+- The VG Resource (https://www.vg-resource.com)
+-- Forum: Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-65.html)
+--- Forum: July 2014 Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-139.html)
+---- Forum: Other Stuff (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-6.html)
+----- Forum: Gaming Discussion (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-18.html)
+----- Thread: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? (/thread-17676.html)
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - PrettyNier - 06-25-2011
Quote:Beat em ups can be fun even to someone who doesn't like fighters.and fighters can be fun to someone who doesn't like beat 'em ups
(me, most of the time)
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kriven - 06-25-2011
"Fighters get stale" isn't really a viable argument, because you knew what you were buying when you bought it.
Also: Have you guys beaten Nightmare Train? Because I literally spent seven hours getting my ass kicked.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Negative-Zer0 - 06-26-2011
Linear boring fighters with nothing to offer from the engine or competition get stale. Fun fighters that have a lot of depth last a long time.
E.G. Platform fighters like Brawl have nothing to offer in terms of depth within it's engine. But Melee lasted 10 years due to it's incredibly fun engine and the mystery of depth surrounding it that brawl could not deliver.
MvC2 has so much depth surrounding it's engine it took combo makers 10 years to break it down. The depth, even with it's unbalance, provides very fun gameplay at low and high levels.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kairos - 06-29-2011
(06-26-2011, 10:45 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: E.G. Platform fighters like Brawl have nothing to offer in terms of depth within it's engine. But Melee lasted 10 years due to it's incredibly fun engine and the mystery of depth surrounding it that brawl could not deliver.
Depth =/= Glitches
Melee was a bunch of glitches not depth.
Not that it was a bad game. It was just gltichy as fuck.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - DadNier - 06-30-2011
i hope you're not implying glitches are not a legitimate thing to use in competitive games because then you're literally discounting the entirety of capcom's combo system in 2D fighting games (and probably a lot of other company's games too; anything with cancels as a function) since 1991
edit: i also realized that would kill a lot of interesting mechanics that aren't even related to combos in said games as well soooo yeah
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kairos - 07-01-2011
(06-30-2011, 12:35 AM)DrSlouch Wrote: i hope you're not implying glitches are not a legitimate thing to use in competitive games because then you're literally discounting the entirety of capcom's combo system in 2D fighting games (and probably a lot of other company's games too; anything with cancels as a function) since 1991
No. Not at all. I'm very well aware that glitches and such made a lot of fighters a while back. I'm just saying that's not depth. at least not intentional depth.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Negative-Zer0 - 07-01-2011
(07-01-2011, 08:15 PM)Rags Wrote:(06-30-2011, 12:35 AM)DrSlouch Wrote: i hope you're not implying glitches are not a legitimate thing to use in competitive games because then you're literally discounting the entirety of capcom's combo system in 2D fighting games (and probably a lot of other company's games too; anything with cancels as a function) since 1991
No. Not at all. I'm very well aware that glitches and such made a lot of fighters a while back. I'm just saying that's not depth. at least not intentional depth.
Intentional or not, depth is depth. You can't pick and choose which ones are actual depth becuase from the very same post you quoted me on, you excluded MvC2, which was more accidental than Melee was.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kairos - 07-02-2011
(07-01-2011, 09:03 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote:(07-01-2011, 08:15 PM)Rags Wrote:(06-30-2011, 12:35 AM)DrSlouch Wrote: i hope you're not implying glitches are not a legitimate thing to use in competitive games because then you're literally discounting the entirety of capcom's combo system in 2D fighting games (and probably a lot of other company's games too; anything with cancels as a function) since 1991
No. Not at all. I'm very well aware that glitches and such made a lot of fighters a while back. I'm just saying that's not depth. at least not intentional depth.
Intentional or not, depth is depth. You can't pick and choose which ones are actual depth becuase from the very same post you quoted me on, you excluded MvC2, which was more accidental than Melee was.
Actually didn't noticed the MvC2 part WHOOPS.
MvC2 is in the very same boat Melee is.
Any game, fighting or not, isn't deep if it's just glitches. Yeah. glitches made MvC2, but it was still decently deep if you got past the glitches. And it probably still be well known without said glitches.
But saying that Brawl or MvC3 can't hold up to their predecessors because they're not as deep (which is bullshit) is really dumb.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Negative-Zer0 - 07-03-2011
(07-02-2011, 02:31 PM)Rags Wrote:Even without the intention of the developers, if it adds depth then it shouldn't matter. Some of the best fighting games around have had glitches to add an extra layer of depth.(07-01-2011, 09:03 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote:(07-01-2011, 08:15 PM)Rags Wrote:(06-30-2011, 12:35 AM)DrSlouch Wrote: i hope you're not implying glitches are not a legitimate thing to use in competitive games because then you're literally discounting the entirety of capcom's combo system in 2D fighting games (and probably a lot of other company's games too; anything with cancels as a function) since 1991
No. Not at all. I'm very well aware that glitches and such made a lot of fighters a while back. I'm just saying that's not depth. at least not intentional depth.
Intentional or not, depth is depth. You can't pick and choose which ones are actual depth becuase from the very same post you quoted me on, you excluded MvC2, which was more accidental than Melee was.
Actually didn't noticed the MvC2 part WHOOPS.
MvC2 is in the very same boat Melee is.
Any game, fighting or not, isn't deep if it's just glitches. Yeah. glitches made MvC2, but it was still decently deep if you got past the glitches. And it probably still be well known without said glitches.
But saying that Brawl or MvC3 can't hold up to their predecessors because they're not as deep (which is bullshit) is really dumb.
Combos in SF2 as rarely as they were used (at the time of release around 91-93, when entire games were pokes and counter pokes.)
Unfly, tri-jumps, loops, all of which made there way to MvC3 in some way, shape, or form because though they were unintentional, they actually didn't break the game and added some layer of depth to the game.
Kara canceling in 3rd strike, which made it's way to CvS2, which also had roll canceling, Kara then made it's way to SF4.
Glitches or unintentional engine exploits can be bad, but they can also be the best thing to happen to the game. It's important to not see all glitches as glitches and sometimes to see them as something more. Sakurai failed to do this and couldn't even capture the fun of knocking your opponent around the stage in a combo. He simply did everything in his power to make it not competitive, which blinded him completely making a product that is still fun to play 20 min after unlocking everyone.
Brawl was made specifically to get rid of all of the glitches in melee/64. Not saying it isn't deep, but it is very linear to play.
And I never mentioned MvC3, that game is still being dug into.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kriven - 07-03-2011
Glithces are not meant to add a layer of depth, they just happened to work out that way.
Brawl really is not linear. So I can't wavedash. Whoop-dee-freakin-doo.
I don't know why your head is so far up your ass, but Brawl was far from the atrocity you keep making it out to be, and it has a rather large, and very, very active userbase. Because it's a fun game.
Do glitches count as depth? Well, no, actually, what they count for are incomplete gaming scripts that had the potential to be negative, and they just happened to be lucky enough that the games didn't crash when the glitch happened.
Oh, and there's a lot more to depth than accidental super abilities. Like intentional super abilities and tag battles.
Zero, you really need to stop acting like your opinion is the one and only fundamental truth of the universe, stop getting angry when people don't agree with you and actually decide to defend the opinion you attacked, and stop acting like you're smarter than everybody around you. Remember that this debate is about fucking video games, understand that everyone has a different idea of what depth is, and move on with your damn life. Or go to the MUGEN community. They'd love to have you.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Negative-Zer0 - 07-03-2011
(07-03-2011, 03:17 PM)Kriven Wrote: Glithces are not meant to add a layer of depth, they just happened to work out that way. Not to be a dick, but this is literally exactly what I said in my post.
Brawl really is not linear. So I can't wavedash. Whoop-dee-freakin-doo.
(1) I don't know why your head is so far up your ass, but Brawl was far from the atrocity you keep making it out to be, and it has a rather large, and very, very active userbase. Because it's a fun game.
Do glitches count as depth? Well, no, actually, what they count for are incomplete gaming scripts that had the potential to be negative, and they just happened to be lucky enough that the games didn't crash when the glitch happened.
Oh, and there's a lot more to depth than accidental super abilities. Like intentional super abilities and tag battles.
Zero, you really need to stop acting like your opinion is the one and only fundamental truth of the universe, (1) stop getting angry when people don't agree with you and actually decide to defend the opinion you attacked, and stop acting like you're smarter than everybody around you. Remember that this debate is about fucking video games, understand that everyone has a different idea of what depth is, and move on with your damn life. Or go to the MUGEN community. They'd love to have you.
1 is hypocrisy.
Anyway...
What the hell? Who is getting mad. It was a civil, and honest debate, and I was just stating my opinion on the matter. The only person here getting angry is you.
What you said I have already stated in my post. Glitches may be bad most of the time, but then there the ones that don't take away but add. And despite whether or not they were intentional, if you are enjoying the game, than that glitch was a lucky one that didn't take away.
Calm down, no one is arguing, no one is being hostile, and no one is threatening anyone. It is nothing more than a civil debate, and nothing more.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Kriven - 07-03-2011
(07-03-2011, 11:40 AM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: Some of the best fighting games around have had glitches to add an extra layer of depth.
(07-03-2011, 11:26 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote:(07-03-2011, 03:17 PM)Kriven Wrote: Glithces are not meant to add a layer of depth, they just happened to work out that way. Not to be a dick, but this is literally exactly what I said in my post.
Not to be a dick, but you said literally exactly the opposite.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Negative-Zer0 - 07-03-2011
Selective reading is selective reading.
Glitches or unintentional engine exploits can be bad, but they can also be the best thing to happen to the game. It's important to not see all glitches as glitches and sometimes to see them as something more.
Take a chill pill and stop being blinded by rage.
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - Cobalt Blue - 07-04-2011
beat em ups getting stale? what? since when?
RE: Should fighting games include a beat em up portion? - TomGuycott - 07-04-2011
My favorite example of glitches adding depth is in MvC3, where you crash the game by slowly deploying Dr Doom's hidden missiles. That way I don't have to actually get up to smash the system, I just have to blind my opponent so he actually lets me do that.