Reply
Wastelander
Registered: 04/15/2009
Offline
722 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012
Or maybe because they had started working on Injustice.

For most developers though, DLC is somewhat of a "Strike while the Iron is hot" concept. Ideally, it's best to release DLC about 1-3 months after a game releases. This is the clutch period in which early adopters are usually finishing up a game and a bit of new content would be ideal because they are still interested and haven't traded the game in yet. Waiting a year to release DLC isn't wise unless there's a huge demand, because by that time most have played and traded the game in already.

Warner, strategically has done a good job with marketing their DLC thus far. Take a game like Arkham City, it had a season pass style DLC release, and the final Harley Quinn DLC was followed by a GOTY edition about a month later to take advantage of the last few folks who are on the fence.
Message 31 of 40 (106 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/20/2011
Offline
288 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

Fear4TheHero47 wrote:
Also in school for game design and I agree with both Stefam and Ark. Usually, things like the roster are thought of pretty early to get the team time to work on the characters and balance them, think up moves, etc. Honestly, the roster should be finalized for the most part in the first 3-6 months of the development cycle, if not sooner. This can change obviously and also varies from team to team, but this should be largely universal. Sometimes there are last minute additions before the game goes into beta or gold status, but generally speaking, once a game is gold or even in beta, most of the creation is done and all that's left is usually hours of testing and adjustments to code and UI elements.

Put bluntly, the roster has probably been finalized for a while now unless they had extra resources to allocate towards the development of more characters. If a character didn't make it in, it's most likely because a license wasn't acquired in time, they just didn't fit, or someone else (Evil Cole, Dante, whoever) fit better. That doesn't make them a wasted slot. That makes them better equipped to fit within the scope and style of the game than anyone that didn't make the cut. There are less than two months left. The game should be gold right now (or extremely close) and anything that's going to be created for release is likely done. Any more and you're looking at DLC most likely.

Incidentally, what schools are you both attending? I'm going to Full Sail Online. In month 7, Design Tools 1. I'd have attended formally, but I have a wife, 2 kids, and a job at Chrysler (Detroit). Can't just up and be moving around whenever I please.

me im going to george brown in toronto 2nd year. thats understandable life takes many diffrent paths some just have many more stops wich is a good thing for artists life experience add to your understanding of the world wich is important when ur makeing your own worlds

 

Message 32 of 40 (99 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 07/22/2009
Offline
949 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

no what the problem is, is development time. They take time to make a charcter that doest deserve a spot, instead of taking that time to make a character that is MORE DESERVING not roster spot. DEVELOPMENT TIME

Omar - "what are you guys doing? Why did you get rid of crash!"
Game devs - "we wanted to put in evil Cole so we had to get rid of everyone else the fans wanted"
Omar- "Oh nice, good idea. I didn't think of that"
Message 33 of 40 (99 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 08/15/2012
Offline
5278 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

I agree there is not a limit set from the start. they could have planeed to make hundreds and dwindeled down to what ever is the final roster due to many factors, evil cole is not a wasted slot like manysay instead he is another inclusion that is on top of the other more relevant and deserving characters, if this was on the ps1 the logic of only so many slots may have held up but I have seen alot of fighters in games. The number is not set and an already finished character won't be pushed aside by anyone else. 

#ProtectorProgramme
Message 34 of 40 (89 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/20/2011
Offline
288 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

SniperWolf323 wrote:

no what the problem is, is development time. They take time to make a character that doest deserve a spot, instead of taking that time to make a character that is MORE DESERVING not roster spot. DEVELOPMENT TIME


that is a misconception if a character isn't in it means that they didn't fit not that they didn't have the time. 99% of the time has to do with other issues<rights,conflict of interest with IP holder,didn't fit the atmosphere of the game> and not a matter of manpower not havening the time to work on the character.

 

Message 35 of 40 (84 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 09/24/2012
Offline
759 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012
This. ^ mainly, I think it should just be attributed to certain characters not fitting in the game. If Wander didn't make it, I'd be devastated. But I'd also understand that maybe he just didn't feel right as a character, so they scrapped him this time and might try again next time.
_______________________________________________________________


Image Hosted by ImageShack.us--- The Colossal King
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us--- The Gravity Queen
Message 36 of 40 (75 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 07/22/2009
Offline
949 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

[ Edited ]
Sep 25, 2012

ark567 wrote:

SniperWolf323 wrote:

no what the problem is, is development time. They take time to make a character that doest deserve a spot, instead of taking that time to make a character that is MORE DESERVING not roster spot. DEVELOPMENT TIME


that is a misconception if a character isn't in it means that they didn't fit not that they didn't have the time. 99% of the time has to do with other issues<rights,conflict of interest with IP holder,didn't fit the atmosphere of the game> and not a matter of manpower not havening the time to work on the character.

 


yea ok because development time is non-exsistant eh? because everything you just said is made up BEFORE  the game is strting to be made you really think they are going to go for character licencing while they game is being made? NO

 

Omar - "what are you guys doing? Why did you get rid of crash!"
Game devs - "we wanted to put in evil Cole so we had to get rid of everyone else the fans wanted"
Omar- "Oh nice, good idea. I didn't think of that"
Message 37 of 40 (68 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 09/24/2012
Offline
759 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012
Development time is all factored in once they get the green light from a publishing company. Essentially, SuperBot has deadlines from Sony. HOWEVER, saying development time is the reason why certain characters didn't make the cut is false. They decide their characters before they do anything and give themselves a reasonable number and scale with which to go by. Saying that one character being included could have been time to use on another character is false. That character had already been chosen over the other character within the first few months of development. Time had nothing to do with it.

/They. Just. Didn't. Fit./

Someone else fit better and hence was chosen over the other character likely before any modeling, move sets, VO work, animations, etc. was done. Basically, their spot was likely gone long before you even heard about the game. True story.
_______________________________________________________________


Image Hosted by ImageShack.us--- The Colossal King
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us--- The Gravity Queen
Message 38 of 40 (60 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/20/2011
Offline
288 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

SniperWolf323 wrote:

ark567 wrote:

SniperWolf323 wrote:

no what the problem is, is development time. They take time to make a character that doest deserve a spot, instead of taking that time to make a character that is MORE DESERVING not roster spot. DEVELOPMENT TIME


that is a misconception if a character isn't in it means that they didn't fit not that they didn't have the time. 99% of the time has to do with other issues<rights,conflict of interest with IP holder,didn't fit the atmosphere of the game> and not a matter of manpower not havening the time to work on the character.

 


yea ok because development time is non-exsistant eh? because everything you just said is made up BEFORE  the game is strting to be made you really think they are going to go for character licencing while they game is being made? NO

 


i didnt say that i said that it isnt the reason for charecters not being in the game. they start licenceing before the game but they need a proof of concept before the other companys will normaly sign off and then they have to work with the ip holder to make the charecter fit if the ip holder doesnt agrea with the company they have the rights to have the charecter pulled depending on the agread upon contract. ive had to work on a project for a external company through my school and ive had to completly redo a design for a charecter because it wasnt jizeing with the client it sucked but it is how it works

 

Message 39 of 40 (55 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 07/08/2012
Offline
2516 posts
 

Re: The Myth of "Roster Spots"

Sep 25, 2012

There's a few things people need, NEED, to take into consideration when it comes to roster space and DLC.

 

A: DLC. You entitled little brats. Look, be glad we even get the game. Expecting every character 'you' want, and then expect-, no, DEMANDING they do it no less (I've seen it), makes you, without a doubt, a spoiled little brat. You do not have to buy the game if your character doesn't make it in. Their profit can probably withstand your one loss of sale because of a third party character that's obscure and completely forgettable. You get my idea. (tl;dr some of you make me sick)

 

B: There are a few things that SuperBot has to do in order to get certain characters. They have to decide roster space (which for games nowadays is usually around the 20-30 mark sans Capcom but Capcom sucks as of SFxT so they're irrelevant), then they have to fit characters into the game's unique atmosphere. They have to then model the character, animate the moveset, effects artistry, sound recording, program, and then balance the character in with the several others they already have. Some characters just don't have enough to work with (I'm actually kind of scared for Crash; he only really had that spin attack now that I remember, maybe I'm forgetting some moves), and for a fighting game you kind of need a certain amount of moves to do anything. Take Ryu from Street Fighter for example; the 'Shoto' template. You have your projectile, your anti-air, normals, target combos, and distancing tools. When people request Spyro, I'm all for it, but all I really remember is fire breathing and spin with tail attacks.

 

The past few weeks people have been vying for Kat. Why Kat? GO PLAY GRAVITY RUSH. She has more than enough moves to pick from and would be an amazing, unique fighting game character that I don't even think had been done before. Magneto from UMVC3 maybe but still you get the idea.

 

Tl;Dr edition: If you expect everything on a silver platter then you shouldn't be playing games.

Message 40 of 40 (44 Views)