So do you think fighting games shouldn’t have fireballs? People jumping ten feet in the air? I’m going to guess not, so already you’re picking and choosing what has to carry over from a real fight to a fighting game in order for it to qualify as one. Why can’t I do the same? Because I disagree with you on what’s interesting? You don’t own the definition of “fighting game”.
There’s a difference between “dumbing down” and “making it not arbitrarily difficult”. “Dumbing down” would consist of making the execution easier to the point where it’s detrimental to the gameplay, such as my flawed DP example from a few posts up. Of course I don’t advocate that. The thing is - and I don’t know if you just can’t see this because you’re a retard incapable of creative thought - MUCH of the execution in fighting games can be simplified without dumbing the game down. Ideally, working from my premise that execution isn’t something interesting to test, execution in a fighting game amounts to nothing more than the sheer necessity (by virtue of the fact that we can’t yet control video games using brain waves alone) of having to use a control interface to tell the game what you want to do. Not a fucking single-player game in itself.
Fighters reflect fighting concepts. Controlling space with movement and attacks while thinking about strategy to counter those movements and attacks.
Now if you just look @ the basic fundamental concept, a fireball is an attack. That attack can be countered with proper strategy. Its the elements of fighting not a direct translation between reality and a video game. Quit splitting hairs.
why are sports game called sports games? could it be that they reflect sports games? why is DDR considered a dance game? could it be that it reflects dancing? why are fishing games considered fishing games? could it be the reflect fishing? why are racing games called racing games? could it be the reflect actual racing? nah. That possibly couldn’t be it. I’m just crazy to think that…
There are already “easy executable” games like smash. Go play those but to come to a street fighter forum and cry about execution is too much is just flat out scrubby. If anything fighters should be harder imo.
No, that’s YOUR definition of a fighting game. To me, a fighting game is nothing more than a multiplayer game in which 2 (or more - see Smash/GG Isuka ) players compete with each other using their direct control over a single character to interact with each other in a manner that aesthetically resembles a fight. The concepts behind the gameplay have nothing to do with it, it’s the aesthetic presentation, the control scheme, and the equal distribution of number of characters (i.e. beat 'em ups aren’t fighting games) that makes it a fighter.
I’m not splitting hairs, anyway. You’re choosing to ignore certain essential elements of real-life fighting (and I’d say the fact that people can’t throw fireballs is a pretty fucking essential element) in favor of what you deem as the most important elements, yet when I do the same I’m “splitting hairs”. You’re a hypocrite.
Oh, so because there’s one game with easier execution that means there can’t be any more? I’m not “crying”, I love many existing fighting games - I’m just discussing ways in which I think future fighting games could improve on past ones. How is that scrubby? Did you listen to Sirlin - a multi-time tournament winner and top 8 placer - complain about how he hates execution-intensive games despite playing them, and how he thinks ideally execution shouldn’t be a factor at all? Is he a scrub too?
Actually I think fighting games are all strategy, because after a certain point execution is simply muscle memory. If you eliminate the need to overcome a high execution barrier, you’re still left with strategy, aren’t you?
And I think it’s a bit sad that you actually have to bring ‘REAL LIFE FIGHTING CONCEPTS’ into this. It’s not like we log out of reality the instant we press start or put a quarter into the cabinet.
See that’s another example of how the execution requirement is low in Arcana Heart.
If you hit someone with a ‘launcher’ (usually 3C for many characters) the opponent goes flying up. In many other games you’d be expected to super jump after them (down, up), or super jump install perhaps, or time it right to combo them on the way down or what have you, but in AH all it takes is one button (in this example). You hold D and your character automatically locks onto your opponent, leaving you to combo as soon as you reach them.
IAD’s are done the same way they are in GG I believe. All the cancels in this game are done with one button as well. Homing cancels, guard cancels, etc.
I’d say this is almost true. In a game where everything used in high level play everyone can do 100%, it’s definitely true. However, I mentioned somewhere (may even have been in my first post) that there is some execution-dependent stuff so hard to do consistently that even at the top level of play people don’t get it 100% of the time, but there’s little risk in going for it so people will do it regardless (think Sent unblockable in MvC2). This injects some execution into the proceedings.
Generally, though, yeah, at high levels it’s ALL strategy (disregarding freak accidents of poor execution) because everyone can execute everything perfectly or they wouldn’t be at that level in the first place. The problem then is why bother making the execution so hard in the first place? If it’s all strategy at high levels, why not simplify the execution so that it becomes all strategy at low levels too, and not give those players with the time/interest to practice the difficult shit an uninteresting advantage (they’ll still be the best anyway because they’re the best strategists, presumably), and make the game more accessible to new players, expanding the scene?
It’s ironic that the game I had thought would fufill that title (low execution requirement and smoother entryway into post begininer strategy) is the one that requires an absurd amount of execution to even begin taking seriously.
Yeah, but the learning curve is at least very gentle - you can learn to do most of the shit that was supposed to be in there in a matter of hours if not less, even if you’ve never played a similar game before. What other 2d fighter can you say that for?
You know, no one has really defined at what point execution is “too hard” or “too easy”.
I will say this- anyone who believes that hard execution increases strategic depth needs to play SSVSP. Will prove them wrong- that game is about 90% strategy and 10% execution (some things do require good timing, like Gedo’s alternate DM and Enja’s DP)
I defined “too hard” as anything harder than is essential to maintain the balance of the game, when no functionally identical (or appropriately similar) balance-maintaining solutions that would allow for easier execution are available.
for me it differs from game to game.
some would argue that having near perfect execution makes characters who would alternately not be viable in competitive play a LOT scarier.
take Hugo for example - the ability to do Tachi Gigas ( walk forward or partitioned ) consistently makes him a lot more frightening.
or take YSB red parrying out of Geneijin and going INTO partitioned Gigas - HARD, but definitely makes Yun players rethink randomly trying to rush him down lest they get command grabbed ( or rather, what they rush in WITH ).
i guess it really all depends on how players in whatever game they prefer apply themselves. execution really is nothing without prior experience and knowledge backing it, and that goes for any game. but if you don’t apply yourself at all then you fail simple as that.
Absolutely nothing about the idea offends me. The problem is you’re assuming that it is possible to take the current paradigm of fighting games, remove the execution barrier, and end up with this ultimate of pure strategy and extreme depth with a control system a 3 year old could use. Sounds great except it misses a very major point:
Execution is a core part of the strategy in fighting games. Not just playing the game, as you seem to think, but a core part of this strategy. Setting up situations that are difficult for your opponent to recover from is the core of fighting game strategy.
Turn based is the ONLY possible system that takes execution entirely out of the equation. If its real time, it requires execution and physical skill. Every attempt to simplify the execution required for real time play results in a DIRECT reduction in the strategy; see my previous post.
But, I have good news: Your ideal game has been made and has been out for like 2 years now. Fighting game, favorite characters, and absolutely zero time in training mode required: http://www.sabertoothgames.com/ufs/ufs.asp
something better than polarity’s useless and overly subjective posts.
seriously play chess/RTS/turnbased stuff whatever. but execution is one half to 2 parts of fighting games, period.
and polarity should really stop complaining about replies to his post about his opinion if he won’t in turn ignore said reply…instead he replies to that reply and spews more BS.
in a few replies of his (polarity), one being a reply to one of shoults replies, he says something along the line of “what’s the point/don’t bother replying to/etc.” to his post where he said something like “there’s no point in replying since it’s just opinion/no point if you don’t agree with my view…”…
which is all well and good, but then when he replies to a post repeating that point, yet continues to reply with other stuff (nonsense btw) to said post… he should either repeat the “what’s the point” and shut up or don’t complain when people continue to post shit when he does.
lol hope that’s understandable, I don’t want to bother going back and getting the specific posts…
) players compete with each other using their direct control over a single character to interact with each other in a manner that aesthetically resembles a fight. The concepts behind the gameplay have nothing to do with it, it’s the aesthetic presentation, the control scheme, and the equal distribution of number of characters (i.e. beat 'em ups aren’t fighting games) that makes it a fighter.
