My thoughts on the current state of fighting games

LOL

 

So you're telling me that you can successfully evade a move and still get hit by it. Not counting the exception to the rule of pressing a button during an evade and getting hit because of that.

 

There is no way to win after you lose, you are correct.

Dont you understand the analogy of yours is you can jump a fireeball, and if done wrong (distance whatever) you get clipped and can mess up the jump (evade)

But the Vf version of this analogy should be, in SF you jumped too short/too early, well in VF you evaded the wrong way (or at all if its a full circ.)

What youre doing is saying after you successfully jumped over the fireball , can the fireball still hit you ?

Of course not, if I succesfully evade, yes then I win that moment, but thats IF i successfully evade, just like IF you jumped clear over the fireball, you dont get clipped.

If you assume that my evade is the right direction, then I assume your jump over the projectile was timed right. Do you get what Im saying?

But evading is a risk, what if you chose wrong, just like what if you jumped too soon?

not even mentioning that the aftermath of if you DID evade correctly chnages dramatically based on what was evaded, so its not a fix-all button. Thats secondary tho, please consider the first point about your analogy.

 

I get what you're saying, my question is why is that a problem? You see this as an issue while I see it as a non-issue. This is where we disagree. If you're in the life lead, you have every right to turtle and "troll with pokes" if you want to because you earned your place out the hot seat. You're in the lead so you're allowed to make that choice if you want. The other player has to play catch up and it's not as if VF doesn't provide the player means to do it effectively. I have no issues with the prospect of playing "lame" when games give the aggressor sufficient means to combat against it. Things like G canceling dashes, crouch dashes, EDs, ECDs while having to commit their back dash variants since backdashes can't be G canceled. So while it might be technically harder to make an approach, it's not to the degree in which it hampers the game at higher level play, making turtling THE dominate playstyle. Hence why I see it as a non-issue.

Either way, what you want basically is the fusion dance of VF and Soul Calibur (which I'm not opposed to since I like both games anyway). Just make it a new IP.

 

A example of this would be Wolf full charge P+K. You can success evade in the right direction and without pushing anything extra. The catch is you evade too early, the game still registers it as a successful evade (lol) and you still get hit not being able to do anything cept block and pray on your shaking skill or panic and press a button and get counter hit changed.

 

Soon as you retarded ass dudes realize Space and time are the same thing.. You realize how stupid and retarded this thread is.

VF and Tekken don't need air dashes because you lack the Skill to open up a offense Quash.



Pro tip: vf has no 2-D spacing footsies because you don't have enough TIME TO START A POKEFEST or Keep Away match.. MATCHES ARE FAST and DMG is high. EACH CHARACTER HAS A LUNGING MOVE TO CLOSE IN ON SPACE. Leave 3-D fighters alone. It's called "Diversity".

 

I think the closest I've seen in a 2d game to VF's evade is KOF's roll and dodge. They can be used to escape certain traps and can punish a big move with slow recovery if timed right but they also lose to throws and can be baited out and punished themselves as they are vulnerable at the end.

 

after the akira overpowered thread i thought nothing could top that...but this is ridiculous in the most pathetic way...lets just say quash loses hard against turtles

when it comes to legit projectiles for vf it should be shurikens, throw knives and stuff like that...whateva

 

At least someone here is getting it.

Everyone else is acting like I don't know you can bait evades, or that evading jabs is bad; in the same way that you can bait jumps in 2D and jumping to avoid normals is (typically) bad. It works with my example just fine, but some people here are just out to discredit me at any cost.

Sure, but it's still nowhere near the level of the air game in 2D games, which again, I think is most comparable to the options the Z axis gives you in 3D. The air game in 3D is most similar to invincible moves in 2D, if anything.

They really aren't, though. You could have argued that in the 90's, sure, but we are well past that now. There's the mech fighters. There's 2D mech fighters. There's mechanics taken straight from VF that have been applied in 2D games. There's 3D fighters that have at least tried to make the range game more interesting. There's a ton of different ways to approach this genre and VF is sticking squarely in the past, which is why nobody is playing it anymore.

 

While technically correct, you are thinking about it the wrong way. It's not so much that they are the exact same thing and moreso they are opposite ends of the same spectrum.

If you're going to use that logic, then the close range guessing game of VF is "the same thing" as throwing fireballs at fullscreen, and we all know that isn't true.

Right, and I never said they did.

All these attempts to discredit me based on skill make me laugh. You don't know how good I am at the game and it is irrelevant anyways. There's more to being good at the game than knowing how it works, like being able to actually do the things you understand.

We are not talking about who is the best player here, we are talking about what makes for the best games.

But there is poking and there is keepaway in VF, it's just not the same as it is in 2D fighters.

The same can be said of a lot of 2D fighters. You are not on the verge of a groundbreaking revelation here.

Giving every character a lunging move is diverse? Sounds more like a lazy solution to a problem that other games have solved awhile ago.

 

The issue I have with it is that it's rigid. Unless you just straight up out-poke the other guy, there's no way to work your way in to a poking range where you can work better. The game gives you enough ways to get in, but you are doing just that: resetting the situation to the close range game. The game still works best at close range to be sure, but what's the point of the ranged game if all it serves as is a hasty segue to return the game back to where it plays best?

Turtling isn't and won't ever be the predominant playstyle in VF, but that's because it's not as rewarding as the close range game.

If you want an example of a 3D fighter that does make the range game nearly as rewarding as the close range game, look no further than DOA. You can set up triangle from ridiculous ranges in that game, which is why there's more incentive to play lame.

This isn't the right way to fix this issue for a number of reasons, but that's beside the point. All I'm saying here is that all you'd have to to make VF the same right now would be to have pokes inflict a stupid amount of stagger or something. Sega knows better than to do this so it won't happen, and I don't want it to happen. It's just an example I'm using to make a point.

As I said in the beginning, I'm not sure there's much reason for a new VF at this point. You guys can have your "pure" 3D fighters and play them for the rest of your lives, if you want. The rest of us will be playing stuff that will be putting the games that are out now to shame and enjoying every minute of it.

 

You're literally complaining and taking issue with things that are ultimately irrelevant in top level play. In other words, as I've been saying this entire thread, you're making issues out of non-issues. This is why people are questioning your credibility. Why you can't understand this is beyond me, honestly.

Because other elements like ring awareness (walls and, more importantly, ring out threat) are still at play. Also, if a game is close ranged focuses, and the ranged game only serves as a segue back into close range (the focus of the game), then it's serving it's purpose. The End.

 

How is this "irrelevant in top level play"? The game does not magically change when you get better at it. Your character does not sprout extra limbs and suddenly gain new ranges to fight at. It may feel like that to you, but that's just your perception of the game improving, not the game itself.

I still don't see how anyone can argue against my assessment of the ranged game of VF. It doesn't reward careful positioning and instead wants you to dash toward/around your opponent and make a hard callout. This is at all levels of play because this is just how the game works.

There can and should be more to the long range game, which basically goes back to what I was saying earlier about how there is no "need" for 3D fighters to be like this.

You can have your preference, but the days of 3D fighters having a boring ranged games are over. There will be more and more emphasis on poking and controlling space moving forward, and you can quote me on that.

 

That's the entire point in VF. Other games make good use of the ranged game as a supplement to the close range game. Again, mech fighters, airdash games, Soul Calbur, etc.

It's not bad game design, and it works well enough for the purposes of keeping VF about the close range game, but it's unimaginative and is an unsightly blemish on an otherwise very well polished system.

When I say triangle in reference to DOA I am basically talking about stun. If you gave every move in VF "stun" (or just a stupid amount of stagger), you would be able to do way more damage (read: reap greater reward) from farther ranges.

Compare any of the VF character's pokes in DOA to their VF counterparts and I think you'll find that on hit, they're all way more rewarding across the board. I know that I am definitely not getting 60%+ damage off of Jacky's 3K in VF.

You have not really been reading what I have been saying.

I don't think VF is worse than SF. I don't think SF is the epitome of fighting games, either. I do think that there are some conceptual shortcomings in the VF formula that need to be addressed moving forward, but I don't think VF necessarily needs to be the game to do it. Make a new 3D fighter and let it keep what VF does best while fixing the things that set it back compared to its contemporaries.

It is really just a matter of observation, dude. I will be writing an entire article on this soon, so I'll politely ask you to wait for this.

 

It's more like that VF design works incredibly well where it shines, but doesn't work well at all when it doesn't. The article is there precisely to provide a bigger picture on what other games have done to both adopt the best elements of VF and 3D fighters in general while also fixing the issue of a mediocre range game.

Of course this is all opinion dude, I don't know why you're harping on that like it's enough to say I'm wrong about anything. Discrediting anything as "just opinion" is a flippant dismissal that carries no weight, and relying on someone's reputation as a basis for validating yours is just as bad as a justification.

I didn't say "this is right because SKill says so" at any point in either the article or this thread. I would appreciate it if you could stop acting like I have.

Which is my point exactly.

Of course, but forcing stun is still a pretty big reward in and of itself.

This is more character specific than anything, really, but you can still get plenty of stun off of most pokes. True, most moves with Level 2 stun tend to be more mid/close range tools, but you can still get a lot off of Level 1 stun if you're privy to your opponent's hold/stagger tendencies.

Right, as a hard callout to a backdash. In DOA on the other hand, I can graze you with it at neutral and put you in a bad situation.

I have hinted as much at the reason why some games are more popular than others both in the thread and in the original article, but the detailed explanation will come later.