Captain Toad
Banned
What a coincidence. All the big Xbox posters never really cared for Marvel.
Even with all that....by definition thats close, IMHO.
Unless 8 is now no longer close to 9.
Why was I quoted in this? I've hated Marvel/Disney games since the 90s I don't care what platform they are on the last one I enjoyed was Aladdin on the Sega Genesis
I bet Playground Games could make a great superhero game. All that studio ever does is put out high quality, great playing and looking releases. Hoping to hear an update on Fable next month.
I literally said the same thing when they put out Miles Morales and announced Wolverine and when Guardians was getting 10 min e3 demos. It has nothing to do with console wars. But of course thats an impossibility to you.What a coincidence. All the big Xbox posters never really cared for Marvel.
A virtual who's who of anti-Sony posters on this site. The only charter member missing is SlimeGoo dude.Lognor and Hendricks shitting on Marvel games as trash and garbage yet in the thread "Guardians of the Galaxy finding their audience on Gamepass"
What happened all of a sudden that you're glad? Were you pissed off that you were getting garbage and trash so you were trying to create a dumpster fire with those emojis?
CopeSpider-Man has WAY too much handholding and context sensitive elements. also the mission design is extremely samey, and in the first game the missions with secondary characters were absolute dogshit
Arkham is way better <- fact
And do you think this was a one time offer from Marvel? Unlikely. Sony just added Wolverine to their stable of Marvel IP. You don't think Marvel would entertain a discussion with Microsoft if the latter wanted to develop a Punisher game or something? Seems unlikely.
well in the game review world not really no.
my actual rating if 1-10 was actually used to the full extend would be a 7 for Spiderman and a 9 for Batman, but that's not how game ratings work these days is it?
we basically have a scale of 6-10 and then everything below 6 which are just varying degrees of terrible for many people, hence my rating based on those trends
the Batman Arkham games, especially the first 2, are a full tier above Spider Man imo. less reliance on context sensitive mechanics, less random player movement restriction for no in-universe reason, better designed stealth encounters, better leveldesign and better controls.
Spider-Man imo is like an 8/10, and Arkham Asylum + City are both in the 9.5 area... with Arkham Knight being ~8.9
You don't have to tell me. You have people in this thread doing mental gymnastics to justify Microsft Passing on making a Marvel game which was either bad judgment or a good call, but hindsight says it was a bad call for whoever made that decision. Microsoft had close ties with Insomniac at that time and they could have easily contracted them seeing as how they just made a critically well-received Superhero game Sunset Overdrive for Microsoft. Insomniac would have happily said yes.believe me, exclusive games made and promoted by a first party tend to have a more favorable stance in the minds of the console owners.
That is your opinion and is a valid one. But Spiderman does score critically higher as well as higher user scores and is commercially more successful. So who's to say which is a better game is up to the user at the end of the day.which shows that quality doesn't sell games, imo Sunset Overdrive is a better game
Your opinion again. The game is critically well-liked as well as has higher user scores. Commercially it did not meet Square's expectations but we don't know what their expectations were.there were good super hero games that didn't sell that well, and at the time this deal was made it was a time of absolute overflow of mediocre Marvel games... Guardians is shit tho, it deserved to sell badly, I don't get why people praise it that much, absolutely awful fighting system with terrible hit detection and animations.
Yes, both are equally great games. There are some things one does better than the other.both great, yes... equally great? not at all
Why were the activision SM games failures then?no, because I also told you why I think Spider-Man was a success... and Wolverine literally has the exact same premise doesn't it?
but I don't think it will be as successful as Spider-Man, because Spider-Man is, well, Spider-Man... the most popular super hero out there basically.
Why were the activision SM games failures then?
That should be obvious but that poster sad ps4’s SM is a success because it’s SM… which is not true at all.Matt McMuscles has some really good videos on those. It was mostly down to the developers and the demands of the publisher. Combination which didn’t allow those games to be as good as they should have been.
The green rats are spinning more than a ballerina in this thread. It’s sad and amusing at the same time.
Go buy playstation consoles, people, that way you can stop being salty about games you want to play but are not available on your platform of choice.
The name alone helps sell some copies. However Insomniacs Spider-Man was very successful due to the game being good more than anything. Not really anything having to do with it being an exclusive or having Insomniacs name behind it.That should be obvious but that poster sad ps4’s SM is a success because it’s SM… which is not true at all.
Why were the activision SM games failures then?
Tell that to that poster. I Agree with youThe name alone helps sell some copies. However Insomniacs Spider-Man was very successful due to the game being good more than anything. Not really anything having to do with it being an exclusive or having Insomniacs name behind it.
Good. They dodged a bullet
I dont think its console war'n as much as it is killing YET ANOTHER dumbass take like this one, trying to push this agenda
but hey what do i know
Tell that to that poster. I Agree with you
Activision didn't put much of a budget into the Spiderman games before Sony took over the IP.Tell that to that poster. I Agree with you
IP alone doesn't mean good games. Insomniac made a good game.
MS passing on the IP means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Those were not the facts as were known back then.Just seems like a statement of fact (as it was known on 2/9/22), Spider-Man was once multi-plat and then became exclusive. It's not like this guy was in the room, same with the rest of us. Before this article broke that's the way everyone thought it went. Sometimes you make a good-faith argument based on information that looked like facts but turns out to be bad assumptions, I know I've done it
People keep forgetting it was Marvel that approached Sony about making a game and Sony chose Insomniac. They were allowed to choose any character they wanted and Spiderman was the character they chose. Wolverine was the second character they talked about doing after Spiderman.
Those were not the facts as were known back then.
Literally was said back then that Marvel approached Sony and Sony approached Insomniac who then chose Spiderman.
This is me from Jan this year.
IP alone doesn't mean good games. Insomniac made a good game.
MS passing on the IP means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Those were not the facts as were known back then.
Literally was said back then that Marvel approached Sony and Sony approached Insomniac who then chose Spiderman.
This is me from 1/25/22.
Yeah, this is the mind blowing thing.True. I was talking about the MS passed on Marvel angle. Everyone assumed that Insomniac chose the character and it went exclusive, no one had any idea that the possibility existed for MS to have a shot at it first. That's new.
True. I was talking about the MS passed on Marvel angle. Everyone assumed that Insomniac chose the character and it went exclusive, no one had any idea that the possibility existed for MS to have a shot at it first. That's new.
It would have been nice to know more details from the Microsoft side of things. I guess back then their priorities were much different and maybe it didn’t make sense for them to work on a Marvel IP. Although it certainly would have benefited them especially with Gamepass. No idea how the game would have turned out but I’m sure Insomniac are not the only ones capable of making good Marvel games.
Nah it sucked, but Infamous 2nd Son sucked more. In fairness though I didn't finish either one.SSO didn't suck before, but now it does?
Xbox fans have been using Spider-Man to attack Sony everytime they run out of arguments for years. After the Activision deal in January they were posting those Spider-Man covers everywhere
Now the truth is out. Remember that MS also denied GTA on Xbox so they released on PS2 instead. Those MS execs have no vision at all and their fans always blame Sony for everything.
There was no moneyhats, MS just screwed up.
Coalition spawn seems like a good fit. I feel like the coalition could make a very very good melee based game.MS holding out for that Spawn license.
I have no idea what you are talking about 'using Spider-Man to attack Sony' (persecution complex) but there is clearly a stark difference between passing on a completed project like GTA3 and access to IP but needing a studio ready to create a first party project for your platform.Xbox fans have been using Spider-Man to attack Sony everytime they run out of arguments for years. After the Activision deal in January they were posting those Spider-Man covers everywhere
Now the truth is out. Remember that MS also denied GTA on Xbox so they released on PS2 instead. Those MS execs have no vision at all and their fans always blame Sony for everything.
There was no moneyhats, MS just screwed up.
I'd like a Spiderman quality level game out of Xbox, Sony have done very well there indeed. Tried Avengers and GotG and after an hour or two with both I had zero interesting in playing those child-like cheesy repetitive games. My kids aren't big on Marvel or DC or superhero stuff anyhow but it was nice of Gamepass to have them both there to trial.
I'd like a Spiderman quality level game out of Xbox, Sony have done very well there indeed. Tried Avengers and GotG and after an hour or two with both I had zero interesting in playing those child-like cheesy repetitive games. My kids aren't big on Marvel or DC or superhero stuff anyhow but it was nice of Gamepass to have them both there to trial.
I thought GotG was in the same quality range as Spider-Man, tbh. There is a certain amount of repetitiveness to all the superhero stuff, most have a bit of a beat'em up/shoot'em up feel depending on the title. Spider-Man does have a great sense of freedom in movement, you've got to give them that.
There is a lot of potential for licensed IP.
Take Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for example, Unreal 5, Ninja Theory or someone like that “lean, mean and on the green machine”.
Take that Matrix demo and have the Coalition make a game out of it. I’d argue the Coalition have the potential to make a cool Transformers game too.
nah. this is not the full story.
Microsoft spent $100 million to keep rise of the tomb raider off PlayStation for 1 year. How much do you figure Spiderman cost to make?Xbox didn't want to spend big money and risk on a new IP
Sony did not use their internal studio to make the game, their internal studios were busy working on their own games.and their studios are busy making their own games.
They all take risks when they want to.Sony has balls and willing to take a risk,
Insomniac just made Sunset for Microsoft during that time period so they had a close relationship with them too.being a close partner with Insomniac is also an advantage.
Sony did not use their internal studio to make the game, their internal studios were busy working on their own games.