Modern Control Scheme Coming to VF6????

Positive evolution is good.
Negative evolution (devolution) is bad.

Yes fighting games should adapt to the times but not all change is good.

• When VF added customization to a Fighting Game for the first time that was good change.

• When VF added the concept of ring outs to 3D fighting games that was a good change

• When VF added the concept of a quest mode to 3D fighting games that was good change.

• When VF4 EVO added the first advanced training mode to a 3D arcade fighting game that was good evolution.

• When Virtua Fighter added the first trainable AI to 3D arcade fighting game that was good positive evolution

• When Virtua Fighter added the first real time announcer to a 3D arcade fighting game that was positive change and positive evolution.

I've been for VF evolving from its inception. However, copying off of Tekken, digressing to Tekken Style Red, Blue, Purple, and Yellow Hit Sparks, retreating to a Tekken UI, and Tekken skins , or kow-towing to Street Fighting 6 Modern Style Controls that's not evolution, or positive change, that's nothing but Seiji Aoki and RGG's lazy pandering attempt to cash in on Tekken's perceived popularity, or the up and coming popularity of Street Fighter 6 trend and the dumbing down of fighting games

Let's be clear here. I'm all for VF changing and evolving. In fact every version of Virtua Fighter that's ever been released (except VF5US) brought new innovations and evolution to 3D arcade fighting games.

@Dragonps There are wannabe chess players that would like the pawn to be able to move 3 squares horizontally and vertically under certain circumstances. There are wannabe chess players that would like knights to also be able to move diagonally to make the game simpler. But those changes would result in chess not being chess.

The Virtua Fighter concept cannot survive arbitrary changes just to make the game easier so that every one can play. We could make baseball diamonds smaller so that everyone can hit grand slams, or we could lower basketball hoops so that it would be easier for any one to dunk the ball.

In the same way chess is not for everyone, neither is VF (nor should it be). Sure anybody can sit down in front of a chess board, and anybody can pickup a stick to play VF. But some folks just won't be able to cut it at chess, and some folks won't be able to cut it at VF.

No I don't want the game watered down so that any wannabe can play it, just like I wouldn't want the game of chess to add diagonal moves to a knight, or 3-square horizontal moves to a pawn in order for chess to be more accessible to the masses

If you don't have the skill, or the capability to get the skill to play VF then pick another game. If you're to short to play basket ball, maybe golf or bowling might be a better game for you. If you can't hang with VF then go play Guilt Gear, KOF, Blaze Blue, or Tekken or some other fighting game that requires less skill.

 

We're not talking about fighting system, we're talking about the control scheme.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the CHOICE of using regular or simple control schemes.

This kind of mentality will end up killing the whole fgc.

It's the reason why people like you who think this way aren't in charge of making fighting games. If you did you'd end up aliening a huge number of potential consumers.

Why shouldn't someone not play fighting games just because they don't have the skill?

Case in point I once knew a guy who loved VF and when I found out I was ecstatic because I had someone to play with. Then he told me he only plays to customize his characters, he loved dressing them up and so forth.

So should my friend "play another game" because he lacks the skill?

I'm too short for basketball but was the highest scorer of the season for my team when I played at school.

I was never anything special at the game but I played it because I loved it. There are so many VF players that aren't very good but they play because they love it.

 

@Dragonps with much respect. The controller, control scheme, joystick button presses, physicality of the sticks are integral part of playing fighting games. This holds more for fighting games than most other video games. The hand eye coordination, the speed , agility and ability to actually successfully enter the commands for a combo, and evade, etc are a fundamental part of the competitiveness in fighting games. Its not just using the combo or move, its the ability and skill that it takes to pull off the combo or move.

In this regard I'm speaking only about competition, ranked competition, and e-sports competition. Yes there are a lot of mind games, there is a lot of intellectual sparring taking place, but there is also is a battle of who has the best mastery of the stick, controller, joystick the controller scheme. That physicality is part of the measurement of who is the best.

So if Street Fighter 6, or the next release of Virtua Fighter removes the skill required to pull off combos in high pressured situations, or removes the skill required to pull off the more challenging combos, or if they significantly reduce the skill required by introducing simplified control schemes then those companies will have changed the nature of a Virtua Fighter or Street Fighter competition.

Like making baseball diamonds smaller so more players can't hit home runs, or lowering the basket ball hoop so more players can dunk, or changing adding vertical movement to pawns, and diagonal movements to knights in chess so anyone can win. Simplifying the control scheme, button presses, is literally changing the game

If you are not playing a fighting game at the competitive level, then simpler controller schemes are okay. If tournaments and competitive scenarios restrict controller schemes to regulation schemes and leave the simpler control schemes for casual players then adding simpler controller scheme are okay.

I would like everyone in the world to play Virtua Fighter, but I don't want Sega to make Virtua Fighter into another game to make that happen.

 

They already made VF much easier with 5FS than it used to be but that hasn't made it any more successful. In fact from what I gathered these changes weren't well received in Japan and it flopped and hence no VF6.

Look at the example of Tekken 7 which has been the biggest selling fighter of the current crop and yet that game is harder and more complicated than VF5FS. Who are the most popular characters in that game? The Mishimas, Kings and Hwoarang are all up there and yet there among the hardest of the cast.

Point is there are far more significant things to consider like the graphics, character designs, hit effects, story, modes and netcode. Look at what SF6 is doing with it's presentation.

A change I would like to the control scheme however is the dodge button back. I think that made advancement movement easier and less taxing.

 

Changes that will subtract from the game are definitely not welcome. The current VF iteration is already as simple as a fighting can get without risking its integrity, depth and consistency. And as with chess this game seems to thrive in skillful and thoughtful player environment that values some effort and delayed gratification. The players are the main reason that keeps me hooked on this game, this community of passionate and patient people. I know that the older VF titles would be there for the new and old players to enjoy. Still I would like Sega and RGG to come up with something more appropriate than fixing the perfectly working features in their fresh take on the series.

 

That Tekken 7 game and Tekken in general, is not that hard, or complicated to play though. In my many years of playing it, it's like the easiest fighting game to learn, and that is due to the game, lacking proper quality of life gameplay and mechanics. To be honest, alot of fighting games have been lacking that, for like close to over two decades.

 

I've played Tekken since the 90s but only in the last few years have I really started to dig deeper into it's mechanics and realized how little I knew. It is a really complicated game. Look at how the sidestep system and tracking of moves work or the near non existent buffering window and all the difficulties that causes. There's a good reason why there has never been a tutorial in a Tekken game and why there so reluctant to do one.

 

Yes that is correct.

Tekken is complicated --- Hard To Understand (Possibly Confusing)
Virtua Fighter is complex --- Many Possibilities (Impossible to Brute Force Solve)

Although most folks don't no the difference between these two words. Technically they mean different things.

https://englishlessonsbrighton.co.uk/whats-difference-complex-complicated/

Virtua Fighter is easy to play but complex. Tekken is also easy to play but complicated

Or in other words

Virtua fighter is simple but mastery is complex
Tekken is simple but mastery is complicated


https://www.fastcompany.com/90344944/complex-vs-complicated-problems
https://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/JohnKamensky.pdf

This difference is one of the reasons why Virtua Fighter mechanics, gameplay and balance are far superior to Tekken's

 

This point you're making here pretty much invalidates all your other points and it's the very point I used in my previous post.

Making a move or combo easier to perform doesn't mean you're more likely to win. Knowing when and where to perform those moves and combos is the key to a good player.

You understand that in SF6 it's been confirmed that the easy control method is a choice?

It. Is. A. Choice.

Meaning you don't have to use it if you don't want to. Besides this what's the issue? Are you scared that a noob will be able to defeat you because they only have to press one button to pull off a combo?

They still have to know when to pull it off, to understand frame advantage etc. They won't understand all of those things so giving them an easy control scheme won't be a big deal for a player of your calibre?

That's a pretty bad analogy as the movement rules for a chess piece are a very different matter from a control scheme in a videogame. With your analogy is proposing that characters in fighting games would have the rules of their movement changed so they could do things they couldn't before to make it easier. Such as Jacky having a punch that is safe on block and takes half your health bar if it connects etc.

I can sort of see what you're trying to say but the analogy is a bit up there.

This would depend on if it creates an advantage and we're yet to see if it does. A true test would be a veteran SF player using the regular control scheme facing a beginner using the simple one.

I'm willing to bet the veteran will win everytime not becuase of a control method but becuase they understand the mechanics more than the beginner. They undertsand what's safe what isin't, what has frame advantage, frame traps, resets etc.

These are things a new player won't have a clue about so making it easier for them to play I doubt is going to collapse the fgc.

I know you love VF so I'm going to ask you a question and I'd like you to answer honestly.

Do you want VF to thrive or die?

The reason I ask is because will it really change the game if a VF6 adds a simple control method as a choice?

VF has to evolve and I think an optional simple control scheme would help, there are many other factors too of course but I think it would be a start. VF is not a hard game to play at all, it uses three buttons for goodness sake. However it has the legend that it's a hard game and I think that puts some people off.

Never found Tekken to be complicated, it's pretty straight forward and like VF it can be enjoyed on many different levels from casual to pro. Tekken has a lot of depth to it if you really dig around, lots of cool tech to find.

One thing I do find is in Tekken there's an abundance of characters that you can mash and cool stuff happens compared to VF

 

I think the weak point of current Tekken is inconsistency of it's core mechanic that makes it pretty obscure (e.g. the sidesteps and their usefulness). One of the main reasons is the mentioned bloated roster, full of quirky characters that you can mash playing with and watch cool stuff happen. It is fun, but this fun gets old pretty quickly. Of course a player may play long enough to see plenty of situations to figure if and when character-specific features will work or not - but that's arguably a display of thought-through game design on Harada's part.
In VF less in terms of roster and superfluous visualisation might be more in the gameplay department.

 

@Dragonps dude.,., your logic is literally beyond belief. I found your argument simply breath taking. You are what they call in the old tongue reprobate and in the new tongue logically monotonic. Because of some sort of physical , mental or combination of physical and mental disability you need the world to be a certain way, and you simply reject any premise, assertion, or fact that is not consistent with the world as you need it to be. The rules of inference that you applied in the argument you just posted are simply beyond reconciliation and cannot be made internally consistent

I don't really play VF competitively, and I could care less about losing to a noob, a casual, or anyone else. I've lost thousands of matches in all kinds of contexts and to all kinds of people. I've lost more VF matches than you will ever play. But that fact clearly would have no impact on your ability to even comprehend my point.

Says who? Why is it mandatory that VF has to evolve. Some would say:

If it a'int broke then don't fix it.

There is nothing wrong with progressive change in VF I support it. But saying that VF has to evolve is a false premise. There are many PS2 games that are currently being played just as they are and the gamers are happy with them in the state they are in. I play Fight For New York and Urban Reign and Absolver regularly. And these games don't need to evolve in any way. They're fine just the way they are. RGG could have ported VF5FS in its entirety to PS4 without any changes and it would have been far more successful than VF5US. But I now understand that you don't have the capacity to understand that point.

Of course you want VF to evolve until the day that you don't want VF to evolve
On that day you'll make the opposite version of the non-sequitur argument you just made.

In your mind, some games are evolved enough, and others still need to evolve. And because of some deficiency you have, you feel that VF needs to evolve. It never would occur to you that you are the one needs to evolve. It would never occur to you that instead of changing the control scheme to fit your lack of skill that you change or evolve your skill to fit the current control scheme.

@Dragonps unfortunately you don't understand and don't want to understand the relationships between the control scheme, the controller, character move lists, physical dexterity and high level game play in VF; and I'm not inclined to further decompose your cognitive dissonance relative to how you currently perform at VF versus how you imagine yourself performing at VF.

The real test for a new modern control scheme would not be a noob using the simplified control scheme vs a high level player, it would be two high level players (relatively equal high level players) competing where one high level player has the simplified control scheme and the other high level player had the regulation control scheme.

@Dragonps, Hundreds of thousands of matches, by hundreds of thousands of players have been played with VF's current control scheme and every one involved have been totally happy with the control scheme thus far. Its only recently in this current environment of fragile snow flakes and greedy game publishers does the notion of simplifying (evolving) the VF controls so that lesser skilled people can have a chance does the topic even come up. Sadly, the apologists for a new modern control scheme can't even comprehend why their proposal for making the change is being unequivocally rejected by all who really understand the game

 

Then, why are we asking for a new VF? All SEGA can do is to port the same game, over and over again, and everybody will be happy. Problem solved!

Evolution =/= break something that doesn't need to be fixed

It's because of this evolution that gamers all over the world keep playing video games.

 

@Shinobi because you used '=/=' operator in you response And that's one of my favorite operators I'm going to seriously try to help you with the answer to

First here is an article, that has at least a modicum of truth to it and it proffers at least a tentative answer to your question.

https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/11/what...d-why-is-it-always-more-of-the-same-14387679/

Second we all are being constantly conditioned by millions even billions of dollars spent on advertising, marketing campaigns and social psychology that causes us, prompts us, cajoles us to buy the next thing, and the next version of the next thing. The seller depends on continuous sales. The reason why we are asking for a new VF is because we've been conditioned to ask for a new VF. That's what keeps capitalist economies vibrant.


Third games are ultimately a form of software and it was software more than anything else that introduced the notion of 'Versions' into the public psyche. Msdos 1.0 then Msdos 2.0, then Msdos 3.0. Windows 3.0, Windows 95, Windows 2000, Mac OS9, Mac OSX, There were those in the software industry that used the notion of "version" to force consumers to upgrade to the next thing, even though they didn't really need to. Software vendors more than any other kind of vendor created and cultivated FOMO in consumers:

https://www.verywellmind.com/how-to-cope-with-fomo-4174664

When we buy a refrigerator, microwave, a leather recliner, a Steinway D grand piano we don't rush out to buy the next version next year. Because in part we operate under the assumption if-its-not-broke-don't-fix-it principle. However, for software which does not break, which does not age, which cannot rust, which cannot chip, cannot degrade, we have been conditioned to crave the next version even if the version that we currently have is not broken. We are compelled to drop version 1.5 the moment version 2.0 comes out even if version 2.0 is ultimately not as good as version 1.5. In fact the trend in software over the last decade has been to add 2 new features and remove 4 old ones and bump the version. The old one-step-forward-two-steps-back hustle. Ultimately that approach keeps revenue coming in and cuts costs for those selling software (games or otherwise) and keeps consumers thinking that they're getting something better when actually they getting less than they had before.

@Shinobi

What's the difference between video games, and games like poker, checkers, baseball, monopoly jax, marbles, chess, parcheesi, basketball, backgammon, pool, bowling, dice, black jack, tic-tac-toe, etc? These games remain basically the same decade after decade and hundreds of thousands of people still learn them and play them. However because video games are "software" and are subject to the notion of 'Version" we've been conditioned to want the next release, even when the current release is fine. This conditioning benefits the sellers and the game publishers, and retailers more than the actual consumers.

@Shinobi,@Dragonps

In fact, The best thing that RGG could have done was port VF5 or VF4 Evo (as is) to current and next gen Xbox, Playstation, Switch, and PC and that VF would be selling like bananas. There would be an active vibrant VF community with plenty of new players. The problem with VF5US is it tried to 'evolve' by adding red, purple, blue, and yellow hit sparks , Tekken Skins, Tekken Ui and Tekken Music. while removing Single Player modes , customization options, and replay features. And all that was accomplished is embarrassment, loss of face, and diminution of the player base.

And adding modern control schemes would only serve to dilute the game further

 

Really? You're going to resort to name calling? If you have nothing further to add to the discussion then simply leave it as it is. Calling me names is a rather crass attempt and quite frankly beneath you Po.

Then I guess you're happy to keep plying versions of VF5FS for then ext 50 years? Then again you take every opportunity you get to remind us your disdain for VF5US so...

As for the rest of your regurgitated cynicism I really don't know what to say other than actually read what I'm saying instead of just trying to come back with your constant insults on mental disability.

You've not countered a single one of my points instead inferring that I don't play VF as much as you or that I don't understand it to your degree.

Your replies devolve into childish insults unworthy of the name of Master Po, a calm cool collected and very wise character from the Kung Fu TV series.

I'll be waiting here when you're ready to have an actual debate and not just a slagging match.

 

@Dragonps

First, what I did was not name calling. I'm not interested in name calling. What I did was categorizing and describing you and your argument.

The reason why you believe that I have not countered any of your points is because you are not capable of understanding all of the points I made in the first place.

If you had read and were able to comprehend my points, you would have not even tried to make your points. A person who is unable to change her/his conclusions regardless to new information being presented is monotonic. That's not a name, its a category of reasoner. In the old world the word reprobate was used to describe or categorize those that were simply unable to accept the gospel and were therefore condemned

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprobation

Its not name calling mate, its describing your ability to logically process an argument.

Of course you are entitled to your position. But your position is ipso facto non sequitur the changes that you would accept to virtua fighter would result in a new game that would be Virtua Fighter in name only.

The current control scheme for button positions, punch, kick, guard designations are part of very definition of the Virtua Fighter. You change (or evolve) those and you change the definition of VF. For some reason, you are unable to process that fact. I'm not calling you names, I'm just pointing out the fact that you can't process, understand, or accept basic definitions, assertions, propositions, or facts (when it comes to VF)

You clearly want a Virtua Fighter that plays differently than the one we have today, that looks different than the one we have today, and that has a different measure for success than the one we have today.

You would be better off just rooting for a new Fighting Game! There's nothing wrong with new fighting games being introduced. There are half a dozen or so new games coming out by late 2022 and early 2023. Maybe you'll like the control scheme on one of those games better.

I've made it explicit several times in this thread than I'm for positive change that doesn't redefine the game in a negative fashion. Again, you seem unable to process my assertion.

I use the term mental or physical disability only to try to characterize my observations about your information processing. I'm not trying to be mean, or resort to insults or name calling. I'm only pointing out that I've already given you clear unambiguous, unequivocal, counters to all of your points and either you have some physical impairment that keeps you from reading (dyslexia maybe), or some mental impairment (attention deficit disorder maybe) that keeps you from processing the posts.

If it were only a matter that you disagreed, then I would just agree to disagree. But you literally have not absorbed for one reason or another my positions.

@Dragonps Your basic position is that VF needs to change with the times, to modernize itself, and possibly add modern control schemes that will make the game more accessible to the masses. Your position is the more people playing VF the better off VF is regardless to what compromises to VF that were made to attract the "more people". You argument also suggests that you may have the monkey-see-monkey-do-syndrome. You appear to want Virtua Fighter to look like, and play like, and copy off popular Fighting games (i.e. Tekken 7, Street Fighter 6, etc) so that we can get more players in the VF community. You clearly seem to be advancing the point that all change is positive change.

My entire post is a point for point argument and counter against your basic position. But your cognitive dissonance doesn't let you process the information in the post

Its not name calling mate, its just describing your intellectual state affairs.

The only other option here is that you are a Troll. And if that's the case then let me leave you with one of my favorite childhood poems:

I am Rubber
You are Glue
You can try to Troll me
But I will actually Troll you

 

You alluded to me having a physical or mental disability and used that as your reason for my apparent inability to understand you. You don't ever make fun of someone's physical or mental disability.

You lost the entire debate when you resorted to that Po and this subsequent post from you shows your frustration with yourself not me.

And you think it's ok to categorize someone based on their apparent disabilities?

No I countered all your points and you like usual replied with insults and trolling. I can only assume this was because you had no counter.

No the changes I proposed would not change the system in any way, it would simply give players an easier control method. A method that you've been unable to counter because simply you want gamers to "learn the hard way like I did" which is a very tired and old way of thinking.

Offering players the choice of a simply control scheme would not effect the balance of the game or the mechanics because the real identifiers of skill (combo timing, set up, footies etc) would NOT be effected by the control scheme.

I've said it a dozen times but I'm having to repeat myself, skill is not denoted by how easy you can execute a move.

There are many levels to skill many different layers.

I could have a ten hit combo mapped to one button, but what good would that be without the skill to know when to use it?

Who's to say those would change with a simple control scheme?

Maybe a simple control scheme makes it easier to perform combos, or performs an auto combo when the opponent is in a floating state?

Tekken 7 did something similar and guess what? No pro players use it. They don't have to because they're good. It's something a beginner would use to get used to the system before diving into ranked etc.

Didn't effect the definition of Tekken.

An assumption based on your inability to understand my counter points.

To clarify:

I want a VF that everyone can get to grips with, a game that players aren't scared off by. A game that can be enjoyed by different skill levels.

Yes I want the game to look different, why would I want a VF game that looks the same as the one we have?

I want it's graphical fidelity to shine and outclass everything else.

Success is measured by sales, at least in the entertainment medium.

I hope this clarifies those points for you.

Are you implying I don't like the current control scheme in VF? Have I mentioned this at any point?

Tekken 7 had a simple control option, it didn't redefine the game in a negative fashion.

Power Rangers BFTG had a simple control option, it didn't redefine the game in a negative fashion.

CvsSNK2 had a simple control option, it didn't redefine the game in a negative fashion.

There are plenty more examples but you see where I'm going?

No Po the issue is that you can't or won't debate and instead you resort to these trolling tactics to either get a response or hope the conversation goes in a different direction I don't know.

What I do know is that I disagree with your points and I'm happy to leave it there, but don't ever throw insults at me like that. Mental disability for example is no joke, it's no damn joke at all.

Yes but not lose it's identity.

Why not? The more people play the bigger and more active the community. VF deserves a bigger player base. It deserves to sell more no?

Compromises here are subjective, you can't prove a control scheme change choice would negatively impact the game or the franchise as a whole.

I know you're going to reply with a whimsical troll or insult here but please show me where I've stated I want VF to look, play or copy from other fighting games?

 

@Dragonps your position is clearly on record. My position is clearly on record.

I am suggesting that the ability to enter a sequence of commands correctly, and quickly enough within a frame or a window of time within a match is part of the skill required to play VF. You are saying that's a false statement.

I am saying that characters in VF have some simple inputs, some intermediate inputs and some that require extraordinary skill to pull off at any time, let alone during a high pressure match. Your are saying simplifying all input strings should not have and will not have any bearing on the skill set to win a match in Virtua Fighter.

In fact, based on your positions, ( from a move list point of view) no character should be any harder or any more difficult than any other character in VF, because there should be simple commands that allow anyone to execute any move, at any time, regardless to tournament or not, because move complexity has nothing to do with skill in VF.

So you are saying that the ability to press the right sequence of buttons correctly, within the allotted time frame has nothing to do with the skill associated with being good or excelling at Virtua Fighter.

@Dragonps and all those that agree with you, I hope you ultimately get the game you are wishing for. At the end of the day I want you to feel like you are good at Virtua Fighter too. At this point I'm satisfied because I have versions of VF that I can play, and enjoy now. So future versions that have been simplified so that all can play and win won't really have an impact on my personal game play.

Tekken Skins, Tekken, UI, Tekken Music, Hit Sparks, Meters, Modern (Simplified Controls), Super moves, Comeback Mechanics, and all the other future changes that will be made to future versions of VF to make it more attractive and make it easier to win regardless of skill level should get you to the VF that you and your control scheme apologists envision.

@Dragonps I agree with you mental disability is no damn joke, and certainly no reason to make fun of people. It was not and is not my intention to deride , make light of, or poke fun at any mental or physical disability that you or anyone else on VFDC has.

I definitely support accessibility options being added to Virtua Fighter that would make it accessible to anyone and everyone. Keep in mind there is a big difference between accessibility options, and simplifying controls.

We all love VF here, and if a simplified version keeps you and your mates happy and playing the game, who am I to stand in the way of progress

 

Very good point. I've been saying that same thing for years, even with other fighting games.