Why the cancellation? (Capcom, SFA3)
Steven J. Sheridan
(import) Saturn after it was already announced that it would be out in
Jan. 1999? I was under the impression that Saturn import titles would
continue to be published through the entire first quarter of next year.
And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
--
It's not polite to point.
Chocobo
> Can someone please post why Capcom chose not to release SFA3 for
> (import) Saturn after it was already announced that it would be out in
> Jan. 1999? I was under the impression that Saturn import titles would
> continue to be published through the entire first quarter of next year.
>
It appears that they simply changed their minds, thinking probably that
it's not worth the time and effort to put in on the Saturn for how much
money they expect it would get them.
>
> And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess. I would expect
that the loading times and slowdown problems would be decreased from XSF
levels, but I doubt it'll be close enough to satisfy any of the people who
weren't satisfied by PSX XSF.
Tempora
>> And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
>> Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
>> version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
>
>Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
>modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
>your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
>opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
>Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
>person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
>Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess. I would expect
>that the loading times and slowdown problems would be decreased from XSF
>levels, but I doubt it'll be close enough to satisfy any of the people who
>weren't satisfied by PSX XSF.
>
Oh, and don't for get about the hideous animation and horrible coloring
(it's coloring is very pixilized and dithered ALL the way down to what looks
like 256 colors) the PSX version will have, just like X-Men Vs. SF.
kazu...@hotmail.com
was indeed going to have a tag-team mode but didn't know how they were going
to do it. What Capcom won't do to release a game...
In article <36688DAE...@mindspring.com>,
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> "Steven J. Sheridan" wrote:
>
> > Can someone please post why Capcom chose not to release SFA3 for
> > (import) Saturn after it was already announced that it would be out in
> > Jan. 1999? I was under the impression that Saturn import titles would
> > continue to be published through the entire first quarter of next year.
> >
>
> It appears that they simply changed their minds, thinking probably that
> it's not worth the time and effort to put in on the Saturn for how much
> money they expect it would get them.
>
> >
> > And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> > Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> > version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
>
> Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
> modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
> your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
> opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
> Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
> person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
> Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess. I would expect
> that the loading times and slowdown problems would be decreased from XSF
> levels, but I doubt it'll be close enough to satisfy any of the people who
> weren't satisfied by PSX XSF.
>
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Chocobo
> >>
> >> And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> >> Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> >> version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
> >
> >Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
> >modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
> >your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
> >opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
> >Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
> >person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
> >Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess. I would expect
> >that the loading times and slowdown problems would be decreased from XSF
> >levels, but I doubt it'll be close enough to satisfy any of the people who
> >weren't satisfied by PSX XSF.
> >
>
> Oh, and don't for get about the hideous animation and horrible coloring
> (it's coloring is very pixilized and dithered ALL the way down to what looks
> like 256 colors) the PSX version will have, just like X-Men Vs. SF.
OK, I won't forget that. I also won't forget that to play the closer version (I
won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's done), I'd have to
pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX version. Can't you fucking
one-system advocates just leave it alone... no one said a THING about one
version being better... excuse me, closer than the other. If someone starts
talking about strategies in the SF2: Hyper Fighting, would you point out that
the SNES version was better than the Genesis version?
mp
> won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's done), I'd have to
> pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX version. Can't you fucking
> one-system advocates just leave it alone...
Heh heh. It's a never ending battle my friend. I'll tell you why
I usually don't let it rest. You PSXers are "settling" for your versions
just as Capcom is forced to make them. You PSXers helped kill the Saturn
by buying one which forced Capcom to make PSX ports which helped you guys
settle for the PSX versions. At least you're very honest, Chocobo, though
I sometimes wonder why you think the PSX XMvsSF is "close enough". But
fact is, you acknowledge the fact that the SS Capcom ports ARE better...
and the fact that Capcom has abandoned the SS because of sales or whatnot
hurts the whole industry.
> If someone starts talking about strategies in the SF2: Hyper Fighting,
> would you point out that the SNES version was better than the Genesis
> version?
Oh, but it was =) Actually, IIRC the Genesis never had a SF2:HF.
SNES: SF2, SF2Turbo, SuperSF2 (have 'em all :P)
Genesis: SF2 Championship Edition, Super SF2
Not to mention all the Gennie sound effects sounded like they were
done underwater...
-mp
What's in my VCR: Hime-chan no Ribbon, Romeo no Aoi Sora
What's in my Saturn: Marvel vs Street Fighter
What's in my stereo: CoCo: Singles, anything Idol Project
Who's in my heart: Kouda Mariko
Chocobo
> > OK, I won't forget that. I also won't forget that to play the closer version (I
> > won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's done), I'd have to
> > pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX version. Can't you fucking
> > one-system advocates just leave it alone...
>
> Heh heh. It's a never ending battle my friend. I'll tell you why
> I usually don't let it rest. You PSXers are "settling" for your versions
> just as Capcom is forced to make them.
Never ending battle? Um, ok... I don't see what you have to try to turn it into that.
Why do you care if PSX owners want to "settle" (that word must be in quotes now for
some reason, I don't know why) for the poorer PSX ports? Why are you "settling" for
the non-arcade perfect Saturn MSF, anyway? I just don't see why any post about a game
that happens to be on both systems has to turn into an argument about how one system
is better than another. Everyone knows that the Saturn conversion is better, it
doesn't have to be shoved in everyone's face constantly.
> You PSXers helped kill the Saturn
> by buying one which forced Capcom to make PSX ports which helped you guys
> settle for the PSX versions.
What, are you mad because your favorite system didn't do as well as the PSX? Don't
blame the people who bought the systems, blame whoever it was at Sega who allowed most
of the good games to be made on the PSX without getting those titles onto the Saturn.
>
> > If someone starts talking about strategies in the SF2: Hyper Fighting,
> > would you point out that the SNES version was better than the Genesis
> > version?
>
> Oh, but it was =) Actually, IIRC the Genesis never had a SF2:HF.
>
It had SF2 Special Champion Edition, which was basically HF.
Steven J. Sheridan
> > Oh, and don't for get about the hideous animation and horrible coloring
> > (it's coloring is very pixilized and dithered ALL the way down to what looks
> > like 256 colors) the PSX version will have, just like X-Men Vs. SF.
>
> OK, I won't forget that. I also won't forget that to play the closer
> version (I won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's
> done), I'd have to pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX
> version. Can't you fucking one-system advocates just leave it alone... no
> one said a THING about one version being better... excuse me, closer than
> the other. If someone starts talking about strategies in the SF2: Hyper
> Fighting, would you point out that the SNES version was better than the
> Genesis version?
Now that you bring that up, the SNES' SF2T version *is* head and
shoulders above the Genesis' SCE version in terms of clear as a bell
*sound* quality (I own both versions). And there is nothing wrong with
pointing out the different strengths and weaknesses systems have against
each other and how titles come across in each one. That's how people
who can afford to buy only one or the other make informed decisions.
After they buy the one of their choice, THEN you can talk about game
strategies...
Steven J. Sheridan
> > OK, I won't forget that. I also won't forget that to play the closer
> > version (I won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's
> > done), I'd have to pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX
> > version. Can't you fucking one-system advocates just leave it alone...
>
> Heh heh. It's a never ending battle my friend. I'll tell you why
> I usually don't let it rest. You PSXers are "settling" for your versions
> just as Capcom is forced to make them. You PSXers helped kill the Saturn
> by buying one which forced Capcom to make PSX ports which helped you guys
> settle for the PSX versions. At least you're very honest, Chocobo, though
> I sometimes wonder why you think the PSX XMvsSF is "close enough". But
> fact is, you acknowledge the fact that the SS Capcom ports ARE better...
> and the fact that Capcom has abandoned the SS because of sales or whatnot
> hurts the whole industry.
>
> > If someone starts talking about strategies in the SF2: Hyper Fighting,
> > would you point out that the SNES version was better than the Genesis
> > version?
>
> Oh, but it was =) Actually, IIRC the Genesis never had a SF2:HF.
>
> SNES: SF2, SF2Turbo, SuperSF2 (have 'em all :P)
> Genesis: SF2 Championship Edition, Super SF2
>
> Not to mention all the Gennie sound effects sounded like they were
> done underwater...
>
> -mp
Good post, mp. Let me add my "what's in" to yours.....
> What's in my VCR: Hime-chan no Ribbon, Romeo no Aoi Sora
> What's in my Saturn: Marvel vs Street Fighter
> What's in my stereo: CoCo: Singles, anything Idol Project
> Who's in my heart: Kouda Mariko
What's in my VCR: nothing but weekly taped tv shows
What's in my Saturn: MSH vs. SF and VS
What's in my DVD: Night Warriors: Darkstalker's Revenge
What's in my stereo: Mostly Saturn redbook audio discs (if I have to do
other things in the house besides video games, I can at LEAST be
listening to video game music!)
Who's in my heart: my significant other
Matt Seidl
>I usually don't let it rest. You PSXers are "settling" for your versions
>just as Capcom is forced to make them. You PSXers helped kill the Saturn
>by buying one which forced Capcom to make PSX ports which helped you guys
>settle for the PSX versions.
Yeeesh, laying it on a bit thick, aren't we? We should have eschewed buying
a PSX, just to keep Capcom from having to develop versions of their fighting
games for that system? Sorry, but some us find a bit more to life than
Capcom fighters...
Besides, SOA killed the US Saturn (figuratively, if not officially) long
before the RAM cart came out...
WhoaMoses
gamers are willing to settle for the butchered PSX versions of the two versus
games, and if you are one of these gamers, let me just settle the whole darned
issue by saying this: if you played the Saturn versions, you would shit the
wall. They're really that much better, and you would NEVER want to play, or
even come within a one-mile radius, of the PSX versions ever again. I'm
guessing that those that have settled for these versions have never played the
Saturn versions. But it's perfectly understandable why the PSX came out on top
in America: Sega of America. They killed every Sega product so far, and they'll
continue to do it over and over by refusing to release the good games and
giving us the shit that's left at the bottom of the barrel.
Like always, nuff' said.
The Almighty WhoaMoses has spoken.
mp
> Never ending battle? Um, ok... I don't see what you have to try to turn it into that.
It was a joke, yet it wasn't. You don't see me "shoving this in
everyone's face constantly". I was just making the point that perhaps
there will always be a time where people will argue over these things.
> Why do you care if PSX owners want to "settle" (that word must be in quotes now for
> some reason, I don't know why) for the poorer PSX ports? Why are you "settling" for
> the non-arcade perfect Saturn MSF, anyway?
For your first Q, why do I care? Because a lot of PSXers don't
know the existence of the respective saturn versions. I am not insulting
your intelligence. Since you're on these NGs and obviously know something
about the state of gaming, you're heads and shoulders above 90% of PSXers
out there. But the point isn't that I care waht PSXers think about their
ports. The point is that even if the Saturn hardware is better for Capcom
ports, it doesn't matter because since the PSX is the more popular system,
Capcom will be making PSX ports instead of Saturn ones.
For your 2nd Q, I meant to address this some time ago. Well, you
are correct in saying that MSHvsSF and XMvsSF are not 100% arcade perfect.
Heck, in a way, I'd say that a Neo Geo Cart System isn't arcade perfect
either... But you're right. They're probably as close to arcade that you
can get on these 32/64 bit systems. However, at least when you play
XMvsSF, Marvel vs SF, you can see it's resemblence to the arcade. How
many people will say that XMvsSF SS and XMvsSF PSX are entirely different
games? (*raises his hand*) THAT'S where I draw the line. PSX XMvsSF
isn't a port. It's a... version? I dunno what the heck you'd call it.
And lastly on this point, you keep saying that Darkstalkers 3 PSX
is 99% perfect. Unless you have some facts to back that up, I don't know
how anyone would dare say that. I'd say that Vampire Saviour is 99%
perfect(well, except for the extra characters).
> I just don't see why any post about a game
> that happens to be on both systems has to turn into an argument about how one system
> is better than another. Everyone knows that the Saturn conversion is better, it
> doesn't have to be shoved in everyone's face constantly.
I semi-agree. There are still 100s of thousands of people out
there that don't know, but I suppose if you've been on the NGs for a
while, you don't have to reminded everytime.
> What, are you mad because your favorite system didn't do as well as the PSX? Don't
> blame the people who bought the systems, blame whoever it was at Sega who allowed most
> of the good games to be made on the PSX without getting those titles onto the Saturn.
Blame who? Sega of Japan? Sega of America? If you're
talking about SoA, there's so many factors that are out of our hands. I
don't care about business. I care about the games. It's why I hate
ignorant PSXers who think their system is the only one out there. Just
because SoA lost its market doesn't make the Saturn the worse system by
default.
I guess this applies to SoJ now too...
But if Capcom *could* do a better port on a Saturn, but *won't*
because it won't sell, what does that say about video games in general?
I know this is true of any product, but it goes to show that popularity
isn't necessarily a good thing. XMvsSF should have stayed a saturn-only
game . Maybe Marvel vs SF will be better. We'll have to see.
Actually a question for you, Chocobo, for purposes of curiosity
and nothing else: Have you ever played a 4MB RAM cart game on the Saturn?
(ie XMvsSF, Vampire Saviour, Marvel vs SF, and kinda Pocket Fighter).
> It had SF2 Special Champion Edition, which was basically HF.
Whoops, didn't know that. Thanks for clearing it up. Still... it
was pretty crappy... and if you didn't have a 6 button controller, man was
it a chore to play.
Chocobo
> You don't see me "shoving this in
> everyone's face constantly".
Someone asked if MSF was coming out for the PSX... there's no need to state that the Saturn
version is better, it's just annoying. If I was going to ask if Quake II is planned for the
N64, I don't need to hear about how the PC version is better.
> For your first Q, why do I care? Because a lot of PSXers don't
> know the existence of the respective saturn versions. I am not insulting
> your intelligence. Since you're on these NGs and obviously know something
> about the state of gaming, you're heads and shoulders above 90% of PSXers
> out there.
I think most people reading these newsgroups know that there's a better version of the games
on the Saturn... for the few who don't know that, I guess constant reminders on how Saturn
conversion are better might help them out, but it's a waste of time for everyone else.
> How
> many people will say that XMvsSF SS and XMvsSF PSX are entirely different
> games? (*raises his hand*) THAT'S where I draw the line. PSX XMvsSF
> isn't a port. It's a... version? I dunno what the heck you'd call it.
I don't know about "entirely different"... as far as the gameplay and combo system goes,
it's exactly the same. I see what you mean though.
> And lastly on this point, you keep saying that Darkstalkers 3 PSX
> is 99% perfect. Unless you have some facts to back that up, I don't know
> how anyone would dare say that. I'd say that Vampire Saviour is 99%
> perfect(well, except for the extra characters).
>
OK... would it be better if I said it's 97% perfect? My point is that the PSX version is
very close, and the flaws are few and minor. For almost everyone who likes this game, the
PSX version is good enough. There are always a few people who just can't stand it if a frame
of animation or an object in the background is missing.
> Blame who? Sega of Japan? Sega of America? If you're
> talking about SoA, there's so many factors that are out of our hands. I
> don't care about business. I care about the games.
Either one I guess... but mostly Sega of America. They could have done a lot better with the
Saturn in the US.
> But if Capcom *could* do a better port on a Saturn, but *won't*
> because it won't sell, what does that say about video games in general?
I guess you're trying to say that people don't care if the game is good or not, since if
they did care then people would be buying the Saturn games. The reason it won't sell is
because people have abandoned their Saturns in favor of the PSX for the opposite reason..
the PSX has better games, and a wider selection.
> I know this is true of any product, but it goes to show that popularity
> isn't necessarily a good thing. XMvsSF should have stayed a saturn-only
> game .
Why? How does it hurt to have a Playstation version in existence?
> Actually a question for you, Chocobo, for purposes of curiosity
> and nothing else: Have you ever played a 4MB RAM cart game on the Saturn?
> (ie XMvsSF, Vampire Saviour, Marvel vs SF, and kinda Pocket Fighter).
Of course I have seen them, I couldn't take part in this discussion otherwise. They look
great... no loading, full animation and everything else... near-perfection.
Steven J. Sheridan
> "Steven J. Sheridan" wrote:
>
> > And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> > Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> > version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
>
> Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
> modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
> your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
> opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
> Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
> person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
> Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess.
How is this "better"? Part of the fun of playing the CPU is not knowing
which characters they are going to oppose you with in each round. Now
they've taken all the guesswork out of that with this version, and you
wind up playing a mirror image of your own team each round. To me, that
sucks.
Team Red Herring
>
> Can someone please post why Capcom chose not to release SFA3 for
> (import) Saturn after it was already announced that it would be out in
> Jan. 1999? I was under the impression that Saturn import titles would
> continue to be published through the entire first quarter of next year.
They never really officially announce it, just that General Producer
(the guy who makes all the important decisions), Funamizu Noritaka
hinted that it might come to Saturn by Spring '99. But with Saturn
rapidly dying out (MvSF sold only roughly 100,000, not enough to be
considered a best seller), it seems that the game is shelved. However,
seeing as Capcom is good buddies with Sega, maybe a Dreamcast version
might be in the works.
> And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
Yes, and Norimaro will still be in the Japanese PS game. He won't
be included in the US version. Copyright issue with Marvel Comics.
--
----------------------------------------------------
This message has been brought to you by
<Team Red Herring>
Red Herring - Evil Herring - Hirokun
mailto:ham...@pc.jaring.my - Main e-mail
mailto:go...@tm.net.my - Emergency e-mail
----------------------------------------------------
Chocobo
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > "Steven J. Sheridan" wrote:
> >
> > > And is MSH vs. SF still in the works for the PlayStation? (without
> > > Norimaro, of course!) I'm not at all interested in getting this
> > > version, just curious to know if it's still due out.
> >
> > Yep, it sure is. It still doesn't have the "true" tag team mode, it has a
> > modified version of what XSF had. You select only one "main" character, and
> > your second character changes every fight, to the character that your
> > opponent has. For instance, you pick Ken. Your first CPU fight is Omega
> > Red, so your partner is Omega Red, and the CPU's partner is Ken. Then a
> > person comes and plays against you, he selects Dan. Now it's Ken/Dan vs
> > Dan/Ken. It's a little bit better than XSF was, I guess.
>
> How is this "better"? Part of the fun of playing the CPU is not knowing
> which characters they are going to oppose you with in each round.
Before, you would have a team of Ken/Cyclops and fight the computer
Wolverine/Cammy. It would be a one on one fight between Ken and Wolverine, while
the second character only comes out to help in team supers and in alpha counters.
Now, you'd actually get a tag team battle like in the arcade- Ken/Wolverine vs
Wolverine/Ken. You go on to your next fight, it could be Ken/Omega Red vs Omega
Red/Ken. This is a lot better than one on one fights each time.
> Now
> they've taken all the guesswork out of that with this version, and you
> wind up playing a mirror image of your own team each round. To me, that
> sucks.
huh?
terrell gibbs
<cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
:OK, I won't forget that. I also won't forget that to play the closer version (I
:won't say "good" because the game is shit no matter how it's done), I'd have to
:pay around $140, more than triple the cost of the PSX version.
Or course, if there are 2 or 3 Capcom games you want, then the price of a
Saturn and 4M converter starts to look pretty reasonable. Certainly, for
anybody who is really enthusiastic about Capcom's "Vs." games, the Saturn
is the only way to go.
terrell gibbs
<temp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:Oh, and don't for get about the hideous animation and horrible coloring
:(it's coloring is very pixilized and dithered ALL the way down to what looks
:like 256 colors) the PSX version will have, just like X-Men Vs. SF.
I thought that Capcom fighters were dithered to 256 colors in the arcade
versions. Is X-Men Vs. SF any different?
Jeyski1
Nah I don't know maybe becoz they know that the saturn one is better!
Peace-Jeyski1-{Jusaki}-
"There are opinons but facts prove points!"
Raymond McKeithen II
terrell gibbs wrote in message ...
Interesting point. I believe the number of colors per sprite on CPS2 is 16
(reported in various places when Capcom was playing up the 'improvements'
for CPS3). I can't recall the total number on-screen, though, but it's
apparently more than the Neo Geo (palette of 4096, on-screen is ?)... In the
arcade at least, the characters aren't really dithered, because 16-color
characters is sufficient for the cartoon/anime-style artwork they're using.
I haven't seen the PS games so, no comment there.
Raymond
remove 2 nospam's for email.
Raymond
remove 2 nospam's for email.
Steven J. Sheridan
Just read what you said in your last paragraph above and I believe the
"huh?" will be answered. Basically, from what you said: in the PSX
version of this game that's due out--you are never fighting a completely
different team OTHER than your own, which is mirrored in opposite by the
CPU--on each level--no matter *who* you pick as your own tag team
members. The changes in actual gameplay you mentioned don't begin to
make up for such a bad decision as this, and in no way do I see this as
a good thing for this version. A "feature" like this will only add to
the shortcomings we all know this title will have; better they should
have left well enough alone and since they HAVE to make it for PSX due
to market demand--have it play the way that Xmen vs. SF for PSX did.
Chocobo
> Just read what you said in your last paragraph above and I believe the
> "huh?" will be answered.
I don't know what you mean, still.
> Basically, from what you said: in the PSX
> version of this game that's due out--you are never fighting a completely
> different team OTHER than your own, which is mirrored in opposite by the
> CPU--on each level--no matter *who* you pick as your own tag team
> members.
You always fight against a different team. One of the characters on the
opponent's team will be the same as long as you're sticking with one character.
> The changes in actual gameplay you mentioned don't begin to
> make up for such a bad decision as this, and in no way do I see this as
> a good thing for this version.
I don't believe I mentioned any changes in actual gameplay. It ought to play
exactly like the arcade game.
> A "feature" like this will only add to
> the shortcomings we all know this title will have; better they should
> have left well enough alone and since they HAVE to make it for PSX due
> to market demand--have it play the way that Xmen vs. SF for PSX did.
I don't see how this could be a bad thing... they're simply improving on the
idea they had with XSF.
Ian Finnesey
: In article <74afjh$val$1...@camel18.mindspring.com>, "Tempora"
: <temp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: :Oh, and don't for get about the hideous animation and horrible coloring
: :(it's coloring is very pixilized and dithered ALL the way down to what looks
: :like 256 colors) the PSX version will have, just like X-Men Vs. SF.
: I thought that Capcom fighters were dithered to 256 colors in the arcade
: versions. Is X-Men Vs. SF any different?
Take a look at them...there isn't a lot of dithering in ANY capcom game.
Different levels of shading (usually not more than three per colored
region) end rather abruptly.
I've never noticed any in PSX versions, either, although I haven't played
any of the games involving marvel characters (you see, I hate Marvel.
Particularly the non-X-books. And I'm not especially fond of Street
Fighter. The only reason I like Marvel Vs. Capcom is the non-SF capcom
characters.)
This in contrast to SNK games (everything except Real Bout), which seems
to go for a more gradiented look. (is that even a word?)
--
---
"What would you like to be buried in? Drawstring or twist-tie?"