the capcom producer both being americans who know each other can probably smooth that kinda shit over.



niitsumas twitter actually confirmed that nova in umvc3 was a specific request by marvel to be put in
https://twitter.com/fubarduck/status/814235454417633280

I thought the double jump thing was a decision by the devs, not Marvel.

 

[Neoxon]

remember when captain america was extra garbage in marvel 3 because marvel meddling made it so he didn't have a doublejump like he does in literally every other game he's been in ever
and the reasoning was specifically "captain america doublejumping isn't canon, how does that make sense??"
am i crazy? i definitely remember reading this in an interview with niitsuma or neo_g about how marvel let capcom have more freedom in adjustments and stuff for ultimate, hence shulk potentially having an airdash in the beta builds and other shit like that
anyhow i have less worry about that now since i get the feeling the marvel producer and the capcom producer both being americans who know each other can probably smooth that kinda shit over.



niitsumas twitter actually confirmed that nova in umvc3 was a specific request by marvel to be put in
https://twitter.com/fubarduck/status/814235454417633280

Marvel was more strict with Doctor Strange, to the point where they refused to let him have an air dash.