The death of fighting games… A personal journey that hopefully can help MvC:I ???

1234568

Comments

  • NickRocksNickRocks Knock Knock Joined: Posts: 22,837
    the combos in mvc3 were obnoxiously long and still werent as satisfying as AHVB or storm/sent DHC
    King of the Post-09ers
    In Dusty We Trusty
    Last of the Prembers, R.I.P. my nibbas
    Maximilian is a racist thief
    https://clips.twitch.tv/maximilian_dood/DifferentBeeHeyGuys
  • Pete278Pete278 Yare yare daze Joined: Posts: 1,285
    ukyo_rulz wrote: »
    Try going 1v1 against someone in a shooter when you've never played a shooter before and they have months to years of experience. You'll be lucky to get any kills. That's why 1v1 modes in shooters tend to struggle, or not even exist at all. The only ones I can think of that ever had a strong 1v1 community were games like Quake and UT, and those aren't even doing as well as fighters these days.

    I played 1v1 against a competitive Quake player for months back in college. Went from an easy 10-0 for him, to a hard-won 10-0 for him, to the point where I could usually get it to 6-4 in his favor and even 3-7 in my favor when I got lucky. At no point in time did I ever do anything other than actually play Quake. There wasn't a separate "intro to Quake" mode that I had to grind in for weeks or months. Just playing was enough.

    That is the difference.

    Kinda doubt that the OGs in Street Fighter had training mode.
    Pretty sure you can get good at fighting games with minimal time spent in training mode.

    Also took the OGs way longer to find tech than it did now that there's the internet, and 'save that shit for nationals' is no longer a viable strategy.
  • NuSix3NuSix3 Britney's Dancebeat Champ Joined: Posts: 19
    Pete278 wrote: »
    ukyo_rulz wrote: »
    Try going 1v1 against someone in a shooter when you've never played a shooter before and they have months to years of experience. You'll be lucky to get any kills. That's why 1v1 modes in shooters tend to struggle, or not even exist at all. The only ones I can think of that ever had a strong 1v1 community were games like Quake and UT, and those aren't even doing as well as fighters these days.

    I played 1v1 against a competitive Quake player for months back in college. Went from an easy 10-0 for him, to a hard-won 10-0 for him, to the point where I could usually get it to 6-4 in his favor and even 3-7 in my favor when I got lucky. At no point in time did I ever do anything other than actually play Quake. There wasn't a separate "intro to Quake" mode that I had to grind in for weeks or months. Just playing was enough.

    That is the difference.

    Kinda doubt that the OGs in Street Fighter had training mode.
    Pretty sure you can get good at fighting games with minimal time spent in training mode.

    Also took the OGs way longer to find tech than it did now that there's the internet, and 'save that shit for nationals' is no longer a viable strategy.

    I'm not all for making games easier, but what the OP said has some merit. What OGs had to do to get good is completely different. The games weren't half as complicated as they are now. I'm not saying they weren't difficult - but every time I go back and play an old game I'm amazed at how much slower input timing is. As the franchises evolved, so did the players who had those early titles as a base. Also, FPSs are their own animal and can only be compared in a really general manner - most of what you need to learn can only be learned in a live game.

    I still stick to my original point that the internet has made people too aware of how good one can be at the game and that beginners are holding themselves to too high a standard because of it. But to deny that some games have strange learning curves or have gone overboard (virtua fighter where you need a fucking calculator by your side to play) means your not even trying to think of where the other player is coming from.
  • PVL_93_RUPVL_93_RU When's Dragon Ball? Joined: Posts: 10,871
    purbeast wrote: »
    This basically boils down to 2 things IMO.

    ...

    2. Instant gratification. Todays ADD generation needs to instantly be rewarded. That just isn't the case in fighting games. You don't see the rewards until you put a lot of time and effort into them and start to become good.

    I honestly have no idea how these people live real lives. Like, do they go to a university and expect to know everything on Day one? Do they apply for a job and expect to be a CEO the next day? Do they find relationships and attempt to have sex the same night?

    Because I don't think they apply a different logic to a real world, where they have to work just as hard to actually achieve SOMETHING
    SRK's Story Thread Crew:
    • bakfromon, Miðgarðsorm, & Lord Vega - Translations and Lore info
    • just5moreminutes - Story Mode v2.0
    • Doctrine Dark - Character Bios and Endings
    • Shockdingo - The paragraph writer
    • YagamiFire & Darc Requiem - The thread MVPs
    • Cestus - the Dolls endorser
    • The Shakunetsu - The character concept machine
    • Caio_Lins - The CFN profile cropper
    • Daemos - The thread dictator, also a Bison fanboy
    • DarthEnder - The bullshit caller

    Also starring (but not limited to):
    Mykka, Scotia, Hawkingbird, TrueBackLash, Chun-Li_Forever, Kecka, ruthless_nash, mikros, ...
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    Instant gratification is feasible in gaming, so obviously people go after it. It's not feasible in every facet of life. Over the past few decades, PVP games have evolved to make everyone feel like a winner with relatively low effort, and now those games saturate the market.
  • TebboTebbo Play. Joined: Posts: 5,709
    Breaking down why things are how they are... Fighting games are a type of arcade game. They were originally developed for arcade hardware (a stick).
    Much of what ended up defining them came from the interaction with that hardware.
    No different than many other arcade games... you're not playing Golden Tee properly at home unless you go out and buy a specific piece of hardware to replicate the experience.

    Now that arcades only survive in certain areas globally and the market has shifted to consoles and pc, people do not have much familiarity or interest in arcade specific hardware.

    Give it another generation and they won't design for sticks at all. Or they will abandon relevant IPs for a while until they can market them using nostalgia again.
    Play more.
  • vitalvital Joined: Posts: 324
    I don't think the arcade stick argument holds water when you look at some of the best American players in the world having great success with pad.

    The games are plenty successful enough to warrant sequels and competition within the genre from other developers...I could care less about bottom line or appealing to extremely casual players that leave a game after a couple of weeks, I'd rather have a smaller and more hardcore player pool(the size that it is now) than a much larger player pool for a dumbed down and easier game.

    My 2c
  • andrew_janDekandrew_janDek Joined: Posts: 100
    edited January 3
    Topics like this are hard to discuss without getting way to bloated and intensely opinionated. I've only ventured outside the 3rd strike forum once, and that was to say something in defense of "Alan Wake" if I recall. So I'm probably not a good candidate to opine in an unbiased manor. That said the title was compelling enough and here I am. I must say I was rather shocked at the contents of your post. I genuinely expected another rant on how bad and easy new 2d fighting games (Even though I generally agree with the that sentiment. At least in terms of recent Street Fighter and Marvel vs Capcom I think 3d fighters like Tekken and Virtua Fighter, even with some of the "casual" additions that aid comebacks and such. Offer a robust in depth fighting system. Even though I've moved on from Tekken largely in favor of the aforementioned title). Anyway onto real thoughts and not stream of consciousness needless backstory. I only play SF3. I own SFV and BB:CP for friends that aren't willing to play an "old, hard game that I'm too gad at" (reality, I'm trash at 3S which really just furthers serves my point). I think new games are unfathomably simple, at the very least in regards to inputs/execution etc. (SFV MVC3 at least, SFIV for that matter as well) While I am very casual in terms of the amount of time and practice I put into the game. I am intensely passionate in my love of the game, and my desire to learn to play the game (counter intuitive I know, but my schedule is rather hectic) as it is played in Japanese arcades. I have gone to every event for the game that has been held and been able to attend I will say. Such a tremendously beautiful, seemingly infinite world of possibility. It is a game that to me, makes almost anything possible due to the complexity and depth within the mechanics of the game. It is undoubtedly unbalanced, rather significantly at that. In terms of Character strength (though this would not likely even come into play as it pertains to the manor in which you wish to play the game anyway), but the game is built in such a way that no matter what, outside of literally one or two extremely unlikely nearly glitch like situations, in which there is almost never an escape or solution possible as long as you make the right decision/guess/read whatever you want to say.

    To me that is infinitely more appealing than being able to see a bunch of flashy things on the screen (you certainly can, but there is no doubt a higher learning than in more recent 2d offering to say the least). The closest comparison experience in recent memory I have to compare to you was just mere days ago. My stick finally game out (well I cold probably fix it, but I've repaired it countless times so I think its time to move on) so I decided to play a little bit of SFV just to see what I remembered and see if I could grind out some of the points to buy Gouki or someone, well first and foremost as a result of not wanting to play 3s on pad. Anyway I was utterly floored by how easy the game felt. I just picked Ken and you can pretty much do huge crazy combos within Minutes. I even texted my friend who I have been slowly converting to 3S from the others (he doesn't own any of them, just similarly grew around arcades and always had an affinity for Street Fighter games) about how incredibly shocked I was at how easy a game it was and I would be utterly shocked if he could not do all sorts of shit in minutes. In spite of my rather patronizing statement, he ultimately agreed and said (shockingly enough, as there could not be a more casual and uninformed person as far as it pertains to FG developments and such) that he felt it was "built for E sports" (feel dirty just saying that word). Now that he is "all in" on 3s (in that the one or two times a month we get together to play that is the only game he wants to play) to see him watch the mechanics slowly unfold is a beautiful thing. (It helps that he is an incredibly talented musician, and intensely competitive/cynical by nature). I actually try and use other characters, and he refuses and demands I pick my best and play my best even though it is certainly at his expense.

    edit: The more I think about it, "saving fighting games" at least from my perspective. Comes more down to doing just what I am trying to state above. Show someone the possibility of something great, and the joys it can bring. No different from getting into a dense record that may seem abrasive at first. Or watching a Lynch or Cronenberg film. It is hard to deal with at first, but if you approach it with an open mind (I suppose some degree of intelligence is required in all of the above examples) that will have a greater impact on the longevity, then getting a bunch of people to buy something that is already being catered to them, and have them throw it down after a week and say it's too hard anyway. Single player can help, I certainly loved Tekken Force in middle school. I can acknowledge that, but again I guess my perspective is fundamentally different to begin with, as I dislike most recent Capcom offerings, some more than others but I think they are all pretty bad in comparison to their predecessors. I don't know exactly what my point is, but I guess I'm just trying to say I don't know how they could possibly make them any easier. It seems input windows are nearly seconds long, and you just have to get a rough, relatively close approximation of the command (which the games throws at you left and right) to "do the move you want to do" as you say.
    -note: I only read page one...-


    I agree with both sides of this. First off when arcades were prominent in the early 90s they certainly were not niche by a long shot. Every Mall had one, let alone half the pizza shops and Corner stores (I'm thirty and the previously mentioned friend is 32 if that helps provide any sort of context). That said I didn't learn to play fighting games "for real" until 2008 with "Tekken 5:DR" so a good portion of my time at the arcade was spent playing a variety of fighting game arcade modes, not to say I wasn't happier to play a live opponent. Nonetheless I think there is something to be said there.
    Pertho wrote: »
    Arcade mode
    Arcade Mode is all 75% of players ever played, especially before online was a thing. Most people didn't actually play in arcades when they were a thing here. That was always a niche. So unless you were waiting to play locally against your friend, most people were playing the computer.
    quote]


    Post edited by andrew_janDek on
  • UltimaUltima Retired SF Aristocrat Joined: Posts: 1,777 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    23 hours last post? Okay, not too long ago then.

    andrew_janDek:

    Just wanted to point out something here: Your insane love of 3S notwithstanding (most OG players like me barely tolerate that game for very good reasons which I won't get into here), this clause is most poignant:
    I suppose some degree of intelligence is required in all of the above examples

    Exactly. Which means you're doomed to failure from the start. Those tactics might work on one person, but that won't help the community at large to grow.

    re: Accessibility

    I read the OP that essentially complains about "accessibility", with "accessibility" in this instance meaning "moves too hard to do". I agree with this, but only to a certain extent. Moves in a classic 1 on 1 fighter like SF2 are designed with a certain base level of manual dexterity involved. It's right there in the design. Take the SPD: A really powerful special move, but also somewhat difficult to pull off, especially for someone with zero fighting game experience (they still exist!). If you take away the difficulty of pulling off the move, then something else needs to change or else the move becomes imbalanced. Making the motion "easier" only works to an extent, because unless you go as far as making the move literally a single button attack, somebody is going to have trouble pulling it off. How far do you want to lower the execution barrier, and thus affect the entire game design? Even an "easy" game like Smash Bros (pick one, doesn't have to be Melee) has some difficult stuff to pull off in it.

    I agree that SF, my first love of fighting games, can be made more "accessible" without necessarily "lowering standards". I consider Guilty Gear series (another series I'm a huge fan of, at least since GGXX onwards) to be extremely accessible, in that performing most moves (Gamma Ray notwithstanding) and most combos are very easy. Yet we all know GG games can be complex and hard as hell to play if you take it far enough or play against "real" competition. I found that GG strikes a good balance between casual accessibility while also having hardcore appeal, one that Capcom would be wise to emulate. They don't need to turn SF into GG per se, but I feel that they could definitely borrow some stuff from them.

    In other words, I'm all in favour of Simple MOdes. I never checked the one from MvC3, but the Easy Mode in MvC1 was really good IMO. MvC1 got played a lot in the arcades here, more than any other Vs. game (MvC2 wasn't as widespread here), and when I would see people playing by themselves, most of the time it was using Easy Mode.

    re: Sales

    Regarding fighting game popularity, you have to determine what exactly do you want to accomplish.

    If you want really good sales, well, I think at the minimum you have to go the MK route and throw in tons of single player content, which I agree is a good thing. But note that, as others have pointed out, you're not going to get fighters to compete with FPS and MOBAs because they're 1 on 1 and are mercilessly unforgiving in terms of competition and the "time needed to git gud".

    Furthermore on this note, even with sufficient content, I don't think (traditional) fighters outside of SF, MvC, MK (I count Injustice as part of this series BTW), or Tekken have the brand name recognition to get big (i.e. millions of sales). Guilty Gear Xrd: Revelator is awesome from top to bottom but most people don't care. And even SF and MvC aren't guaranteed. MvC3 is the only one in the series to sell a million plus. Among SF games, only the 16 bit editions of SF2, SFA3 for PSX, SFIV series and SFV have sold more than a million as well. MK is the only fighting game series that is guaranteed to sell a couple million copies (because outside of MK Armageddon, every single MK has sold at least a million copies), and that's because it's popularity is based on gimmicks (violence, hype, unlockables) that other fighters can't or won't emulate. I used to put Tekken in this category as well but their status isn't as solid as it was during the PS1/PS2 days.

    Even if Capcom had put in all the single player content in the world, SFV was never going to sell what the first iteration of SFIV did. With all the updates to SFIV, SF never really "went away" like it did before, so demand for a new one wasn't as big. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't have put more single player content in though! I still think SFV is a budget title in disguise.

    If you want your game to be played for years, well, I actually think Capcom's doing a decent job at that. SFV is a better "base" game than SFIV was, after all, though there's much room for improvement.

    d3v:

    Just wanted to point out one thing:
    modes that keep people from actually playing [the competitive aspects] aren't the answer.

    I disagree with this 100%.

    As has been pointed out by a some folks in this thread, there are fighting game fans who don't actually like to play against other people. And that's fine! From a developer's standpoint, that's not a bad thing at all. You want as many people playing your fighting game as you can, in whatever way they enjoy playing them. If they enjoy the single player content, that's fine. Because a player who enjoys playing the single player content in your fighting game might graduate to playing the competitive aspects if s/he enjoys the game enough. Not everyone starts off hardcore and competitive, some folks need to grow into it. And many never do. But that's okay, because you want your games to be bought by these players, if for no other reason than to generate revenue updating the current game/for the next game.

    Plus, as Daigo pointed out, you need new players to form the FGC in the future. If they don't even want to play your game because there's nothing in it for them to do but play hellish Survival or go online and lose to stuff that they don't understand, that doesn't help anyone.

    (FOr those who said it, I agree that better matchmaking is vital to keeping new players interested in getting better; no one likes getting stomped by stuff from players way more advanced than you are)
    Ultima - The Right Arm of Scrub Voltron
  • GreenwoodGreenwood Earth, the only true God Joined: Posts: 888
    edited January 4
    Greenwood wrote: »
    why fighting games lost their top-tier popularity over the years?

    In what universe did fighting games have top-tier popularity?

    early 90's? where have you been?

    Oh, you mean 1992 and 1993. 2 years FGs have been top tier. Whoopdie fucking do.

    That's not what the OP is talking about. "Why FGs have lost their top-tier popularity over the years" implies that FGs were king for a long period of time and gradually declined. They were king for 2 years, about 25 years ago.
    BB_Hoody wrote: »
    There was a time in the early to mid 90's where fighting games were running shit like FPS games are today.

    It was just 2 years. By the mid-90's, they were "popular", not top-tier. I was there, trust me.

    The downfall of arcades started around the time SF came out. This is because SNES and GEN were able to create capable ports to popular arcade games. When PS came out in 1994-1995, arcades became obsolete. At that time, FGs were a middling genre.

    Last time I frequented an arcade, a few people were huddled around UMK3 while CotA, VF, KI, and MSH were completely ignored. That's not "running shit like an FPS" in my book.

    Post edited by Greenwood on
    Injustice 2 - Wonder Woman, Joker
    Boring, stale, predictable FGs - Cammy, Kuma, whatever yawn zzzzz
  • Bomberman3000Bomberman3000 The Headshaker Joined: Posts: 2,339
    I cannot believe I ignored this thread for this long.
    This shit gave me the giggles. Too bad the OP left his nuts on the floor when he fled the scene of the crime he started with this thread.

    But honestly fighters are niche nowadays mostly because like many have said, people don't like to lose, don't want to practice and would rather play other stuff that gives them the constant feel-goods before moving onto another game of some sort.
    Most of the sales of fighters, even the big name ones like MK and Street Fighter are driven by the casual crowd looking for a fix before they turn that shit into Gamestop or set the game back into their collection to collect dust until another new hotness comes out to get fixated over. They may try some online, win some matches by mashing, lose more matches, get mad at losing due to 'bullshit' (aka 'I don't know why I'm losing so fuck this game'), put the game away after beating whatever other content of the game there is and be done with it.

    What keeps the FGC active is out of those, who there enjoys actually playing people and wanting to learn more and are willing to take their lumps along the way. Not easy, especially if game balance of characters is completely ass. Making shit control easier (while welcome) will only make it easier for the seasoned fighting game vets to kill people faster.

    Hell, I personally made someone's interest in fighting games go down to zero because they talked soo much up and down about their skill in a game I was playing (MvC2), so... I played against them. After some decimation later, they quit all fighting games and only stuck to Halo multiplayer.

    And FPS and Fighters still share some things... yeah, FPS games like CoD have more insta-gratification and lower skill ceiling and more avenues for who to blame losses on... when in team games. But get this... it's still possible to learn all the little tricks in the engine of those games as well as what guns and other mess in a map is good. Now... take such team games where it was evenly matched with top players doing good and the middle and bottom players leeching/doing their best... and throw them in a free-for-all match. FUCKING GUARANTEED the same exact complaints that people hear of those sucking at fighting games will be heard loud and clear... just because those who took a little extra time to explore the game are doing a whole lot better than the others just going through the motions.


    What people seem to want is a game to generate that Mortal Kombat money... but also KEEP at least more than a fraction of those casuals around to keep the scene going. That in itself will take some fucking smart investment and a company not scared to take risks. Because it seems nowadays most video game companies are afraid to take risks, and when they do, they do it in such a sideways manner they end up burying themselves. When game costs years ago were lower, there was more leeway... but not today.

    I know there are a fucking lot of old franchises years ago that could be snapped up and revived that would entice the market to try that shit out... but that takes some risks that most developers are unwilling to take.
    "What Strength!!
    But Don't forget,
    There are many guys like you, all over the world!!!"

    SteamID: BombermanGOLDEN
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    edited January 4
    Too bad the OP left his nuts on the floor when he fled the scene of the crime he started with this thread.

    Yeah seriously.
    When game costs years ago were lower, there was more leeway... but not today.

    I always hear this. Looking at Skullgirls, Lab Zero made the game with 8 characters for 2 million, and each characters after that was $150,000. Apply that to SFV(for example), and the game could be made for $3.2 million. They sold 1.4 million copies by the end of March. I don't know how much they actually make per copy sold, but 1.4m x $60 is 84 million dollars. I also don't know how much marketing costs, but if their total development budget was 3.2 million for SFV, then they would only have to sell 53,333 copies to break even. I'm pretty sure an SF game could do that by word of mouth alone, and the same goes for a Marvel game. Even if MvC:I cost twice as much to make, they could probably break even without even trying.

    Obviously Disney takes their cut, so maybe this doesn't necessarily work well for MvC:I this time, but as far as fighters go, I don't believe there is so much risk involved that a publisher ought to be too scared to stray from the "safe" formula. From what I see, the risk seems to be higher for low profile titles like Skullgirls than it is for big names like SF and Marvel anyway.
  • crotchpunchacrotchpuncha Joined: Posts: 21,898
    NickRocks wrote: »
    i
    NickRocks wrote: »

    no

    The people that dont care about evo or the fgc dont even post here; the true casual buys a fighting game, mashes out enough jump in roundhouse sweeps to beat story mode, unlocks all characters/colors, beats the trials, and gets all the trophies and is content. He puts the game down and doesnt touch it again for years except for when a equally as casual buddy comes over and goes Yo u got dat mvc3? They put the game in and have a grand ol time mashing thor vs frank west.

    The scrub is the one that takes time and watches streams, cares about evo and the fgc, and whines about balance/"unfairness"/"op tactics" on forums. He is the one that capcom and the fighting game devs are listening to because there are more of him than there are people who actually play the game. The scrub hopped online got hit with AHVB and goes "MvC2 is a bad game because AHVB is a bad game design mechanic *the scrubs favorite buzz phrase* and never touches mvc2 again.

    The scrub is a casual who wont admit to himself hes a casual. There are games coming out with tutorial modes, TRAINING MODE RECORD REPLAY SAVE STATES!!! There is the amazing amazing resource tool known as youtube tutorial videos (i learned how to play cable in mvc2 just by watching videos). Yet even with all this, the scrub still goes "fighting games arent accessible enough" without even knowing what that means.

    If you ever put time into any fighting game and its scene then this should be pretty obvious to you. There are always guys who say yea i wanna learn mvc and so you show them some shit and you can tell they will never touch this game again because they dont want to lose. Its a tough pill to swallow to know ur just gonna get rekt over and over for hundreds if not thousands of matches before you accumulate enough knowledge to be even decent. No matter what tutorial mode or simple mode or one button assists or one button hypers they put it will change that fact. Casuals and scrubs will be bad until they put in the work to not be bad.

    So I don't post here? I couldn't care less about the FGC.

    Most people playing the game only want to be good enough to beat Arcade Mode and mess around with their friends. I don't 100% agree with the OP that the games need to be simplified completely but I don't see making them easier as a bad thing. Maybe that's because I don't play to be competitive.

    Obviously there are people who want to be good but aren't willing to lose 100 matches to get there. I don't know how anyone could change that or if it would even be possible. As you said there are games that do a good job of teaching you how to play but there will always be people who don't want to put it the slightest bit of effort. That's a shame but that doesn't mean those tools are some how a waste, there are probably just as many people taking advantage of training mode save states as there are ignoring them.

    I'm not actually what most would call part of the "scene." As I said in my earlier post I don't play online, ever, at all. I never have and its never appealed to me. So I don't come across these players that you guys do which may be why I have a bit of a different stance on them.

    The problem would then be catering to "scrubs" instead of "casuals." Having enough modes and characters for the casual players to feel like the game is worth their money is probably a better approach than dumbing down the controls. I'm fine with standard fighting game controls I just want to see more games.

    So would you admit youre in the wrong place then? I mean this is a pretty heavily fgc/evo focused website. You say you dont care about the fgc but youre here, which would say the opposite

    Maybe, maybe not. I don't care about FGC stuff but I'd like to talk about fighting games. I don't know where would be more appropriate than the most popular fighting game forum.
    GameFAQS is perfect for you. They even have a fighting game general board.
    It's not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
  • N_paulN_paul aka Peaches Joined: Posts: 688
    We pretty well have already developed good ways to make the entry to play very low.

    Street Fighter X Tekken had a perfect model. (Aside from making gems paid DLC, that was a huge mistake).
    There were auto combo gems, throw break gems, auto block gems.

    You get two new players to play and they can get easy access to damage and cool looking combos. However, you lose out on free damage gems and they ate through meter. This gave players an easy way to give them an assist that can make the game more fun and rewarding to get them through the difficulty of learning the game.

    Marvel series and Persona had easy combo modes too. I'm sure there's some other examples as well. Good players will of course stomp all over new players even with assisted combos and defenses. To top it off, we havn't really seen much of a bump with casual players in the games that have some sort of 'assist mode.'

    Maybe if you combine an assist mode with some thing like Soul Calibur's Conquest mode. You could play a faction and control territory; by playing you would train a ghost. I think Killer Instinct did something similar with the shadow ai. I think these semi-single player types of modes are good way to segue into versus mode.

    Even with these though, I just don't think that fighting games attract people. I had a friend who wanted to learn and he just starts mashing buttons. If I make him stop mashing buttons he loses interest in like a minute lol. I just don't get it; it reinforces the idea that only people who like training mode will really like fighting games.
  • WorstPlayerWorstPlayer Calm Yourself Joined: Posts: 4,796
    I hate training mode. I love fighting games, but I'm old school. My mettle was tested in the fires of small smelly rooms and lots of asians.

  • Jion_WansuJion_Wansu Joined: Posts: 6,155
    Greenwood wrote: »
    Greenwood wrote: »
    why fighting games lost their top-tier popularity over the years?

    In what universe did fighting games have top-tier popularity?

    early 90's? where have you been?

    Oh, you mean 1992 and 1993. 2 years FGs have been top tier. Whoopdie fucking do.

    That's not what the OP is talking about. "Why FGs have lost their top-tier popularity over the years" implies that FGs were king for a long period of time and gradually declined. They were king for 2 years, about 25 years ago.
    BB_Hoody wrote: »
    There was a time in the early to mid 90's where fighting games were running shit like FPS games are today.

    It was just 2 years. By the mid-90's, they were "popular", not top-tier. I was there, trust me.

    The downfall of arcades started around the time SF came out. This is because SNES and GEN were able to create capable ports to popular arcade games. When PS came out in 1994-1995, arcades became obsolete. At that time, FGs were a middling genre.

    Last time I frequented an arcade, a few people were huddled around UMK3 while CotA, VF, KI, and MSH were completely ignored. That's not "running shit like an FPS" in my book.

    Uh... no

    Everyone should read the three about the info on the old SF scene in FGD...
  • noorsfvnoorsfv Joined: Posts: 45
    Partially it's about execution. I am a fighting game scrub and i can do combos that deal 500 damage.

    The real issue is strategy. When does it come into play ?
    Most people play this game in a way it isn't supposed to be played. For 90% of the player base this game is pure auto pilot. The moment they realize that the other player doesn't know how to counter a certain move, they will repeat that move till they win that match. (That is also the moment most beginners call a game "cheap" and quit).

    Fighting games aren't clear , they seem to be too vague , difficult to understand. Players can't tell what is happening. Why should I do move "A" and not "B" , "C" , "D" or "E". In short, there is a HUGE information gap. Its like playing chess but you don't know which piece does what and what it is meant for. There is no strategy for a specific "Situation" and in case of beginners there is no strategy for any situation. It is just random stuff, till one finds something he can use and repeat constantly.

    There is loads of strategy in fighting games but sadly people like me can't access it. All we can do is use some gimmick. Who ever has the better gimmick wins. For us its like playing chess and not knowing why we are moving pieces. One guy will win eventually but the win/loss is meaningless.


  • BantlerBantler Joined: Posts: 9
    edited February 1
    The measure of any game's quality is depth...measured by the number of levels attainable. Each successive level wins %75 of games against the next lowest rung. GO and chess have about 9 levels from scrub to grandmaster. Tic-tac-toe as maybe 2. Fighting games are about 5 average ranging from dive kick to maybe GG. I prefer development that strives for deep gameplay, and I reckon the fgc does as well.
  • AirLancerAirLancer Just a touch of Honey Joined: Posts: 826
    edited February 1
    Lower execution barriers is never the way to go in my book, though that's not an endorsement of unnecessarily difficult execution barriers either.

    I've seen people stop trying to learn KOF 13 because they couldn't do cl.C f+A. That's literally just pressing a close standing heavy punch, and then pressing forward and light punch. Hell, once things get reduced down to just one or two buttons required for specials and supers, people will probably complain about timing being too strict (if they weren't already) or games being too fast. 50/50s are unfair, okizeme is cheap, throws are unfair, juggling is unfair, links are unfair, combos are unfair, hitstun is unfair, blocking too much is unfair.

    Literally any mechanic or skill that can be used to one's advantage, people will take it as a reason to decide that the game is bad and that they can't play it, even down to just using your characters' attacks. Or as you may often see people complain "just spamming the same thing over and over." Every time an element is removed to appease to the mythical casual crowd that'll suddenly pick up easier fighting games seriously, the core players are just left with shallower and shallower games.
  • learis1learis1 Guardian Cadet Joined: Posts: 818
    It seems like the majority of the OP was about execution barriers. Marvel definitely has some tough execution in it. But I think the future is looking better in this department. Capcom seems be moving more towards leniency of execution if SFV is any indication.

    A part of me is glad about this because it means I can focus more on strategy without having as big a wall of execution to hurdle over. But a part of me is also worried about this...

    I sadly gave up on SFV for one main reason: homogenization. Many of the characters felt rather similar in their strategies and frame data. I feel like Capcom was too safe in making SFV and they lost a lot of the heart and soul of the game. I sincerely hope this is not the case with MVCI. I want each character in that game to feel creative and unique. Hopefully execution considerations don't detract from the creativity and uniqueness behind each character.
    Mend and Defend

    Location: South Florida (N. Miami)

    SF5: Fighter Tag: Learis1
    main char: Ryu
    avg lp: 2000

    SF4: main char: Fei Long
  • HecatomHecatom Aka Black Gorilla (・Д・)ノ Joined: Posts: 23,782
    Pertho wrote: »
    Names withheld to protect something or other:
    Traditional fighting game companies can learn from Ubisoft's FOR HONOR

    The best modern fighting game is not produced by any traditional fighting game developer. Look out Capcam, NAMCO, Netherealms, SNK, Atlus etc. etc. etc. because here comes FOR HONOR by Ubisoft.

    We can look to traditional fighting game companies to demonstrate arrested development. We can look to Capcom, NAMCO, and many other traditional fighting game developers and see they are woefully behind any progressive ideas to move the fighting game genre forward.

    For decades players have asked these traditional fighters to be progressive, push the fighting game mechanics to new areas of fun and exploration.

    However fighting game developers soon discovered changing the core-gameplay typically change the game too drastically. So drastically it was no longer the same game.

    These drastic changes meant hardcore players might not return to the franchise. Also drastic changes meant it was financially safer to give the niche fan-base what they wanted, the same basic game, with only a small variance in gameplay.

    What results is a genera tailoring to the hardcore, slowly leaving behind the casual market (80% of the player base left behind) and arresting the development of any progressive ideas and or exploratory aspects for the genre of fighting games.

    Thank god for Ubisoft FOR HONOR. Ubisoft's game sheds light on the woefully behind fighting game genre.

    Where to start on the juxtaposition?

    My first thought is FOR HONOR was a game NAMCO should have developed years ago (Looking at you Soul Calibur) But lets take a closer look on why traditional fighting game companies can learn a thing or two or a dozen from Ubisoft.

    Fist Ubisoft proves a 3rd person camera works for fighting games. That is a camera behind the player. Imagine a Street fighter, or Tekken, any your favorite fighter done this way? The visuals are more spectacular.

    This 3rd person view, allows for fuller 3D character movement, this is important is it brings the stage environment more into life. This allows for the "stages" to play even a more important role.

    Such as ring outs, yes we know traditional fighting games have ring outs, however FOR HONOR ring out locations are ever changing dynamic places on the staging. Allot of this owing to the 3rd person camera angle.

    Also the different terrain heights adds to the fun, as one player fights on the stairs and the other player below on the ground. Again other traditional fighting games (Tekken 4 comes to mind) played around with terrain variants, however the negative blow-back from players on the overall Tekken 4 experience was overwhelming.

    Once bitten twice shy NAMCO decided to go back to basics in Tekken 5. To say it another way, they decided to play it safe. So have Capcom and many other companies.

    But playing it safe, while understandable to satisfy the hardcore, has left the genres with little to no exploration to further the genre. It's really to bad too, as some aspects of Tekken 4 could have been worked out over time to move the genre forward, but as they say it's arrested-development-history.

    Again FOR HONOR not only pushes the genres forward it does so in so many directions it's hard to catalogue all of the differences.

    So I'll try to rapid fire through many of them:

    - The game takes into account the 99% of players today play on CONTROL PADS. And thus is FULLY accessible to the 99% the VAST majority of player base.
    - TEAM PLAY! Talk about a lagging behind the times for traditional fighting game developers! REALLY over 25 years of gameplay and we only had at best a "tag" option.... FOR HONOR supports teams of 2, 3 and 4 players, a total of 8 players at the same time!
    - A capture the flag element of 3 zones to capture, more TEAM PLAY aspects!
    - A solo player CAMPAIGN. Why traditional fighting game companies put little to no effort in campaigns anymore is beyond my understanding

    Now don't get me wrong, the traditional fighting game companies do have a secret sauce that cant be easily replaced. High quality versus gameplay mechanics, iconic characters but what traditional fighting game companies product offering is old and stale.

    It's like comparing the features of a 1970 Camero to the 2016 Camero with anti-lock brakes, power windows, air-conditioned seats, the 1970 car just doesn't even have those options available.

    Is the 1970 Camero still fun to drive, yes sure it is, however you get more with the 2016 Camero. And the 2016 Camero is advancing, pushing forward... The 1970's Camero is stuck in time.

    And that's the problem with the traditional fighting game conundrum, change to 2016 design, but risk loosing those people who only prefer driving the classics.

    I for one am ready to move forward, hopefully Capcam, NAMCO and others are ready too.

    Names should never be witheld
    ( •_•) IT'S NOT RAPE,
    ( •_•)>⌐■-■
    IT'S SURPRISE SEX! (⌐■_■)
    YEAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!
    "Orgasm is a simile for the emotional epiphany a woman has when the shame of penetration is eclipsed by the inherent virtue of servicing a man." ~ Kromo.
    ( •_•)
    ( ಠ_ಠ)
    ( ಥ_ಥ)
  • S00perCamS00perCam Cold as ice Joined: Posts: 2,455
    I agree on the for honor sentiment entirely the game industry is getting stale 2 years ago Rocket league put the sports genre on notice last year Overwatch put FPS games on notice and I'm glad it's Fighting games turn New gameplay fresh gameplay. SF 30 year anniversary is this year and (while I'm admittedly excited for it) we are getting yet ANOTHER revision of SF2.

    If MVCI shakes things up and makes it accessible or whatever I'll be with it. I loved the ABCS System for MVC3 and if they dumb it down further good. This fighting games are overly complicated and too samey conversation has been going on too long, it's not everyone else that's the problem it's the games.
    Just because your buff, don't play tuff Cause I'll reverse the earth and turn your flesh back to dust
  • Raging_ZoroarkRaging_Zoroark Disgraceful! Joined: Posts: 1,458
    I really don't understand what some people have against tradicional fighting games. I mean, it's nice to have games like For Honor and Smash Brothers (more options are always welcome), but tradicional FGs also have their place among the gamers. There are a lot of games that already offers a more casual experience, no need to change (or eliminate) the ones aimed at competitive play.

    And lol to the "fighting games getting stale". People are so blind at what really happens in the matches that it really baffles me. They sound like my parents: "Dunno how you can sit there for hours just trading blows with someone".
    Steam: Razor
    3DS FC: 0576-4330-3314
    NNID: Featther
  • S00perCamS00perCam Cold as ice Joined: Posts: 2,455
    Typical question my cred or act like I'm stupid response I expect from SRK. The only reason I deal with this insufferable group of man-children is because I love fighting games as they are and as they have been. Change gon' come motherfuckers.
    Just because your buff, don't play tuff Cause I'll reverse the earth and turn your flesh back to dust
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    S00perCam wrote: »
    I agree on the for honor sentiment entirely the game industry is getting stale 2 years ago Rocket league put the sports genre on notice last year Overwatch put FPS games on notice and I'm glad it's Fighting games turn New gameplay fresh gameplay. SF 30 year anniversary is this year and (while I'm admittedly excited for it) we are getting yet ANOTHER revision of SF2.

    If MVCI shakes things up and makes it accessible or whatever I'll be with it. I loved the ABCS System for MVC3 and if they dumb it down further good. This fighting games are overly complicated and too samey conversation has been going on too long, it's not everyone else that's the problem it's the games.

    I don't see how anyone can think fighters as a genre have gotten stale. SF, GG, KI, MK, Tekken, DOA, SC, and Marvel are all very different gameplay experiences within the genre. Obviously many share the same mechanics, but it's not like they feel the like clones of the same game.

    Overwatch is just doing what TF2 has been doing for 10 years. For Honor has not proven itself to be a serious fighting game, so let's see how that discussion plays out before declaring it to be the next big fighter.

    And Rocket League didn't put the sports genre on notice because the sports genre is largely based on actual real life sports. If you're a huge soccer fan, you're going to want to play FIFA over Rocket League. I personally love Rocket League and hate sports games.
  • S00perCamS00perCam Cold as ice Joined: Posts: 2,455
    S00perCam wrote: »
    I agree on the for honor sentiment entirely the game industry is getting stale 2 years ago Rocket league put the sports genre on notice last year Overwatch put FPS games on notice and I'm glad it's Fighting games turn New gameplay fresh gameplay. SF 30 year anniversary is this year and (while I'm admittedly excited for it) we are getting yet ANOTHER revision of SF2.

    If MVCI shakes things up and makes it accessible or whatever I'll be with it. I loved the ABCS System for MVC3 and if they dumb it down further good. This fighting games are overly complicated and too samey conversation has been going on too long, it's not everyone else that's the problem it's the games.

    I don't see how anyone can think fighters as a genre have gotten stale. SF, GG, KI, MK, Tekken, DOA, SC, and Marvel are all very different gameplay experiences within the genre. Obviously many share the same mechanics, but it's not like they feel the like clones of the same game.

    Overwatch is just doing what TF2 has been doing for 10 years. For Honor has not proven itself to be a serious fighting game, so let's see how that discussion plays out before declaring it to be the next big fighter.

    And Rocket League didn't put the sports genre on notice because the sports genre is largely based on actual real life sports. If you're a huge soccer fan, you're going to want to play FIFA over Rocket League. I personally love Rocket League and hate sports games.

    That's the problem you cant see the other side of it. You and I might see SF and it's fundamentalist gameplay, GG with all of its options and freedom, KI with its mindgames, MK with it's aggression, Tekken with the insane spacing. We see all the intricacies of the game and the excitement that comes from that but to the people who never got into it they see 2 characters walking back and forth on a screen. While there's more to it and you know it and I know it it just isn't going to interest the people it doesn't interest. It's not a square peg round hole situation either fighting is a broad term it's not like a sub genre of strategy like card games for example where there has to be cards, it doesn't have to be 2 lifebars side by side characters as long as concepts like spacing, moral, abare, okizeme etc can be applied and it interests people I'm with it. Variety is the spice of life and like mine hot goddamnit.

    Pertho wrote: »
    ....it feels like the people who have played the least amount ....

    make the TF2 Overwatch comparison its dumber than the purposely hyperbolic Soul Calibur For Honor comparison, if you've played either game then you know they just aren't all that alike other than there are classes.

    And to address your point about Rocket League, That's my point exactly you don't like traditional format sports games but Rocket League took a different approach there fore you like Rocket League. For Honor for example has gotten people who don't even like Fighting games to play one.

    I mean I get it this is SRK no one likes ANYTHING not even Street Fighter every Street fighter since Hyper Fighting has been completely shat on as the current game up until the new version dropped except SF3 which has never gotten it's due.


    Just because your buff, don't play tuff Cause I'll reverse the earth and turn your flesh back to dust
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    @S00perCam

    OW and TF2 are both class-based, arcade, team shooters. OW just takes it way further with the amount of classes and what they can do.

    I don't believe RL is a sports game in the same sense that FIFA is a sports game. Sure, you play a sport, but it's nothing like an actual sports game. That's like me saying Fighting Vipers and UFC should be in the same genre because they are both cage fighting. It's dishonest.
  • PerthoPertho The Runed One Joined: Posts: 22,174 mod
    edited February 14
    I forgot how much of a terrible poster s00per is.

    See the people that complain about us being closed minded dont get it: we came here because we lime a certain style of fighting games. This place isnt about any random combat game; thats not what this scene is about.

    For Honor is doing its own thing and people like it? Great for it and its player. They get to play something new and different. Same with Smash. The problem is that there is this insistence that somehow this place has to bend over backwards because of some ultimate argument that has to be settled because of w/e dumb ass moniker was given to the collected communities after arcades mostly ceased operations in the United States. Not only do our people in SRK already playing it, we also don't have to bend over backwards for something different. This place was set up to keep a style of gaming alive. That's what makes it special. If other forms or styles of games come up, good for them. Are we asking the Unreal Tournament players to allow FGs because our tournaments are also 1v1?

    "Why don't you guys play this other game that shares some similarities with the ones you play?"

    Because we like the ones that came for.

    Edit: get to add some additional things on keyboard so lets roll with it:

    For Honor is not similar to SC. As far as I know nobody in here has made that comparison except you. Instead its closer to Bushido Blade which a lot of us want a sequel to. Calling it a fighting game, as it applies to this community, is a fucking stretch when there are 5 people fighting. At that point its basically WoW pvp without casters. If you're suggesting that 1v1 WoW PVP is a fighting game call Blizzard and get that shit at Evo.
    Ronin Chaos on Pertho:

    "Oh, Pertho. You complete me."
    jimmy1200 wrote: »
    pertho attacked me first, saying i get all my life tips from 106th and park.
  • S00perCamS00perCam Cold as ice Joined: Posts: 2,455

    I love you too Pertho.

    It's not about being close minded it's about accepting the truth. Fighting games as we know it are dying and have been doing so for a while. I'm going to love and buy everyone that comes out. Let it sink in though:

    Pokken which is basically a Naruto party fighter with Pokémon, POKEMON, almost kicked MARVEL out of the EVO lineup. Windjammers was almost an EVO game, Fucking Nidhogg idk what it even is supposed to be, was nominated for the lineup. There are 2 Smash games In the line up. When I joined on my first account whenever CVS2 EO came out there would have been blood in the streets over that shit. You cant get much further from a traditional EVO lineup than what we have. Fuck 1v1 WoW PvP might get nominated next year if you keep talking.

    Wiz is going to follow the money he only keeps getting better at it with time. Easy games make money period.
    Just because your buff, don't play tuff Cause I'll reverse the earth and turn your flesh back to dust
  • NoChartNoChart Some say it's vanity, some say it's charm. Joined: Posts: 932
    edited February 14
    As many have said, execution barriers aren't the issue. The "simple" controls mode included in such fighters as MvC3 and GG don't solve the problem in any appreciable way. New players will get bopped because they get zoned-out, blocked wrong, got punished for throwing out unsafe moves, and failed to adapt; not because they got "out-executed". You need to instill the strategies of high-level play, and Arksys/ Reverge Labs have come the closest to addressing this(mission mode and tutorial respectively)- though it's still not perfect. Most casuals will still take the L too many times and end up quitting before they even try learning the game.

    My suggestion is simple: Don't expect everyone to dig for the answers elsewhere. Lead a horse(casual) to water. After a match, have the game itself offer to inform the player why they may have lost. Have a system in place that reviews the match-up in pure numbers and counts up how many jump-ins and overheads they ate, how often they threw out unsafe normals/specials, how many times they were walked into the corner, etc. Use that raw data to offer up a "Review Match" button for an in-game explanation that covers core concepts in quick snippets.

    Press: "Review Match"

    "You got anti-aired 8 times that match. A strong opponent will recognize your habits and punish you accordingly."

    Anti-air explanation follows.
    Steam ID: NoChart
  • PSYCH0J0SHPSYCH0J0SH Joined: Posts: 5,469
    edited February 14
    S00perCam wrote: »
    I love you too Pertho.

    It's not about being close minded it's about accepting the truth. Fighting games as we know it are dying and have been doing so for a while. I'm going to love and buy everyone that comes out. Let it sink in though:

    Pokken which is basically a Naruto party fighter with Pokémon, POKEMON, almost kicked MARVEL out of the EVO lineup. Windjammers was almost an EVO game, Fucking Nidhogg idk what it even is supposed to be, was nominated for the lineup. There are 2 Smash games In the line up. When I joined on my first account whenever CVS2 EO came out there would have been blood in the streets over that shit. You cant get much further from a traditional EVO lineup than what we have. Fuck 1v1 WoW PvP might get nominated next year if you keep talking.

    Wiz is going to follow the money he only keeps getting better at it with time. Easy games make money period.

    With the exception of Windjammer and Nidhogg, all the other games are fighting games. You need to be more open minded that's all. The genre is broadening if anything.

    Despite what all the SRK gutter trolls say, Smash is for all intents and purposes a proper fighting game and it can't be defined as anything else. It has everything that other fighting games have. Mixups, grab games, resets, tech rolls and a complex meta. It belongs at Evo. The major difference is that the stages play a critical role as well. The fact that it has a lot of options for casual players doesn't make it any less of a fighting game. Smash doesn't fit any other category, it's not an FPS, it's not an RTS, it's not competitive Tetris. It is a real fighting game, even if SF and Marvel fanboys like to shit all over it, it nonetheless is the same type of game.
    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

    GigaMaidens on twitter - on deviantArt - on Discord

    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬



  • Raging_ZoroarkRaging_Zoroark Disgraceful! Joined: Posts: 1,458
    edited February 14
    Pertho wrote: »
    Sometimes it feels like the people who have played the least amount of games are the ones asking for more shake ups.

    Makes sense. People that don't enjoy fighting games want them to become non fighting games, so they can (maybe) enjoy it (which, for the majority of them, means playing for 2 weeks and forgetting about the game's existence afterwards). Again, I find extremely positive to have games like For Honor and Smash, because it adds options to the market and there's always the possibility that someone that plays those games may become interested in fighting games in the future (I used to play smash before getting into FGs).

    But when people start to suggest a huge overhaul to already estabilished franchises, saying shit like this:
    First Ubisoft proves a 3rd person camera works for fighting games. That is a camera behind the player. Imagine a Street fighter, or Tekken, any your favorite fighter done this way? The visuals are more spectacular.

    ...that's where the problem lies. Seriously motherfucker? You are suggesting a MAJOR change to a fighting game (3d person camera) that would change the gameplay in a radical and drastic way, and visuals, FUCKING VISUALS, is the first thing that comes to your mind? GTFO, you don't have any idea what are you talking about.

    Casual market is bigger than hardcore market? Sure thing bro. But if wasn't for the hardcore EVO wouldn't exist, FGs wouldn't survive for that long and awesome things like Daigo's parry moment wouldn't exist either. I'm sure that a lot of people enjoy watching high level tournaments, even if they aren't invested in playing FGs seriously (like my brother).

    Also @Pertho where this huge scrubquote comes from?
    Steam: Razor
    3DS FC: 0576-4330-3314
    NNID: Featther
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    S00perCam wrote: »
    Pokken which is basically a Naruto party fighter with Pokémon, POKEMON, almost kicked MARVEL out of the EVO lineup.
    Pokken was at EVO last year, so it makes sense that it developed a hardcore fanbase and they wanted it back. The way I see it, a game from 2011 with terrible online play and that was discontinued for years beat out Pokken. That tells me that people still aren't sick of UMvC3.
    S00perCam wrote: »
    Windjammers was almost an EVO game, Fucking Nidhogg idk what it even is supposed to be, was nominated for the lineup.
    Neither of those games came close to being at EVO.
    S00perCam wrote: »
    There are 2 Smash games In the line up. When I joined on my first account whenever CVS2 EO came out there would have been blood in the streets over that shit. You cant get much further from a traditional EVO lineup than what we have.
    I don't know about Smash 4, but Melee is far from casual friendly. And Smash games have been using the same formula for 18 years. They aren't fresh.
    S00perCam wrote: »
    Fuck 1v1 WoW PvP might get nominated next year if you keep talking.
    I'm sure there is a line that can be crossed and WoW PVP is way past it.
  • S00perCamS00perCam Cold as ice Joined: Posts: 2,455
    Pokken was at EVO last year, so it makes sense that it developed a hardcore fanbase and they wanted it back. The way I see it, a game from 2011 with terrible online play and that was discontinued for years beat out Pokken. That tells me that people still aren't sick of UMvC3.

    Wait are you going to sit here dogpile on me for saying we should be open minded about fighters and then tell me with a straight face that Pokken should have beaten the bell of the Ball Marvel Vs Capcom for a spot at EVO the event that Marvel has made? GTFO just GTFO
    Neither of those games came close to being at EVO.

    They came closer than Legit games like CVS2, 3s, Darkstalkers, or Virtua Fighter 5

    I don't know about Smash 4, but Melee is far from casual friendly. And Smash games have been using the same formula for 18 years. They aren't fresh.

    I'm not questioning Smashes validity at all I was never one of those guys

    I'm sure there is a line that can be crossed and WoW PVP is way past it.

    Maybe but Pokken Nidhogg and Windjammers bring us closer to that line for sure.

    This conversation is starting to become one of double standards I feel which is great. I feel the OP shouldn't have been shat on like he was and has a point.
    Just because your buff, don't play tuff Cause I'll reverse the earth and turn your flesh back to dust
  • Evolution169Evolution169 Wake up DP is unbeatable Joined: Posts: 1,082
    S00perCam wrote: »
    This conversation is starting to become one of double standards I feel which is great.
    I dont't recall seeing anyone say Windjammers and Nidhogg would be fine at EVO. You are clinging to the fact that they were part of the fundraiser as some sort of proof that the FGC isn't consistent. I never asked for those games to be part of it. Take that up with Mr. Wizard.
This discussion has been closed.