might be interesting to debate

Discussion in 'Junky's Jungle' started by GodEater, Feb 3, 2001.

  1. GodEater

    GodEater Well-Known Member


    Seth Killian from Shoryuken.com wrote a piece some time ago
    about "2d versus 3d". Seth is great because he writes well
    and has contentious opinions. I was wondering what anyone
    thinks of his particular point of view in this case. I'm a
    bona fide fence sitter as something smacks me as incomplete
    in his argument but since I can't dredge it up I can't really
    say anything.


  2. GreatDeceiver

    GreatDeceiver Well-Known Member

    I read up on his columns whenever I can; I agree that he writes well, with conscientious opinions and suffieciently clear arguments to back them up, but regarding that particular column, while I appreciate the point he makes (i.e. about the important role of distance-combat - driven by the projectile, or fireball - in 2D games, and the strategic options it opens) I don't think he got the whole picture under perspective.

    First, he never differentiates between VF and Tekken - at the very end of the article, he writes and I quote:

    "Make the game really play when you’re at a distance, instead of simply degenerating into unpunishable backdashing..."

    However that may be true for Tekken (unpunishable backdashing, aided by high priority pokes such as low punch and low kick) - a simple solution for a simplistic game, it's evidently never true for VF.

    I am of the opinion that you are never, ever really safe in VF. There are simply too many variables that can work against you at the same time, not the least of all a dash->throw attempt, or as importantly, the elbow/sidekick stagger, which can lead to massive damage, or even a shift in mind balance. Sometimes, entire VF matches hinge on stagger set-ups (the way I play with Kage, for example). Movement is carried out extremely fast in the game, and gaps can be closed within the fraction of a second (I love E-dashing so much :) So, not to carry on for too long, VF is an entirely different system from any other game, and extremely tactical, from a distance, in its own right - the writer of the column should have taken that into perspective, and I think he would, if he had a deeper knowledge of VF; but instead, he equated all "current" 3D games, as he called them, to the same overall thing, and that is ridiculous.

    I appreciate that there is no "fireball" equivalent in VF, but then again, there is no real fast jumping - again it's obvious that it's a completely different system (and not just cosmetic appearance, or rendering method); doing a chain-reasoning where you go from the non-existence of fireballs to the non-existence of distance games is absolutely fallacious when you consider VF. And one has to consider and acknowledge VF if "3D games" are even mentioned. The writer didn't, and it compromised his column.

  3. Myke

    Myke Administrator Staff Member Content Manager Kage

    I first read this article when it was first posted, i.e. a little while ago, and I remember back then thinking just how biased and uninformed the author was.

    I re-read it again just now, and I still think the same.

    GreatDeceiver quoted what I thought was the key sentence which highlights the author's 2D bias and lack of knowledge (bordering on plain ignorance) on 3D fighters:

    "Make the game really play when you’re at a distance"


    I agree with the points GreatDeceiver raised concerning that statement, so I won't repeat them. Seth sounds so sure of himself when it comes to what elements are lacking in today's 3D fighter. He even goes on to say that the Virtual On series are a step in the right direction. I'm sorry, but that's just so wrong. I love the VO games, and while they share many similar aspects to 3D fighting, they are not representative of the future of traditional 3D fighters. They're a different beast altogether, a hybrid of shoot'em up, FPS and fighter. If you want to really play at a distance (any distance), then VO will more than accomodate that. But to say that the 3D fighting genre should take a step in this direction is just ignorant.

    Back to the 2D vs 3D debate. I had a lot of trouble with jchensor's post where he stated what he liked about 2D and disliked about 3D games. In short, he liked the precision of 2D, and disliked the (apparent) randomness and inconsistency of 3D. Again, it's painfully obvious that jchensor, or Seth, have no idea when it comes to 3D games. I really couldn't be bothered in taking this debate any further, but if anyone's interested in reading a reputable SFer's take on 3D fighters, then have a read of his reply.

    To be honest, it was quite upsetting to see such a narrow minded view coming from someone I considered to be quite intelligent, imaginative and skillful; an opinion I've formed of jchensor only from the FAQs of his that I've read and the movies I've seen of his play.

    For what it's worth, Seth's article was really interesting to read, and I will agree that the fireball had a huge impact in shaping the 2D fighting genre that we know today. If it were simply an article on why 2D games are still around and going strong, and not a 2D vs 3D comparison, then I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

    BTW Chanchai: TB stands for Team Battle ;)

    m y k e
    how ya gonna win when ya ain't right within?
  4. Chanchai

    Chanchai Well-Known Member

    Well shit, what the hell was I smoking that day?! God, I must've been on IGN way too much (remember how they speculated TB was referring to network play or some stupid thing like that?!).

    Okay, I've just punished myself for that one and embarassingly made the edit on the post (which shows the edit was done today, ugh).

    Anyways, while we're on the topic:


    Read some of the responses to the article to get what that statement was about (here's a hint: Krull). And yes, for those of you that argue that he has a point regarding the relationship of playing style and how a person generally is, I can accept that, but this guy takes that argument a little far and specific. Seems like he's either a very seriousness nutbar or he's just screwing around.


    P.S. oh may I be forgiven for another title mixup, worse than when I accidentally said Street Fighter 2 Championship Edition/images/icons/tongue.gif

    Extra Note:
    -There are quite a few things I said back then that I'd take back now, but it's over with, no need for me to do that except one:
    -I take back the statement I made on DoA2, definitely not all that random. Soul Calibur still feels pretty random/images/icons/tongue.gif
  5. ice-9

    ice-9 Well-Known Member

    A few quick comments:

    1) If fireballs are the key to 2D's success, then developers must be missing out big time. If you look at how 2D games progress, it's pretty clear that the trend has been towards de-emphasizing projectiles. Look at Alpha, III and KOF as your main examples.

    2) Helpers are fundamentally different than projectiles. Helpers are a way to open up the gameplay and allow the player to attack in different ways. For most traditional projectiles the character is immobile upon execution and is frozen with considerable recovery time. This is not really the case with helpers.

    3) If anything, I think the key component to 2D's continued success/survival (depending on whose point of view) is the established fan base. A lot of people know how to play 2D so they continue playing 2D.

  6. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Not a bad article...i think i read another of his a while back, on "cheapness"

    I'd definitely agree that fireballs were a giant leap forward...probably taken for granted by us all for several years. Without them and their offspring, there wouldn't even be much of a second dimention to SF.

    As to why 3d fighters are having a tougher time catching on, i'd say that's a different matter. Not only is it incredibly difficult to implement a workable input model (VF3's E is nice, but it only allows a short burst of movement, unless you want to get really fancy stepping involved), but it would require a bit too much processing power for the average human to handle.

    Interestingly enough, VF3's not really _that_ much more 3d than SF, it just uses different dimensions. Increased freedom on the ground seems to have cost us air maneuverability. VF3 probably lets you jump on more occassions than SF lets you move into or out of the background, but not by much, and not to any great, practical effect. I'm trying to imagine VF with SF-style jumping...definitely fun to try, but i think it might get too...um...messy.
  7. Shadowdean

    Shadowdean Well-Known Member

    I think this guy is a crock of shit...granted...in 2d games - projectiles play a paramount role...but I think he just misses the entire point of 3d games...and I doubt he really has invested any amount of time into learning a 3d game in and out.

    "Victory can be anticipated, but not assured" Sun-Tzu
  8. SummAh

    SummAh Well-Known Member

    I hated the article.
    I read it ages ago..
    disagreed with it

    Then again, I've never agreed with any of his articles. Maybe I just like to have my own theories. But I hardly follow one. Cause when it comes down to it, sometimes one has to throw all their ideas outta the window and just depend on instincts.

    They never play 3d games at all. What they know is purely from word of mouth n second guessing, meaning one 3d game is the same as the other 3d game.

    From a writer's point of view, they are biased on the get go. Instead of writing it from his point of view, he should have collaborated the effort with someone who is 'major' in 3d games.

    And no, I do not agree with his fireball theories.
    Look at it from this way, players from SRK.com only play SF and the Versus series. They don't even play 3rd strike.
    They don't venture into the SNK fighting games. They don't know how 2d games have changed in a whole new way where having a fireball attack means nothing.

    I'm different, I actually play all of them. Be it 3rd strike, Kof, Garou, FF, GGX, VF....

    I don't see a difference.
    Essentially, it all boils down to how you, as the player would play the game.

    As i recalled, Jchen made a stupid remake, saying how 3d games players are looking for a 'quick fix'. Now what the F@#k is that suppose to mean?

    Since I am always attacking, the big diff in 2d vs 3d games for me are the ways of attacking. 2d games, fun as it may be, are very limited in the number of tactics. I can think of bagfuls of tactics for 3d fighting games in general. Yet for 2d, I can only use a handful.

    Not because I suck at 2d games. A couple of members here have played with me. They know very well what level I am at in terms of 2d games. Rather, it's the game engines that restricts me. Which is why the only 2d fighting game I play and challenge on a regular basis is 3rd strike. I'm sure I don't need to explain why I choose 3S over KOF.

    <font color=red>SummErs' 'PSO '
  9. SummAh

    SummAh Well-Known Member

    As a matter of fact, that post came on when I first met u!!

    Boy, those were the good old days /images/icons/smile.gif

    <font color=red>SummErs' 'PSO '
  10. akiralove

    akiralove Well-Known Member

    I read this guy's article on cheapness, and on the difference between normal players and champions (i.e. the diff. between loosing and being beaten). I thought they were well written, funny, and really insightful about fighting game subculture. But I agree that this article is uninformed.

    To repeat what someone else said, his mention of VO is really telling. I also consider VO to be a great game, but not really a traditional fighting game. I've always thought that VO was what FPS games should aspire to, not fighting games. The fact that he wants to be far away from his opponent firing projectiles at him makes me feel that he enjoys doing damage or winning more than actually "fighting".

    To me, the Vs. series games are more of a hybrid shooting/fighting/action game than a fighting game. I feel the same way about games like power stone and smash brothers. When my attack is to summon a giant gorilla on the screen who fires 20 laser beams out of his mouth in 1 second (MvC2), am I really "fighting"? Am I even really interacting with the other player? How about when doctor doom flies up into the corner, away from the opponent, and stays there for a while firing dozens of beams in every direction? I'm not saying that it's dumb or that it's not as good as 3D games. I just feel it's a different type of game; it's different than jumping in with a deep cross-up fierce, low short, spinning piledriver.

    To say that 3D games are fundementally lacking because they have no fireball range-pressure games is to totally not understand their nature. It's like saying that SF3 sucks because it doesn't have sagat and blanka. They have nothing do do with that game, and to slight it for not having them is to ignore the real issues of the game, positive or negative. Fireballs have NOTHING to do with 3D fighting. Even if it were true that 3D games had NO play at long range (which isn't true, you can close the distance between you and the opponent at the maximum range in about 1 second), and that backdashing was all powerful, you'd still be ignoring the all the things that made the game great.

    Here's a short list of things that I like about 3D games:

    potent throws that are a real part of the gameplay for every character

    normal, double, guard, escape, escape-guard, reversal, and reversal-guard-throw escapes

    reversals, parrys and inashi

    reversal reversals, chickens, and special or character specific reversals or attacks or throws

    akira's low punch reversal

    combo reversals

    staggers and stuns

    rising attacks, okizeme, urawamari, escaping, reversing, and guarding rising attacks, rolling rising attacks, and special character specific rising attacks

    hit-throws, ground chrows, combo throws, back throws, low throws, side throws, side and back low throws, combo low throws, and low throw escapes

    air combos

    fighting with your back to the opponent, sitting or laying down, or standing on your hands

    stance, and switching it, and what that means

    picking your opponent up off the ground, down attacks

    ring out

    I like having to think about my place in a stage, and how I can use that

    wall throws and combos

    undulation and bounce combos

    and for me nothing, in any fighting game ever, compares to the sheer power, beauty, and challenge of Akira's "Hougekiunshinsoukoshou", or SPOD, and what it feels like when I finish a match with it.

    I quit playing SF to play VF and I'm so glad I did. After I passed the 100,000 fireball mark, I just wasn't interested anymore. I was ready for all the things I mentioned above, and Yu delivered. The first time I saw people playing VF2, it was like the characters were free, they could do whatever they wanted. To me, what separates Vf from all other fighting games, what IMO makes it superior beyond measure, is that it's not just a "game", it's like practicing martial arts in cyberspace. You have to train, you have to think, you have to grow, and you have to better yourself. You can use the game to help other people better themselves. I learned a lot about myself from playing VF. You can see someone's personality when they learn how to play VF well, and you can see yourself, and see in 30 seconds your attitudes towards yourself and other people. You can grow with other people by challenging each other.

    to play VF well is to make art.

  11. SummAh

    SummAh Well-Known Member

    To give him credit

    To give him some credit...
    No matter how often I find myself being disagreeing with his articles,

    I am glad someone out there is actually getting off his ass, stop playing games and write these sort of articles.

    I might not like it(I hate some of em)
    But others do.
    Some players really do need these sorts of guidances.

    So, I guess it's a good cause.

    However, I do wish he can stop being so damn ignorant.

    <font color=red>SummErs' 'Ride the Legacy'
  12. SummAh

    SummAh Well-Known Member

    To give him credit

    To give him some credit...
    No matter how often I find myself being disagreeing with his articles,

    I am glad someone out there is actually getting off his ass, stop playing games and write these sort of articles.

    I might not like it(I hate some of em)
    But others do.
    Some players really do need these sorts of guidances.

    So, I guess it's a good cause.

    However, I do wish he can stop being so damn ignorant.
    My only worry is that some readers out there actually treats it as a bible.

    God damn!

    <font color=red>SummErs' 'Ride the Legacy'
  13. Mr. Bungle

    Mr. Bungle Well-Known Member

    seth wrote another rant, this one on tournament play, which might be intere..oops. we vf'ers don't "do" tournaments anymore. sorry, my bad!

    *bungle looks down at the two wins under his belt - wins from the last two large(ish), -organized- tournaments in NA. bungle desires MORE.


  14. Chanchai

    Chanchai Well-Known Member

    I think Mr. Bongle has been taking too many hits from the bong lately/images/icons/smile.gif

    Didn't know you checked out that site... That article seems like a filler article to me. Something to fill the gap until he decides on writing something better. But at least someone wrote something on some tournament symptoms.

    Speaking of which, how many people have experienced (either as the first person or in the third person) the type of tournament players that really don't think they're going to do well and next thing you know they're doing very well, but they still think they're playing like crap?

  15. Hayai_JiJi

    Hayai_JiJi Well-Known Member

    I always thought that was a psyche out technique. I mean I think some of those players just say that so the person playing them underestimates their ability. Then when they start winning you just think it is a fluke. It is could also be that they say that as a way out if they lose.

    Under the surface of the most jaded cynic lies a dissappointed idealist- George Carlin
  16. kbcat

    kbcat Well-Known Member

    Hey hey. TO players are always up for a tourney, and judging by NYC's "we only play to win" post I think the NYC gang is good for a knockdown drag out, we keep score and declare a winner, *tournament*. So... maybe we should plan an eastcoast v eastcoast thingy. GE's tourney system while still in the refinment process (it's only had a couple runs at a real tourney setting) is quite good.


    kbcat! woo... finally interested in VF again after a long time on the fringe.
  17. adamYUKI

    adamYUKI Well-Known Member

    Depending on when everyone decides to hold this "tournament", and other people's interest...........BRING IT OAN, MUTHA FUKKUZ!! :)

    <font color=red>ORA! ORA! ORA!</font color=red>

    <font color=white>adam</font color=white><font color=red>YUKI</font color=red>
  18. kbcat

    kbcat Well-Known Member

    Did we hear that TO?! GE, Llany, are we going to do something about that? NYC must not survive our wrath!

    ...easier said than done ;)

  19. GodEater

    GodEater Well-Known Member

    fair enough.

    Well, what if it was held in Toronto with an Arcade VF3TB
    set on free play in a comfortable surrounding and the odd
    DC for seeding and general fucking around?

    the tournament would be a tournament with a nominal
    entrance fee and prizes.

  20. Gnug315

    Gnug315 Well-Known Member

    I read Krull's post too.. It's brilliant, I love it.

    Reminds me of the players (I think Japanese) who considered a single backdash in VF to be deeply dishonourable.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice