By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
VGPolyglot said:
DonFerrari said:
I will say that 2 of your points are not relevant but the others are critical.

Roster size... it's better to have a good and varied rooster than to have only numbers... Capcom or another dev said that they saw too many chars that played the same... I think that was the reason for roster size on SF VI. And going by what was said during Killer Instinct, most players use a couple chars only.

So, the solution is to make each game have a smaller roster than the one before? Where it the happy medium? 20 characters? 10 characters? How varied do they have to be?

To me it can have 100 chars... I'm just saying that 30 isn't really small size, and that really variations of skin pallete doesn't add much.

But considering the appeal of each char to a userbase, like Wolverine, Batman, Ryu (not saying they are or could be on the game) even if playing basically the same can add sales by themselves.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."