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

Forums - Gaming - Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite looks like a mess

VGPolyglot said:

So, if you guys are familiar with me, you may know that I'm a big fan of Capcom's fighting games. Now, one of their most beloved franchises is their Marvel vs. series. Now, I've enjoyed every single one of the games from the series: X-Men: Children of the Atom, Marvel Super Heroes, X-Men vs. Street Fighter, Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter, Marvel vs. Capcom: Clash of Super Heroes, Marvel vs. Capcom 2: New Age of Heroes, Marvel vs. Capcom 3: Fate of Two Worlds and Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3. I remember going to a movie theatre years ago, seeing Marvel vs. Capcom 2, and being a Street Fighter and Spider-Man fan, being amazed that they were in a crossover appearing in the same game. I don't know if I really have a favourite, and in fact until late last year-early this year I was mainly familiar with MvC1 and MvC3, but I have to say that playing the other games at my uncle's house I really grew to love the games. So, when the game was first released, I really was excited.

However, I definitely should have known, coming from Capcom, that the game would have issues. Right off the bat, I want to complain about the roster. Only 30 characters? While Mvc2 had 56, UMvC3 had 50 (DLC and PS4/XB1) and even vanilla MvC3 had 36? Why does the roster size keep going downward? There's also the problem with the roster itself, considering that Wolverine, who had been in every game beforehand, does not appear in it. I know that Marvel don't have the film rights for X-Men and Fantastic Four, but they should have had him and possibly Doctor Doom for history's sake.

Of course, the graphics were also an issue. If you can remember, Chun-Li looked really strange. However, it was not just her. Chris Redfield and Dante also had strange appearances. Now, I realize that they were fixed, but why show them like that in the first place? Especially when Chun-Li already had a great model in Street Fighter V.

Finally though, the DLC. They announced 6 DLC characters from the get go!! Why? What a way to make me want to buy the game. Well, get go I mean by before the game even came out, not that they'll be there at launch. However, it just shows shades of greed, and knowing that Capcom has a history of re-releasing games, makes me just want to wait for a complete version.

Another issue though is that Capcom these past few years have not brought up a great reputation for themselves. Street Fighter X Tekken had 12, 12, 12, 12 characters on-disc, as DLC!! Street Fighter V also had a very infamous, incomplete launch, which does not instill confidence nor the benefit of the doubt.

Now, the game has not been released yet, so who knows? Maybe it is great? Or maybe we'll eventually get a complete edition that manages to fix most of the issues, while having a much more acceptable roster size? In any case, I do not like how it looks, and I hope that Capcom doesn't strike out anymore times. It seems like we're reaching the ninth inning as it already is.

I think Capcom has lost it's touch with fighting games. The quality has gone down, and they now release everything as half complete DLC induced nonsense. 



Around the Network

The roster is so meh. They just stole MvC3 roster and took some characters out while adding like 3 new ones. There's also no X-men so I wasn't going to be hype about this either way. The game is also ugly especially the characters. The gameplay looks fun though.



DonFerrari said:
VGPolyglot said:

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.

Yea I never got the hate for 'clones' like say in smash. Originality is alwas optimal, sure. But if its the choice of a character you like or not being in the game, i woudl prefer them be in it, even if they are a clone of another essentially. As long as their 'cloneness' makes sense. Like you can't have Link and Roy as clones, but Mario and Luigi are fine. Or you can't have Bowser and DK as clones, but Fox and Falco are fine. IMO. 

Also more skins the better. Take Link. He has a different look each game. So they could have say 8 links in smash. Keep them all the same movesets, and give each one their own skins as well. You know, Twilight Princess link gets green tunic, the blue water tunic from his game, the magic armor, ect. Different outfits that fit that world. Skyward Sword Link is the same link in moves, yet looks different. This Link also gets a green tunic, blue tunic, ect. So with all forms of link and all colors, you woudl have say 50 varients of link that all look different yet play identical. Your picking link how you want him to look but still they all play the same. THe time required to make all those skins would not be hard compared to making a whole new character. And you please every Lunk fan out there, cause their favorite Link is an option.



Woke up this morning to see the Opencritic and Metascores hovering around 77. I wasn't following the game's previews so this was a huge shock to me. MvC games usually score really well.



irstupid said:
DonFerrari said:

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.

Yea I never got the hate for 'clones' like say in smash. Originality is alwas optimal, sure. But if its the choice of a character you like or not being in the game, i woudl prefer them be in it, even if they are a clone of another essentially. As long as their 'cloneness' makes sense. Like you can't have Link and Roy as clones, but Mario and Luigi are fine. Or you can't have Bowser and DK as clones, but Fox and Falco are fine. IMO. 

Also more skins the better. Take Link. He has a different look each game. So they could have say 8 links in smash. Keep them all the same movesets, and give each one their own skins as well. You know, Twilight Princess link gets green tunic, the blue water tunic from his game, the magic armor, ect. Different outfits that fit that world. Skyward Sword Link is the same link in moves, yet looks different. This Link also gets a green tunic, blue tunic, ect. So with all forms of link and all colors, you woudl have say 50 varients of link that all look different yet play identical. Your picking link how you want him to look but still they all play the same. THe time required to make all those skins would not be hard compared to making a whole new character. And you please every Lunk fan out there, cause their favorite Link is an option.

Considering the size of games nowadays, yes I have nothing against clones (as you said, try to keep the models consistent between big builds, agile, etc) as long as there is enough different char models and movesets... also yes put 30 palletes per char for the ones that have a lot of option (like ones that had 30 different games and clothes on its history), the only issue on that is it will add cost, but we by ourselves shouldn't complain that they exist.



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."

Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 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.

Yeah you're right. One of the biggest issues with MvC games is tha the roster is so big that there's always a broken combination of characters that ruins the fun for everyone. 

Rosters that are too big enhance the possibility of bugs or unbalanced fights... although in the case of Dragon Ball I would like that Gogeta SSJ4 wouldn't be the same power as Chaos.



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."

I bought it for 23.99€ on PC.



Hiku said:

Check out the collectors edition gems.

Expectation vs reality


it really doesn't look even close, discusting. Aliexpress have it better.



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."

Hiku said:

Check out the collectors edition gems.

Expectation vs reality


That's nice, they smoothed the rocks for you so you don't have to.



Cerebralbore101 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.

Yeah you're right. One of the biggest issues with MvC games is tha the roster is so big that there's always a broken combination of characters that ruins the fun for everyone. 

Only in gaming today we have constant balancing for games so anything of the sort gets patched, one of the main draws of the series was a multitude of characters either teaming up for clashes it's what provided the bulk of depth in the games.