Eddie_the_Hated

Fighting games are dead,

outside of arcades.

Aren't arcades dead?

Aren't arcades dead?

Only if you're not Asian.

mastachefbkw

Aren't arcades dead?

Fighting games surely do not sell consoles like they used to but they seem to be steadily on a rise and Devs are certainly churning them out over the last few years, even if it is mainly for the hardcore audience.. DOA4, VF5, Tekken 5, SSB: Brawl, SC4, SFII Remix and SFIV, Tekken 6, Tk vs Cap to come..  No way are they 'DEAD'

Fighting games surely do not sell consoles like they used to but they seem to be steadily on a rise and Devs are certainly churning them out over the last few years, even if it is mainly for the hardcore audience.. DOA4, VF5, Tekken 5, SSB: Brawl, SC4, SFII Remix and SFIV, Tekken 6, Tk vs Cap to come..  No way are they 'DEAD'

Repeatedly smashing X keeps the genre alive? I'm sure you'll shit yourself when I say this, but Tekken, DOA, VF, SC, its all the same shit under a different name. And SF? What the fuck is this, 1990? Sure it was a great game, but how many rehashes can you get?

They were kept alive during the psx era because of 3D, but they were on the decline even then, last gen they saw a revival again because of better graphics, this gen the graphics are better but fundamentally they don't add anything to the experience.   Soul edge to soul calibur, vf3 to vf4, doa to doa2 were a huge leap because of the technology.   Vf5, doa4, sc4 are the same shit as their prequels with better graphics, they have peaked, there is nothing that can be done to make them faster, more fluid or more interactive, all you can do is make them prettier.

People also want more meat from their games, pretty much every genre of games has some excessive dramatic narrative and story.  That shit doesn't work in fighting games, I don't want to watch a 20 minute plot-twist scene about how Cervantes is Spawn's mother.

emofag


I don't want to watch a 20 minute plot-twist scene about how Cervantes is Spawn's mother.

rofl

Repeatedly shooting somebody keeps the genre alive? I'm sure you'll shit yourself when I say this, but Halo, Call of Duty, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, its all the same shit under a different name. And Doom? What the fuck is this, 1993? Sure it was a great game, but how many rehashes can you get?

Works several ways.

I'd agree that fighting games aren't in the pink at present, either in terms of raw hard sales or mechanical innovation, but srsly u guys - look at, oh, let's say the Def Jam fighters (variable in quality though they were) or Guilty Gear, or the Fight Night series, or Bleach on the DS, or even craptastic Naruto and chums. It's fundamentally the same template, of course - beat the crap out of somebody, rinse and repeat - but let's not pretend developers have simply been reskinning the same mechanics for each fresh iteration. There's a lot of light between even heavily recycled titles, too - walk into Virtua Fighter with the intention of hammering buttons Tekken-style and see how quickly you get your arse handed to you.

I also think the whole "same-but-prettier" argument rests on the false assumption that somehow more advanced graphics mean nothing. Go on, tell me it doesn't make a difference when you see the shadows of individual tree branches sliding over your rifle barrel in Crysis. Or that the sight of individual drops of blood flying away from somebody's recently broken jaw is besides the point. Even if there's no direct relevance to the supposedly discrete, mechanical category of "gameplay", these details add volumes to the experience.

The story-telling point is valid, though - I wonder if anyone at Namco, Capcom et al has any ideas on that front. Anyhoo, I shan't rant on. VF5 - I don't think you've been out of order in this thread, but we'll have no bloody platform trolling here, thank you very much. Love Thy Neighbour, etc.

Repeatedly shooting somebody keeps the genre alive? I'm sure you'll shit yourself when I say this, but Halo, Call of Duty, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, its all the same shit under a different name. And Doom? What the fuck is this, 1993? Sure it was a great game, but how many rehashes can you get?  Disregard this, I sucks cock

I agree.

Allow me to rephrase :)

I cant be arsed to pay full price for figthing games and sports games, I like the story and campaign exprieince which is non exsistant on those genres.

Edwin


Allow me to rephrase :)

Eww, dont infect this forum with your Jewtube AIDS.

Edwin

I also think the whole "same-but-prettier" argument rests on the false assumption that somehow more advanced graphics mean nothing. Go on, tell me it doesn't make a difference when you see the shadows of individual tree branches sliding over your rifle barrel in Crysis. Or that the sight of individual drops of blood flying away from somebody's recently broken jaw is besides the point. Even if there's no direct relevance to the supposedly discrete, mechanical category of "gameplay", these details add volumes to the experience.

The difference is in those genre environments matter.  In fighting games all the shit that goes on in the background doesn't matter, might as well be a 2D background.  You can see people from much further away in modern FPS than in last gen, that adds elements to the gameplay, amazing shit going on in the background adds nothing to fighters.

Destructible environments.

I like fighters.  Always have.  I bought MK v DC, and I played it for quite a while.  Not done yet, either!

I also downloaded Vader for SCIV, and I went through story mode with him.  Seems when you download Vader, they also give you a new intro, and a new ending for Starkiller.  Also some new dialog for other characters (I think), a new board, and some new artwork (ok, so it's one friggin' picture!  So sue me!)

Definitely looking forward to SFIV too!  I just like to play fighters, pure and simple.  I don't need to stinkin' reasons other than that!

emofag

Edwin

I also think the whole "same-but-prettier" argument rests on the false assumption that somehow more advanced graphics mean nothing. Go on, tell me it doesn't make a difference when you see the shadows of individual tree branches sliding over your rifle barrel in Crysis. Or that the sight of individual drops of blood flying away from somebody's recently broken jaw is besides the point. Even if there's no direct relevance to the supposedly discrete, mechanical category of "gameplay", these details add volumes to the experience.

The difference is in those genre environments matter.  In fighting games all the shit that goes on in the background doesn't matter, might as well be a 2D background.  You can see people from much further away in modern FPS than in last gen, that adds elements to the gameplay, amazing shit going on in the background adds nothing to fighters.

If it's "amazing shit" then it does "add something" even where mechanically irrelevant - you can't pretend that being able to see the seams in Sophitia's crotch when she kicks some poor sod in the nostrils means sweet fuck all. And as I've pointed out, there are plenty of fighting games where the visuals are more than just a gloss for the combos and reversals.

All this rests upon a false distinction, anyway - "gameplay" and "graphics" are slippery terms, deployed by reviewers mainly for the sake of convenience, and arguably impossible to consider in isolation from one another. I can tell how close to a knockout my opponent is in Fight Night 3 from the state of his face - is that a graphical element, or a gameplay element, or a little of both?

It's fundamentally the same template, of course - beat the crap out of somebody, rinse and repeat - but let's not pretend developers have simply been reskinning the same mechanics for each fresh iteration.

All this rests upon a false distinction, anyway - "gameplay" and "graphics" are slippery terms, deployed by reviewers mainly for the sake of convenience, and arguably impossible to consider in isolation from one another. I can tell how close to a knockout my opponent is in Fight Night 3 from the state of his face - is that a graphical element, or a gameplay element, or a little of both?

Valid but d'you think the new visual style in SFIV really adds anything to SF in general?  I dunno if they can get much better than the Alpha series imo.

I used to love fighting games, but haven't bought one since Capcom vs SNK 2.  For me it really just comes down to the fact that I can't be bothered to constantly re-learn new combos for each new fighter that comes out, when essentially I'm playing the same basic fighting mechanic I was 10 years ago.

All the shit Emo is stating does not take away the fact that fighters are clearly not 'dead' There's obviously a big enough hardcore audience that are still hooked and will buy, reason why they are still being made. (read the Tekken 6 interview).

Would you prefer if I said "Passed away" as opposed to "dead"?

???

DoA4 owns...
Tekken: Dark Resurrection owns...
Virtua Fighter 5 owns...
Tekken 6 owns...

Pressing x owns.....

My point, fighting games are more or less the same thing, but have different storylines(which always suck).