Jump to content
Awoo.

General Fighting Game Discussion Thread.


Kuzu

Recommended Posts

Yeah, I meant that you'd just have two attack buttons. All High and Low attacks would be by holding the D pad in a certain direction. Should streamline things a bit more.

Or turn my hands into pretzels. Yikes. Why not leave the dpad for movement?

Every time I see comments like this I can't help but think of games like Cursed Crusade or Dynasty Warriors which advertise things like "300+ moves" only for it to be beat-em-up equivalent of Simon Says in depth. I really wouldn't say it's impossible to make some decent metagame with only two buttons - hell, if anything that would help narrow down the focus of the game and cut down on the unnecessary proverbial fat that few people honestly look to in the first place.

Unless you literally mean one kick move and one punch move as opposed to just a two button fighting game. Which yeah, would be a bit too extreme on that end of the scale.

The Dynasty Warriors argument is such a strawman I don't even want to bother replying to it. However many moves or combinations there are in Dynasty Warriors has absolutely no bearing in any fighting game ever. It's like comparing Starcraft and DOTA.

As for the latter- who says these games have fat to be trimmed in the first place? I play as Bang in Blazblue, a 4 button game.

I can honestly say I use virtually every standing jumping, crouching and special variation of his moves. That's like what.... 36+ basic moves? I use some at distance, I use other moves up close, some moves are for spacing, some are for people that crouch black heaps, others are for catching people in the air, or punishing predictable players.

None of them are really redundant apart from maybe 6b and his air bumper gimmick.

Your whole argument hinges on the fact that all these buttons are unneeded because they are just a bunch of silly useless moves, the reality is the opposite, all trimming moves would do would be homogenise the characters and make the game simple, ie. boring. In good games almost all of the moves are vital, just because it's not what you're used to or because you have to learn it doesn't make it bad.

Smash Bros' gameplay is much easier to grasp. Every character had different moves, weight, and feel, but their controls are all exactly the same. To get good at the game, you need to learn which moves to use and when for each character, just like other fighters, but you don't have to spend as much time learning the basic controls.

Smash Bros works because it's Smash Bros. It's control scheme is deeply tied to it's gameplay system and set up. You can't just simplify normal fighters into a smash type control scheme, it doesn't work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Developers such as Capcom and Namco tend to create their games with tournament play in mind. Smash Brothers hopes that people will look at the cover and say...

"WOAH! BACK THE FUCK UP! MARIO AND PIKACHU!! I'M SOLD!"

Smash has built an experience where a group of friends can bunch together in a living room and have a grand old time playing as their favourite Nintendo characters. The game's simplistic mechanics let anyone pick up the game a play in a matter on minutes, and this simple gameplay has brought enjoyment to many.

What I'm really trying to get at is that Smash feels more like a party game then a fighter. Yes, it has it's competitive players with full blown tournaments, and yes, a good 1v1 is always great, but it always feels better to grab a few friends, turn on items, an allow for total madness to ensue.

This is why I dislike comparing Smash Brothers to other fighting games such as Street Fighter, MVC, Tekken, etc..., and why it really shouldn't. Smash is it's own little thing.

If you feel like putting in the time to memorize a characters moves and combos, then great, traditional fighters are more of your thing, but if you want to just pick up a controller and brawl with some buddies, then Smash is more suited for you (not to say that you can't like both).

That's just how I see it.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dpad IS being left for movement. You just press it at as the same time you press the attack button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dpad IS being left for movement. You just press it at as the same time you press the attack button.

Would jumping and guarding be on the D Pad too, like they are with most fighters or would they be relegated to separate buttons as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guarding has it's own separate button. Jumping stays on the Dpad though.

Edited by Waterwraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

jump is up, and guard is on a seperate button

Congratulations, you have a three button game. Only one more and you'll be on the same level of virtually every fighter ever.

See how easy it is to rack up the button count? If you want to have a competitive game with any type of depth players have to be able to do stuff, to be able to do stuff requires the game to have inputs for said stuff, hence the 4 or 6 button setups.

Removing buttons from a fighter is like removing the Knight from Chess because it's too complicated.

I've always thought guarding should have it's own separate button. Jumping stays on the Dpad though.

Isn't it simpler if you just defend whenever you move backwards ? I mean having to press a button is much more complicated then just backing out, and having the game guard for you as you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fighting a computer in training mode and a person who's been at this for a while aren't really the same.

No, but it gives you a general idea on how to fight said character, and how to defend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels so much more of an accomplishment to kick ass with Ragna or better yet Carl because you mastered the character despite said character needing a certain amount of execution and memorization. Fighting games like Blazblue are the pinnacle of gaming so excuse me if I laugh at complaints that such games are too complicated. It is pretty much this generation's chess on a high speed scale. You account for your enemy's strengths and weaknesses on both the character and how the character is being played. Dumbing it down because someone wants a simplier experience is exactly what is wrong with FPS and Beat em ups today.

Edited by turbojet
  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or turn my hands into pretzels. Yikes. Why not leave the dpad for movement?
...weren't you the one who was just saying that was practical enough in Soul Calibur? Or am I missing the point?

The Dynasty Warriors argument is such a strawman I don't even want to bother replying to it. However many moves or combinations there are in Dynasty Warriors has absolutely no bearing in any fighting game ever. It's like comparing Starcraft and DOTA.
You mean besides sharing the exact same combo system as Soul Calibur and DOA? MINI-troll-face.png

But yeah, all I was really doing here is making a point of comparison to the fact that quantity does not necessarily equal substance. I'm well aware of the fact the two genres are incomparable otherwise.

As for the latter- who says these games have fat to be trimmed in the first place? I play as Bang in Blazblue, a 4 button game and I can honestly say I use virtually every standing jumping, crouching and special variation of his moves in a fight and that none of them are really redundant apart from maybe 6b and his air bumper gimmick.
...where did this come from? I don't ever recall saying that all fighters that use more buttons have more in the redundant moves department, only that cutting down would help cut down on them and make the games a lot more accessible. If there happens to exist games that can function regardless, good for you.

Of course, as you helpfully pointed out below, it does help if games are built from the ground up around it rather than just taking Blazblue or SF4 and stripping buttons.

ie simple, ie. boring.
These two things are not mutually exclusive, either. Don't kid yourself.

Smash Bros works because it's Smash Bros. It's control scheme is deeply tied to it's gameplay system and set up. You can't just simplify normal fighters into a smash type control scheme, it doesn't work.
Where did he imply that they should? Edited by The Cheese
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OH BOY QUOTE DISSECTION

...weren't you the one who was just saying that was practical enough in Soul Calibur? Or am I missing the point?

Nope, it's kind of stupid in Soul hence why I don't play it that much. Soul is also the biggest representative for dumbass redundant move lists in the genre, so yeah.

You mean besides sharing the exact same combo system as Soul Calibur and DOA? MINI-troll-face.png

But yeah, all I was really doing here is making a point of comparison to the fact that quantity does not necessarily equal substance. I'm well aware of the fact the two genres are incomparable otherwise.

Derp. If you honestly believe this your view on these games is shallow enough to make this conversation useless.

You know that DOA only has a punch, kick and guard button right? So it kind of supports what you're saying anyway? You can have a simple game? what's your point, that more moves doesn't equal more depth? that's factually wrong, lol.

3D Fighters are a whole different bag of mechanics to the 2D ones as well so that's another thing that's kind of eeeeh.

...where did this come from? I don't ever recall saying that all fighters that use more buttons have more in the redundant moves department, only that cutting down would help cut down on them and make the games a lot more accessible. If there happens to exist games that can function regardless, good for you.

Of course, as you helpfully pointed out below, it does help if games are built from the ground up around it rath

Well seeing as there are

already

fighters

with two or three button setups

I thought you just wanted to homogenise the rest.

less moves= more accessible is kind of true... but considering the minute amount of effort required to play these games at a base level it's completely unnecessary.

Where did he imply that they should?

Virtually every post in this thread i've replied to has either implied or stated more games should be like smash bros, don't kid yourself.

Fun fact: in the time this thread has been open I could probably teach everyone in here how to play Street Fighter, special moves and all.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

only that cutting down would help cut down on them and make the games a lot more accessible.
I'm not sure how much more I can emphasise that one word to make you stop assuming I'm implying any kind of mutual exclusivity here.

Moving on.

Virtually every post in this thread i've replied to has either implied or stated more games should be like smash bros, don't kid yourself.
Nobody has stated or implied that we actually transform StreeBlazKombat whatever into a Smash Bros-alike, nor do I think it encroaches on your precious demograph if more such games exist, so I'm reallllly not seeing the problem here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These games don't need help. ;D

Nobody has stated or implied that we actually transform StreeBlazKombat whatever into a Smash Bros-alike, nor do I think it encroaches on your precious demograph if more such games exist, so I'm reallllly not seeing the problem here.

What are you saying then? that we need more games with Smash Bros level mechanics? Yeah great, whatever. more games is always better. Who cares.

What a boring thing to talk about.

Guess we have Playstation All Stars coming up. Hooray?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say they're too "complicated" because I think part of what makes them so interesting is their technical depth. I will say, however, that most fighting games are pretty bad when it comes with providing teaching-tools for the player.

Capcom's games, for example, often don't explain things that might frustrate or confuse a new user, such as the timing between links, or that a 360 input doesn't really need to be 360 degrees. Yet they still try and accomodate new players anyway with awful crutch mechanics like easy-input gems in SFxT.

Now obviously the fighting game community has tons of really good tutorials to help learn a game, but the fact that the game doesn't do the same creates an environment that's frustrating to learn in for casual players. That's why I think people say they're "too complicated."

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blazblue and MVC3 both have already have a simple mode which is to the effect of what you guys are asking for. They both suck when played that way and basically become a competition of who can land the most first hits.

The problem isn't that the games are too complicated or clusterfucky. The problem is, like the post above me says, that they're often poorly explained ingame, and you need to seek out a friend or online guides to really understand the systems.

This has got better in recent years with stuff like the tutorial modes in Blazblue, P4A, etc. but the genre has a ways to go.

I was trying to get this across earlier but the moment people start talking about how great SSB is and how shitty and stupid other games are I become rabid.

  • Thumbs Up 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I am big on fighting games and love the fact that it is complicated. Because it takes loads of practice to get good. I spent countless hours in training mode in Marvel Vs Capcom 2 & Guilty Gear. Those 2 are my favorite fighting games. I just like the thrill of learning those sick combos; when you learn them and know that alot of people cannot perform them is just awesome. Marvel Vs Capcom 3 was kinda of an upset. As soon as I read an interview with the director of the game saying that he wanted to appeal more to causal players I knew that game was fucked. Launching opponents is now one button. So fucking lame. The hard/complicated factor is not there anymore. The thrill of mastering new combos and not to mention your character is just lost for the most part. I like games like smash bros, but I want more button combinations, sequences and inputs to maximize carnage and create more combos.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, traditional 2D fighters have always just been pretty meh for me. Like I'll play some MvC or Mortal Combat if I've got people ove or if I'm at someone'shouse but other than that I wouldn't really go out of my way to buy one. The controlls and combos really don't feel to me like they require too much tedious memorization or anything, I think it's really easy to start panicking and just mash mindlessly after that. My problem is with them is that aside from Smash Bros and maybe the ability to shift a bit in the Z axis in some of te newer ones, I really haven't seen much changes to the formula since they first started. It also seems like it's really easy to win by just mashing the punch button over and over again. but again, my knowledge on them is pretty limited since I don't play that many of them.

Edited by Adam Malkovich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, UMvC3 is considered simple?

Well damn, I must just suck at fighting games then.

It's not really a simple game, it's as deep as the others, but in different ways.

What it does have is really easy combos, anyone can basically air combo someone else via pressing L,M,H -S L,M,H

What it really comes down to is that a lot of stuff that was more varied or weird in MVC2 was standardised in 3. Some people felt this was "dumbing down" the game but I don't really think so. MVC3 and 2 are just different is all

The director lied when he said he was making an accessible game lol.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, UMvC3 is considered simple?

Well damn, I must just suck at fighting games then.

Like I said in my first post, it's not for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's a relief.

I'm decent at the game, but when I play it it just doesn't click with me like some other fighters do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blazblue and MVC3 both have already have a simple mode which is to the effect of what you guys are asking for. They both suck when played that way and basically become a competition of who can land the most first hits.
MVC3's simple mode was pretty extremist even for my liking, though. I mean, don't get me wrong, it's kinda neat that they automatically chain together the first three dial-a-combo moves that I never really found any reason to use seperately, which is exactly the kind of "cutting redundancies" shindig that I've been talking about, but when it gets to the extent that they have to automatically throw a launcher and aircombo in with that every single time just by spamming one button it speaks less of simplifying and more of blatant hand-holding. I would personally like a fighter that's less about quantity of moves (or at the very least has a proper learning curve built around it, like Solly just pointed out), but I don't think anyone wants a fighting game that just plays itself.

Which if anything just goes to show that existing fighting games can't be simplified/dumbed down just for the sake of it. By all means, if there's a market for both sides of the fence, I can't really complain.

Edited by The Cheese
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, UMvC3 is considered simple?

Well damn, I must just suck at fighting games then.

Simple button layout, the gameplay is still a hyper yet mesmerizing clusterfuck.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.