Baraka407 Wrote:


I think that what makes me nervous about this is sustainability. Let's say I pay $70 or $80 for the special edition season pass and they're concept is to release the content over time. Now, this unproven developer thought that the idea of releasing content for years after the initial offering would be great.

But what is the initial offering? For the special edition, is it ten characters and the original KI with more to follow at some undetermined time? What if its only five or six characters? What if this season pass winds up getting me four characters like MK and all of a sudden it's three or four months later and MS has decided that while years if content is a cute idea, that they have made all of the money that they're going to make and then that's it?

This is why I'm nervous. Because I don't know what my money is buying me, and I'm spending based on the promise that more content will follow and keep following. Will I have to buy multiple season passes when they decide that my initial payment has been fulfilled and further content will require more money? Do I then pay $5 for four characters like MK or what if, once I'm roped in, it's $3 or $4 per character and I want a complete game so...

I guess we'll know more as we get closer to the release, but given that its only five or six months away, is anyone really confident that we're going to get anything approaching a complete (20 characters plus to me) and balanced game in that time?

I like that the developers want to establish a dialog with interested parties and I love the theory that this won't be a complete retail product followed by post release paid unlocks from content already on the disc or even legit DLC released a week or two later. But is this the better solution? No retail copy of a game that people have wanted for well over a decade and the hope that your money will be spent on a game that eventually, over an unspecified period of time, for an unspecified amount of money, will grow roster-wise (and possibly mode-wise as well) in to completeness?

I dunno. It sounds, right now, like a gamble. One that most people would probably prefer not to take, especially on a title that fans have been waiting so long for. Well, here's hoping it pays off, and that we end up with a great game, great bonuses, and that I can get past the concept of a game being "full" or "complete" when it's only forms of existence are not on a retail disc.

Jaded-Raven Wrote:
Mortal Kombat VS Killer Instinct a possible future?

KungLaodoesntsuck Wrote:


MK vs. SF or bust.

Jaded-Raven Wrote:


Nah, let Capcom and Namco keep playing together.

I would much rather see KI vs MK happen!

KungLaodoesntsuck Wrote:


Nah. Not enough characters.

KungLaodoesntsuck Wrote:
Even if they make new characters, I guarantee they won't have over 30 characters. I'd like to be able for each franchise to be able to pick each character match-up as closely as possible, without having to have every character in the game because they have a small roster.

I really don't care if it's T or not. I got over that a long time ago. I play fighting games to fight, not pointless gimmicks like blood and gore.

KungLaodoesntsuck Wrote:
MK has over 50 characters to choose from. As it stands, KI has 13 not including bosses. It's not about quantity, but SF has better match-ups and more to choose from.

And does SF not make quality fighting games?

Jaded-Raven Wrote:
Depends on who you are asking. The majority of the SF community find the newer games rather lacking in quality when it comes to gameplay, and many loathe SF vs Tekken.

MortalSidd Wrote:
Why does it even matter that KI only has 13 (EXCLUDING BOSSES) characters? MKvDC only used 10 of the MK characters excluding shao kahn.

A cross over would work just fine and I'm pretty sure this new KI will be expanding the roster anyway.

Murcielago Wrote:
Never understood the hype for this game. Heard of it, never played it though. Thought it was shooter game.