By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Marvel Vs Capcom 3. First Screens.

jarrod on 28 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:
Khuutra said:
CGI-Quality said:
rubido said:
WTH people. I don't want to get another console just for this game. I like TvC but I prefer to play with Marvel instead of Tatsunoko characters. Fuck!! I love the Marvel vs Campom series.

Just hope Capcom comes to its senses and releases this game for the Wii also.

Then you don't really want the game.

That is a ridiculous sentiment. Saying "you must not want this game if you're not willingn to sink in a couple of hundred extra dollars to play it" is not defensible as a statement or as a position.

Perhaps it does sound a little ridiculous. It sounds just as ridiculous to say you want a game but you don't want to buy the console it's on. Everything can't (and shouldn't) be expected to be on every console.

The sentiment makes sense either way, no matter how ridiculous it may sound. You want a certain game on a said console, you're going to need that said console, otherwise there's nothing you can do about it. When I only owned a Genesis, I knew I was going to have to buy the SNES if I wanted to play certain games. I didn't sit around twittling my thumbs hoping for the game to come to my system and then moan about it when it didn't.

This nonsense that everything should be on everything has gotten out of hand. Pretty much the pinnacle of my frustration.

While that may true in general, I think it makes some sense to allow for some leeway here given the last Versus game was on Wii.  It's a little like PS3 owners lamenting Peace Walker, Valkyria 2 or the new Yakuza game being on PSP rather than their system. 

I also don't see a problem in wanting one singular game on your system of choice and expressing that.   It's not like he's lamenting a ton of titles Wii's not getting, it's just one game.  Not everyone thinks one game justifies buying another console.



Around the Network
jarrod on 28 May 2010
Khuutra said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Khuutra said:
M.U.G.E.N said:

So yeah maybe capcom doesn't expect THIS to push the big numbers also so they are not gonna bother with it?

You're not following me - though your logic wouldn't work anyway since a port of MvC3 isn't going to be as expensive as making TvC from the ground up.

Do you know why they didn't expect Tatsunoko to sell big? I'll give you a hint: the question answers itself

ok please give me the numbers on good fighting titles on the wii, then let's compare it to the HD twins to see if this genre really is selling relatively bad on the wii or not...guilt gear, tetsunoko, shattered blade, Naruto shippuuden, dragon ballz etc does not sell well compared to the HD twins as far as I know...

 

maybe, just maybe, this isn't a genre that is popular on the wii? and I know you will bring up the smash bro argument to this...but that game is VERY different to games like SF4, Blazblue, Capcom vs., Tekken etc...I 'personally' don't even consider it to be a fighter cuz for me it's a party brawler with a lot of star power (A LOT of fun too btw I may add)

Uh

Tenkaichi Budokai 3 sold better than any DBZ games on the HD twins, to my knowledge, Tatsunoko is beating the Hell out of both expectations and MvC sales on older consoles, and oh yeah

SMASH BROTHERS

God. Listen. Tatsunoko didn't rock the charts because nobody knows what Tatsunoko is.

The few entries that the Wii has had sold very well for what they were.

Additionally, the best selling Naruto game this generation is on Wii (Clash of Ninja Revolution).  The first Bleach on Wii did decently too, it even sold on par with VF5 PS3 in Japan (lol).

Actually, the platform that's seemed to be bombing for fighters recently is PSP (Blazblue, Tekken 5, Soulcalibur BD, etc).  I bet those games all would've done better on Wii instead...



Khuutra on 28 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:

You've misunderstood the point, twice now. No, it's not ridiculous to not want to buy the hardware a said game is on, got that. It IS ridiculous, however, to just expect everything to be on everything, or to sit around expecting a game to come to your console, even if it's evident that it may not/won't, and then complain about it.Everything can't/won't be on everything

No matter how often you try to rightously justify it to me, I'm stationary on the subject.

The guy you replied to said, and I am quoting, "WTH people. I don't want to get another console just for this game."

Either you're being inconsistent with your message or you very seriously misfired at a guy who was not xpressing the sentiment you're talking about. I can only operate based on the things you say and reply to.



jarrod on 28 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:
Khuutra said:
CGI-Quality said:
Khuutra said:

That is a ridiculous sentiment. Saying "you must not want this game if you're not willingn to sink in a couple of hundred extra dollars to play it" is not defensible as a statement or as a position.

Perhaps it does sound a little ridiculous. It sounds just as ridiculous to say you want a game but you don't want to buy the console it's on. Everything can't (and shouldn't) be expected to be on every console.

When I only owned a Genesis, I knew I was going to have to by the SNES if I wanted to play certain games. I didn't sit around twittling my thumbs hoping for the game to come to my system and then moan about it when it didn't.

This nonsense that everything should be on everything has gotten out of hand. Pretty much the pinnacle of my frustration.

It is not at all ridiculous to want a game but not the hardware - there's nothing inherently wrong with wishing that you could get a game on hardware that you already own. That's not ridiculous, that's just preferring not to spend money you don't have to. The very intuitive nature of the statement is why your proposed sentiment is ridiculous! It is an intrinsic point.

I imagined you didn't sit around waiting, but if you didn't wish that you had the option to play those games on your hardware then you were just ignoring the quality of those games. It's a sentiment as old and as fierce as the console wars:

Your frustration is misplaced and immaterial. People wishing that they could play games that are on other systems is not new, it's not novel to this generation, and it's not unreasonable. Feeling entitled to those games is unreasonable, but that's not new to this generation either and nobody in this topic is really expressing that. The guy you replied to certainly wasn't implying that, and your response did not imply that you thought he was, so ... well I think you need to stand back and reassess what about this upsets you, and whether or not it actually should.

You've misunderstood the point, twice now. No, it's not ridiculous to not want to buy the hardware a said game is on, got that. It IS ridiculous, however, to just expect everything to be on everything, or to sit around expecting a game to come to your console, even if it's evident that it may not/won't, and then complain about it.Everything can't/won't be on everything

No matter how often you try to rightously justify it to me, I'm stationary on the subject.

Expecting the next Versus game from the Versus team to be on the same platform as the last Versus game from the Versus team isn't exactly ridiculous.  Hell, before the game was revealed/leaked people were actually expecting the next Versus game to be on Wii.  



Khuutra on 28 May 2010
jarrod said:
CGI-Quality said:

You've misunderstood the point, twice now. No, it's not ridiculous to not want to buy the hardware a said game is on, got that. It IS ridiculous, however, to just expect everything to be on everything, or to sit around expecting a game to come to your console, even if it's evident that it may not/won't, and then complain about it.Everything can't/won't be on everything

No matter how often you try to rightously justify it to me, I'm stationary on the subject.

Expecting the next Versus game from the Versus team to be on the same platform as the last Versus game from the Versus team isn't exactly ridiculous.  Hell, before the game was revealed/leaked people were actually expecting the next Versus game to be on Wii.  

The guy quoted didn't even expect it. He was lamenting! Lamentation is not objectionable.



Around the Network
Khuutra on 28 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:
Khuutra said:

The guy you replied to said, and I am quoting, "WTH people. I don't want to get another console just for this game."

Either you're being inconsistent with your message or you very seriously misfired at a guy who was not xpressing the sentiment you're talking about. I can only operate based on the things you say and reply to.

* sigh *

His first post: "So they're not putting it on the Wii? What the Hell is wron with Capcom"?

Perhaps you didn't see it, perhaps you deliberately ignored it. The point is, it's THAT type of statement that is bothersome. The first post I skipped though, because others had already quoted him and gotten on him for it. That is where it started though.

That still dosn't equate to entitlement, and it especially doesn't imply that he doesn't really want the game.

But I suppose there's nothing more I can say; if there's any last word, it's yours.



jarrod on 28 May 2010

Entitlement implies privilege though, usually undeservedly so and it definitely carries a negative connotation. I can understand your sentiment, but you could definitely use more neutral language. It also sort of brushes over the context in this specific case (TvC team, TvC beating expectations, Wii engine/assets already in place). I mean there's concrete reasons to think a Wii version makes obvious sense, and "entitlement" sort of clouds that.



Fab_GS on 28 May 2010
jarrod said:
V-r0cK said:
rubido said:
V-r0cK said:
rubido said:
So they are not putting this on the wii? What the hell is wrong with capcom?

Couldnt HD console owners say the same thing about Capcom vs Tatsunoko?

Sure! Go ahead and do that if you like :P

But independent of that, I find it odd that a game that can be easily done on the wii is not ported over. WTH capcom?!?! Did anyone not tell them which console has the most number consumers out there?

Have you looked at the sales of Capcom vs Tatsunoko? (about 260K) Its so small compared to sales of SF4 for PS3 or 360 (each over 1.4M).  Just because Wii has the larger fanbase doesnt mean it'll sell better. (If thats the case then all games should be made for Wii from now on)  It goes to show that when it comes to fighting games HD console is where its at.

lol.  The best selling fighter this gen by a gigantic margin (Smash Brawl) is on Wii.  It sold triple what SF4 did.  Hell, it's actually the best selling fighter in history.

TvC hasn't lit up the charts like SF4 did, but uh, consider the game and what sort of push it got.  Tatsunoko?  How many westerners even know what that is?  As is it's still exceeded Capcom's expectations by all accounts and is actually on track to outsell MVC2 PS2.  Had TvC been on PS3 or 360, it probably would've sold similarly.  Had SF4 been on Wii, it also probably would've sold similarly.  The two aren't exactly an apples/apples comparison...

Street Fighter II says hi.



Train wreck on 28 May 2010
jarrod said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
jarrod said:
Capcom's reluctance to port their fighters this gen baffles me in general. I mean this is the same company that whored SF2 to about every platform under the sun (even the Master System and original Game Boy!), who managed to squeeze SFA2 on to the SNES (complete with load times, lol), and they can't be bothered to bring SF4 to the best selling console (Wii) in history? Or TVC to the HD twins, who's audiences just bought 3m copies of their last fighter? Or *anything at all* to the best selling games system in history (DS)? REALLY? :/

So many missed opportunities...

Correct me if I'm wrong but this genre doesn't perticurly sell well on the wii....Even tetsunoko sold rather horribly imo....maybe capcom see it as a useless investment..but who knows, they might announce a wii version in the future

You're wrong.  Smash Brawl is the best selling fighter in history.  TVC is exceeding Capcom's expectations, and on pace to outsell what MVC2 managed on DC, Xbox and PS2.  Even licensed stuff like the Naruto and DBZ fighters are doing extremely well on Wii.  Even niche releases like GGXAC and the SNK Anthologies have done "okay" on Wii, comparable to what they did on PS2.

Context would help.

The ps2 and Xbox versions of MVC2 were in extremely limited print, thats why the game today sells for a ton today.  The Dreamcast not only had an extremely short shelf life (2.5 years), it also suffered from extreme piracy, thats why Capcom did not 1 but 2 re-releases of the game.



jarrod on 28 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:
jarrod said:
Entitlement implies privilege though, usually undeservedly so and it definitely carries a negative connotation. I can understand your sentiment, but you could definitely use more neutral language. It also sort of brushes over the context in this specific case (TvC team, TvC beating expectations, Wii engine/assets already in place). I mean there's concrete reasons to think a Wii version makes obvious sense, and "entitlement" sort of clouds that.

TvC was Wii exclusive, so in this context, I can understand that he wants MvC on the Wii. But entitlement isn't that strict in it's meaning. If you feel you're entitlted to something, that would be classified as "entitlement" (be it legal/not legal). He feels he's entitled to Marvel vs Capcom on the Wii because of TvC. OK, I get that people are backing that sentiment......

If that's the case, should PS fans be able to moan about the latest Monster Hunter? After all, it WAS initially a PS3 exclusive. The game switched platforms completely, although I understood the reasoning behind it. Point is, if they had moaned and groaned, I would have repeated myself: you want the game, you're going to need the system it's on. That's all I'm saying to him at this point.

Games go exclusive all the time (see Soul Calibur II to Soul Calibur III).

 

 

There *was* a ton of moaning about MH3.  And SC3 too.  Though really the context in those cases was also pretty different.

SC3 actually released on one of the same platforms as SC2 at least (PS2).  And originally SC3 was GC/PS2/Xbox multiplatform (with a 360 version in the works), Sony basically "bought" the exclusive.  This evidently happened late in the cycle and surprised everyone, including staff on the development team who reportedly found out about PS2 exclusivity with the Famitsu announcement.  EA was caught flat footed too, they even had the GC/Xbox versions listed with European distributors, and ended up losing the title entirely (SCEE handled the PS2 release themselves after the switch).

And really MH3 isn't a great comparison either since PS3 never had a MH actually release on it (unlike Versus on Wii), the jump happened in a generational transition (unlike Versus leaving Wii) and PS3 lost the title chiefly due to market forces (which also can't be said for Versus on Wii).