• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fighting Games Weekly | Oct 7-13 | Sharing magical moments in cyberspace

M

Mr. X

Member
There's a lot of indie/community made fighters out and coming out. I'd get over known devs/pubs hibernating their fighters if they choose to.

Superarcade USF4 *mumble*
 
V

vulva

Member
About USF4 not being at NYCC, was it ever announced that it would be? I can't remember that being announced, but I've been out of the loop for a month or so now
 
A

alstein

Member
Kumubou said:
I think the reason is that it's a game and a genre that has both shown a fair amount of staying power (DotA was originally released what, 10 years ago? The genre has seen nothing but growth since then.) and is a genre with a learning curve that's just as nasty as fighting games, but seems to pull in a massive player base despite that. It's worth looking at -- even though there are going to be significant differences as well.

The issue is that, fundamentally, investing in a fighting game makes little sense for a publisher. The genre is marginal as it is and just doesn't represent a good return on investment, especially as it seems difficult to either reduce costs or raise revenues (the latter is probably easier to solve, but doing so without having your core players revolt is a challenge). Who is making money with fighting games right now? NRS/WB seems to be doing OK and... who else? Capcom? They might be able to, but they're so badly hobbled by other mistakes that it seems like they don't have the resources needed (and if they quotes from jason_24cf is even remotely close, they may not have the the core competencies required right now). Namco has seen some ugly trends with both Tekken and SC as of late. Sega is Sega (and it's unclear if they would even want to touch any of their FGs outside of Japan), and the smaller, more boutique developers (like ArcSys, Examu, French Bread) are too small and are too focused on Japan to really be relevant internationally.
Click to expand...

One huge fundamental difference between fighters and LOL/DOTA.

Fighters are individual, LOL/DOTA is team.

With a team game, you can be carried to a win even if you suck, or you can blame teammates if you lose. Can't do that with fighters, so your losses hurt a lot more.
 
E

Edgeward

Member
That's why I like fighters over team games. I don't want to depend on people or have anything contribute to my win or loss other than my own skills
 
C

casperOne

Member
Edgeward said:
That's why I like fighters over team games. I don't want to depend on people or have anything contribute to my win or loss other than my own skills
Click to expand...

This brings back fond memories of SFxT at Evo 2012.

When Laugh and Infiltration were still friends...

The good ole days.

That shit was annoying as fuck to judge. Four way button checks and every round ended in a timeout, me with four (not the standard two) consoles and two brackets every two hours for eight hours straight. It's a miracle that tournament didn't run over in a massive way.
 
P

Professor Beef

Banned
Edgeward said:
That's why I like fighters over team games. I don't want to depend on people or have anything contribute to my win or loss other than my own skills
Click to expand...
It's why I hate Doubles in Smash. I swear to christ almighty I still hate everyone who bothered me at the last Smash tournament I went to in the friendlies area.
vulva said:
because one person said it might happen despite having no authority?
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
C

call_kotaku

Member
It's not strictly a matter of playing as part of a team so you can cushion the pain of a loss, but rather you're playing within your own objectives that may not necessarily relate to winning or losing. In a MOBA your ability to affect the outcome of a match is very limited, so usually people are just trying to land their ult or get a certain K/D or just "play well" by their own metrics. Same with team-based shooters, where you're just playing for a K/D ratio or more likely just to get enough EXP to unlock the next thing, and which team wins and by what margin is sort of irrelevant.

I don't see it as fighters being unappealing to gamers, but more like it hasn't optimized all that skinner box stuff that gaming is devolving into. It's sort of the logic behind absurd comeback mechanics and risk/reward scenarios in newer fighting games, so players can think "if I make 4 correct guesses in a row I can win!" (or "if I guessed X at Y I would've won!") and want to try their luck again, instead of having to reflect back on the mistake 6 seconds into the round that lost them the game, or think about the percentages on those 4 guesses they forced themselves into making.
 
S

SixMachine

Member
alstein said:
One huge fundamental difference between fighters and LOL/DOTA.

Fighters are individual, LOL/DOTA is team.

With a team game, you can be carried to a win even if you suck, or you can blame teammates if you lose. Can't do that with fighters, so your losses hurt a lot more.
Click to expand...

I think in general team games are much more popular than individual games. If you look at the most popular sports, it's stuff like football (or soccer) and basketball. The most popular 1v1 one game off the top of my head is tennis and less people play that than soccer (or football whatever name you prefer).

I also remember back when DFO was alive (even though it still is in Asia and still making Nexon over a billion bucks), if you go in pvp rooms people usually would have some form of team game. You can still find 1v1 (usually you find better people 1v1 from a first hand experience. You do get faster matches that way.) but stuff like 3v3s (think like KOF format except you can ping in and jump ahead of the queue on your team if you knew your next teammate had a bad matchup) were more common to me and you could find team games where everyone plays at once for fun. Thinking about it DFO was probably the closest thing to a fighting game that made the most money. The way they had costume avatars overlay the sprite made it cheap to produce costumes that basically came out every month.
 
F

FindMyFarms

Member
Had to share, this is too good lol

QzEYSzr.png
 
K

Kumubou

Member
I think Harada just solved the issue of broadening a fighting game's userbase.

SixMachine said:
I also remember back when DFO was alive (even though it still is in Asia and still making Nexon over a billion bucks), if you go in pvp rooms people usually would have some form of team game. You can still find 1v1 (usually you find better people 1v1 from a first hand experience. You do get faster matches that way.) but stuff like 3v3s (think like KOF format except you can ping in and jump ahead of the queue on your team if you knew your next teammate had a bad matchup) were more common to me and you could find team games where everyone plays at once for fun. Thinking about it DFO was probably the closest thing to a fighting game that made the most money. The way they had costume avatars overlay the sprite made it cheap to produce costumes that basically came out every month.
Click to expand...
DFO is a good example... but it's also a good example of how badly a company can misjudge a market. I still can't comprehend how Nexon was losing money on the US version of the game. They really screwed up how the game was handled here.
 
K

Karsticles

Member
Widening the customer base is way simpler than developers make it seem. There are five big reasons people leave fighting games:
1) They are FotM gamers; they were going to leave no matter what.
2) The game has gotten boring (how many Ryu mirrors is the average joe willing to play?).
3) The game's balance has become a serious issue.
4) The competition has gotten too good.
5) The netcode is not good enough for online play.

3/5 of these issues can be solved through post-release support, and developers need to understand that free post-release support is the expectation from people who buy fighting games. MOBAs do this just fine, and it's the same crowd of gamers that enjoy these games. 3) and 5) are killing Marvel, and 2) is killing Street Fighter.

Fighting games do not need to be watered down. No one is watering down LoL, DotA, and various FPS games. No one is giving the people who play these games crap like X-Factor, TACs, Ultras, and other gimmicks for the casual base, but people keep playing these games and learning them. They keep playing these games because they have a social component (team play), have great netcode, are continually rebalanced, and never get boring because each match is extremely different. How many fighting games can spout all four of these characteristics? I can't even think of a fighting game that has two of these characteristics.

If fighting games are dying, it's because the developers are not creating games good enough to keep the genre alive. While I love Marvel, I love Marvel like I love the only chinese buffet in town. It's the only way I have to satisfy a craving. The food is not great, but at least I got chinese. Real talk: Marvel has mediocre balance, and the netcode is just rotten. That the game still has a considerable active playerbase shows how much potential a game like this has, but most of the people I know got tired of being stomped by the "top tiers" in laggy games. Vergil is 10x more terrifying in lag.

It's downright embarrassing that major fighting game companies like NRS, Capcom, and SNK can't make netcode that feels better than the days when I played Diablo II on a 56k modem, but small companies like ASW and LabZero are knocking out of the part. These guys need to get their shit together and stop looking for gimmicks that will fix their products. They need to make solid products for a change. Fighting games are not like your factory-made AAA titles. They cannot get by on flashy graphics and QTE interactives to impress the masses. They need to actually be good games, and most companies don't know how to make one of those anymore.
 
O

onionfrog

Member
I'd like to add a few things to the list:

Karsticles said:
There are five seven big reasons people leave fighting games:
1) They are FotM gamers; they were going to leave no matter what.
2) The game has gotten boring (how many Ryu mirrors is the average joe willing to play?).
3) The game's balance has become a serious issue.
4) The competition has gotten too good.
5) The netcode is not good enough for online play.
6) The game has been patched too often. (NRS)
7) The base game was incomplete, poorly balanced and full of horrible on disc DLC. (SFxT)
Click to expand...

While these are definitely good points on why many people leave fighting games, I think different changes would help to appeal to a broader audience.

For example:

-A well done single player story mode. (NRS). Obviously we consider a single player story mode uneccessary, but your average consumer loves that shit and it'll drive sales when a game first releases.

-More in depth tutorials for new players. Not just combo trials like many game currently have. (Most of which are odd, impractical combos). I think a game with a series of trials that teach a player how to deal with "habdouken spammers" and zoning in general would be a great idea. It might help your average user to learn how to deal with zoning instead of just bitching about it and calling other players cheap.
Maybe some trials on mix ups, cross unders, and unblockable setups too. Also one to explain hit/hurt boxes.

-Allow the players to update their game to the newest version for a nominal fee instead of having to buy a new disc. (SF4 AE, USF4)

-More content that is Unlockable through normal play. Costumes, alternate music tracks, alt colors... Etc (See NRS, they usually include at least one alt costume per character that is Unlockable, not paid for)

-Continued support and expansions.

-Better Netcode, hopefully that shit will be smooth next gen. I agree with you that netcode in some games is just laughable. (UMVC3, Kof13)
 
C

casperOne

Member
onionfrog said:
full of horrible on disc DLC.
Click to expand...

I really wish this would stop being tossed around (BTW, I'm not singling you out onionfrog, just the argument in general, please don't take any of this personally).

The game isn't just what you get on the disc. A game is comprised of many pieces: the disc, patches, data updates from online, etc.

The position that a game has problems because (or that someone becomes frustrated over the fact that) it has content on disc doesn't make sense to me..

When you purchase a game, you're entering into a contract. You say you're going to fork over your $60/$40/$20/whatever and in return, you're going to get the game as advertised.

The extra content on disc that supports expansion of the game (whether that expansion is in the engine, the characters, or whatever) isn't included in that contract because it isn't advertised.

What is in the initial contract is usually that there will be a mechanism in the game to get future content (whether it's true DLC or pseudo-DLC characters, stages, changes to the engine) under a new contract.

That's it.

What's surprising to me is that when people found that there were incomplete models in Marvel which were then able to be purchased/unlocked to their full potential, people threw a fit.

However, when you bought Super Street Fighter 4, it had code in it that allowed entire parts of the engine to be replaced (that upgrade engine has been used for AE, AE 2012, and will be used for Ultra, because you can go from Super -> Ultra) but no one made a stink about that when that engine was used to charge $20 for the upgrade to AE.

They're the same exact mechanisms; there's code on the disc that allows for expansion of the game later.

TL;DR

You're paying for a black box, being surprised if you find some more stuff on there is fine, but being indignant/entitled that you can't access it seems foolish. How a publisher chooses to organize their assets for their game is their business as long as those assets don't have a material impact on your expectations of the game at the time of purchase.
 
P

Parallax Scroll

Banned
casperOne said:
You're paying for a black box, being surprised if you find some more stuff on there is fine, but being indignant/entitled that you can't access it seems foolish. How a publisher chooses to organize their assets for their game is their business as long as those assets don't have a material impact on your expectations of the game at the time of purchase.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree, but in SFxT's case it was shitty having to wait months to be able to buy the DLC characters when pirates were already using them.
 
K

kick51

Banned
That badger isn't running away...it just heard a lion somewhere behind it and it's running over to bite out its jugular.
 
M

MechaX

Member
FindMyFarms said:
Had to share, this is too good lol

QzEYSzr.png
Click to expand...

I have to give it to Marvel players sometimes. I have to give it to them for being able to constantly go through the thought process of "shit shit shit dead character shit shit zero, how do I bl- shit, dead character." That kind of meta-game would just be too demoralizing for me.
 
K

kick51

Banned
Smedwicks said:
Did you pick Vergil?
Click to expand...



Towards the end, I did. Vergil/Doom, even. But I wanted to play as X-23 as well, which is where I went wrong.

It's no excuse, but even after putting more than average time into the game, I wasn't getting anywhere. oh well, still the most fun to watch.

Vergil/X23/Doom...fun team, actually. point vergil doesn't get enough love
 
F

Fantasmo

Member
Godofnerdiness said:
I'm tempted, but I dunno if my PS3 fightpad will work. Couldn't get it to work in SF4.
Click to expand...

Eh? PS3 fightpad works fine. You're talking about the Capcom branded USB Wireless PS3 Fight Pad? It works without a hitch, you just have to get past the GFWL login for it to kick in for some stupid reason.
 
O

onionfrog

Member
casperOne said:
What is in the initial contract is usually that there will be a mechanism in the game to get future content
Click to expand...
I've got no problem with this. There need to be "hooks" in the game engine to allow updates.

casperOne said:
What's surprising to me is that when people found that there were incomplete models in Marvel which were then able to be purchased/unlocked to their full potential, people threw a fit.
Click to expand...
This didn't bother me at all, since the characters weren't completed. What was on disc was just WIP files for Jill and Shuma, obviously placeholders to be completed later. I've go no problem with DLC like that.

casperOne said:
However, when you bought Super Street Fighter 4, it had code in it that allowed entire parts of the engine to be replaced (that upgrade engine has been used for AE, AE 2012, and will be used for Ultra, because you can go from Super -> Ultra) but no one made a stink about that when that engine was used to charge $20 for the upgrade to AE.

They're the same exact mechanisms; there's code on the disc that allows for expansion of the game later.
Click to expand...
Once again I'm fine with that. I'm not the type of person that bitches at capcom for "milking" people with a new version of SF4. I'm excited for Ultra(Good on capcom for including all previous costume DLC if you buy physical or DD version of the game) and I'm all for games having support for upgrades like this.

casperOne said:
How a publisher chooses to organize their assets for their game is their business as long as those assets don't have a material impact on your expectations of the game at the time of purchase.
Click to expand...
For me I guess it depends on the context and the extent of the content.

-SFxT's 12 fully completed characters being on disc but not usable without paying for them = Bad. ( If the game came out last gen, they'd probably have been Unlockable)

-Incomplete characters on disc, to be completed later = totally fine.

-Costumes on disc, but must be purchased = also fine.

I'd rather not have the DLC data on disk, since it does upset many people. If its not on the disc, no one fewer people can bitch about an incomplete game. It helps the general public's perception of the game as well.

I like NRS's approach to DLC. Nothing is on disc and they release new content gradually. Then once they're done they release a complete edition, which contains all DLC.

People will always complain, but if there isn't obviously locked content on the disc, then people can't complain nearly as much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Gematsu] TGS 2023 official live stream program schedule announced
News
3
975
ElCasual replied
GamesRadar presents the Future Games Show is back for an August spectacular
Event Hype
3
683
Abriael_GN replied
gamescom 2021 |OT| The ♥ of gaming
|OT| 17 18 19 20 21
1K
49K
Exoil replied
Tokyo Game Show 2020 Online (09/24/20 - 09/27/20)
4 5 6 7 8
370
38K
D.Final replied
Fighting Tournament Weekend: EGX,
2 3 4 5
200
20K
Tripon replied
Top Bottom