Why hasn't Marvel cashed in on some MCU themed video games?

[Elfgore]

I'm honestly surprised myself, as I would buy the hell out of decent superhero game. Especially Marvel, I like them better than DC. I'd enjoy a Mortal Kombat style fighting game at the least. At the most I'd want an open-world game where you let me play as a bunch of different heroes and fight crime. While the main story builds up and results in one giant battle. T'would be amazing.

 

[Xeorm]

Not tremendously surprised. I don't think there was really a lot of good game play involved with much of the marvel cast. I'd certainly like a good game done right, but you can't get that with a lame movie tie in.

I would like more spiderman games though. Those were always welcome.

 

[Therumancer]

They want to promote their online isometric game? Personally, I'd definitely buy into a Marvel game that is more like DCUO. I'd love to create an original superhero in the Marvel universe.

Not likely to ever happen for a lot of reasons. Marvel has a bad relationship with video games and strong tie in products going back many years, and does not know how to deal with publishers and developers. The current game "Champions Online" was supposed to be a Marvel Heroes MMORPG but the deal with Marvel fell through for a lot of reasons (the known parts of the drama and various speculation might still be on the internet somewhere) and they decided to go with the Champions RPG license in order to save it.

Marvel did approve an isometric "Diablo type" loot treadmill MMO called "Marvel Heroes Online" which I still play once in a while that allows you to play as various Marvel characters. It uses a very generic comic-based set up, and is heavy into selling skins which can be used to represent variants of existing characters, for example characters like Iron Man have costume options you can buy based on their movie personas. There are also expensive "enhanced costumes" which change the character's voice work and animations as well. Of course Marvel keeps Gazillion on a tight leash and everything Gazillion releases has to be approved by Marvel.

As far as merchandising purely based on the movies goes, I think Marvel is walking a careful line there. At the end of the day kids don't actually play with toys much anymore, it happens, but it's increasingly uncommon. Things like Action Figures while once a huge business for children are increasingly aimed at adult collectors. This is why you see adults lining up at stores to buy them by the truckload and take them out to the con circuit, sometimes even camping in front of stores, and then once in a while you hear some parental complaint about "why can't I find X" when they actually go shopping for kids. 24 hours after the release of a popular figure the only place to find it might be for 10x retail on Ebay or by going to cons where you'll see similar prices. I believe guys like Todd Mcfarlane, who has done quite well with figures, have talked about the changing nature of that kind of business and who the actual audience is. Advertising of kids with figures being less directed at kids as nostalgia seeking adults remembering their own childhoods when such things were big.

Marvel pretty much wants to keep to it's main universe despite side money makers, as huge as they might be it seems, and when it comes to video games it appears they feel their bubble burst there. A lot of their games haven't succeeded all that well, and the series that did such as "X-men Legends" and it's spiritual successor "Marvel: Ultimate Alliance" started out really strong but apparently "Ultimate Alliance 2" didn't go over as well as they wanted. Otherwise their roster of video games over the years have mostly ranged from "pathetic" to "mediocre". It's no surprise that given that in 20 years these movies likely won't be that big a thing any more, yet the IPs will be surviving even if not hitting thise heights, that they don't want to spend all kinds of money trying to make a good video game which has been a huge craps shoot for them, when if they do it right it might be two or three years down the road before it comes out and by that point who knows where the movies might be. The Marvel cinematic freight train charges on for the moment, but all it takes is a few failures to slow it, and everyone knows the bubble will indeed burst at some point, and the trick is to be done by the time that happens, not stuck with millions of dollars of products in development, and a huge back stock of toys aimed at children that children do not want since they have moved on to the hottest new thing. Limiting merchandizing aimed at a relatively safe market (no matter how it looks) is simply wise. *IF* Marvel does a new video game I expect it will not be based entirely on the Cinematic universe, but be more of a general thing, and closer to the comics, but perhaps involving costume options and such based on the movies, much like "Marvel Heroes Online". I personally have been waiting to see if they were going to risk an "Ultimate Alliance 3" assuming their contract with Gazillion doesn't prohibit such a thing.

 

[sXeth]

iv) Disney/Marvel are trying to minimise the number of products that contain MCU characters likenesses. Sooner or later Downey, Hemsworth, Hiddleston and co are going to disappear, whether through age, money disputes or simply not wanting to do it anymore. When that happens Disney will want them gone and replaced as fast as possible with as little in the way of ongoing royalties or visible connection as possible. That's how Disney rolls.

This seems unlikely, unless the game spends a lot of focus on their civvie moments. Marvel/Disney would own all the character likeness because of the comic properties they dressed them up as. Loki's the main one that really gets away from his existing Marvel getup (I think, anyways, I'm not well-versed on the Ultimates, where the MCU seems to pull from.)

 

[laggyteabag]

Because licenced games (especially movie tie-ins) tend not to go all that well. Sure, we get a good one every now and again, like Spiderman 2, but for the most part, they are pretty shitty.

 

[Kae]

There was a Thor game on the DS made by WayForward that was pretty cool, it was a 2D brawler with some platforming thrown in for good measure, I think it might have been the only decent MCU game and that's probably why there aren't any MCU games right now.

 

[Zontar]

There was a Thor game on the DS made by WayForward that was pretty cool, it was a 2D brawler with some platforming thrown in for good measure, I think it might have been the only decent MCU game and that's probably why there aren't any MCU games right now.

If it was a decent MCU based game, then it was definitely the only one as the 4 I'm aware of (the console Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America) that exist on console where all terrible and at least two of them financial flops.

 

[RJ 17]

My guess: they're aware of - or have at least realized - that movie tie-in games are often more detrimental to the brand than beneficial. Oh sure, there's been a couple good ones, but for the most part the perception of them is "half-assed money grab."

 

[Inazuma1]

Marvel: Avengers Alliance on Facebook. It's been running since the release of the first Avengers movie.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Well, we did get a Lego one and are getting another, but I get what you mean.

I can only echo others: the console market had some turds in the run up to Avengers (X-men Destiny, Spider Man Edge of Time) as well as poor reception to past tie ins, and even DC wasn't doing well with anything without Arkham in the title. Then they saw the easier to please and microtransaction to death mobile market so they jumped from the sinking ship to the floating one.

 

[WolfThomas]

I'd like a Black Widow/Hawkeye 3rd person action/RPG with stealth elements and whatnot.

A COOP Black Widow/Hawkeye game would be awesome.

 

[Kae]

Marvel needs to pull a Arkham, and actually have a developer with the passion to make an original Marvel game.

The Ultimate Alliance games, are pretty close, I wish MuA 3 was made someday.

Well Telltale is making one but absolutely zero details have been revealed about it, there's not even a single clue as to what characters may be involved, I also have no idea when that's coming out, given Telltale's record there is a chance that could be a good one but also given Telltale's record it could just be really mediocre.

 

[Savagezion]

My guess: they're aware of - or have at least realized - that movie tie-in games are often more detrimental to the brand than beneficial. Oh sure, there's been a couple good ones, but for the most part the perception of them is "half-assed money grab."

I feel this holds a lot of relevance this generation. Especially, concerning the SEGA marvel games. Their biggest crime was a low budget, the same crime I see droves of people not only overlook on the indie scene today, but praise and excuse. These games aren't polished like high budget titles but are being compared to them as if they are the same.

They were able to follow Arkhams basic floor plan and map out some decent game play with Capt. Iron Man, I have limited experience with but it doesn't strike me as "terrible" but you can see a small budget namely in the art department. Thor I have yet to play but I doubt it is as bad as people make it out to be. At some point I think our preconception of movie tie in games could taint our reception of them. Mix that with "anything under an 8 is shit" mentality and these games were doomed out of the gate when they are actually decent games.

These games may not be blockbuster AAA material but I would say they would be contenders if they had HD textures. That's all arkham has on these titles really. I guess Arkham offers a sandbox over a zelda-esque zoned map. But as far as game play goes, Arkham doesn't really offer anything superior. Similar leveling system on Capt, similar combat with new moves and probably more ways to attack in Capts game, same level of storytelling, same level of challenge to the "puzzles". arkham is just prettier and "makes it look good".

 

[sXeth]

My guess: they're aware of - or have at least realized - that movie tie-in games are often more detrimental to the brand than beneficial. Oh sure, there's been a couple good ones, but for the most part the perception of them is "half-assed money grab."

They were able to follow Arkhams basic floor plan and map out some decent game play with Capt. Iron Man, I have limited experience with but it doesn't strike me as "terrible" but you can see a small budget namely in the art department. Thor I have yet to play but I doubt it is as bad as people make it out to be. At some point I think our preconception of movie tie in games could taint our reception of them. Mix that with "anything under an 8 is shit" mentality and these games were doomed out of the gate when they are actually decent.

If I'm remembering right, Iron Man's problems tended to be somewhat poor controls, and a very limited pallette of enemies and level design. It wasn't completely awful but what it had wore out fast.

The Hulk tie-in was generally decent, but again suffered from very limited combat, and bosses were often methodical timing exercises of counter-punching, which hardly matches the protagonists, so you didn't feel like you were playing Hulk.

 

[DeimosMasque]

There was a Captain America game that wasn't too bad but flopped. The Thor and Iron Man games just sucked though.

I would like Disney to do SOMETHING with the Marvel brand for video games but at the moment it seems unlikely outside Infinity and maybe a 2nd Lego game