Raging Debate over at TZ....

we're former Tekken pitbulls, turtles and nutjobs

I've never followed TZ... could someone define pitbull and nutjob?
I don't remember ever seeing these terms used before.

 

If my knowledge of Tekken 4 is limited, please test me for your own pleasure. Ask anything, and you'll get the proper response required....maybe even ones you didn't expect. Oh, and by the way, I never stated that VF had chara imbalancing issues.......if there is anything that you would like for me to reiterate on....again, please ask away.

 

Re: ...

ReCharredSigh: Um....I never stated that I mastered Shun, I simply said that TO ME, Shun is an easy chara to learn because he simply boasts the same stance concept as Lei Wulong, only linear instead of circular. Again, I do not describe game functions through whatever lingo and terminologies that everyone else does (hell I've been playing since Tekken/VF 1 and I'm still foreign to the lingo). I just describe it as I see it or as it "feels". This is my own personal thing that I I've learned through gung fu....try not to put titles on things or else one will become ritualized. Again, this is MY own personal thought pattern.......

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you never said you stated character imbalancing issues. However, can you explain what you meant by VF having "design imbalances?" That is... First I would like you to give me an example of what constitutes design balance and imbalance, and then explain to me how VF's design is imbalanced in this way. Additional illustration would be nice so I can understand what it is you are saying about this.

Factual Correction on the earliest sidestep. You mentioned that Michelle had the first side step in a 3d fighter. I won't argue what "3d fighter" had the first side step, except I will tell you that Virtua Fighter 2 came before Tekken 1, and Lion and Shun BOTH had sidesteps. This is explained on a Japanese release schedule of the Tekken series and VF series, not a western one. If what I've come to understand and read from Japanese publications is true, Virtua Fighter 2 came out before Tekken 1. Again, this is more or less something we throw into the debate, and its relevance is unimportant if we're to argue the designs of two or more games and compare, since the origins of sidestepping refers more to an argument about invention or maybe even innovation. But to clarify, Tekken was not the first 3d fighter to have sidesteps.

-Chanchai

 

Re: ...

Kamhou, another recommendation to you when trying to create an argument without bias... Try to refrain from using subjective language such as sub-par or examples such as masher friendly.

The masher friendly debate that happened in the thread bit back at you for various reasons because it has only a small place in design goals and often goes merely into the realm of small local scenes of the game, but hardly goes into what ultimately happens in the game as time goes by for a player. Generally, some would even argue that masher friendly is a good thing with bad implications, some would argue it's a bad thing altogether, some would argue why it's made a game like Soul Calibur so popular in the console market in the western world. Some would even argue that it's the reason Tekken became popular, since a lot of mashers mash buttons in a buffering manner, some sliding their hands across the buttons and accidentally coming across various attacks that are in Tekken--while some others actually tap buttons in sequences which works for VF. My experiences of seeing mashers play is they have an easier time playing Tekken because a common button mash is not sequential, but lots of overlapping, thus accidentally using Tekken's buffer features--hence a crap load of Eddy Gordo sweeps and what not when a masher chooses Eddy Gordo. This is what you wanted to talk about regarding mashing right? How easy it is to mash and come out with a move? You didn't want to imply anywhere that Mashing was bad based on how well it can be handled, right? And I don't blame you, mashing in BOTH GAMES are easy as hell to handle. But leave the argument of mashing out of your "objective" and "factual" analysis.

Your subjective language ended up with talking about VF a lot of the time as something close to inferior (through a combination of other words) and Tekken 4 as something good with the quantity over quality argument (not in those words, but you were stressing many issues that some could label as quantitative arguments for features that look different "on the spot" as opposed to the actual options you have at the moment). I'm not saying this is what you meant, or intended. But I'm telling you this is how it looks to a lot of people... and that making your claim that it was not biased was just asking for criticism as the statement came off as arrogant.

Bias or not, the observation and analysis and comparison you were claiming to make ended up putting in too much ego and that was not needed (and don't worry, it wasn't just you, but your ego popped up a few times as you tried to defend what you had to say and it ended up looking like you were being ignorant of other posters in your "unbiased quest.")

I'm not trying to mock you, but I am trying to tell you that you set yourself up for the type of argument that took place. Now, the later thread you reopened up is a much better start, so I'll give you some props for that... and if your intentions are really to compare the two games as opposed to just justifying why you like Tekken 4 more (which I wouldn't blame you if you would, every person is entitled to his or her own opinion), then maybe something nice will come out or you'll appreciate both games, or whatever. That would be to your personal benefit anyways, I guess.

No single person has seen it all (let's not count religious figures), despite the vast experience a person can accumulate in a lifetime. I'm sure you understand this, so please also understand that you most likely have not seen the full spectrum of play in VF4 (and probably not in TK4 as well). I'll admit the same myself. It's when you try to pass off your experiences as all-knowing and saying such statements out loud do you give large room for ignorance against you for what would most likely seem to be your own ignorance.

-Chanchai

Additional Note: Grammar and vocabulary are generally important... but if it is clear what your opponent meant, and those reading his statements can read it... I'd recommend you refrain from correcting or arguing the grammar/vocabulary/spelling unless that is what is at stake. To many people (such as myself), it's nothing more than a cheap shot that has no relevance to the actual argument.

 

Chanchai:
Oh sure, I'll explain. What I mean my game balancing issues is that VF is notorious for abusing an old game design technique that's been used in old action games for many years, especially from Japan. Keep the configuration simple and most people will gain the illusion of depth. The first game to try this was SFII, while the config wasn't simple, the movement list and options were. So in essence this gave game players the illusion that the game was in depth, when in actually it was just elementary in design. Now, whilst I am NOT saying that VF is shallow (both VF4 and T4 are very deep in scope), my complaint as both a designer and a gamer as well as my fellow partners derives from VF's incessant simplicity after all of these years with no real significant advancement. Yes, tweaks here and there are nice and all, but in reality there is no REAL difference between 2 and 4. And again, I will reiterate that even Suzuki-san himself stated the regression of the design and exactly why in every single interview pre-release. VF3 was a MAJOR improvement, but alas the Japanese, as usual, cannot adapt to more complex scopes of gameplay (this explains why all of their RPG's are exactly the same in design) and prefer to be "spoon fed" for many years (now you also know why certain games in Japan need to be "upped" in difficulty before being translated to the U.S.). This also explains the major slump in their game industry as well and why most of the big Nihonjin developers concentrate on the U.S. more than ever.

And secondly, this is the biggest misconception in 3D gaming. Do not forget, VF2 had two incarnations; 2 and 2.1. Tekken was released post 2 and introduced the SS with Michelle Chang. Then, around 3 1/2 months later, the system upgrade to VF2 was released as 2.1. This involved the coveted SS that you described to me earlier.

 

Re: ...

Point taken. Thanks Chanchai....I'll improve on that ASAP.

 

Re: ...

Youre a funny little man arent you .

 

Note: Sidesteps were in VF 2.0. They WERE NOT ADDED in VF2.1 as I thought you said. Again, VF2.0 was released before Tekken 1 in Japan. Lion and Shun had them.

So... Are you saying that Dead or Alive 3 is better because it is more advanced? I want to clarify something, just to make sure I've understood what you're talking about... You simply just want to compare the games, but at the same time, you seem to take a huge preference in design towards expansion on the external matters. Because of this, it seems like you are saying Tekken 4 is better because it's trying to go for the concept-expansion theory (as in, let's make games more "realistic" and "have more interactive variables") as opposed to the gameplay theory which VF4 and various other games have come across. I'm not saying this is what you meant to say, but this is what it looks like... and this is probably why it LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE ATTACKING VF AND THAT THOSE WHO HAVE SIDED WITH YOU ON THE FORUMS HAVE BEEN THE TEKKEN FANS, NOT NECESSARILY THOSE THAT ARE TRYING TO CONTRIBUTE TO AN "UNBIASED" ANALYSIS. Sorry, the caps were not meant to be yelling, they were just trying to emphasize my "observation."

That being said... we can transcend your argument of a comparison between Tekken 4 and Virtua FIghter 4 into the nature of gameplay design, and to whom such games are designed towards. Expanding VISUAL concepts vs. expanded gameplay around a simple interface, and well.. there are many more categories... But this is all in preference. You seem to be trying to say, the more "realistic" the game looks to you with its variable terrain and dodging, the better. The way I see my own thinking on the subject is-- IT DEPENDS ON THE GAME AND THE INTENDED DESIGN. In my case, I love VF3tb the most, but not for the reasons you've mentioned. I like it for its overall focus, maybe it's harsher input system, and specific positioning games that result with the overall design. Do I like Tekken 4 all that much? I play it, but honestly no, because it feels even simpler than previous Tekken games despite the addition of walls and terrain.

So why do I talk about VF4 and defend it with my statements and point to various things? Because as simple as you make it out to be, the throw escape situations will always lead to more incentives and discouragement as to why and why not to use them because they have varying results and are not so simple to escape. Because dodging is a skill that can be used both as a reactive reflex or as a an option against a predicted attack--and because of that, you have heavy incentive to go for the dodge or not to go for it--does your opponent expect you to dodge and thus will screw you or should you go for it or will it even give that much benefit? In addition, the blindfighting in VF4 has a variety of options including a fairly fast all way walk that works well in combat, but that is only a small sampling of so many options as well. Not to mention the various results of hits such as normal hits, sabaki, stagger, wall stagger, back stagger, Major Counter, minor Counter, head crumble, stomach crumble, low crumble, and guard break. Among other things. There is the full spectrum of a range game of which ALL ARE APPLICABLE in VF4 (much like Soul Calibur) and thus you have a spectrum of range consideration in the game. In addition, the consideration of walls has played a big role and the wall dynamic has been improved in VF4 well over VF3. Ring outs are a classic game, but tech rolls have made them QUITE DIFFERENT. Quick rise has its own contributions as well. And yet, there is more, and I'm only going into somewhat detailed aspects of the engine. VF4 is much more than a sequel to VF2. And it plays very much differently than VF2, I assure you.

My complaint about Tekken 4 is that for all of the added features of the engine, I am not convinced that the results have produced anything more than gaining a few things while losing out on a whole lot of others. The range play that was quite intense in Tekken Tag has reduced from probably a 4 or 5 level system seems to have been dumbed down to a 2 level system comprising of jab range and non-jab range. The most interesting aspects of Tekken 4 play being outside of jab range, but jab range becoming so important that the only time it gets more interesting than as boring as it already is, is when one of the characters has a parry or reversal. When it comes to the positioning game on terrains, I often see that it's always good to just be on the lower end... that way, various combos apparently work when you're going uphill and when your opponent is on the ground, you are more likely to have okizeme advantages and more options. I don't have much incentive to set up the position for me to be on the higher terrain. When it comes to walls, it's almost too easy to control positioning on either side that the game ends up linear all the time anyways.... but the wall has a bit of benefit in a few combos for a lot of characters, but aside from that it's hit or miss between escaping the wall with a single tap of 1 or getting wedged between a corner of a wall and not being able to move out and being attacked by an infinite combo. And if you ask me about the Jungle Stage, that wedged area in the higher plane is practically a design flaw, but go ahead and justify it as an incentive for positioning in the game or as a Tekken style ring out zone. Anyways, these are of course my complaints of Tekken, but it goes into a bit of what my design preferences are and are not.

I don't think one can be so objective in terms of "advancement" when there's a difference between "interaction" versus "function." I feel that Tekken 4 rushed out an idea for designing the game towards "interaction" while VF4 focused on "function."

And if we were to argue about interaction versus function, again, it tells us nothing more than what you and I would prefer. But the thing is, I'm not all function, nor interaction. My preferences (and I assume yours too) are more than just one or the other.

I believe that function is the most important, but a level of interaction is great AS LONG AS IT SERVES ITS FUNCTION PROPERLY. That's how I feel, doesn't mean you're not saying that or disagree with that, but I'm just making that statement.

But what I can also say is I love games like Rez... which have a very simple design, but to me, the execution came out as a superbly unique experience that originated from simplicity, but the experience is complex enough that I haven't found a truly accurate description of the experience. That simple design of a game, which didn't do anything truly "revolutionary," gave me an experience more interactive to me than so many other games I've played that tried so hard to immitate life. But again, that was just how I saw it and how I experienced it, and it suited MY PREFERENCES.

If you ask me... Mastering or pushing the envelopes of even the simplest of function based designs--accomplishing that goal in a game is far better than creating a game that added a lot of so-called "interactivity" and ended up simplifying (or as some would say, dumbed down) the experience when the goal of that design was to supposedly create more complex and chaotic situations by adding more complex and chaotic variables.

Anyways... the debate goes on, and the needs and wants are always changing all the time, faster than generations. 10 years ago, Virtual Reality was the "wave of the future" by allowing us to interact more, or better yet, for the world of games to create a subworld for ourselves. Only probably 3 years ago, going back to the original design of games--looking back at games as GAMES and not a substitute for a complex life--through thinking like this we find that games were always meant to be fun... that a combination of simple elements could provide games of small to good sized scopes could be FUN. That we can magnify the output of a few inputs if we created more variables that were subtle--instead of creating complex variables that were truly nothing more than added bits to the experience. Hell, the rise of Parappa and Bemani style games a couple years ago (and currently in the US) should sort of give a message of the times that the old game "Simon" is still popular! And yet it's interactive in a very simple way--it didn't recreate the environment so much as said, use your feet for the same buttons.

Anyways, it's not a question of right or wrong as you ask me. For me, it's a question of "what do you want out of games?" and sometimes just as important or more important, is when this question is asked. Time goes on, people's minds change back and forth from one time to another. Yu Suzuki worked on Shenmue for awhile, going for the type of things that I believe you are expressing an interest in. When he went back to VF4, he went back to his roots, not just those of VF2, but to his "game design because it's a game" roots. But he didn't make the game simpler, far from it, he actually created more rules and newer considerations for the players... Things that have changed the way we (who play this game seriously) play the game. As a designer, you might want to acknowledge this... Not to necessarily use in your future projects, but as another experience as to why many people (new fans and old fans) seem to embrace VF4 despite marketing hype that it is "simpler" or more like "VF2."

In any case... perhaps you will become one of the visionaries towards your concept of games and bring a whole new level of interactive experience. Perhaps the "game" focus will carry on for so long... The timing, the mindset, the place of games in society... all important. But if we were to compare games, I couldn't tell you which is better or worse usually... especially not in this case... All I can tell you is what I think is better. And all you could tell me is what you think is better. And it more or less, again, becomes "what do YOU want? What do YOU think is better?" and it won't have so much of an effect on me except for the conversation that comes out of it. But at least we can see things more in each other's eyes.

-Chanchai

 

""""VF3 was a MAJOR improvement, but alas the Japanese, as usual, cannot adapt to more complex scopes of gameplay""

On the contary...it was the game that was deemed by many westerners as ' too hard to play'...if anything, the gameplay was not dumbed down...in fact, it's only easier to get into...but definitely harder to master.

"""(this explains why all of their RPG's are exactly the same in design) and prefer to be "spoon fed" for many years (now you also know why certain games in Japan need to be "upped" in difficulty before being translated to the U.S.)."""

Give me evidence where u got ur assumption from....don't tell me it's because of the extra bosses in the RPGs n stuff....

"""This also explains the major slump in their game industry as well and why most of the big Nihonjin developers concentrate on the U.S. more than ever."""

Once again, u've put ur ass on an area which u have no idea about. Japan's economy as a whole has slowed down...in fact, make it the world's economy. Go read the news papers or attend ur economic classes.

People DO NOT HAVE the capacity to spend as they have been able to in the past. It has nothing to do with games being easier or harder..

"""Keep the configuration simple and most people will gain the illusion of depth"""

U're the one that's in a world of illusion of ur own and it should remain exclusively ur own. Plz do not spread your mental illness to anyone else.

"""but in reality there is no REAL difference between 2 and 4"""

Taking out of ur ass again. U want readers to believe your statement? PROVE IT WITH GAME PLAY STATEMENTS. Tell me what was possible in VF2 is still possible in VF4 n vice vera. Even better...tell me more...tell readers abt the technical details that made you to believe that VF4 n VF2 are the same game.


""prefer to be "spoon fed" for many years""

Oh really? Take a wild guess at which countries all the treasure hunters come from?

hint: majority are not from the east.

BTW: one of TTT's champion, Ryan hart recently went to Japan to play VF4 for a month

 

Former Tekken Pitbulls, Turtles and Nutjobs

<font color=yellow>Tekken like VF has it's own lingo that are thrown around by oldhands like yourself, Yupa... I'm still trying to get to the jargon used here at the mighty VFDC!
/versus/images/icons/wink.gif<ul type="square">[*]Pitbull: A player who uses a character with an Offense Only or Offense First manner. The style uses constant barrage of Offense to keep up the pressure his opponent into making blocking/reversal mistakes and takes advantage of openings that occur during a match. In Tekken, Lee, Jin, the Ogres, Eddie, and Bryan were great Pitbull characters. In VF, Pai, Lau, Sarah, Jacky and Lei Fei are the Pitbull characters.
[*]Turtles: The opposite of the Pitbull. The player uses the character in a manner that sits back and waits for the action to come to him. Reversal, parry, block and punish, and sidestep/attack on read and react are among the the bread and butter plays of this character. In Tekken, Paul, Anna, Lei, Nina, Jin, and Jun were among the good turtle characters. In VF, Akira, Pai, Wolf, Kage, Shun Di and Aoi have the best turtle games going on.
[*]Nutjobs: This is an interesting way of calling someone an Expert. This kind of player would know so much about a character that they could be considered a "nut", play it a myriad of ways and still get the job done. Here the character doesn't matter so much it's about the player... Speaking of players, alex valle, MIC, tomhilfiger and tragic are considered among the throng of Tekken nutjobs. In VF, ShinZ is the only one I see get props. I'm sure there are others...
[/list]Chanchai: 1,023 words in 15 minutes = </font color=yellow><font color=orange>68.2 WPM</font color=orange><font color=yellow>! Chanchai got skills yo!</font color=yellow>
/versus/images/icons/smile.gif

<a target="_blank" href=http://tekkenzaibatsu.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37062>Click here if you're tired of copying & pasting the http://tekkenzaibatsu.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37062 link.</a>

 

Re: ...

that kuma player was Mic idiot, he was 3rd place in the ttt WORLD tourney, what proof is that when a high level player of tekken wins to a 3rd rate jin players, and the same goes for the others...i never said winning against jin is impossible, i said he's cheap, and overpowered, that's why so many poeple use him.

you can't compare vf characters with tekken ones...well, t4 one's...and im sure you have seen many people who say they won the tourney with, lets say, julia, but i've learned not to trust that crap, cause i've seen too many poeple who in a tourney use julia, or kuma once, and list that they played as THAT character, and leave out the fact they used jin for the majority of their matches.

people use diff characters very effectively in tag, that game is unbalanced, but only because some poeple juggle better than others...xiaoluv, seok, hameko, kingfan, insanelee, bryanfury...

just because you can't win against them...

you see? you see how stupid crap talking is, don't try to down my knowledge, i haven't heard of you.

just because you won some no-name 3rd rate t4 tourney with Christie, and "won the winners bracket"...ha!

yes i've played in tourneys, i've played as christie, yoshi, and steve, and at one time, jin, but i can still admit that jin is a bit cheaper than ur average character.

 

why yes, thank you for your consideration in asking me!!!

next time you tell a joke meant to be funny, and no one laughs, don't tell another joke in your life...cause that means you're not very good at it.

 

woi, you're wearing a suit of beef jerky armor to defend against pit bull terriers..

Oh sure, I'll explain. What I mean my game balancing issues is that VF is notorious for abusing an old game design technique

Your whole paragraph that's supposed to explain balancing issues says "the game isn't as deep as it looks, it's failed to innovate between games, and blah blah blah speculation about the game industry".
Balance involves interactions between the characters. I don't see he specific examples chanchai asked for. I don't see any character's names.

Now, whilst I am NOT saying that VF is shallow (both VF4 and T4 are very deep in scope), my complaint as both a designer and a gamer as well as my fellow partners derives from VF's incessant simplicity

instant contradiction. The game is not shallow, but is 'incessantly simple.' What's that supposed to mean? Explain how simple is bad, or better yet, show how simple (what could you POSSIBLY be referring to!? three buttons?) equates to shallow equates to VF being unworthy. I'm no tekken expert, but no area of the game is significantly deeper than VF's, and quite a few are much more shallow.

VF3 was a MAJOR improvement, but alas the Japanese, as usual, cannot adapt to more complex scopes of gameplay

Racist trash. You couldn't be more wrong. Name the thirty deepest games your narrow mind can come up with. Ok great, done? They were all made in Japan. Ass.

And secondly, this is the biggest misconception in 3D gaming. Do not forget, VF2 had two incarnations; 2 and 2.1. Tekken was released post 2 and introduced the SS with Michelle Chang. Then, around 3 1/2 months later, the system upgrade to VF2 was released as 2.1. This involved the coveted SS that you described to me earlier.[

You are flat out making up 'facts' to support a lost claim. Shun and Lion had sidesteps in every version of 2. If you're going to try wandering down the path of "Tekken = innovator & vf = copycat", watch your step. It's littered with tekken player bodies.


---------
I don't see why you're trying this, some people just can't stand to admit when they don't know, or they fucked up, or they got it wrong. A few VF players can talk tekken with you on a competent level, but I've found very few tekken players who can discuss VF on an intelligent level. You're definitely not in that field, your generalizations are so broad because you can't get specific about a game without having played it.

 

Re:actually...

thanx for the correction, i only remember seing alex standing in front of the ttt machine holding a silver pacman trophy, i assumed it was 2nd. oh well

i realize that those 5 characters can be extremely cheap, but it always seems that there are more ways around being cheap than in t4...in ttt you just deal with it, but in t4, you just accept it and shrug...

 

*Racist trash. You couldn't be more wrong. Name the thirty deepest games your narrow mind can come up with. Ok great, done? They were all made in Japan. Ass. *

Elder Scrolls MorrowWind
Ice Windale
Baulder's Gate/Forgotten Realms Series
Diablo 1,2
GTA III
StarWars Galaxies
X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter
Shadow Run
Ultima
Ultima Online
Dark Age of Camelot
Everquest
Ghost Recon
Half Life
Counter Strike
Age of Empires
Dues Ex
Halo
Medal of Honor Frontline/Allied Assault/ Underground
Colin McRae
I.Q.


....don't make me continue. While I was practically raised off of Japanese games and general Asian culture (from Ge Ge Ge no Kitaro to anything even remotely based on the manga and anime works of Osamu Tezuka, Hayao Miyazaki, Masamune Shirow, Kyosuke Fujishima, Rumiko Takahashi etc.), I'm not even stupid enough to claim that the Japanese generally create deep games, or a great amount of original ones for that matter. The deepest RPG so far to hail from Japan has been Vagrant Story (based off of Amer. pen and paper RPG's as well). So before you even begin sniffing Nihonjin ass, do general game research first. Then come back to me when you're ready, alright. And don't even bring up that anime' love story cliche' Final Fantasy series, kid (by the way, turn based SD rpgs are based off of Ultima, just to let you know). More like a typical soap opera love story from weekday morning FCI (Fujisake Communications International). You'll get eaten alive on an RPG front with that one.

 

Try comparing fighters vs PC RPG's that haven't innovated at all since the SSI days.

 

Re: Former Tekken Pitbulls, Turtles and Nutjobs

I'd list Chibita and Kyasao as nutjobs then too. Jo Shun for VF3.
Thanks for the definitions.

Chanchai: 1,023 words in 15 minutes = 68.2 WPM! Chanchai got skills yo!

I'd put money on Creed if we had type off... =)

 

Unbelievable

that list of games is just so ridiculous
you ARE allowed to admit that Japanese do make a few deep games once in awhile... you don't have to grasp at straws to prove a point (Galaxies? Diablo? COUNTERSTRIKE?? (god i love it, but c'mon...) Halo really does it for me) Virtually every MMORPG (sp?)... c'mon man...

 

You Da Man!

<font color=yellow> /versus/images/icons/laugh.gif

As far as I'm concerned, Yupa, you and everyone else who posts here regularly at VFDC are nutjobs!
/versus/images/icons/wink.gif

I am the student... You are the master...

::bows::</font color=yellow>