-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
coachmcguirk91
Member
Outside of Nintendo IP, gamers won't buy mediocre slop, even if it's Marvel. Square Enix already realized this
Last edited:
MonkD
Member
It's still a massive IP.
But I guess the performance of the last Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and Suicide Squad made them eager to try their hand at it. Brave with the insane breakeven that the Insomniac games seem to have.
In all honesty though, a good Avengers game would sell well. But a new avengers game could also be a lower budget title like Ultimate Alliance 4. We don't even know who is developing, right? The source seems to be all about shitting on the last game.
SEGAvangelist
Member
Hopefully they stretch out development so they can keep their jobs longer.
ssringo
Gold Member
I immediately thought of the casting couch meme except the white girl is surrounding by Hulks. I'd make an edit of the meme if I wasn't posting from my work computer so maybe someone else can...
Putonahappyface
Gold Member
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
The superhero grab bag still dangling above everyone's head.
if Marvel Avenger movies can get $1-2 billion in sales in theatres, it's slam dunk a game will sell well too.
if Marvel Avenger movies can get $1-2 billion in sales in theatres, it's slam dunk a game will sell well too.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
vaibhavpisal
Member
Marvels Rivals success means they will try more for sure.
Cert.in.Death
Member
I really hope it’s a GaaS where we’re cast as the villains and have to go around murdering the heroes.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Sooner
Gold Member
It's Avengers. It's like all the other comic book super heros since the NES. There is and will always be one being made.
Will the next be high quality or another mediocre game that just hopes it can ride the coat tail of its IP? History says it's likely the latter, but sometimes we are surprised with an Arkham Asylum or an Insomniac Spider-Man.
Will the next be high quality or another mediocre game that just hopes it can ride the coat tail of its IP? History says it's likely the latter, but sometimes we are surprised with an Arkham Asylum or an Insomniac Spider-Man.
ReBurn
Gold Member
It's like if iron man and starlord had a baby
Vyse
Gold Member
Was thinking the same. Playing GotG game right now and it’s really well done.
Miyazaki’s Slave
Gold Member
Hats off to you...I didn't think it was possible to make this game LOOK even worse to people that didn't play it...but you found a way.
You are a monster for sure...but damned if you didn't nail this!
Mister Wolf
Member
Who the developer/publisher is will make or break this game. People(men) still like Marvel IP(Marvel Rivals), but not if it's filtered through a feminist/modern western lens. Arkane better not fuck up Blade.
Last edited:
VinnyMac
Member
literally came here to say this. the gotg game was a fantastic way to use a property
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
The push is done.
Everyone got board of her already the images are from the 2020 game.
I doubt they will be including her in this new game as in the comics shes now part of the X-Men Z-list team.
Yes I consider NYX to be a Z-list team even if it has Laura.
CliffBronger
Member
Icymanipulator
Member
All the designs look terrible, might be the ugliest version of the avengers I've ever seen. Especially Ironman. What the holy fuck 
The industry has learned nothing from Concord.
The industry has learned nothing from Concord.
March Climber
Member
Luke warm take that's somehow a hot take on GAF:
On average, Marvel games have been better than their movie counterparts. Making a video game would be seen as the smarter call.
Jinzo Prime
Member
Crystal Dynamics' Avengers was made during the height of Marvel mania and flopped; you can't make slop and expect it to sell even with Marvel's brand power.
Warspite
Member
And is there is evidence that Crystal Dynamics have learn from their previous efforts?
March Climber
Member
Who said that they're working on this new game?
darthkarki
Member
Honest question, has anyone commenting here actually played the game? Or just dogpiling on the hate bandwagon with the same generic "lol dumb" takes you heard from someone else? It definitely seems like the latter. I truly don't understand how so many people have the energy to be so negative all the time. It's exhausting.
What's so sad about CD's Avengers game is that it could have been really good. A lot of the core was there and pretty solid. Getting to play as so many heroes, each with different moves and capabilities, is awesome - I actually just reinstalled the game recently after watching Captain America Civil War with a hankering to throw a shield into some faces, and messing about with Cap in the training rooms my first reaction was, damn, this feels really good. Responsive controls, fluid animations, lots of great combos. Got me pretty psyched.
Then I wanted to try an actual mission, and remembered where it went wrong.
First, the whole map/mission system is super confusing to navigate. It's really hard to figure out what is a story mission, or what's just some random side thing. Or is there even a difference? I'm not sure.
Then, in the (post)game, the missions are pretty much all the same - run around a medium sized open area, punch some boxes for some kind of currency, and fight the same robot enemies over and over.
That's where the game failed. In the stupid live service angle. Which, of course, we all knew was going to be a bad idea - but the core of the game was good.
If we can get another shot at something like this, without the stupid live service nonsense - if we can honestly just have this game, but simplified, focused on singleplayer/co-op action, with more effort put on the campaign without having to design it to also work as endlessly replayable live service missions - it could be really good. That would be a good thing.
Why don't you people want good things?
Ms. Marvel's character was widely mentioned as a positive in previews and reviews - here's just a couple examples:
www.ign.com
If you weren't following along with the coverage at the time, probably best not to make sweeping definitive statements based on your personal feelings - you end up looking foolish.
For my own part, while she would be exactly nowhere on my list of favorite characters and I thought the Ms. Marvel TV show was awful, I have to agree that this game handled her character exceptionally well.
What's so sad about CD's Avengers game is that it could have been really good. A lot of the core was there and pretty solid. Getting to play as so many heroes, each with different moves and capabilities, is awesome - I actually just reinstalled the game recently after watching Captain America Civil War with a hankering to throw a shield into some faces, and messing about with Cap in the training rooms my first reaction was, damn, this feels really good. Responsive controls, fluid animations, lots of great combos. Got me pretty psyched.
Then I wanted to try an actual mission, and remembered where it went wrong.
First, the whole map/mission system is super confusing to navigate. It's really hard to figure out what is a story mission, or what's just some random side thing. Or is there even a difference? I'm not sure.
Then, in the (post)game, the missions are pretty much all the same - run around a medium sized open area, punch some boxes for some kind of currency, and fight the same robot enemies over and over.
That's where the game failed. In the stupid live service angle. Which, of course, we all knew was going to be a bad idea - but the core of the game was good.
If we can get another shot at something like this, without the stupid live service nonsense - if we can honestly just have this game, but simplified, focused on singleplayer/co-op action, with more effort put on the campaign without having to design it to also work as endlessly replayable live service missions - it could be really good. That would be a good thing.
Why don't you people want good things?
Nobody was praising the introduction of Ms. Marvel.
Ms. Marvel's character was widely mentioned as a positive in previews and reviews - here's just a couple examples:
Marvel's Avengers Review - IGN
Marvel's Avengers' campaign is fun and endearing, but the loot-based endgame is a mess.
If you weren't following along with the coverage at the time, probably best not to make sweeping definitive statements based on your personal feelings - you end up looking foolish.
For my own part, while she would be exactly nowhere on my list of favorite characters and I thought the Ms. Marvel TV show was awful, I have to agree that this game handled her character exceptionally well.
Last edited:
Larxia
Member
I was about to say the same thing.
I had a pretty nice time with the campaign and it's really not as bad as people make it seem to be. Even Ms Marvel wasn't a particularly annoying character, I found this version better than the one in the MCU.
The service part though, I have absolutely no idea how they thought this game could be a live service game, there just isn't enough content at all for that.
Because of its gaas aspect, the game launched in a pretty bad state, however, despite all its problems, I think the way Square Enix / Crystal Dynamics handled the closure of the game was perfect (despite the game being delisted...).
They removed all the gaas aspects, micro transactions, store etc from the game. They included EVERYTHING into the base game, all dlcs, updates, costumes etc, they made sure the game could be played offline, AND they made the multiplayer peer to peer so you could keep playing with friends even after the game is shut down.
This is a really good example on how game closures should be done.
Thanks to this, the game in its "current" (if that means anything since it's delisted, although you can still buy steam keys I think, so let's say "post closure") state is honestly pretty solid. It's not amazing or anything, but it's definitely an enjoyable experience with a pretty good gameplay.
This is how I played the game, when it was about to be delisted and they did this final update and sold the game for like 5$.
But even in this current state, with all the content and updates, it really didn't feel like there was enough content to make a game as a service out of this, so I can't imagine how it was at launch and how the hell did they think this could work as a service game.