Capcom employees, Seth Killian and Christian Svensson, addressed fan questions recently on the Unity Boards. They talk about additional guest characters being in Street Fighter X Tekken, outside of Cole, the idea of running polls for the next alternative costumes in fighting games, if SFxT will go on tour like Marvel vs. Capcom 3 did, and stuff of that nature.
Ono said more guest characters in SFxT is likely. Seriously? As if Cole wasn't enough? He's blowing valuable time and resources on third-party characters that are better spent on actual SF and Tekken characters that people want. On top of that, these characters are just gonna get banned from tournaments anyway on the grounds of console-exclusivity. — Mr. Reaper
Seth Killian: Speaking just for myself, I evaluate guest characters on a case-by-case basis. Some I'm into, others not, but even when I don't care about a guest character I don't get upset that they're in there.
Of course I know where you're coming from on tournaments, and while fighting tourneys are one of my favorite things in the world, not every feature needs to be built only around tournament. To my mind, more content = more better, even if it's a Master Chief or a Link in my fighter.
Speaking about Cole in particular, the only thing I can really say is that even though he's unfinished, he's fun. Even though I see where you're coming from with the concerns, hopefully that still counts :P
If Street Fighter 3 Third Strike Online Edition does well, would that increase the odds of a game like Vampire Savior getting the same treatment? — Genis Sage
Svensson: One never knows. Let's see how this does first.
I think it'd be nice to have Official Capcom polls for the alternate DLC costumes we get. — True Ryu
Seth Killian: We've been able to do some similar kinds of things in the past on a bunch of titles (like weapons in Monster Hunter Tri, Dead Rising 2, levels in BCR, the Dev Room, etc. etc.), but I do particularly like this concept.
We explored the concept of doing a "fan" pack (not fanny pack) for SFIV skins based on all of the amazing PC skins we saw, but it didn't work out for a few reasons, including the dreaded legal reasons. That said, it's possible, it will just take some commitments from the dev side and a product to build around. Since we're talking SF, it will involve Ono-san as well.
We shall stir the pot internally on this one again. It begins today (well, probably tomorrow, I have meetings til 8pm tonight ;( ) [Editor's note: This message was written several days ago.].
It may be a while before we have anything to say one way or the other, but I'll (obviously) let everyone know as soon as we have something to say, and thanks for bringing this one back up in such a constructive and reasonably-reasoned way — no doubt it's a cool idea.
Will you have any exclusive items at this year's San Diego Comic-Con? — Menasor
Svensson: We'll have a couple tricks up our sleeve... I believe Darin will announce something fairly soon. Keep checking the Unity Blog as we get a little closer to Comic-Con.
Will you guys take Street Fighter X Tekken on tour to other states like you did with Marvel vs. Capcom 3? — Evil Ryu
Seth Killian: In a word: yes ;) and it shouldn't be very long wait. [...]
Console users who didn't buy any costumes for vanilla got the complete vanilla pack and a 2nd complete set of alternatives for free. — Bobschmick
Svensson: To the best of my knowledge, no, they didn't. If they bought prior costumes, they work. That is all. Unfortunately, we couldn't extend the same to you for the technical changes I described above.
The PC packs will be ALL of the costumes from a given edition for a very low price.
When is a poll feature going to be included in EH? that's the real question.
I'd love a redone HD VS with all the excluded characters. ALMOST more than a new one, since that would probably be made by the TVC team. ALTHOUGH that could be fun too. I say just give us both. I'll buy'em.
"Ono said more guest characters in SFxT is likely. Seriously? As if Cole wasn't enough? He's blowing valuable time and resources on third-party characters that are better spent on actual SF and Tekken characters that people want. On top of that, these characters are just gonna get banned from tournaments anyway on the grounds of console-exclusivity. — Mr. Reaper "
Typical elitist attitude right there. Why cant people enjoy games for what they are these days, first and foremost "entertainment" and not tools for tournaments or fanboy services.
LOL, what kind of tool cries over a new character being included in a game because of their tournament viability? Somebody slap whoever asked that first question.
Newsflash douche, tournament players don't make up even 5% of sales, despite being the most vocal, whiniest, pu$$iest demographic.
What happened to playing video games for fun and entertainment? These are VIDEO GAMES ffs!
Wonder if the purchased costumes for SSF4 will be compatable with X Tekken.. And if it works the other way too that would be neat!
Also pondering if the new SF chars that will be added, that two of them will fill the last 2 spots in AE. Doubt it tho.
I really hope they don't pick a dumb character for the Microsoft exclusive.... i also hope they don't add any more than 1 guest character each. I just want my Street Fighter and Tekken characters fighting each other.
@13- Elitist, huh? If that's the case, why don't we just add Big Bird to the PS3 version and put Barney the Dinosaur on the 360? After all, more characters is ALWAYS better, right? Who gives a fck if they're not SF or Tekken characters? By this point, the game's title doesn't mean sht anymore.
And it's not like tournament players should have ANY input. Nope. Console exclusives and a playing field left UNEVEN for owners of either platform is just the way to go.
Go fck yourself.
i'm soooo glad he doesn't base characters around tornaments. serioulsy tornaments are just a contest between the same six charaters.
@20 Quit putting whole paragraphs in his comment he didn't even say. The point wasn't that reg tourney goers shouldn't get have their voices heard in regards to these games, it was that ideas implemented in these games don't revolve around that atmosphere and instead focus on what's fun to play in your bedroom. Period.
@15- So people who play at tournaments don't do it for fun? What a plug-in you are.
Listen dckhead, learning a character and trying to improve your game are what make fighting games fun. What's the point in doing that with a console-exclusive? You can't play him against the very best, so what do you get out of it? Do you want Cole in the game so you can beat off to him?
Or do you only play fighting games to lose? Because last I checked, you can still have fun while you're playing to win. You're acting as if you cant do both, and why that is is beyond me. You need to get your head out your ass.
@22- Sure. Large rosters are never meant to be explored. Never mind the few that care enough to innovate and beat common picks.
Also, newcomers to the tournament scene apparently don't get any say-so. Because they want to get good at the game, and by seeing certain characters get banned, they might realize what a waste Cole is, or any guest character, and stick with what's viable.
Yeah, fck them. Who needs them to ruin the experience for people who don't give a sht WHAT Capcom feeds them? They can make the game better for people on ALL levels, but no, wasting all that time and money on third-party characters is good for those who "play for fun."
You guys must have some warped definition of fun.
@24
Actually, he called the question-asking guy, on a small fan forum mind you, elitist. What is a casual doing here? Games aren't just made for fun. That's a "new" player putting words in everyones mouths.
In fact, Video Games were always tools for competition, that's what they were supposed to be "games" i.e. competitive tools. The first games were like Pong or score based AND THE MACHINE SAVED THE SCORES FOR BRAGGING RIGHTS.
To say games should just be "fun" implies the importance of game design is secondary to "story" and "graphics", because to me and many other "elitists" like arcade fanatics, Indie game scenesters, game design students and competitive gamers - a game is "fun" when it is a tightly constructed product which follows it's own logic and allows the gamer to compete, either with themselves or others, within those perimeters. So ... having a character split the rule set arbitrarily to sell copies? That's an evil to benefit the corporations bottom line, not the fans.
Did I put too many words in your mouth?
The reality is there are A LOT of people with the same "tournament" attitude as shown in the 1st question, especially on SRK.
It shows in many comments such as those regarding Smash. There are comments left and right on whether a Smash game is a "fighting game" or a "party game"or a "fighter that can't be competitive". Truth is, the games were not intended to be tournament products, as the default settings show. Additionally, SSBM and later SSBB packed a crapton of content, modes, bonuses, and settings onto their discs, something Capcom is only just learning to do with 3S:OE. Smash was first and foremost designed for fun entertainment and a celebration of Nintendo. The wealth of content and customization options gave casual buyers several ways to play and enjoy the game, and the competitive crowd simply turned off all the random elements, picked a few plain stages, and BAM they had a tournament fighter with Melee. It was that simple, and SSBM had something for everyone to play because like "more content = more better".
Compare this to SF and Vs. releases where the only difference in battles are the characters chosen. Every stage is the exact same tournament-viable size and only differ in appearance. The only customization options are the timer, # of rounds, or damage level (in mvc3). Capcom clearly made these games coming from an arcade attitude where all people did was choose characters and fight.
Critics complained that MvC3 suffered from a lack of modes or extras, whereas they praise games like Smash and MK9 for containing many fun bonuses and extras. Of course, critics review fighters from a casual view because there's no way they can judge the core gameplay to the fullest; they review these games on paper. You're going to see MK9 win a lot of "best fighter of 2011" awards over MvC3 because of this, regardless of what you think of MK9's gameplay being worse or better.
Capcom is learning the ways of casual appeal though. Guest characters are fine, tournaments will happen anyway. Soulcalibur did it, DoA did it, SSBB did it, and MK9 did it. While I like certain guests over others, there's gotta be certain fans out there who will be sold when they see their chance to play as a certain guest. I liked Link in SC2 (cube) and Kratos in MK9 because they fit so well in addition to being icons of great franchises. I didn't like Spawn in SC2 (xbox) because he seemed like a lame promotion for Todd McFarlane who participated in the game development. And Nicole as a random made-up female spartan Master-chief lookalike in DoA was very WTF. I'm iffy on Cole because he barely fits and seems like a Sony promotion for their new franchise, but if he's fun...he's fun and that's what's important.
@24- Again, why can't some things that are fun to play BE viable for tournaments? That would mean EVERYBODY CAN ENJOY IT.
For fck sake. If you can't take a guest character to a tournament and play the best, that makes him a waste. What don't you understand about that?
@King of Sharks.
I commend you for going out of your way to smash SMASH, as it were, but I'm dissapointed. Any game - ANY GAME - can be competitive if people want it to be. My friends and I played, to put it lightly, competitve Bust-a-move for a whole year in my friends garage. We even put up flyers and got drunk and sloshed and had the time of our lives. The problem was, we were just 20 or so guys loving the game. We were in our early 20's and just loving it.
All scenes start somewhere, to bash Smash for finding their way with a game they paid for and love is to spit on the same community spirit that started the scene with SFII back in 91' - Do you think Capcom expected to start a sport, let alone a cultural milestone and competitive scene? The only reason the game got sequels and patches was to accomidate a guerilla scene as powerful as any DIY scene.
So, whether Smash becomes a "real" fighter or goes the way of my little BAM scene, don't spit on people trying to do something real. You can't live or die by what developers want or we'd all be planning on learning Cole, which I guarantee no one on this site is.
p.s. (Sorry cole fans and people who might actually play cole for fun, you know my point!)
(THANK YOU FOR YOUR WISDOM SETH KILLIAN!
Now I have something to link for the guest character haters!:
"Seth Killian: Speaking just for myself, I evaluate guest characters on a case-by-case basis. Some I'm into, others not, but even when I don't care about a guest character I don't get upset that they're in there.
Of course I know where you're coming from on tournaments, and while fighting tourneys are one of my favorite things in the world, not every feature needs to be built only around tournament. To my mind, more content = more better, even if it's a Master Chief or a Link in my fighter.
Speaking about Cole in particular, the only thing I can really say is that even though he's unfinished, he's fun. Even though I see where you're coming from with the concerns, hopefully that still counts :P" - Seth Killian
I'd also be interested in that official costume poll, and I wonder if they'll do free or paid costumes since it's half Tekken and due to MK's new status)
What is the point of crying about Cole?
He won't be at tournaments, because he's a console exclusive, so there's no need to learn the match up or anything like that. It's just a bonus, to help you decide which version to get if you own both consoles.
While I don't really hang out at MK sites or forums, but on Kotaku or Destructoid, I didn't see too much complain about Kratos. If anything, the attitude was "Kratos in MK? that's cool."
But here it's "OH MAH GAWD! THE SANCTITY OF THE SACRED STREET FIGHTER IS RUEEEEEEENED! CHARLIE CHRIST!!!"
I for one, am just going to enjoy being able to play as Cole. When playing with the guys, I'll pick him once in a while. It's also another interesting character to fight. Cole Vs Heihachi would be an interesting team, since they both can summon electricity.
And for the X bots, I bet if Master Chief or Marcus Feenix is announced, things will calm down...
@ #32
The point is, we'd all rather have that Tekken/SF X character who won't make the cut, instead of having the who-gives-a-damn-about-him Cole.
And yeah, that's a waste of developing resources (money, time).
Cole fanboys should stick to the infamous franchise, this should be SFxT not some kind of fighting orgy.
@26 Actually, yes you are because I said nothing about games not being fun for the competitive value in them. I didn't say anything confusing, multi-layered, or deep: The only thing i mentioned was that when it comes to guest characters, resources aren't "wasted" because people used to the tournament atmosphere say so. If you're comment means anything, it means there's more than one kind of "fun" out there.
@26 What's stopping you from enjoying them, again? The point i just reiterated you missed. Though tournaments have clearly have had influence in fighting games here and there, when they are release they don't just revolve around tournaments nor were they meant to. You don't have to ride out to a venue to play and enjoy a guest character, and you make it sound like that's all that will ever matter. These are just little promotions that add a little something extra for when you take your copy home. Your definition of a full on waste of a character is all I disagree with. Not being able to use him competitively isn't a measure of their worth IMO.
Alot of people are actually missing the point here. It's not even down to the fact that there's a guest character in the game. Its the fact that the game is called STREET FIGHTER X TEKKEN for a reason. When you start adding random guest characters from different games, it just misses the whole point of it being called that and game loses its value.
One arguement is that "the guest characters were already decided, theyre not stealing any spots"
If you know Capcom full well, a couple weeks down the line with another Capcom Unity Q & A session after release, someone's gonna ask 'Why didn't x character get into the game???' And you know they're gonna turn around and say, 'oh they barely just missed the cut, i really wanted e.g. Elena in the game'. That's the problem because they can then turn back and say that, which will be really frustrating.
@34- If I really wanted to play Cole, I'd just start buying the Infamous series. I'm not gonna bother playing a character if there's no use in learning him. And I'm certainly not gonna enjoy playing against him online when I could be fighting someone who counts.
Tournaments are important, but I'm not saying they are all that matter. Giving everyone equal opportunities to experience and enjoy the same game matters. Dividing people with console exclusives makes that impossible. Ono never deviated from his little chess analogy with SF4. Why should it be any different with SFxT?
#27 has a point
People here seem to think these fighters are designed for tournaments but tournaments are not what sells the game. If you count you will see that the number of people who participate in these tournaments are a very small percent compared to the casual gamers who buy it as well.
People here feel like if it's not up to tournment quality it will not do well. But Fighting games is a game first, it's up to the community to make it competitive.
As much as people bash on Smash Bros. Keep in mind Smash Bros. was never intended for competitive play. The community made that game competitive by creating rules and settings to even the playing field such as no random items and stages that do not have traps beyond the pit.
You can make any game competitive but it's up to the community to champion it, it's not gonna become competitive on it's own, someone must get out there and rally the community to do so.
The point is, they are putting in characters that shouldn't be in the game, and then a couple days later are going to make us pay for some dlc charater that should have already been in the game. INB4 someone says "You don't have to buy the dlc herp derp" It doesn't matter, because those characters should've replaced these guests in the first place.
And you are dumb if you think that video games weren't created to be competitive.
@mrdrofficer
You're very formal in your comments. However, I'm not smashing Smash. I'm actually trying to demonstrate its influence on the "fighters on consoles" world we live in now, since they are 60 dollar packages. More Content is GOOD, and I love Smash for that. Without customization, Smash Melee would have never been able to have a healthy tournament scene. Items and some silly stages would just ruin it. If anything, SRK people crying foul over Smash because the tourney community had to "ban" so much of what's on the disc, for tourney purposes, are hypocrites in that they are demeaning community efforts.
You can say ANY game can be competitive, which is true if you're talking about that competitive feeling/atmosphere of "I must beat this guy". But at the end of the day, I don't see an option to turn off all the random Sh*t that goes on in my Mario Kart games. There can't be any serious DIY scene for Mario Kart if they literally can't do it themselves. You can try, but you won't get many followers because randomness breaks tournaments. Mario Kart is still fun though, but customization would benefit that series.
That's the difference between Mario Kart and Smash. Both can appeal to casuals, but with Smash you don't have to live or die by what the developers wanted. A commendable tourney scene happened thanks to community efforts. In a way, Sakurai "spit" on that scene when he released Brawl, taking out all tournament-heavy advanced techniques and adding the unchangeable tripping factor to kill off competitive atmosphere. =(
As for Cole? Capcom certainly isn't forcing us to play him at home. I know I won't go in depth with him at all. Capcom and Seth know that tourney people won't play him. But they also know that those same people won't be playing any mini-games or trying to get all achievements or unlock all art gallery pieces. To me, Cole is just a bonus, along the same lines as Car-smashing mode in SSF4, Puzzle Kombat, or art galleries. In fact, it probably took as much time/resources making Cole as it did to make all 4 of those MvC3 CGI cutscenes. Would us competitive people have preferred development time to Strider and Cyclops over CGI cutscenes and Galactus? Yes. But we must understand that Capcom's gotta do this promotional stuff and bonus stuff on the side to help the game as a "package".
Kratos helped raise eyebrows for non-fighting veterans who were just on the fence of buying MK9. And the game still turned out great! The only people who would take offense are those who hate the idea of Kratos' face polluting the iconic MK9 character select screen. Same with Cole polluting the sentimental SFxT character select screen. To those I say, just let it go...
Plus, why would HDremix include the return of Akuma if they know he's gonna be banned in tourneys anyways? There's more to a fighting game package than just the tournament elements. But respect to tournament scenes, no doubt.
@31- You know, Seth is an EMPLOYEE at Capcom. You're aware of that, right? You think he's gonna diss any character they add in his position? You think he'd talk himself out of a job by bringing his own negative vibe to a game they're trying to sell? If you stopped sucking his dck, you'd see that.
@mrdrofficer
"Game" and "competitive" are not mutually exclusive.
Also you of all people should be able to see why people would call him "elitist". He shoves his idea of "fun" in other peoples faces with his posts. Just because a game is created to be competitive does not mean it's always played in a competitive manner.
Defending a guy who says "Do you want Cole in the game so you can beat off to him?" doesn't win points with many people.
All the weepy eyes over Cole is hilarious. Super hardcore players are living in such a fantasy land. "Wasted resouces waahhh!! I know their budget! I'm not just some creepy nerd who thinks he can do hadoukens in real life!" It's almost adorable; these type's thinking processes...
Peter Pan it up fellas. Sure, tournament play is the primary target of Capcom, since that's where all the money comes from... yeah...
For everyone whose thinking about Quantity, think about Marvel vs. Capcom 2. I'd say...I don't know, more then half those characters never saw the light of day? But NO, it was just good to have them there. That shouldn't be the case. I believe if a fighting game has quality fighters, the game will be remembered and cherished. As to this Cole situation, just let it be. Jesus, don't you guys wanna zap the crap out of Ryu, Sagat, Ken, etc.? And the tournament fighters...stfu
This community has too many people with their heads up their asses. The main roster will probably be more than 40+ characters and yet when they see even one exclusive character in the game, they start acting like a vacuous tournament d!ck-rider with no appreciation for anything other than the character's use in competitive gameplay.
@37
And Jesus.. by your logic, games like MK9 and Soul Calibur are not truly loyal to their name because they have guest characters like Kratos, Yoda, and Darth. Capcom has stated that their main character roster will be abundant; more so than the SF4 series. I am against the idea of Capcom adding more and more "exclusive" characters as well, but if it is only a minimal amount(by that, I mean 1-2 per console at best), then I could care less, and so should most of these whiners in the community who seek this out to be a serious issue.
Well, Sony giving Capcom money to have Cole in is going toward the overall development of the game, They probably hired 2-3 more heads for Cole, and or use a DLC team, similar to how a diffrent set of people make the costume DLC for SFIV.
I'm sure Cole is not "eating up resources."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
Street Fighter fans are officially worse than Sonic fans.
@43- Oh, so you DO play to lose? Well, if that's how you enjoy competitive games, more power to you. But I'd hate for your enjoyment to be a hindrance to those who'd rather play the game as it was meant to be played... you know, beating the other guy to WIN?
Yeah, it's quite a concept. If you could wrap your fcking head around it for once, maybe you'd see how inflated your use of the term "elitist" really is. Sounds to me like you have an inferiority complex. That's okay. People who lack the will or the brains to compete at anything in life typically do.
@44- You're right. The money comes from people like you who buy games just to jack off to 3D models, and try to decipher some beautiful message hidden in their rich, empowering storylines. That's fine. It just gives Capcom more incentive to produce quality games.
But the rest of us are stick to reality and find new ways to beat each other down.
@Kingofshark
ONLY RESPOND IF YOU'VE BEEN "IN" THE SMASH SCENE
Tourney scene existed in SSB64 first and Items and all sorts of sheningans were allowed.
It didn't become so Black/White until SF(3rd Failure) took the scene and encouraged other fighting communities to follow in suit.
EDIT:
Melee's Tourney scene wasn't Black/white either. If you look back in 2002; the tourney scene was still using Items and there weren't many advanced mechanics involved during the evolution of it's metagame.
2003, it was the same way; still using items and a lil L-cancelling here and there.
Check your facts.
@46- Did you ever think for a second (if that's within your mental capacity), that, just MAYBE, a "casual" player will not get to see a SF/Tekken character he wanted BECAUSE they put so much time into the "minimal" amount of guest characters?
Yeah, I guess that makes those people "tournament d!ck-riders" too, right? What a blowhard.
@47- Well, I don't see SF fans making their franchise into some kind of religion, or fantasizing about marrying their fave characters, or coming up with ridiculous OCs that are usually re-colors of a character that's already there.
Furthermore, you have NO proof that Sony even paid Capcom to put Cole in the game. Was it George Lucas' bright idea to come to Namco and get Stars Wars characters added to Soul Calibur? You even said "probably." So why don't you just STFU about the complainers and move on? It's not gonna stop YOU from enjoying exclusive, is it?
Oh, but the opinions of SF fans that are worse than Sonic fans really does make you that insecure... never mind.
Can somebody ban Murderous or something? This guy can't make a point without insulting people and seemingly flaming others. At one point I thought he was trolling but really, this guy cannot make one single point without Insulting SOMEBODY. Just a hint, nobody is going to take you or your comments seriously if you can't make your point without the need to add insults in your comments.
@ Jinzo - I think you're misinterpreting what i'm saying. What I'm trying to say is, before you add guest characters, at least get a proper roster out first. Why make Sf x Tekken if you're going to put Guest characters in from the bat? I wouldn't mind Cole, or Marcus from Gears, but it just seems that it can just be used as an excuse as to why certain characters can't make it. And, i'm pretty sure they said these guest characters are fanservice. Cole is fanservice?
As i've said before i honestly don't have a problem with him, but don't go around saying its for the fans when in neccesity its just to plug a game of Sony or Microsoft. I'd like to see a solid roster before i start seeing master chief with his battle rifle or that dude from uncharted with a magnum or something like that
It's called Street Fighter x Tekken for a reason. It has nothing to do with tournament or the lack of. Cole is not a SF or a Tekken character so why put him in? Most of the people complaining about Cole in the game is because it's a guest character which might end up taking the place of a character that would've been a better choice.
And to those who say games aren't meant to be competitive. Every game IS competitive. Think about it. There's the type of game where your competing against yourself such as Sonic or Crash(games where it tests your reactions otherwise you'll die) and then there's competing against another person OR the AI(Fighting games, Racing games, sports games, some puzzles too).
Capcom isn't going to please everybody with their final character roster, with or without guest characters. Just take a look at SF4. At the end of the day somebody is gonna' get left out regardless of guest appearances. Not every aspect of a fighting game has to specifically cater to tournament players and the most vocal of those who are making complaints don't realize how spoiled they sound.
Not every match played takes place in a tournament bracket and i'm sure people will enjoy playing Cole in casuals.
@Twilito Just because you can't see the roster, doesn't mean they don't already have one. I'm pretty sure the one of fist things they planned is the characters who is going to be in the game. They can't please everybody, and they won't, but you can't blame coles or anybody else inclusion in the game for the reason why your character hasn't made it in the game. Your character may have not even been planned to begin with. Cole is just added content. And maybe other characters are.
"not every feature needs to be built only around tournament. To my mind, more content = more better, even if it's a Master Chief or a Link in my fighter."
BEST ANSWER EVER!!! It was like a punch line straight in the face of those who like to act as if tournaments are above everything else. Seth Killian is a very smart person who really have a clear understanding about games.
You guys do know MK9 has guest characters, Soul calibur always had guest characters (Etc etc I can go on) and no dont reply with ''But those games suck or <insert w/e hate>'' I'm just saying a good amount of people enjoyed those games and they are being played in tournaments as well and no one cares about Kratos at all or Yoda w/e in that scene at least (Im assuming though).
Online, we can do whatever the hell we want. I do rather want those potential 2-4 spots going to actually characters, but tbh it'll be kinda cool to see like Dante or..Ratchet or something tbh.
Also please stop saying ''Why aren't you giving us straigth answers Capcom!!'' try putting yourselves in their shoes, one slip up and they can get in a lot of trouble. They CANT be to straight up/blunt about some of these things. I actaully feel they are telling us as much as they can
@53- Well I'm not gonna take YOUR punk ass seriously until you learn to man up. You don't like that I'm insulting others? Well, keep crying son. That doesn't invalidate anything I said. And it doesn't put anyone ELSE in the right who's doing the exact same thing with the guy who posed the question on Unity.
And no matter WHAT you say, Capcom is just shtting all over the game's intended fanbases with this garbage. There is no refuting this. Anything that went towards Cole and other guests, separate budget or not, could still have been put towards viable characters from Tekken and SF (possibly as DLC). Hence, more satisfied customers, casuals and tournament players alike. Get the picture now, coksucker?
@59- WTF do you know about Seth Killian? If everyone knew how much he hates 3rd Strike, you f@ggots would just tear him apart.
Yeah, the game's not just for tournament players. No sht. But if you think it's okay to fck them over, or casuals who have the same beef about Cole taking space from the game's title characters, you're a bigger ass than you're making them out to be.
@60
Having guest characters in SC and MK is fine and dandy, because companies can manage to get guest characters in their games.
I'll say that again:
*IN THEIR OWN GAMES*
This is a crossover title.
*CROSSOVER*
Why would there be GUEST characters in a CROSSOVER title that are a part of something else OTHER than the TWO titles going at it?
Just my two cents, I expect people to jump on my case, but I find this idea horrible and ridiculous.
Change the title to "SFxT with Friends and Friends"
Hey look I fixed Muderous's argument for him!
"Hey guise stop liking what I don't like! What? Other people have opinions as to what is good?!? Not on my Eventhubs!! I can't hear you LALALALALALA"
Also where in my post did I say I like to lose? I posted that it's possible to play without being super competitive. I'm also a competitive player but I was just stating a point.
You come off as very VERY stupid assuming you know anything about me personally.
@64- Uh, yeah.... they're fictional characters. What about it, you stupid btch? And who the hell used the word "sacred?" If you're gonna throw out lame comments such as this, you should learn to read first.
Cole's fcking SFxT royally. I can't change that, but if people complain, Capcom won't be so eager to make the same decision for later games. They're the ones talking themselves up as a company that "listens to fans." So just because there are people like yourself who'd rather blow them 1000x, there's no reason to stay silent. Now STFU.
Hey look Murderous. I have a different opinion then you. How does it make you feel? Angry? Why don't you find another way to vent your anger out? Ever tried Yoga?... Either way it doesn't change the fact that Cole has invaded the game. Complaining won't solve anything as the game is still going to do well. And if it does well, then it they are going too keep doing it. U still mad?
@Lyn
Woop-de-doo. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. But my point was not "when, where, or how" slowly their tourney scene evolved. My point lies in "what" they ended up doing. Now the only random stuff is probably unchangeable minor shenanigans like Luigi's Green Missile 12.5% chance of exploding. I don't care how long it took them to fully develop the intrinsic rules. I know that communities don't come to final conclusions instantly.
So don't tell me to not talk if I haven't been in the scene. My comments were about the nature of casual/tournament features in fighting game packages. Not about what Smash communities temporarily tried in the beginning. Plus, the Smash scene has made all the right decisions in their power as of the past few years, hence Brawl mods and such, which I don't have high expectations down the road but it's commendable
@64- You say that, but it's obvious you think there's any point at all in playing from a non-competitive angle. I think it's stupid, and that somehow makes me an elitist? You play to beat the other guy. There's nothing else to it. If you're not in it to better yourself, then WTF are you doing?
Not everyone's a tournament player, but that doesn't mean people shouldn't be encouraged. And console exclusives only do the opposite. If you want to tell me any different, you're a fcking retard. Plain and simple.
#27 Well said sir!
#37 I feel you 100% on this topic. The game is called Street fighter x Tekken, so it is kinda a kick in the nads to add one or two seemingly random guest characters. I mean...if they added Superman to Marvel vs. Capcom 3(for example), me being a big fan of the series i would be PISSED! And seeing as how there is no megaman, yet two megaman universe characters made the cut I would probably explode because that spot that superman got could have went to megaman...or any other x-man...or venom...
I'm just saying I was on the fence about this topic before but now I understand how silly this guest character stuff is, honestly it wouldnt be as bad if Cole didnt have amazing super powers, even compared to the fireball throwing SF characters. If he was just some sort of martial artist i would be more accepting, but come on electric tornado and samus' grapple beam lol
@70 what kind of argument is that?
There's no guest characters in MvC3 and those characters still didn't make it in.
You could be in it just to have fun? Fighting games can be fun too man, it doesn't have to always be competitive. It just seems you're a really angry person who can't accept the fact that people have different opinions then you. What makes your opinion any more better then anybodies else? What gives you the right to insult other people just because their opinion is different? And more importantly, Why U mad?
Hey InitialRetard, just because a game does well doesn't mean things can't be changed. Why do you think they keep rebalancing updates? You think they just do it for fun? No, dmba$$. People have issues they voice out until they're resolved. Try thinking for once.
You didn't get what I was saying Murderous. It won't change the fact that COLE is in the game. There won't be any patches to remove COLE or any other guest characters. And if it does well, they are just going to keep adding guest characters. Lrn2Comprehend
@72- How many times have I said competing is what MAKES fighting games fun? How else are you supposed to play them?
This concept of "fun" that you have is exactly why people were put off from fighting games over the last decade. This is why I'm pissed off. Too many idiots running around.
Yeah people were definitely put off from Brawl and melee because it was aimed at having fun rather then the tourny scene. Competition makes things fun for COMPETITIVE players, and not all players are competitive, Hence CASUAL players. Some people hate strictly competitive games, hence why Street Fighter 3 nearly killed the SF series. It was TOO competitive and it turned alot of people off.
I can't wait to see how broken this game is. This time around I am going to wait to see how this game does with the fans before buying.
Saw some demonstration video on youtube where the presenter was displaying game play mechanics. He talked about how some of the "simple" mode like play is like MvC3. The mention of MvC3 is enough for me not to get this.
How the heck are they gonna have time to balance anything with a billion characters and some more guests too? Ah yes, they won't.
@Muderous Well since you realized you looked like a moron for assuming personal things I suppose I can be a little more civil.
What I mean is you can still play to better yourself and not be a "competitive" player for lack of a better word at the moment. What about the people who get together with friends in college or people who just casually play over a few drinks? Those people exist you know. I'm NOT saying I want guest characters in but what I am saying is that they ARE going to be in and I don't really think it hurts the game as much as your saying it does.
@King.
I apologize for misreading your post. I gotta stop reading these things so soon before running out of the house. You make points which I wholeheartedly agree on.
MVC was never designed as a tournament game, in fact no game is. You guys aren't entitled to sh1t regardless of what you tourney nerds think. I personally don't enjoy the idea of console exclusives characters for the fact that there is no definitive version of a game. If you guys hate Cole so much then don't play him. Problem solved.
You guys complain ALL the time yet you drones still buy the games. Sounds like the same thing crackheads say when they swear up & down they are getting their sh1t together but they never do.
Playing Darth Vader on SCIV was a blast, Cole will be no different. I can't wait for other guess characters and the other SF characters that weren't on SSFIV.
LOL @ Trollderous spamming all over this thread. Everybody should leave this retard alone.
@23
I meant Tournaments, not in general, if tournament players always had their way we would never get characters Like MODOK and I would be a sad panda :(
@82
I know I love guest characters in general, Vader was awesome in SCIV, and I loved Spawn way back in SCII, and i've really enjoyed Kratos in MK, there is nothing wrong with adding variety especially if its from other thing you like :)
People getting upset over developers adding content to your game making it more value for money? Wow. I agree with S-Kill on this one. Not everything has to revolve around a tournament because most players here don't play in them any way.
@79 Good job.
Probably half the people who buy fighting games don't really play them competitively. As where balance across the most of the characters is what tournament players are looking for, some people just like seeing characters that bring some variety. And besides, with most fighting games there are a lot of characters whether they're from the series or not that don't get used anyway. So why put someone who no one is going to use regardless, when you can add someone who people can use just playing around?
The game has hit its first major snag (apart from the concept).
Infamous is a hack-'n'-slash sandbox, not exactly a fighting game. Throwing in a character that's completely unrelated to either franchise and that CAPCOM would essentially have to create an entire moveset for seems like a real waste of effort and a character slot.
@87
You have a good a point. But just about every crossover game and games with cameos in existence has problems with not having all the fighters meshing together to some degree. Hell, this game mashes together two series of fighters with totally different buttons setups and input commands. And of course, having guest stars in any video game will attract more people.
The first question is just plain stupid. Any person buying anything will be happy to be getting more than they pay for. I never understood why even complain that you getting extra content. Not everyone plays in tournaments, and those who do only use the same top tier characters most of the time. I guess Mr.Reaper is a happy man paying extra money for dlc palette swap for street fighter, but if Capcom is giving you extra free content you bitch about it smh.
@71 what is there not to understand about my statement?
I simply said being a huge fan of the MVC games if a non Marvel or Capcom character got a guest character spot I would be upset about it. Leading to me ultimately being upset about guest characters in SFXT. Especially ones that are out of place like Cole.
People saying star wars characters were out of place for SC4...well Soul Caliber is a weapons based fighter, Jedi's use weapons (light sabers) so even though they may not have fit the games setting and storyline they still fit in the game from a design perspective. They fought with weapons...and helped move units. Cole does not fit in SF or Tekken universe or game design since he is not a martial artist. I predict we will not get Cody in this game now because Cole will probably fight similar to him, at least his normal moves. Special moves will be totally different (duh).
At the end of the day, I'm just saying that a completely nonsensical guest character for this game is silly and I understand why fans are upset. I will probably end up buying the ps3 version and use the guy out of sheer curiosity but that's where it stops. Also hoping he's unlock able so maybe you wont have to ever see him LOL
Like I said earlier, People are just mad that their special fighting game has been tainted. Star Wars characters had NO BUISNESS in Soul Caliber. Weapons or not, they made no sense. But where they fun to play? Yes, they were pretty alright to play as. As long as they make him fun it doesn' matter to me. And cody may have not be planned too begin with.
@83
"if tournament players always had their way we would never get characters Like MODOK and I would be a sad panda :("
Well that leaves the casual fans as the crowd to please, but how many of them would have wanted that troll in MvC3? Atleast on the tournament level, the viability would determine his value whereas on the casual level, looks and popularity assumes value.
I doubt tournament play is the reason for all the Cole hate. It sure as hell isn't my reason. In my opinion, he does not fit in well with the other raw fighters like Ryu or Heihachi. Cole is just a powerhouse whose best bet was in MvC3 with all the other superheroes.
I bet your balls if Kim (KoF) or Gato (Garou) were to be the guest instead of Cole, there would be a lot less complaints imo.
Who the f**k asks these retarded questions.