Why fighting games suck

ig·no·rant (gnr-nt)
adj.
1. Lacking education or knowledge.
2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
3. Unaware or uninformed.

So yeh when people on a forum are calling me out, basically calling me an idiot without even properly reading what I put in a thread then yes that is ignorance.

 

Well. The article is simply titled "why fighting games suck" now obviously I play fighting games right, so I clearly like them.

Infact let me go through the article again and make direct references.

"Fighting games had their heyday in the 90's when games like Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter II were released but since then there really has not been much improvement in the fighter genre as a whole"

This is true. Fighting games never really push to improve upon anything. They add in new characters and tweak certain moves but it's really all about game balance or selling copies. I wouldn't say anything innovative happens in the B'mup franchise (apart from stuff such as VF being the first 3D game and all...but that's old hat news now and the ship has sailed).

"When the fighting genre did attempt to evolve by transitioning from 2D to 3D graphics, it was a disaster."

This is one point that I disagree with, although I must say VF is the only 3D game I enjoy.

"In recent times fighters have gone back to being 2D with 3D character models to give the impression of depth and now their popularity has one again sky-rocketed. When a genre actually has to revert major advancements because it couldn't adapt the gameplay to the changes, it's a warning sign that something is wrong."

This is a point you simply cannot argue with. Everyone knows SF4/SSF4 sold a hell of a lot of copies. As much as you may hate SF4 you cannot argue that the game sold a hell of a lot of copies (especially for a fighting game) and even appealed to the mainstream.

"Fighting games are boring because you're doing the same thing, one-on-one duels, over and over again."

As a fighting game fan to me this is not the case but I can definitely see why others would get tired of fighting games. It's just a mentality that some people have/others don't.

"There aren't really any levels or storyline, it is just you, facing off against another character who is either controlled by a CPU or another person, and duking it out. Sure this could be cool for awhile but how many times can you repeat the same actions and still have fun? What other modes are there? Time Trial? Survival?"

This is also true. Even VF doesn't offer an abundance of other modes to keep the players having fun. You got Arcade mode (serves no purpose other than to get achievements/unlock Dural) You got Quest mode (PISSES ME OFF PERSONALLY! I still haven't beat every rival) you got Dojo mode (an important mode but not executed well enough for new players to learn anything). Then you got the real mode - Vs. Mode. But it's not like there's any tag team modes or anything like that. I'm not saying that I want VF to become a tag game but every mode is just 1 character vs another character, and again I can see why people would not like this.

"How about coming up with a new mode where you have to fight three characters all at once? Oh wait...that was actually such a dramatic evolution that it became a whole standalone game (Smash Brothers)!"

The author tries to be sarcastic here, but if you think about it Smash Bros. actually sells a lot of copies. Obviously the appeal of tag fighting games is a lot higher than 3D 1v1 fighting games.

"Sometimes people will spam the same move over and over to win a match and it actually works. One example I can recall from Street Fighter is using M. Bison's down and B attack where he dashes forward."

Here we have a classic example of a scrub attempting to play a fighting game and getting beat by spam. Imagine you are a scrub. One day you think "Damn man, I could really go for a fighting game right now" after getting bored of CoD MW2 on a daily basis. You go out and you pick up (insert fighting game here), you play the game online and your opponent uses 2-3 moves to kill you every single time. What, are you gonna want to play this game? Not everyone has the fighting game mentality of improving and some (read: majority) will actually just think "fuck this" and not bother with it ever again.

"Most fighters are just the same game except with different characters and a different rock, paper, scissors mechanic to memorize. It is high time this tired genre either evolve or retire altogether."

Truth. All fighting games do have the rock, paper, scissors mechanic to them. This is known as mixups among us fighting game players.

You can read this article any way you want but it does actually hold some truth to it.

 

Hazz just out of curiosity how old are you?

 

13

 

Bit of a stupid thread!

 

I am really sorry for the offtopic, but I just ate a delicious dinner and wanted you all to know that.

Wow... was that tasty or what.

Oh, and I heard fighting games are cool. I dunno who said it but I agree. Would anyone care for a cup of tea? It's my treat!

 

This article is truly ignorant. It does, however, reveal unintentionally an 'outside looking in' perspective, which might be useful to understand how to make the fighting genre more accessible/palatable to those on the fence.

 

Umm... since I have a few minutes... why not?

So I heard you like innovations... Let's take the basic premise of fighting games - they are meant to simulate a DUEL, so there will usually be two contestants duking it out till the best wins. You can't really change that core, since then it simply ceases to be a fighting game. If one doesn't like the genre, tough cookies, the door is over there - I hate racing games so no hard feelings.

So, we have the basic premise - two pixel dudes punching each other, and some kind of life bar. From here, some innovations brought into the genre, from the top of my head... I *WILL* leave out 3D being innovative, if you wish:

- different character graphics
- characters differing in speed and power
- special moves
- throws
- various sceneries
- tournament-like progression
- story and backgrounds

...and we arrive at Street Fighter 2 station, the "peak of genre's popularity". Absolutely no innovations from here... of course if you don't count for example:

- super attacks
- custom combos
- overheads
- cross-ups
- juggles
- evasion (roll in kof, evades later)
- cancels
- custom combos
- finishing moves
- weapons
- counter hits
- special attack modes, desperation moves
- taunts
- stances
- unblockables, guard breaks and autoguard moves

...enter VF and later games, and with them...

- reversals
- guard cancels
- ring-outs
- throw escapes
- pounce
- special maneuvers using the bar (GG's FD etc)
- air combos
- parries
- staggers and crumples
- sabaki
- inashi
- customization
- just frames (hate those but w/e)
- walls, wall combos, moves off the wall and breakable walls
- side guard
- hit throws and auto hit throws

...and that's just from the top of my head, pretty damn hefty slew of innovations right there, don't you agree? I'd risk a guess here that fighting games may have been one of the most innovative genres as a whole, because seriously how much has changed in, say, FPS games over the years in comparison... Ever played International Karate + ? Trust me - it's been a looooong way (it was a 3p tho).

I could go on like this but this post is huge already. You could badmouth any genre like this. "Racing games are boring because you only go from start to finish with other dudes". "FPS are boring because you only shoot stuff". "Football is boring because you only kick a ball". Then the dude is complaining about "lack of story" and crap... There is a story, maybe not especially compelling but usually characters have good characterizations and you can tell whether you like them or not, who the good, the bad and the ugly are. That's more than the "cool" games like Halo get (at least in multiplayer).

Complaining about "lack of other modes" is bull, there are modes added to @#% around but the core is the DUEL, even if there is an option to dress up your character and play volleyball. The core will defend itself, fighting games aren't popular because people simply prefer to, say, shoot stuff or play god and you can't force them otherwise. FG's do not need to justify their existence.

(Also... I heard about that one dude who wrote that games in general can't be art, can you believe this??? People are entitled to their opinions, but there's also such a thing as paid trolling. Don't believe everything you read, the tiny snippets of "truth" are only there for the professional trolls to easier feed the reader with a truckload of opinionated, inflammatory drivel.)

 

Hey, keep this open. It is already six pages. Very entertaining.

 

My 2 cents.

Why are people still playing Chess, Shogi or Go?

Those games haven't evolved in a pretty long time, and it's not because people haven't tried to make improved versions of the game either.

It's just that those formulas work. And you realise that when you play games like that, the game is always the same, sometimes for a thousand years, but the players are the key element that improves and evolves. That human element gives us something a lot more rewarding than a few stupid trophies and a cut scene.

You'll never play the exact same match twice, because even if the other guy starts his game plan exactly the same, your reaction will change the flow of the game. If you're dumb enough to react the exact same way each time to something you know is going to end in you losing, then you don't deserve to be in the gene pool.

I bet if they patched Chess every month whenever some top player discovered a new tactic, Chess would be a shit game too.

 

i just wanted to say

lol@ him saying smash bros is the only fighting game that actually takes skill

and that i think chess would be a more popular game if they'd invent a story mode for it

 

In those games, the amount of possible games (string of game positions) is so large, that one person is very unlikely to have two same games in his lifetime when he plays normally. Kind of similar thing with fighting games.

ps. Jigohro, you actually forgot many of the LATEST innovations; like offensive move, throw clash, sabaki a throw in FS etc.

 

I asked because sometimes someone's age can enlighten me on where their critical thinkings skills are. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with a high schooler about a piece of written work because they might just not have the necessary skills trained to analyze yet.

I'm not saying there aren't very bright high schoolers who are ahead of their class and can hang with the best of them. It's just very rare and not the norm. That said Hazz's responses to all our comments/critisim reaks of someone who's lacking some critical thinking skills. The arguments he's used to back up what he says have been weak and downright offensive to the people he's disagreeing with. Using personal attacks instead of attacking the idea being talked about.

A college professor who makes his living writing articles is someone I feel more confident in having an intelectual discussion with than a High schooler who just learned how to proof read. My question of age is a very relavant question. . . . that was all.


@ Marlayjay I don't really know why you got so defensive about me asking someone else for their age. All they have to say is No or just not say their age and it would die. Just so you know, I am a young guy in his early 20's. If an older person wants to discredit my ideas because of my age and nothing else poo poo on them. Now if I started making false arguments that just were illogical and was in my 30's that's totally different than being in my teens. You get what I'm saying here?

You really didn't know why I was asking for Hazz's age, yet you assumed I had malicious intentions. I did not, I was simply trying to determine how to reach Hazz in a way more fitting for him.


sidenote: hazz if you're just trolling this thread good Fing job. If you're not, I really worry for you bra'.

sidenote 2: Anyone who has fought me in any fighting game around here knows that I'm a merciless fighter that will just beat the hell out of my opponent. I'm the same way with intellectual discussions, however I will only attack ideas never the person. Hazz has been actually attacking the character of the people he's disagreeing with, with statement like "you're ignorant" and what not. Those are the kinds of comments that are making me disappointed. They have no place on a forum like VFDC and I will call Mofo's out when I see it.

When an idea is strong it withstands my attacks and actually becomes a stronger idea because of it. Arguments are important for the furthering of ideas, they just need to be about the ideas and not about the people discussing them.

 

He's 17 or maybe 18 now.

 

Not going to waste my time then. Thnx ash.

 

He's 16, every year counts!

 

At that age it really can actually. Huge changes go on in the brain from year to year with all those hormones running through the system.

Again I really don't care about him being young. His comments just sounds like they come from a young mind is all. He actually is young so this is understandable and normal.

 

In This Post: Young, Early 20's man quaking in his boots when can't argue with the points I made. The earliest stage of Hazzerone'd.

1. Just like for fighting games the "chess formula" is not right for everyone.

2. That's an example of the fighting game mindset. Not everyone wants to improve, the fighting game community is full of people that do. You see most people actually would prefer a "trophy and a cutscene" because it gives them a sense of reward and accomplishment.

Jigohro I will accept what you said about fighting games being innovative.

Seeings as you argued against one of my points I'll argue against one of yours now.

It's true that you can say that "FPS are boring because you only shoot stuff". That is the core mechanic we are talking of right? For fighting games the core mechanic is beating the other character, in FPS games it's shooting, grenading or meleeing other characters to kill them. So explain to me why FPS games are able to incorporate various game modes to keep multiplayer play live and interesting? Even the most generic of FPS games nowadays offer a multitude of game modes. Here's what CoD MW2 alone offers: 3rd Person Team Tactical, Barebones Pro, Capture the Flag, Demolition, Domination, Free-for-All, Ground War, Hardcore Mosh Pit, Hardcore Ricochet HQ Pro, Hardcore Ricochet S&D, Hardcore Team Deathmatch, Headquarters Pro, Mercenary Team Deathmatch, Objective Barebones Pro, Sabotage, Search and Destroy, Team Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch Express and Team Tactical it also offers a sort of Co-op minigame called Special Ops. May I point out also that's just Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2! There's an endless list of FPS and many of them offer very different game modes from the norm. So, basically, FPS games revolve around you shooting the enemy but they found a way to incorporate all sorts of other game modes and objectives whilst FG's could not?! That, for me, is what I based my original point of FG's not being innovative around.

Seriously don't know wtf my age has to do with anything, my analytical skills are great. So great that on a forum populated by older men that only one poster could prove me wrong (and only on one of my points made).