Fighting Game of the Year : Virtua Fighter 4

Electronic Gaming Monthly (EGM April 2003 # 165) awarded VF4 as the best fighting game of the year

[ QUOTE ]
-From EGM-

2 broken joysticks 50,000 matches, and countless hours of smack talk later, Sega's masterpiece still reigns as our favorite one on one Ps2 fighter,its simple to pick up, yet profoundly deep.

[/ QUOTE ]

VF4 - 3385 votes (Ps2)
MKV : DA - 1585 votes (Ps2, Xbox, GC)
Tekken 4 - 728 votes (ps2)
Godzilla - Destroy all monsters - 570 (GC)
MvC2 - 551 (Ps2)

quite a bunch of people voted for VF4, which made the game totally dominate the poll, and who would have thought that people actually thinks that Godzilla : Destroy all Monsters was better than MvC2 /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

I love how all these people voted for VF4, but when you look at who actually plays this game and who is dedicated enough to get pretty good, the number is rediculously small here in the US. Small compared to all the Tekken 4, CvS2, SC2, and MvC2 players out there.

 

Ya know, at this point, I could give a shit about people playing to get really good...people are buying the game, thats enough for me.

 

[ QUOTE ]
people are buying the game, thats enough for me.


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly!!!!, i agree, at the very least people may not be getting good at it, but at least they recognize what a great game they're playing, just a couple of hours ago, i showed my friend the same article and he was surprised that the one game he swore he'd never play came out on top, now he's borrowed my VF4 disc. and decided to give it a better look, at one point that improves the number of people who would be versed in playing VF, i couldn't have asked for anything better as far as the game is concerned.

plus on a side note, we can now expect to see the current VF craze (VF4 Evo) to be amongst the best, if not at the top on next years fighting game of the year /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

What's really surprising is the 728 people who voted for Tekken 4, were they Namco employees?

 

[ QUOTE ]
El_Barto said:

What's really surprising is the 728 people who voted for Tekken 4, were they Namco employees?

[/ QUOTE ]
I laughed for 10 min after reading this reply.
Too Good, /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

Offical U.S. Playstation Magazine (OPM) April 2003.

The votes from the reader's poll are in:

Best Fighting Game:
Virtua Fighter 4 : 40%
The Award was accepted by Yu Suzuki San.

Runners-up
Mortal Kombat-Deadly Alliance : 19%
Tekken4 :17%
War of the Monsters : 12%
Marvel vs. Capcom2 : 9%

Here is the Interesting part :
PS2 Game of the Year
Grand Theft Auto-Vice City : 50%
Runners-up
##### : 21%
%%%%% : 7%
&&&&& : 6%
MoH-F : 3%
VIRTUA FIGHTER 4 : 3%
Madden 2003 : 2%
***** : 2%
^^^^^ : 1%
@@@@@ : 1%

Yes, Virtua Fighter 4 beat Madden 2003, hard to believe. As for best fighter game, TK4 is very close to MKDA

 

While I'm as happy as the next VF fan that it's getting increased attention in the media, I think what's more telling is that Deadly Alliance was voted the Runner-Up. The opinions of these voters are swayed by whatever gets more attention in the magazines, not necessarily by the quality of the game.

 

I am a huge Tekken fan, but T4 was/is garbage. MKA is absolutely pathetic as well. Hell, Kakuto Chojin was better than MK. VF4 is very nice. While the graphics could have been cleaned up a bit, it offers more than any fighting game since Soul Calibur. If we see a US release of VF4e this year, I would love to see how well it stacks up against Soul Calibur 2 to their many fans.

 

I don't see Evo doing that well with all the Namco Fanboy's here in America. Especially since US seems to have a style over substance attitude when it comes to fighting games.

 

That is in part true, but I think the NAMCO games do have quite a bit of substance. You may be able to pick them up to average ability quite easily, but they require the same dedication as VF to be good at them. MK and DOA are unfortunately still popular so your point isn't completely wrong.

 

[ QUOTE ]
junosynth said

I don't see Evo doing that well with all the Namco Fanboy's here in America

[/ QUOTE ]


right now i wouldn't make those conclusions, after all the same was thought about VF4, and now look at were its at, its at number 1, regardless of how many namco fanboys are there, VF4 Evo won't be left behind that easily.

 

DoA at its core is a well devloped and put together fighting game. It's core problem lies within the counter system, and even then the prodominance of its shortcomings are only made light at an intermediate level. With a bit of work there's no doubt in my mind that it could be a worthwhile series, but to dismiss it entirely I think is to be a slave to the mob mentality. It's just a step away from putting it all together, and I think to lump it together with the MK series is a bit of a disservice.

The same shortcomings rear their ugly head in games like Tekken, which up to a certain point is a fairly well done fighting engine (particularly TK3), but at its core is fundamentally flawed. Of course, it's wildly popular, and therefore much easier to pick up and roll with. The fact that both these titles use VF as their starting point is kind of ironic in my opinion, since both of them seem to miss the main draw (again imo) of VF, that is its consistent, learned, and unilateral rule set. DoA and TK just turn everything on and let the cards fall where they may, which leads to undeniable mass appeal and gaping holes in their consistency.

Of course, all of this is kind of moot, since the voters and magazines alike could give two shits about how well VF4 plays. What made VF4 so popular with its Kumite mode, which capitalizes on the "gotta catch 'em all" element of collectibility. It has nothing to do with playing better than anything.

edit: death_raven Depending on what you consider important, I wouldn't say VF is winning very much of anything. Sure this award is kind of cool, and it sold fairly well, but TK4 is outselling at a higher price point, and it hasn't been out for 6 months. And MKDA is outselling them both, with about 200,000 more copies sold on the PS2 alone.

 

DOA is a poorly constructed attempt at VF.
That isn't to say it can't be fun, but it needs a lot fo work to become anywhere close to VF. I am not speaking as a fanboy either on this. DOA has more problems than just a bad counter system.

 

I agree that DoA falls terribly short at trying to emulate VF (I tend to group Tekken into the failure group as well, but we can just tackle DoA for now), but I am curious as to what particular elements of DoA's combat systems you find so problematic. All 3d fighters (the crucial ones being VF, Tekkn, Soul Calibur, and DoA) at their core revolve around a very basic rock, paper and scissors format. I could try to explain it here, but it's been done so very well by Dave Sirlin, game design savant and all-around fighting game guru, that I'll just let him do it.

Of course, there is a subsequent layer of rules that makes most 3d fighters a bit more subjective and a lot less arbitrary than simple rock, paper, scissors, and within those rules is normally where a game's "depth" lies. DoA at least fulfils those basic sets of 3d fighting rules, I just don't think it's gone that extra step in instituting an additional set of game systems. There's just that blind global counter system.

Their throw system is pretty pitiful as well, I believe in part because it was based on Tekken's, which is pretty atrocious already, but then dumbed down a bit more to make it as global as the counter system. This tends to make their "throw characters" not really throw characters at all.

But I'm digressing into why I think DoA is flawed, when I'm really curious as to why you do. /versus/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
replicant said:
That is in part true, but I think the NAMCO games do have quite a bit of substance. You may be able to pick them up to average ability quite easily, but they require the same dedication as VF to be good at them. MK and DOA are unfortunately still popular so your point isn't completely wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well any fighting game takes skill. (With the exception of maybe Urban Champion for NES). But I don't see how anyone can honestly think current Namco Fighting games are NOT Style over Substance games. Also while were on the subject on game flaws. One of the main flaws I see in Namco games lately is the ability to abuse moves with little or no punishment. Also they seem to favor Low Risk/High reward moves in their games.

 

DOA fails due to it's overall simplicity. Yes, it follows the basic rules of Punch>Throw>Block. The thing is that it doesn't elevate from that point. Every character has the same countering ability with disregard for their fighting style. They also do a tremendous amount of damage from said counters making them a very much needed part of your arsenal. The counter frame window is also quite large. Imagine that a you can do a counter and 10 frames later catch a high punch with that counter. Seems a bit unfair. No recovery ability from backturned stance, due to the game engine not recognizing backturned characters except for throw applications. This leads to monstrous MC strings. Throws also have higher priority over straigth attacks. You will actually punch through someones throw animation and eat the damage if you are not in a low attack stance. Characters such as Kasumi, Bayman, Hitomi, and Ein do far too much damage. With a guaranteed LS combo they can almost kill someone in 1 less than 5 hit combo. 75%+ guaranteed damage is a bit much, when a MC isn't needed.

 

NAMCO makes beautiful games and usually adds lots of stuff into the home conversions to increase replayability among casual gamers. Ok, they have style.

The titles like SC and Tekken are definitely not in the same league as VF when it comes to depth. Although, they aren't slackers in this department as well. Tekken has a wonderful mC and MC game along with an intuitive throw/escape system and an okizeme focus that is a game unto itself. The universal low parry adds a welcome element to it as well. SC offers a different option for the hand-to-hand driven game market. With it's guard breaking, parry system, and very intuitive controls it starts to open up. Both games are easily gotten into, but both take quite some time to be competent at.

VF could be argued that it is going the way of Style over Substance with it's expanded Pokemon-esque item collecting system, enhanced eye-candy, and mini-games. It's an argument that can be waged against just about every game this side of Vib-Ribbon. The thing is that it is unecessary. Tekke, SC, and VF are all fun to play and have legions of fans behind them.

The point about "low risk/high rewards" for NAMCO games I definitely disagree with. At high level play if you want to do anything of merit, then you need guaranteed damage. Any risky move will get you killed. SC is one of the most Machi games there is at high level. If you run out and go for big damage moves, then you are gonna get embarassed quick. Tekken has all big reward moves now with horrible consequences if you miss. With the exception of the Just Frame Salmon Hunter (Kuma Glitch). Although, it can be dodged, it is very hard. Tekken 4 has changed the playstyle of Tekken by a trememndous amount. It's no longer about MC super juggles and dashing okizeme games. It's all about 8-frame jab interrupts. Poking is the only way to play T4 competitively now. That is why Steve, Paul, and Lee rank so high now, because of their exceptional poking games.

I can't convince you to like any of them, but they aren't mindless games.

 

Well I strongly disagree with most of what you just said. So I guess you could say we agree to disagree. BTW I like and try to play all fighting games. Well, with the exception of the MVC series.

 

I absolutely agree that DoA's countering system hampers it considerably, and I've already mentioned that it's global nature makes pretty much everything else in the game secondary. I've also conceded that it doesn't really take that next step in creating a secondary rule set (I assume because the counter system is supposed to be the focus). And while I didn't expound on it, I've also addressed the throw system. So on those issues you won't hear argument from me.

The lack of a "...recovery ability from backturned stance..." kind of confuses me, as there are many options from a backturned stance, so I'd need some elaboration on that one.

So that leaves high damage, particularly in combos. Well, Tekken 4 is the house of infinites, TTT had its share of absurdly damaging combos, and TK3 had 50%+ damage combos that didn't even require a juggle (this is not to discuss TK1 and TK2's 100% combos), thus creating the precedent for guaranteed high damage combos.

I agree that's DoA is not there yet, I guess I just don't think it's that far away from what people consider "there."