• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

E3 2019: Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 - New Info Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
F-Pina

F-Pina

Nerd Monkeys
Verified
Nov 3, 2017
233
Lisbon
DrBo42 said:
Luckily there's the hero camera when you're playing solo on your switch. Which also applies to online co-op or the system link? co-op. Except for the sections that have the camera icon with an X showing a forced perspective like the side-scrolling areas etc. Playing co-op on the same system in MUA3 is something I will never do because of that camera they have.
DD1kZ8N.gif

k53fdKs.gif
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is good to know. But I was considering this to be played old-school style, 4 ppl on the same machine.
Guess I'll have to wait and see if there is camera option in the release version.
 
Mandos

Mandos

Member
Nov 27, 2017
30,885
F-Pina said:
Just came back from trying out a demo at Nintendo Portugal.
Considering I love these games, in this case, I hated the dynamic camera. Played co-op with a friend and we were constantly losing track of where our character was. REALLY hope there is an option for a more old-school more static camera mode.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean there's 10 times the enemies and the stages are 4 times bigger, fixed would result in some areas with tiny hard to see characters anyways
 
Mandos

Mandos

Member
Nov 27, 2017
30,885
Mr. Pointy said:
IIRC, the game has a classic camera option, even for single player.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
above average said:
The single player camera is the option, the default is the old school style.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You guys are misunderstanding, he said he played in coop. He means that the main top down camera perspective stretches and rotates to allow all 4 characters to stay in view(to a certain degree) so everyone is visible whereas in the original game's the camera stayed at a fixed distance and you chose to rotate it.

Dynamic cameras are more common now, and they likely choose it because levels are a large factor bigger than before with a ton more enemies on screen
 

Deleted member 2340

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,661
Why did I think this game released today? I probably would've impulse bought it today. Next week feels too close to Three Houses for me to justify buying it.

I stood up late last night watching the E3 footage. Game looks like it has potential. It'll be a toss up between this and Astral Chain after I get through with Three Houses.
 
JakeNoseIt

JakeNoseIt

Catch My Drift
Verified
Oct 27, 2017
4,535
Game Informer coverage talked about their being a learning curve to seeing your character in local multi. I'm sure in demos and environments like that it's gonna be a little weird, but something you eventually get used to.

Heck, a bunch of Smash Bros Ultimate previews said it was hard to keep track of your character in that game, and I never felt that way.

It would be pretty silly though if you were stuck playing online in handheld mode with that camera though. The hero cam is a savior for that situation
 
DrBo42

DrBo42

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,760
Mandos said:
You guys are misunderstanding, he said he played in coop. He means that the main top down camera perspective stretches and rotates to allow all 4 characters to stay in view(to a certain degree) so everyone is visible whereas in the original game's the camera stayed at a fixed distance and you chose to rotate it.

Dynamic cameras are more common now, and they likely choose it because levels are a large factor bigger than before with a ton more enemies on screen
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah in same system co-op you just have to wrangle your friends to stay close so the camera doesn't freak out and people don't get trapped.
 
Mandos

Mandos

Member
Nov 27, 2017
30,885
So I found something interesting, not truly a spoiler since it's from official footage, but for anyone touchy about unrevealed characters I'll put it in spoilers
So someone noticed in the cap footage on the Japanese site we see Thane in action with npc battle ai. Most of these guys are unlockable with a few of unconfirmed status but the thing is the power itself
image0.jpg

For anyone not in the know Thane has two main powers, deathtouch and amberfication. So far ai npc have a single skill. So tell me why would his single skill be an amber version of cap's energy shield deflect unless it's his first skill as a playable character? It's nearly identical(likely for Synergy reasons) from a general design standpoint. If he was just a npc his power would likely be the more interesting and dynamic deathtouch(his left hand that is obviously covered in an aura of death)

So I think we've found our second curveball playable character folks. Real question is are Black Bolt and Medusa the story unlocks and him the infinity trial unlock or BB The it unlock?
 
Slayven

Slayven

Never read a comic in his life
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
93,043
Feels like there should be some more info or at least gamepay seeing as ti is a week out
 
Het_Nkik

Het_Nkik

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,397
I went and saw Spider-Man: Far From Home last night and they played a commercial for this game before the trailers so that's something at least. Wish there was more advertising, though. That might be the only ad I've seen in the wild.
 
Mr.Gamerson

Mr.Gamerson

Member
Oct 27, 2017
906
I've seen a few Youtube ads for the game, but can't help but feel like Nintendo is not taking advantage of having an exclusive co-op marvel action game with a crap ton of characters on their platform.

Hopefully, the content they have saved to reveal at comic-con will draw enough attention to the game before launch like the Joker announcement helped with Smash. They should probably release a demo for the game as well, because i think it will help sell the game way more than it would hurt the game's sales. If MUA3 turns out to be a solid package overall, i can see it having really long legs. The expansion pass content should help to re market the game every few months as well.

Sony went big with their exclusive Marvel licensed game and it has paid off in spades and will probably go on on to sell 12 million + copies by the time the PS4 console cycle is over.

If MUA 3 only sells a million or so and Nintendo is still fortunate enough to get access to the MUA license again or another super hero IP, they should definitely put more resources into the game to ensure that it has a chance to stand toe to toe with Nintendo's best first party games.
 
TreIII

TreIII

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,280
Columbia, MD
D_Sm-1DWsAAGwsA.jpg


This will probably change (again) once Beast is confirmed, let alone if anybody else to the tune of Blade, Dracula and/or White Gorilla (M'Baku).
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
spad3

spad3

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,122
California
Mr.Gamerson said:
I've seen a few Youtube ads for the game, but can't help but feel like Nintendo is not taking advantage of having an exclusive co-op marvel action game with a crap ton of characters on their platform.

Hopefully, the content they have saved to reveal at comic-con will draw enough attention to the game before launch like the Joker announcement helped with Smash. They should probably release a demo for the game as well, because i think it will help sell the game way more than it would hurt the game's sales. If MUA3 turns out to be a solid package overall, i can see it having really long legs. The expansion pass content should help to re market the game every few months as well.

Sony went big with their exclusive Marvel licensed game and it has paid off in spades and will probably go on on to sell 12 million + copies by the time the PS4 console cycle is over.

If MUA 3 only sells a million or so and Nintendo is still fortunate enough to get access to the MUA license again or another super hero IP, they should definitely put more resources into the game to ensure that it has a chance to stand toe to toe with Nintendo's best first party games.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The thing is even though the game is exclusive, it isn't a first-party title. Nintendo pushes on marketing for first party titles over third party, regardless of whether or not if the game is exclusive or not or even published by them or not. MUA3 is close enough to Fire Emblem where marketing campaigns would overlap. The part that Nintendo doesn't get is that MUA3 has a very niche following and actually needs the marketing while Fire Emblem does not. People will straight up buy consoles to play Fire Emblem, no one would do that for a MUA game.
 
Lelouch0612

Lelouch0612

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,200
spad3 said:
The thing is even though the game is exclusive, it isn't a first-party title. Nintendo pushes on marketing for first party titles over third party, regardless of whether or not if the game is exclusive or not or even published by them or not. MUA3 is close enough to Fire Emblem where marketing campaigns would overlap. The part that Nintendo doesn't get is that MUA3 has a very niche following and actually needs the marketing while Fire Emblem does not. People will straight up buy consoles to play Fire Emblem, no one would do that for a MUA game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The game is 1st party.

With Fire Emblem getting its round of previews this week you can expect MUA3 to be pushed next week.

It is only logical given the sales potential of both games that FE gets more focus.
 
Stuggatz

Stuggatz

Member
Jun 6, 2018
358
spad3 said:
The thing is even though the game is exclusive, it isn't a first-party title. Nintendo pushes on marketing for first party titles over third party, regardless of whether or not if the game is exclusive or not or even published by them or not. MUA3 is close enough to Fire Emblem where marketing campaigns would overlap. The part that Nintendo doesn't get is that MUA3 has a very niche following and actually needs the marketing while Fire Emblem does not. People will straight up buy consoles to play Fire Emblem, no one would do that for a MUA game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I did.
 
OP
OP
spad3

spad3

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,122
California
Lelouch0612 said:
The game is 1st party.

With Fire Emblem getting its round of previews this week you can expect MUA3 to be pushed next week.

It is only logical given the sales potential of both games that FE gets more focus.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 is a third-party exclusive. It's developed by Team Ninja (Koei Tecmo) and published by Nintendo.
First Party means the publisher owns the developer and the game is made internally for an exclusive platform.
Second Party means the developer works closely with the publisher with exclusives, but isn't prevented from working with other companies/making multiplatform titles.
Third Party means an independent company that creates a game for a platform that may or may not be exclusive.

A third-party exclusive means a game is made by a company not owned by the publisher yet the game is exclusive to a platform. The line between second and third party exclusives is very thin.

Here are examples for this in terms of game exclusivity:

First Party Exclusive:
God of War - Developed by Sony Santa Monica Studios, Published by Sony. Sony owns Santa Monica Studios. God of War is a first-party exclusive.
Super Mario Odyssey - Developed by Nintendo EPD, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo owns Nintendo EPD. Mario Odyssey is a first-party exclusive.
Halo 5 - Developed by 343 Industries. Published by Microsoft. Microsoft owns 343 Industries. Halo 5 is a first-party exclusive.

Second Party Exclusive:
Quantum Break - Developed by Remedy, Published by Microsoft. Microsoft does not own Remedy. Quantum Break is a second-party exclusive.
Spider-Man - Developed by Insomniac, Published by Sony. Sony does not own Insomniac. Spider-Man is a second-party exclusive.
Pokemon Sun and Moon - Developed by GameFreak, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own GameFreak. Pokemon is a second-party exclusive.

Third Party Exclusive:
Bayonetta 2 - Developed by PlatinumGames, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own PlatinumGames, Bayonetta 2 is a third-party exclusive.
Mario+Rabbids: Kingdom Battle - Developed by Ubisoft, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own Ubisoft, Mario+Rabbids is a third-party exclusive.
Journey - Developed by thatgamecompany, Published by Sony. Sony does not own thatgamecompany, Journey is a third-party exclusive.
 
Lelouch0612

Lelouch0612

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,200
spad3 said:
Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 is a third-party exclusive. It's developed by Team Ninja (Koei Tecmo) and published by Nintendo.
First Party means the publisher owns the developer and the game is made internally for an exclusive platform.
Second Party means the developer works closely with the publisher with exclusives, but isn't prevented from working with other companies/making multiplatform titles.
Third Party means an independent company that creates a game for a platform that may or may not be exclusive.

A third-party exclusive means a game is made by a company not owned by the publisher yet the game is exclusive to a platform. The line between second and third party exclusives is very thin.

Here are examples for this in terms of game exclusivity:

First Party Exclusive:
God of War - Developed by Sony Santa Monica Studios, Published by Sony. Sony owns Santa Monica Studios. God of War is a first-party exclusive.
Super Mario Odyssey - Developed by Nintendo EPD, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo owns Nintendo EPD. Mario Odyssey is a first-party exclusive.
Halo 5 - Developed by 343 Industries. Published by Microsoft. Microsoft owns 343 Industries. Halo 5 is a first-party exclusive.

Second Party Exclusive:
Quantum Break - Developed by Remedy, Published by Microsoft. Microsoft does not own Remedy. Quantum Break is a second-party exclusive.
Spider-Man - Developed by Insomniac, Published by Sony. Sony does not own Insomniac. Spider-Man is a second-party exclusive.
Pokemon Sun and Moon - Developed by GameFreak, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own GameFreak. Pokemon is a second-party exclusive.

Third Party Exclusive:
Bayonetta 2 - Developed by PlatinumGames, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own PlatinumGames, Bayonetta 2 is a third-party exclusive.
Mario+Rabbids: Kingdom Battle - Developed by Ubisoft, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own Ubisoft, Mario+Rabbids is a third-party exclusive.
Journey - Developed by thatgamecompany, Published by Sony. Sony does not own thatgamecompany, Journey is a third-party exclusive.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So Smash is a 3rd party exclusive since it is developped by Bandai Namco ?
 
sensui-tomo

sensui-tomo

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,629
Just waiting for my eshop cards to get sent then I'm buying this and FE3H via the voucher program, only a little bit more to wait then I'm going into this hard.
 
OP
OP
spad3

spad3

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,122
California
Lelouch0612 said:
So Smash is a 3rd party exclusive since it is developped by Bandai Namco ?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Exactly. Any game that isn't directly developed by an internal Nintendo team makes it either second or third party. Smash falls under the third party exclusive category.

Edit: Just looked it up and turns out it's codeveloped by Sora Ltd. making it technically a second party exclusive.
 
Xbox Live Mike

Xbox Live Mike

Prophet of Truth
The Fallen
Oct 29, 2017
2,434
USA
spad3 said:
The thing is even though the game is exclusive, it isn't a first-party title. Nintendo pushes on marketing for first party titles over third party, regardless of whether or not if the game is exclusive or not or even published by them or not. MUA3 is close enough to Fire Emblem where marketing campaigns would overlap. The part that Nintendo doesn't get is that MUA3 has a very niche following and actually needs the marketing while Fire Emblem does not. People will straight up buy consoles to play Fire Emblem, no one would do that for a MUA game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I sold my switch during E3 in anticipation of a Switch pro, bought one back for MUA3 since a pro wasn't coming this year.
 
Mr.Gamerson

Mr.Gamerson

Member
Oct 27, 2017
906
spad3 said:
The thing is even though the game is exclusive, it isn't a first-party title. Nintendo pushes on marketing for first party titles over third party, regardless of whether or not if the game is exclusive or not or even published by them or not. MUA3 is close enough to Fire Emblem where marketing campaigns would overlap. The part that Nintendo doesn't get is that MUA3 has a very niche following and actually needs the marketing while Fire Emblem does not. People will straight up buy consoles to play Fire Emblem, no one would do that for a MUA game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I've seen several people in comment sections and in this thread who are now looking to pick up a switch because of this game. I also refuse to consider any game attached to the Marvel as something "niche" especially now with how popular the MCU is.

As soon as i saw Spiderman PS4 i knew it had potential to sell 10 million units because of how much effort seemingly was put into it and then we found out the game was being made by insomniac and that further cemented my belief that the game would do well.

I do think prioritizing more content in a game is more beneficial in this case than better graphics and presentation because it makes it easier to justify buying a system for one game if you know you can get a lot of mileage out of it. We will have to wait for more reviews, but this looks like a very repayable game and the DLC will only help to give this game even more longevity.
 
Santini

Santini

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,616
Love how the mobile size option makes your custom rosters look like movie posters.

One week to go! Still need to pick up a Switch...

MxuZxMI.png


D1uCAHm.png
 

JJConrad

Member
Nov 3, 2017
671
spad3 said:
Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 is a third-party exclusive. It's developed by Team Ninja (Koei Tecmo) and published by Nintendo.
First Party means the publisher owns the developer and the game is made internally for an exclusive platform.
Second Party means the developer works closely with the publisher with exclusives, but isn't prevented from working with other companies/making multiplatform titles.
Third Party means an independent company that creates a game for a platform that may or may not be exclusive.

A third-party exclusive means a game is made by a company not owned by the publisher yet the game is exclusive to a platform. The line between second and third party exclusives is very thin.

Here are examples for this in terms of game exclusivity:

First Party Exclusive:
God of War - Developed by Sony Santa Monica Studios, Published by Sony. Sony owns Santa Monica Studios. God of War is a first-party exclusive.
Super Mario Odyssey - Developed by Nintendo EPD, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo owns Nintendo EPD. Mario Odyssey is a first-party exclusive.
Halo 5 - Developed by 343 Industries. Published by Microsoft. Microsoft owns 343 Industries. Halo 5 is a first-party exclusive.

Second Party Exclusive:
Quantum Break - Developed by Remedy, Published by Microsoft. Microsoft does not own Remedy. Quantum Break is a second-party exclusive.
Spider-Man - Developed by Insomniac, Published by Sony. Sony does not own Insomniac. Spider-Man is a second-party exclusive.
Pokemon Sun and Moon - Developed by GameFreak, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own GameFreak. Pokemon is a second-party exclusive.

Third Party Exclusive:
Bayonetta 2 - Developed by PlatinumGames, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own PlatinumGames, Bayonetta 2 is a third-party exclusive.
Mario+Rabbids: Kingdom Battle - Developed by Ubisoft, Published by Nintendo. Nintendo does not own Ubisoft, Mario+Rabbids is a third-party exclusive.
Journey - Developed by thatgamecompany, Published by Sony. Sony does not own thatgamecompany, Journey is a third-party exclusive.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The first thing that you need to acknowledge is that "2nd party" is an informal term created by a Nintendo exec to explain their relationship with other developers. You're going to get a lot people arguing with you about the terms very existence if you don't recognize that up front. In fact, I don't even remember the last time Nintendo used that term. Microsoft is the only company I've heard stress these terms in recent years. Ultimately the distinctions are meaningless and are mostly used by fans arguing on the internet... like us.

In the past, Nintendo has used the term "2nd party" to define any third party developed game that is contracted or funded and then published by them. From what we know, Nintendo secured the Marvel license and then contracted Team Ninja to develop the game. By all known metrics that makes MUA3 a 2nd party exclusive. However, while Nintendo and Microsoft recognize the term and use it essentially the same way, Sony does not. So, even though the relationship between Sony and Spider-man is identical to Nintendo and MUA3, Sony considers Spider-man to be a first party game and so do their fans. It would be fair to claim that MUA3 is first party or second party depending on who you're talking to.... but not 3rd party.

I don't know where you're getting you definition of third party exclusive from. Usually, a third party game has no 1st party involvement at all. Sometimes the lines have been blurred when a 1st party publisher publishes an otherwise 3rd party game (and even vice-versa), but that distinction is usually obvious. When its not obvious, a good rule of thumb is look at who has ownership, and in the case of licensed games, ownership of the game code.
 
OP
OP
spad3

spad3

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,122
California
JJConrad said:
The first thing that you need to acknowledge is that "2nd party" is an informal term created by a Nintendo exec to explain their relationship with other developers. You're going to get a lot people arguing with you about the terms very existence if you don't recognize that up front. In fact, I don't even remember the last time Nintendo used that term. Microsoft is the only company I've heard stress these terms in recent years. Ultimately the distinctions are meaningless and are mostly used by fans arguing on the internet... like us.

In the past, Nintendo has used the term "2nd party" to define any third party developed game that is contracted or funded and then published by them. From what we know, Nintendo secured the Marvel license and then contracted Team Ninja to develop the game. By all known metrics that makes MUA3 a 2nd party exclusive. However, while Nintendo and Microsoft recognize the term and use it essentially the same way, Sony does not. So, even though the relationship between Sony and Spider-man is identical to Nintendo and MUA3, Sony considers Spider-man to be a first party game and so do their fans. It would be fair to claim that MUA3 is first party or second party depending on who you're talking to.... but not 3rd party.

I don't know where you're getting you definition of third party exclusive from. Usually, a third party game has no 1st party involvement at all. Sometimes the lines have been blurred when a 1st party publisher publishes an otherwise 3rd party game (and even vice-versa), but that distinction is usually obvious. When its not obvious, a good rule of thumb is look at who has ownership, and in the case of licensed games, ownership of the game code.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The primary differentiation is whether or not the development team includes the publisher or not. Nintendo scored the licensing from Marvel, but involved a third-party to develop. Technically it's a third party exclusive, but with licensing it's a second party, because without Nintendo acquiring the licensing and then publishing, the game wouldn't happen. However, in no capacity is this game a first-party title.

Spider-Man is considered a first-party title only due to its long-running relationship with Insomniac. In reality, it's a second-party title as well.

As for ownership, it depends on the contract between the developer and publisher. It can vary depending on the contract cirumstances, however as long as the game isn't being developed by an internal studio owned by the publisher, it's not a first-party title.
 
TDLink

TDLink

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,411
These are dumb semantics that are kind of off topic. But if it's published by Nintendo it's a first party game, even if it's developed by a third party. You can say third party developed, first party produced I guess. But it's all semantics. It's a first party title at the end of the day.
 
BlueRose

BlueRose

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,389
Captain Marvel and Invisible Woman were my primary heroes in MHO. I look forward to having them on the same team in the future, this is the team I'm going to be running on Day One. I'll sub in Cyclops if he's unlockable as well.

9-E9-C6147-813-E-4-F35-8-C32-4-F9-C46-CA2-BBA.png
 
Last edited:
erlim

erlim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,502
London
where are you guys making this lineup creator thing, i've been googling nostop high and low now for a few hours.
 
Jahranimo

Jahranimo

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,007
Figured you guys were posting the team pics, here's mine I posted in a Discord server:

MyUltimateTeam-fb820x360_2.png
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.