Largely it is on behalf of my friend because of whom I have played it more than I should like. I am well aware of how the game works. Don’t try to assume anything about strangers or you will end up playing the part of the fool. Food for thought.
The problem is that all your arguments boil down to saying “I subjectively don’t like the game, and all the reasons I subjectively don’t like the game for are objectively bad”.
Saying that you don’t like the game because of certain mechanics is fine. Saying that those mechanics are bad because you don’t like the game because of them is not - not when that is clearly just an opinion (again, subjective) that not everyone shares.
If you still don’t get it, let me break it down for you.
This statement:
This is subjective, an opinion, and this is fine.
However, the problems arise with statements like these.
These statements suddenly turn objective. You go from saying something subjective, and then try to turn it into an objective argument. Not only is this inconsistent, making for bad arguments, but it makes you look bad.
I am inclined to disagree. If you were to play Virtua Fighter 4 or Kengo II, you would realize that it is the 2D fighters that are more button-masher-friendly in terms of timing and input leniency. Commands can vary from very easy to borderline physically impossible.
If you enjoy watching kendo exhibitions or martial arts films the two above put the spectacle of other fighters to shame.
I personally find bright screen filling hit sparks and repeating cinematics an eyesore. But there are some 3D offerings with those elements.
Some 2D games are slower than some 3D fighters, so it varies, but generally 3D fighters cannot get away with as few frames of animation as 2D fighters without looking choppy or losing weight and impact.
Some 3D fighters like Psychic Force take place exclusively in the air. In most 3D fighters there are aerial attacks in addition to lateral movement, but if they tried to recapture 2D jumping it would act floaty in 3D.
Famous elite players are around in every popular fighting series, but knowledge of them is limited to their own audience. You could tell me about any famous Street Fighter player and I would have no idea who you were talking about, but should you mention someone from Virtua Fighter or Tekken I would likely at least be aware of them.
I will agree that 3D generally does not age as well as 2D graphically, but 3D has come a long way and there are some hideous 2D titles out there.
I always figured it was a kind of burnout. 2D fighters lost their momentum in the late 90s/early 2000s and 3D fighters peaked. Then 2D fighters made a triumphant return to favor with SF4 and 3D fighters started to die off. I know correlation =/= causation, but that’s how I thought it went down.
3D fighters were never all that popular outside of Tekken. It’s just that now there are way more 2D fighters with their own popularity that makes it seem like 3D is dead.
But even with that said, Tekken is still massively popular in places outside the US. DoA is the healthiest it’s ever been. People want a new SoulCalibur that either refines what V had or plays like II.And the only reason Virtua Fighter is dying out is because Sega hasn’t done anything with the franchise in years save for a balance update a year ago.
Mostly on point. 5 is wrong though. Namco’s games are slower but that looks to change somewhat with T7 because of the damage output. 7 is dependent on location but there are more well knowns in 2D. 8 mostly agree.
The thing is, the string based combat system makes sense for 3D fighters where the emphasis is on close range combat. For the most part, instead of doing special moves to control space, you’re using strings to test your opponents ability to block correctly (low/mid/high).
They need to make a 3d game with a viable long range game with interactable environments that go beyond just being a wall to get knocked into. Everyone having a least on long range type move or being able to topple objects so that they will fall and damage/hamper the other player. Stuff the makes being in 3d actually relevant.
It’s funny watching folks try to discuss Dead or Alive game play mechanics without actually knowing anything about it, let alone playing in a intermediate or high-level.
Arena fighters?
Powerstone?
Last fight?
Combate Core?
WWE all star?
Def jam?
Spawn in the demon hands?
Heay metal giomatrix?
Virtual On?
dbz tenkachi?
Bleach blade battlers?
Urban Riegn?
Edit:
Fucking PHANTOM DUST?
ANARCHY Reign?
come on lets not be stupid and act like none of the stuff you ask for hasn’t been done. other than the cluster fuck it’ll lead into.
There was a point there were 3D was a band wagon that everyone could get on. It didn’t matter how bad it looked, it was 3D! What better way to 1 up your friends than by showing them that YOU can play 3D games? Sure, Laura croft’s hair clips into her awkward looking backpack, and her breasts are literally triangles, but we can still pretend she’s a sex icon right? Sure, there were some good 3D games. But these games were remembered because of their ingenuity, not because of their “eye popping” 3D graphics. Like any successful medium, developers eventually found their footing. Now we usher in an age largely dominated by 3D games that are stylized, beautiful to behold, and fun to play.
I think the real reason why 3D fighters have dried up is actually because what we perceive to be a fighter is so narrow. Tekken and DOA are the first to come to mind, and they don’t play ANYTHING like 2D fighters. There’s no special meter, no air game (to speak of), no ranged combat, and things like side stepping, obstacles, and interactive objects are quickly written off as gimmicks by 2D enthusiasts. You’re also typically not making +10 combo chains.
doa 4 was not designed as well as 5 is
The mechanics are more fleshed out
But I’ll be dammed if it wasn’t fun. Especially that stage in Vegas with the cars.
It’s weird cause 3D fighters for the most part have better online then most 2d
fighters if you aren’t playing ggpo.tag 2 and the sc series has good online. But I wish power stone 2 was remade with online.
I get to play my friends in it every other Saturday though.
The last fight game that just came out is pretty fun too.
But generally 2d fighters are more iconic because of little ticks buzz words like hadoken, get over here!
Or the Daigo parry.
Little things like that and the fact that a lot of people aren’t used to stepping into the forground and back make 3D fighters a bit more weary to get into.
Plus the sheer amount of moves you need to remember even though eventually in high level play they only use a few of them with random ones thrown out every blue moon.
Fate unlimited codes looks like a 2D fighter with 3D graphics. Obviously not a true 3D game. I think I read that there was side stepping, but it’s just to change scenery.
Hard to tell if anarchy reins is a true 3D game or not from a combo video where there’s no real game play and it’s just combos.
Third video is the same deal as Fate unlimited codes.
SFC7 is the same as above.
One peice grand adventure is same as above.
Want to say fury of infinate world is also same as above
.Hack looks like it might be an exception,
Castlevania judgement same as above.
Kof NOT same as above.
jojo ASB same as above
X-men Same as above.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt on Anarchy reins…
3 out of 11.
But hey, that’s cool! I didn’t realize there were games that mixed 3D movement with lengthy combos. I wouldn’t call it a common occurrence however.
I think it’s partially because 3d fighters generally aren’t as interesting to the more casual observer. I love Tekken and Soul Calibur, but you don’t really get the cool DPs, fireballs and EX moves in those games (aside from Akuma). You don’t really play with the entire screen because 3d movement hugely downplays any zoning, so you have characters just poking at relatively short ranges. If I’m watching Dhalsim in Street Fighter, I’ll instantly see him throwing out yoga fires and stretchy punches and understand that he generally wants to keep out, while Gief wants to get in. If I’m watching Jin versus Dragunov in Tekken, I might not appreciate the subtle differences in range. Not to mention that while 3d combo systems may be more lenient to complete beginners since you can often just mahs buttons and get something, the sheer amount of strings and moves can be really intimidating.
Early on, 3d fighters had an edge both because of the distinct visuals compared to sprite based 2d fighters and the novelty of 3d movement adding to the complexity. This allowed them to get a foothold that was expanded on, and the fact you didn’t really have strict links or motions like 2d fighters helped make them a casual favorite (seriously, who didn’t own Tekken 3?) because anyone could play. Not very well, but they could still get moves. Nowadays they don’t have the visual advantage, and 2d games gain a lot from generally having flashier and more distinct moves and characters with more visually distinct playstyles.
Soul Calibur died because they tried to fix this problem with a new cast and flashy super/EX moves. Except that’s not what anybody wanted out of SC. Not a single person went “Man, Kilik is so lame! I wish he was some young dude obsessed with food, that would be the best!” or “Why doesn’t Lizardman grow wings and slam into people?”
I really don’t think the addition of EX and Super moves was part of the reason it died. That was all on the roster changes (dumb as hell) and lack of casual content