Support NeoGAF

[SixMachine]

I don't play fighting games much these days but didn't Tekken have a training mode where you would learn all the moves indivdually? Something like that in every fightung game would go a long way in helping new players along without angering vets.

I think what people have problems with is trying to find out the utility of the move. I believe DOA has the exercise where you can go through each move and tekken has the move showcase to show you how it looks like, but in these games you pick out the ones that you would use in situations the most and you don't need every single move in the 100+ list.

Like if someone picked Abel, they look at this move list and see the command roll. A new player wouldn't really know what to use it for and set it up, they either need to experiment it with it a lot to see it's properties and setups or look up an alternative resource like the Abel thread in SRK to see how it works. The player has to keep in mind what is current because what one person might know about a move one day, might completely change the next if they find out that it could be countered 100% of the time or that there was a really good setup for it.

I was wondering, with the advent of online media and always being connected, what if players set up mentoring groups in game. I know people do that in character threads and all that on sites, but online have players that have proven themselves with a character (I know BP or whatever isn't an accurate measure of skill) could gain some mentor status to help people who want help in the newbie training mode. Like imagine a mode in like SF5, where a proven player online could have an incentive to help players who registers themselves as willing to learn new players, then they could match up and have training sessions together or something, which is actually not unlike how you see pro players in other games like Starcraft have payed lessons with people by matching up then giving tips based on observations (yea they had these haha. I think Gootecks used to do this with SF4). It could be a unique way of having the in game community make itself grow.

 

[Big0Bear]

Too many characters. That is the problem. Learning 30-60 matchups from the start is kinda daunting.

I prefer having around 20-25 chars and more via DLC addons (ala Super Sf4) that brings new fighters, stages, optionally modes and a big rebalance.

I think Dlc ruins the experience, all characters and content should be included in the game and after that they should focus on fixing gliches and things not nerfs or buffs though people should learn the game before crying about characters

 

[MikeBreezy92]

Too many characters. That is the problem. Learning 30-60 matchups from the start is kinda daunting.

I prefer having around 20-25 chars and more via DLC addons (ala Super Sf4) that brings new fighters, stages, optionally modes and a big rebalance.

that's not a general problem though

 

[Zukuu]

that's not a general problem though

Most longer running series have that problem tho. Look at Tekken's cast or SF4. It'll only grow and grow and they seem to almost include all characters in their games. Hope SF5 will reduce the initial cast, but will change them to make it a new experience (SF has done that quite well so I'm not really worried). Tekken on the other hand, stagnates and everything just gets more bloated. More and more characters with more and more moves. It's ridiculous. That's the reason Tekken doesn't attract new players. If you haven't played the game years ago, you won't start now all out of a sudden (well except due to the F2P approach).

Persona is actually a neat example of a easy to play, hard to master fighter. You have many system mechanism to play around, even tho the characters are rather limited in options.

I think Dlc ruins the experience, all characters and content should be included in the game and after that they should focus on fixing gliches and things not nerfs or buffs though people should learn the game before crying about characters

I'm not speaking about the normal DLC approach (like Mortal Kombat / Injustice). That's terrible. A Super Street Fighter 4 / Arcade Edition approach is pretty good tho. Keeps the game fresh and adds new content. A major rebalance (like v12 / v13) should happen once a year. In between fix glitches and only alter very obvious misbalanced stuff.

 

[catstronaut]

I don't think they're too obtuse, they just have too many technical barriers to gameplay. Precisely linking chains, etc, things that require hours in training mode before a new player can get them down. Developers should focus more on the mental aspect rather than the physical inputs.

 

[PsychoSoldier]

I think a general problem for some people (me included) is that most of my friends and family don't like playing fighters much if at all and thus I'm stuck with playing just single player (which gets boring pretty quickly) or opening yourself up to randoms online. Which would be fine except for the fact that the matchmaking is extremely uneven so sometimes you go from no challenge to someone way out of your league, thus the aforementioned problem of it being somewhat hard to get a sense of your progress.

I think it's probably just the nature of a mature game (in this case SFIV), but I've personally had a hard time finding people just messing around even in player matches, which is honestly more of what I want.

 

[Zukuu]

I don't think they're too obtuse, they just have too many technical barriers to gameplay. Precisely linking chains, etc, things that require hours in training mode before a new player can get them down. Developers should focus more on the mental aspect rather than the physical inputs.

I found SFxT to be rather good in that aspect. Remove 1F bnbs from your fighters (see Rufus in SF4) unless it's the optimum but still optional combo (Cody in SF4 cl.hp, c.mp does less damage but is easier than f.mp, cl.mp, c.hp). I like the general combo concept of SFxT in terms of difficulty.

Don't make it too casual tho. Shortcuts in SF4 + SFxT are gameplay impacting.

 

[shadowstar]

I think what people have problems with is trying to find out the utility of the move. I believe DOA has the exercise where you can go through each move and tekken has the move showcase to show you how it looks like, but in these games you pick out the ones that you would use in situations the most and you don't need every single move in the 100+ list.

Like if someone picked Abel, they look at this move list and see the command roll. A new player wouldn't really know what to use it for and set it up, they either need to experiment it with it a lot to see it's properties and setups or look up an alternative resource like the Abel thread in SRK to see how it works. The player has to keep in mind what is current because what one person might know about a move one day, might completely change the next if they find out that it could be countered 100% of the time or that there was a really good setup for it.

I was wondering, with the advent of online media and always being connected, what if players set up mentoring groups in game. I know people do that in character threads and all that on sites, but online have players that have proven themselves with a character (I know BP or whatever isn't an accurate measure of skill) could gain some mentor status to help people who want help in the newbie training mode. Like imagine a mode in like SF5, where a proven player online could have an incentive to help players who registers themselves as willing to learn new players, then they could match up and have training sessions together or something, which is actually not unlike how you see pro players in other games like Starcraft have payed lessons with people by matching up then giving tips based on observations (yea they had these haha. I think Gootecks used to do this with SF4). It could be a unique way of having the in game community make itself grow.

That is a huge thing to ask of a person. I mean these are real people with real lives. Spending individual time to teach an individual player... tutoring is an actual job you can't just ask people to do it like that. This is just not realistic to where it would grow the community. At this point, why aren't you using facebook to meet real people and join in some casuals?

The realistic option is what is done by pros. Examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf_OlFBwCHg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7Se1I2K2I8

 

[MikeBreezy92]

Most longer running series have that problem tho. Look at Tekken's cast or SF4. It'll only grow and grow and they seem to almost include all characters in their games. Hope SF5 will reduce the initial cast, but will change them to make it a new experience (SF has done that quite well so I'm not really worried). Tekken on the other hand, stagnates and everything just gets more bloated. More and more characters with more and more moves. It's ridiculous. That's the reason Tekken doesn't attract new players. If you haven't played the game years ago, you won't start now all out of a sudden (well except due to the F2P approach).

Nah its mostly a Tekken problem. Due to the LARGE amount of shit you need to know, the large character list is counter-productive. SF4 doesn't have that problem since its easier to learn matchups because there isn't that much to learn.

If I were to actually want to play SF4 I wouldn't mind the larger cast, in 3D fighters where there are a lot more variables....nah....

 

[bishopcruz]

Fighting games have gotten to this weird place where it feels like they are more hardcore than they have ever been, even if it is easier to get into them than ever. I think part of the reason for it is that with online matches there really isn't a sense of community, and the anonymity hurts a lot as well. Back in the day with Arcades, at least where I used to play I'd go a couple of times a week maybe, often less a go to play against whoever was there. It definitely felt that there was a lot more of a even playing field. It was a fun, comeptitve, but casual experience.

I still love fighters, but I have also learned that there are certain ones that I will always suck at. I can kinda hold my own with Ryu when I play SF4 without having to get into the intricacies of the systems, and that is when I have the most fun with the game. Part of my problem is outside of some extremely basic combos I just can't learn a lot of the execution heavy combos, hell I STILL after days of trying can't finish all of the combos that are in the tutorial section of the game, I don't know what I am doing wrong, but my fingers just refuse to obey.

I can live with that, but it always seems that I end up in the horrible position, of either completely owning the guys who suck, or getting my ass handed to me by people who are good at execution. It also helps when I find games that just click with me. FOr example VF and DoA are my 3d jams, and SFIV and KoF tend to be my 2d ones. I really wish I had it in me to be good at the vs games, but I swear, while I love playing them, I will never not suck.

So the best advice I would give to the OP would be find the games that suit your style, one will hopefully click, and you can have fun, even if you never get to the advanced stages.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

I think its mostly people just getting their ass kicked online and reality setting in. Same happened to FPSs on Consoles.

 

[Zukuu]

Nah its mostly a Tekken problem. Due to the LARGE amount of shit you need to know, the large character list is counter-productive. SF4 doesn't have that problem since its easier to learn matchups because there isn't that much to learn.

If I were to actually want to play SF4 I wouldn't mind the larger cast, in 3D fighters where there are a lot more variables....nah....

SF4, on a more serious level, has so much info you need to know about, it's by NO means "easy". Character and/or position specific combos and setups alone are a huge thing to remember. And you need the setups against YOUR character as well. Frame data is mandatory to know for the whole cast for both games anyway.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

SF4, on a more serious level, has so much info you need to know about, it's by NO means "easy". Character and/or position specific combos and setups alone are a huge thing to remember. And you need the setups against YOUR character as well. Frame data is mandatory to know for the whole cast for both games anyway.

Of course, but Tekken still has more variables to consider when it comes to character matchups, which was my point. Im not saying its easy, lord knows it isn't. Im saying its easier to learn matchups in SF4 than Tekken.

 

[Ken]

So if you had a real life mentor and he told you to punish at an opportune time it would be wrong and lazy? If the game can teach a player how it's systems work that's great for people who would not figure it out on their own.

In the best situation, the game would teach players how its systems work in tutorials and outside of real matches, and the player would then learn to apply the systems to specific experiences. That obviously doesn't happen enough so it's down to player experience and external help.

Punishing certain moves is kind of a combination of the knowledge of systems and recognizing visual cues. Does player B have enough meter or special moves to make that whiffed move safe? If you include too obvious a visual cue by the CPU that the whiff can be safely punished, you kind of train the player to just look for said visual cue rather than well, everything else. If you go a step further and provide possible options, you can end up with flowcharts.

Not to say all obvious visual cues are bad; I appreciate P4A/BB's throw escape window exclamation point. There's only two direct outcomes from a throw AFAIK: you get thrown or you escape it. They also include visual cues for getting hit by unblockables; see it enough and you would hopefully stop repeating whatever you're doing to get hit by them.

 

[Tomat]

I was talking to someone earlier about this thread and the mentioned that developers have tried to make fighting games easier to play with games like Marvel 3 and Injustice.

Is that true, and if so, why aren't people who think fighting games too hard flocking to those?

 

[SixMachine]

That is a huge thing to ask of a person. I mean these are real people with real lives. Spending individual time to teach an individual player... tutoring is an actual job you can't just ask people to do it like that. This is just not realistic to where it would grow the community. At this point, why aren't you using facebook to meet real people and join in some casuals?

The realistic option is what is done by pros. Examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf_OlFBwCHg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7Se1I2K2I8

Well I'm not asking about burdening a player but in a way I was sort of inspired by more innovative multiplayer experiences these day. Like in Dark Souls, some people become Sun Bros to help other people. I was thinking like some players can get some points (I dunno it has to be something not tied to ranking. But what if there were mentor points, or if there was some in game currency like Tekken to buy costumes), they can volunteer to go matchup with a newbie to show them the ropes. And it wouldn't be a handful of people and not exclusive to pros, since we can still learn a lot from our everyman peers, but say, once you break in the top 10% with a certain character you could be viable to be a mentor to gain these type of points. Or maybe they could have a system like the comment system, where they can watch a video someone posts up for advice, then share some tips that the owner can decide to upvote that helped them.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

I was talking to someone earlier about this thread and the mentioned that developers have tried to make fighting games easier to play with games like Marvel 3 and Injustice.

Is that true, and if so, why aren't people who think fighting games too hard flocking to those?

Becuase its still to hard.

 

[Big0Bear]

I'm not speaking about the normal DLC approach (like Mortal Kombat / Injustice). That's terrible. A Super Street Fighter 4 / Arcade Edition approach is pretty good tho. Keeps the game fresh and adds new content. A major rebalance (like v12 / v13) should happen once a year. In between fix glitches and only alter very obvious misbalanced stuff.

Yea I get that but capcom did the same thing selling Shuma and Jill and sfxt updates are cool but costumes characters and everything else should be in game I think.

 

[gutter_trash]

I was talking to someone earlier about this thread and the mentioned that developers have tried to make fighting games easier to play with games like Marvel 3 and Injustice.

Is that true, and if so, why aren't people who think fighting games too hard flocking to those?

MvC3 isn't easier than MvC2, it's actually more convoluted with more unorthodox characters than straight ahead characters

 

[MikeBreezy92]

I don't think DLC is bad for Fighting Games either. Be it characters, customs, or etc.

 

[shadowstar]

Well I'm not asking about burdening a player but in a way I was sort of inspired by more innovative multiplayer experiences these day. Like in Dark Souls, some people become Sun Bros to help other people. I was thinking like some players can get some points (I dunno it has to be something not tied to ranking. But what if there were mentor points, or if there was some in game currency like Tekken to buy costumes), they can volunteer to go matchup with a newbie to show them the ropes. And it wouldn't be a handful of people and not exclusive to pros, since we can still learn a lot from our everyman peers, but say, once you break in the top 10% with a certain character you could be viable to be a mentor to gain these type of points. Or maybe they could have a system like the comment system, where they can watch a video someone posts up for advice, then share some tips that the owner can decide to upvote that helped them.

This seems like a really convoluted way of just going to a forum like this one and saying in the fighting game topic (or specific game topic) "hey I'm new, anyone free to help a newbie out?" You're guaranteed to have plenty of people willing to help you out and I mean, you already post here what is the issue with posting in one more thread? Additionally you'll now be a part of a community of gamers with like minded interests.

As for the videos, people already do that. Players post videos on various fighting game forums and ask for advice all the time. Granted right now there is no way to directly upload your matches, but that's a limitation of console gaming.

 

[PsychoSoldier]

I was talking to someone earlier about this thread and the mentioned that developers have tried to make fighting games easier to play with games like Marvel 3 and Injustice.

Is that true, and if so, why aren't people who think fighting games too hard flocking to those?

Marvel 3 may be easier than SFIV in a technical sense but I would argue it's actually harder in others. I didn't really enjoy my time in Marvel, personally.

Couldn't say for Injustice but as I didn't like Mortal Kombat and I could care less about most of those characters it's not something I've looked at seriously.

 

[SixMachine]

This seems like a really convoluted way of just going to a forum like this one and saying in the fighting game topic (or specific game topic) "hey I'm new, anyone free to help a newbie out?" You're guaranteed to have plenty of people willing to help you out and I mean, you already post here what is the issue with posting in one more thread? Additionally you'll now be a part of a community of gamers with like minded interests.

As for the videos, people already do that. Players post videos on various fighting game forums and ask for advice all the time. Granted right now there is no way to directly upload your matches, but that's a limitation of console gaming.

These recommendations aren't for me, I already go to my local monthly meetups, post on forums, and all that. I just know that there many players who will not use an outside resource and maybe they can learn from the resource within the confines of the game. I started thinking all this because since the next generation of consoles wanted to integrate more media, there could be ways this could be integrated in FGs. Since there will be streaming and video recording options, I don't see why it won't hurt if you can somehow just post up a match vid that you would like critiquing right at your console in game. Like if you hate the Morridoom matchup, you can post a vid of your effort and have players try to comment and discuss, so you can get better ideas, and maybe do something like upvote to promote a player to go around to do the same.

A lot of people are actually kind of gun shy when it comes to competition (I've heard, "But I don't know how to play, I'll get bodied at this game"), but if someone wants to help them they won't turn away if the opportunity comes. Just from experience I've seen people just sit around and eye the game I was playing, and it's until I actually turned around and asked them if they want to try, they might actually like trying the game out, knowing that they would be learning, and not just getting bodied in something they are trying to learn.

I know you are thinking what the point is, but I think if a developer can easily get the community to support itself in the game, instead of expecting everyone to go to an outside resource (since the more casual people won't take the effort to do that), it can help retain players if there ways to help cultivate them on the spot. Granted it needs much working out, but since many social aspects on the internet and connections are growing popular, I don't see why not try to innovate and integrate players in such a manner.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

There definitely needs to be more community/developer relations though.

 

[ReiGun]

I was talking to someone earlier about this thread and the mentioned that developers have tried to make fighting games easier to play with games like Marvel 3 and Injustice.

Is that true, and if so, why aren't people who think fighting games too hard flocking to those?

Of all the current big fighting games, Marvel 3 is one of, if not the most, difficult. You could lose an entire match in seconds and have no idea what you did wrong. It does appear accessible because it's big and flashy and hey, it has Marvel characters; how hard can it be? They also included a simple mode for players who don't want to take the time to learn execution and all that, but it severely gimps your characters.

I can't speak too in depth on Injustice because much to my chagrin, I don't own it. The game got some flack early on from casual players because of Deathstroke, a character with a pretty braindead keepaway strategy at lower levels; of course, this crosses over into that tricky territory of players just not wanting to learn how to play and win. Beyond that, the game seems simple enough. Being related to MK has helped it; the Mortal Kombat series has a rep among casual players for being much easier to play than SF.

I think most casual players are flocking to these games because of the licenses. Players are more willing to overlook any difficulty problems they may have with these two because they can at least enjoy seeing Spider-Man/Superman punch Wolverine/The Flash in the face. And maybe that's something else fighters can look into; if you're not going to "dumb it down" or include better teaching tools, then you can include something else that casual players can have just as much fun with. I think they're trying already, what with how popular super moves have become.

I think the match making point someone made earlier is also pretty key. Giving players more options to better ensure they're being matched up online with players of equal skill, dedication. You'll never come up with a fool-proof method, but all players should feel like they can jump online and have a good time.

There definitely needs to be more community/developer relations though.

Injustice has been great about this. The official facebook and twitter pages as well as Ed Boon himself have done a lot to highlight the efforts of the community and interact with players.

 

[shadowstar]

These recommendations aren't for me, I already go to my local monthly meetups, post on forums, and all that. I just know that there many players who will not use an outside resource and maybe they can learn from the resource within the confines of the game. I started thinking all this because since the next generation of consoles wanted to integrate more media, there could be ways this could be integrated in FGs. Since there will be streaming and video recording options, I don't see why it won't hurt if you can somehow just post up a match vid that you would like critiquing right at your console in game. Like if you hate the Morridoom matchup, you can post a vid of your effort and have players try to comment and discuss, so you can get better ideas, and maybe do something like upvote to promote a player to go around to do the same.

A lot of people are actually kind of gun shy when it comes to competition (I've heard, "But I don't know how to play, I'll get bodied at this game"), but if someone wants to help them they won't turn away if the opportunity comes. Just from experience I've seen people just sit around and eye the game I was playing, and it's until I actually turned around and asked them if they want to try, they might actually like trying the game out, knowing that they would be learning, and not just getting bodied in something they are trying to learn.

I know you are thinking what the point is, but I think if a developer can easily get the community to support itself in the game, instead of expecting everyone to go to an outside resource (since the more casual people won't take the effort to do that), it can help retain players if there ways to help cultivate them on the spot. Granted it needs much working out, but since many social aspects on the internet and connections are growing popular, I don't see why not try to innovate and integrate players in such a manner.

I definitely think the community will take advantage of these recording and social options, but it will still be up to the individual to seek out help. That's the issue and what this topic is partly about, people don't want the social interactions. They want the game to just tell them what to do in every moment like its a concrete thing every time. They don't want to take the time to learn, don't want an execution barrier, don't want to interact with anything but the game. The game should somehow teach every person every single thing possible for every situation. The people who will take advantage of these features are the same people who go look up info or ask questions right now. They are the people who look at character threads or buy the guides. The ones who are quitting right now, who are complaining in this thread, think this effort is too much. They quit before they even start and will do so even if they can upload videos.

I don't think anyone will disagree with you on having the system to upload this stuff and integrate social media to ask questions to a group or community. It's just that this doesn't exist now and we're partially discussing games out now and games that will come out. If that was what the main post was about, I don't think anyone would disagree.

 

[teh_J0kerer]

OP, this is why street fighter 2 is still the best fighting game ever made.

The demand for tons of "systems" in fighting games is from players who think they're hardcore and are confusing depth with surface area.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

OP, this is why street fighter 2 is still the best fighting game ever made.

The demand for tons of "systems" in fighting games is from players who think they're hardcore and are confusing depth with surface area.

No one demanded them or even asks for them , Developers put them in and it became a common Fighting Game trope.

 

[thesolidshark]

OP, this is why street fighter 2 is still the best fighting game ever made.

The demand for tons of "systems" in fighting games is from players who think they're hardcore and are confusing depth with surface area.

Not sure about "tons" of systems, but I would've demanded things being changed up, especially after all the SF2 releases, despite their changes over ever iteration.

But tons of systems doesn't mean everything in the game has to be utilized. A lot of victories I've had in fighters lately are based on the characters and what they can do, while all the systems act as support.

 

[GuardianE]

You know, all these people advocating a simpler fighting game system, and I completely forgot about PSASBR. I was reminded of it because people are figuring out why the game tanked.

So, yeah. All you guys should have picked up PSASBR if proper execution is such a bane for you.

 

[teh_J0kerer]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

 

[MikeBreezy92]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

cough3Dfighterscough

 

[QisTopTier]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

Because SF2 exist, we don't need another SF2 just play freaking SF2

cough3Dfighterscough

Nah man they got juggles and stuff that's not basic! Oh and Tekken has low parries that totally throws what he is saying out the window. He litterally is asking for Normals, Throws, specials *hadokens and stuff* and NOTHING else. Aka he's nostalgic and can't tell if a good game bit him in the ass.

 

[Polioliolio]

I was talking to my girlfriend earlier about this, so funny to see it here.

Traditional fighting games certainly have my nostalgia, but when it comes to even modern fighting games like Street Fighter IV, I hate that I have to look in an instruction book to be able to pull off moves.. Usually I just spam two or three typical patterns trying to get moves off... It's just.. unpleasant. I get that some people love it, but I've never been a huge fan, though I've certainly enjoyed dozens of them.

I think my two favorite fighting games have been Dead or Alive 2 and Smash Bros. The moves are fairly simple, easy to understand, but you can still have a strong understanding and grasp on the game.. I'm also going to throw Bushido Blade 2 in here... Love these fighting games where the moves are are simple as a button press, but using them correctly is up to you.

These days I totally can't stand that abstract button combo shit.

 

[SapientWolf]

OP, this is why street fighter 2 is still the best fighting game ever made.

The demand for tons of "systems" in fighting games is from players who think they're hardcore and are confusing depth with surface area.

A lot of it is so mid-tier players can lord over raw beginners. Daigo's still gonna Daigo, systems be damned.

 

[oneida]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

Not so much "system being defined by characters' moves", but not all series have resorted to 6 gauges and a dozen little systems to remain interesting:

 

[Clawww]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

how familiar are you with SF2? you're acting like there aren't tons of esoteric mechanics, tricks, and exploits.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

Ahhh...VF is really a legit game...I almost hate that I love Tekken more.

 

[oneida]

Ahhh...VF is really a legit game...I almost hate that I love Tekken more.

It's cool man. #team3d

 

[teh_J0kerer]

how familiar are you with SF2? you're acting like there aren't tons of esoteric mechanics, tricks, and exploits.

I'm an expert level player at sf2.. yes I know there's lots of hard tricks you can pull off.. but it's not very important to the most important aspects of the game.. and there are plenty of characters that don't have to worry about that stuff at all.

imo by far the most important difficult thing that you have to do to be competitive at sf2 is safe jumps. And sure, I'd make that easier in my imaginary new fighting game.

I'm not saying sf2 is perfect, that's why I'd like to see a new game that builds on the foundation that it created, without adding any gimmicks.

 

[patapuf]

I agree that some fighting games have a hard execution barrier for basic stuff.And it has discouraged me from playing some.

However there are enough games with low entry barrier. Dead or Alive has easy inputs for the most part, smash was mentioned, i think the mortal combat/injustice games have easy basics as well.

Just pick the right games. Some practice for the advanced stuff will always be required though. But that's true of any competitive game.

 

[Neff]

Fighting games are 1/3 execution, 1/3 knowing your opponent, and 1/3 knowing the game.

The biggest obstacle is always going to be execution. If your reactions and dexterity aren't up to scratch, you're already at a disadvantage, and you're going to have to put in practice. This can take time. But it's something basically anyone can learn.

Knowing your opponent is much simpler. CPU opponents have a limited set of situation sensitive reactions which eventually become quite predictable. If a human opponent has a simple, spammy style, you've read them in a round. If you're going up against someone who is much more versatile, you can still watch for tells and get inside their head. Then in turn they'll find out how to beat what you did. And on it goes.

Knowing the game is about finding a good foundation that works for you. You don't need to memorise every move in the game. Just put together a small toolset that starts getting you wins. When that toolset fails, add to it. Don't be overwhelmed by the movelists, most characters in 3D fighters only have about a dozen or so AAA moves. The rest are there simply to get around various playstyles and to assist mixups/unpredictability.

That's the key thing to bear in mind. Every fighting game is always changing. So don't feel like you're ever being left behind, because even the best players in the world are, too.

 

[CPS2]

I think players just expect a lot of systems now, you probably wouldn't be able to make a game like SF2 at this point. And none of these games are hard to get into, they just do require some time and a mindset that a lot of gamers don't have. I think of each character as being more complex than most player controlled characters in single player games. So each character probably requires more effort than you'd usually exert in a single player game. And you don't get the same type of rewards as single player games (which are trending more and more towards patting you on the back for doing nothing). There's always room for improvement but I think a lot of fighters could stand to be more complex, obtuse, etc.

 

[Fraeon]

Fighting games are 1/3 execution, 1/3 knowing your opponent, and 1/3 knowing the game.

The biggest obstacle is always going to be execution. If your reactions and dexterity aren't up to scratch, you're already at a disadvantage, and you're going to have to put in practice. This can take time. But it's something basically anyone can learn.

Knowing your opponent is much simpler. CPU opponents have a limited set of situation sensitive reactions which eventually become quite predictable. If a human opponent has a simple, spammy style, you've read them in a round. If you're going up against someone who is much more versatile, you can still watch for tells and get inside their head. Then in turn they'll find out how to beat what you did. And on it goes.

Knowing the game is about finding a good foundation that works for you. You don't need to memorise every move in the game. Just put together a small toolset that starts getting you wins. When that toolset fails, add to it. Don't be overwhelmed by the movelists, most characters in 3D fighters only have about a dozen or so AAA moves. The rest are there simply to get around various playstyles and to assist mixups/unpredictability.

I don't know. Execution and knowing the game are things you can obviously grind out. Opponents, though... that's the hardest part because every player you're up against is going to have a subtly different style even though they might use a familiar framework for it (e.g. "this guy is defensive and likes to actively keep me away" as opposed to "this guy is defensive and likes to run away" and "this player actively shuts my mid-range game down by constantly poking").

But yeah, out of the new ones, DOA5 and VF5 are pretty simplistic as far as the basic system goes. SF3 is also quite simple, it's just there are people out there who have that game down to a science.

There's nothing wrong with being fine just hitting buttons against a CPU or a friend, though.

 

[crazygambit]

A physics based fighting game would not work for a competitive environment beause of changing variables. Plus, relating to this thread, who would take the risk of reinventing the fighting game formula when people want more of the same?

First of all, so what? Not every fighting game needs to be able to be played competitively to be fun or have a market. I'd argue is the obsession of the competitive scene that's keeping the genre niche (but that's a whole other thread).

Second, I disagree. A game doesn't need to be complete deterministic to be competitive. Both chess and poker are competitive games with lots of tournaments for both. Even though poker is not completely deterministic like chess, the better player wins enough of the time to be considered a game of skill.

Part of the fun in skill in such a game would be adapting to what's happening in the game rather than have a table of frame advantages memorized. I'd love to see a fighting game that did away with those. Anything new to bring new life to the genre is fine by me to be honest.

 

[MikeBreezy92]

First of all, so what? Not every fighting game needs to be able to be played competitively to be fun or have a market. I'd argue is the obsession of the competitive scene that's keeping the genre niche (but that's a whole other thread).

Second, I disagree. A game doesn't need to be complete deterministic to be competitive. Both chess and poker are competitive games with lots of tournaments for both. Even though poker is not completely deterministic like chess, the better player wins enough of the time to be considered a game of skill.

Part of the fun in skill in such a game would be adapting to what's happening in the game rather than have a table of frame advantages memorized. I'd love to see a fighting game that did away with those. Anything new to bring new life to the genre is fine by me to be honest.

The problem is that a game needs to be somewhat balanced regardless if anyone is playing the game competitively or not. And since fighting games are competitive by nature well...you really can't just take shit out like that. Especially frames since ALL video games tend to work by them...honestly I just don't think you know how fighting games work.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

First of all, so what? Not every fighting game needs to be able to be played competitively to be fun or have a market. I'd argue is the obsession of the competitive scene that's keeping the genre niche (but that's a whole other thread).

Second, I disagree. A game doesn't need to be complete deterministic to be competitive. Both chess and poker are competitive games with lots of tournaments for both. Even though poker is not completely deterministic like chess, the better player wins enough of the time to be considered a game of skill.

Part of the fun in skill in such a game would be adapting to what's happening in the game rather than have a table of frame advantages memorized. I'd love to see a fighting game that did away with those. Anything new to bring new life to the genre is fine by me to be honest.

I agree that not every fighting game needs to be competitive to be fun, but I disagree about the market part. When it comes to fighting games, people either want to play ones that they are familiar with or that have characters they know.

And comparing a physics-based fighter to chess doesn't work. The element of physics would make things unpredictable: a punch would not always have the same elements of knockback, damage and frame data. What makes chess competitive is that there is no random element to it: pieces will always act the same way in every game and the chess board will as well.

Adapting to arbitrary randomness doesn't work in a competitive arena. You have no control for when you would trip in Super Smash Bros. Brawl, for example, and it could occur during a critical moment when you would land a finishing blow on your opponent but instead you would get killed. That's not a question of adaptation; it's pure luck.

 

[ScOULaris]

It's amazing to me that in all the years since sf2, there hasn't been a single other high quality fighting game to come out where the entire system is defined by each character's moves and how they control space on the screen. No chaotic multiple character crap, no alpha this or that, no custom combos, no focus dash cancel, invincible dashes, whatever else. Just methodical 1v1 fighting with normals and specials that control screen space in a variety of interesting ways. Why is that so much to ask for?

Divekick is the answer, my friend.

 

[Skilletor]

First of all, so what? Not every fighting game needs to be able to be played competitively to be fun or have a market. I'd argue is the obsession of the competitive scene that's keeping the genre niche (but that's a whole other thread).

Second, I disagree. A game doesn't need to be complete deterministic to be competitive. Both chess and poker are competitive games with lots of tournaments for both. Even though poker is not completely deterministic like chess, the better player wins enough of the time to be considered a game of skill.

Part of the fun in skill in such a game would be adapting to what's happening in the game rather than have a table of frame advantages memorized. I'd love to see a fighting game that did away with those. Anything new to bring new life to the genre is fine by me to be honest.

But people keep telling me the competitive scene doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. How can the competitive scene hold anything back?

It is, after all, the casual market that makes up the majority of the sales. Are you telling me that the small percentage of people who are the competitive scene are holding fighters back? How does that make sense when they are not the bulk of the money?

 

[crazygambit]

I agree that not every fighting game needs to be competitive to be fun, but I disagree about the market part. When it comes to fighting games, people either want to play ones that they are familiar with or that have characters they know.

And comparing a physics-based fighter to chess doesn't work. The element of physics would make things unpredictable: a punch would not always have the same elements of knockback, damage and frame data. What makes chess competitive is that there is no random element to it: pieces will always act the same way in every game and the chess board will as well.

Adapting to arbitrary randomness doesn't work in a competitive arena. You have no control for when you would trip in Super Smash Bros. Brawl, for example, and it could occur during a critical moment when you would land a finishing blow on your opponent but instead you would get killed. That's not a question of adaptation; it's pure luck.

That's why I was comparing it to poker, chess being the current standard of fighting games (no arbitrary randomness). In Poker luck is involved, yet skill still rules and thus the game is extremely competitive.

It doesn't even have to be random either, it could be as simple as affecting the power and delay of a punch by how long you press the button (since we no longer will have analog buttons next gen).

The point is fighting games are still build with the arcade in mind and thus use arcade sticks. What if for example a new fighting game was build with console controllers in mind. Dual analog sticks and all. It would have to be massively different from what we have now, but I bet it would be interesting.

You guys have been playing and looking at the same kind of games for decades now that you can't take a step back and think outside the box a little.

Edit:

The problem is that a game needs to be somewhat balanced regardless if anyone is playing the game competitively or not. And since fighting games are competitive by nature well...you really can't just take shit out like that. Especially frames since ALL video games tend to work by them...honestly I just don't think you know how fighting games work.

Yes you can. Just because no one has done it successfully yet doesn't mean it's impossible. Maybe fighters could be a little more realistic.

Is every jab you throw exactly the same in real life? Not even close. Then why do they have to be exactly the same number of frames every time? Right now balance, but if you design something from the ground up with the variability in mind, it could work.