It seems like all high level strategies are focused primarily on the traditional street fighter based games, but is there similar deep analysis anywhere for games like UFC? Or is there something about those games that make them bad for high level play? I’ve been unable to find any.
I would guess no.
Because they are shitty broken games.
People play Street Fighter and King of Fighters because they are high quality games and don’t look like real life.
Shit like UFC wrestling and boxing games are designed for a casual crowds that can’t stretch their imagination farther than what they see on a sports channel.
Good job answering his question…
As for the original post, I would say no. There isnt enough going on in the game, system wise, for any real strategy to come into play. Those kind of games are made to just be mashed out with out much else going on. In the end those games are sports games, not fighting games.
Thanks for the answer. Could you give a more specific example of what you mean by mashed out, versus the strategy involved in traditional fighters? The UFC games in specific seem really complex with lots of advance strategies possible. I’m pretty new to the advanced style of fighting game play and am really curious why people only do it with more fiction based fighting games as I tend to gravitate to things that more mimic real life (I’m big into racing sims which strive to replicate the real world as much as possible) Not that I don’t enjoy street fighter type games. I played them a bunch as a kid (apparently badly). Was wondering if it’s just tradition, an aesthetic thing, or if there was something inherently more interesting about the way you fight.
I think a lot of it has to do with randomness, like the fact that you can have one hit KOs. No to mention the lack on visible life bars, timer, attack and frame data and hitboxes. Things like 7/10 on a hit power rating aren’t really calculable. Fighting games tend to be scientific in the sense of makes the high level strategies good. If you’re playing purely on instinct and randomness, it’s very difficult to make reliable strategies. In SFIV for example Character A has 900 health Character B’s standing roundhouse does 90 damage. It will take 10 standing roundhouses to KO Character A. Same goes for calculating combos, there are rules to things things that make them predictable.
How do you plan a strategy or even a tournament where these scenarios are equal possibilities?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAzwfmAP5N0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUhbcdIqJ4Q
In short, numerous or complex mechanics don’t necessarily create a deep game, choices and options do.
For an older game to reference, see Bushido Blade. Amazing game to goof around with friends playing, horrible game to play in a tournament because of instant death and potential for stalemates and no timeouts.
Also it’s a major, I don’t want to say fallacy, misconception maybe, that realism=better or more entertaining. Sure you might gravitate towards that because you like it in real life, but do you only go to movies that portray things with utmost realism? I have a degree in Cinema Studies and when I was in school we studied a movement called Italian Neo-realism, and to be honest it was the most dreadfully boring type of cinema to what because it was so mundane. Think about this phase for a second.
For me, the cinema is not a slice of life, but a piece of cake.
-Alfred Hitchcock
That is the aesthetic aspect of fighting games that appeals to people, not accuracy to real life. And as I explained above, the outcome of games being scientific, calculable and predictable. Look at great games throughout history like chess or poker. There’s elements of rule based game play and psychology. It’s no coincidence that a lot of top fighting game players are also great card players.
The last 2 posts pretty much elaborated on what I said bluntly and admittedly a bit insulting.
Excuse me for that but I’ve grown up on games like Super Mario Bros., Street Fighter and Doom.
Back in the days video games mostly tried to NOT look like real life and it was great.
Video games were a way for people of temporary escapism into a world that isn’t bleak, grey and realistic.
Somewhere where I could focus on doing things I like and where all the fucking jocks and the boring shit they liked, like pro sports and cars had no place.
So basically what I’m getting at is that 1 genre is already completely ruined by only targeting that casual video game mongoloid crowd, which is first person shooters.
Just looking at all the Call of Duty garbage coming out each year makes me defensive about people suggesting bringing that kind of crap into my fighting games, platformers or action games.
Toribash is a very complex fighting game from what I’ve heard and quite difficult to become competitive.
Toribash looks pretty cool, have to check that out. Definitely can understand how the one hit KO or any randomness would not be good. Definitely want the best player to win. Undisputed 3 has a competition mode that removes those things actually. You can see health bars and training mode shows damage figures and things of that nature.
I’m not trying to say realistic means better universally even if I prefer it. I grew up doing karate so maybe that’s why. I was mainly just wondering what the difference is that makes people take the strategy in Street fighter games to such a high level, but I can’t really find the same kind of info for other games. Basically what would happen if a high level street fighter player put their fighting game analytical skills to a game like UFC. Is the optimal strategy something too easy to master like tic-tac-toe and that’s why it’s not popular? Is the lack of popularity just tradition or an aesthetic thing? Something else?
c’mon man, lots of people like neorealism. Ladri di Biciclette is one of the most beloved films of all time. Fellini is one of the most influential filmmakers of all time. There is nothing inherently worse about realism, it’s just a different cinematic perspective. There’s plenty of room for it in cinema, and I would wager there is plenty of room for a competitively viable boxing or mma game as well. I’m not sure why they aren’t getting made, however.
A lot of the reasons why people are not inclined to play such games and develop strategies are personal preference matters. That’s why you don’t see people like Justin Wong do much more than dabble in the more “anime” style airdashers or KoF or for that matter 3D fighters at all. Certainly people could make such things if they put their mind to it. I think inherently the break from realism also gives birth to so many tactics that we take for granted. Depending on how far you push the realism, you lose a lot of mechanics such as canceling, juggles, cross ups, etc. This may be your chance for a break out if you can make a proper case for such games to be on a competitive level. You might even be able to prove your point, but people may still dismiss them because of tradition or aesthetics.
I’d say beloved is a bit of a stretch, respected for certain. I appreciate the technical and artistic merits of the film and that movement. I was definitely professing more of a personal opinion than anything. It’s like if you put Snow White and a Tex Avery cartoon side by side, I’d appreciate the masterful quality of Snow white, but I’d choose to watch the Avery cartoon every time.
As far as why they’re not being made, there just may not be enough demand or interest for them. They would certainly feel incredibly foreign to traditional fighting game players. Think of a game like SF with hitboxes perfectly sculpted to the models, it would feel nothing like the SF we know today.
Thanks for the response, seems like most strategies start with optimizing what can reliably be reacted to and what’s left becomes about optimizing the ideal choices when anticipating your opponent. When I was a kid jumping in was a good tactic as I never played against anyone who could reliably react fast enough and even if they did, they couldn’t punish much. (this was pre internet, I’m 37) I had a really fast dragon punch so could beat pretty much beat anyone I played (friends, local arcade) because I never played anyone good. There was pretty much no reason to do anything but strong attacks as no one could even react to those fast enough regularly. Things change when you start playing people that can. I’ve been playing SF4 with my son and trying to teach him all these new strategies as I learn them myself. Was just seeing if there was any equally advanced UFC/fight night strategies as we play those too. Thanks again guys.
Bunch of shit posted here.
Here are the basic categories of levels of gameplay for any game.
basic/new/beginner level: players are learning the game and its mechanics
intermediate/semi-pro/middle/average level: players are learning to be consistent with how the game naturally wins for them
high/advanced/pro level: when players master the previous stage, perfect play dictates the winner. At that point, surprises, tricks, reading the opponent and calculated risks are the main factors that create outcomes of match ups.
You can have high level techniques in any game. The problem is whether that game has an intermediate level that dominates. If you have a character that only needs to push one button over and over again infinitely to win (maybe a great poke that is easy to link and combos infinitely or something like that,) you can mindlessly press that button and win consistently. At that point, its the other player’s job to avoid the button which is going to take all the high level play as anything lower will result in a statistic loss. When something so easy as pushing a button vs using everything you can imagine to avoid getting hit is the bet, most players won’t bite. That is how you end up with shitty games. There has to be a proper risk reward element where time invested trumps solid play in order to be worth investing into. This also includes random elements. If there are strong random elements that can cause a match up to be randomly changed, players will also not want to invest (time or money) into said game…
TL;DR High level in other kinds of games, yes. Is high level worth getting to, depends on the game.