Fighting games not impressive anymore...

[Rolf N]

All those different fighting games cover a spectrum of gaming tastes, and while I don't see anything that would satisfy my own personal taste, I don't think this is a decline of the genre. Rather you just have to wait until "your" fighting game comes out.

I like 'em chaotic. Smash Bros is pretty much the only fighting franchise that works for me. I enjoyed grinding through Soul Calibur 2's single player campagin, but I actually suck at the game (I can do just two or three of Talim's combos with any reliability).

 

[Naboomagnoli]

Personally I think discussing new concepts for the fighter genre is completely valid, whether its' use of physics, elements of procedural motion or ragdoll, creating more interactive environments etc. It's just as valid as discussing new ideas for first person shooters, sports games, possible uses for the Wiimote/Sixaxis etc. There has been a rather hostile tone towards any suggestions in this thread thus far (proof perhaps that violent games incite more aggressive behaviour? ), presumably because people who adore modern fighters are defending their corner. I do however think Shifty was well within his rights to suggest a fix to the button mashing issue found in a number of fighters - btw Tekken 5 and Soul Calibur II suffered this more than VF4, Tekken 3 (minus Eddy) and Soul Blade - because there isn't really another genre I can think of where subtracting any attempt at skill from your play can occasionally increase your chances of winning. It may not be a problem for every single fighting game, but it does tend to rear its' ugly head alarmingly often. It may not be a problem for "masters" of the game, but that therefore limits the problem to a minority of the population of gamers.

One point to consider is why this is the case. Most fighting games tend to be arcade titles at heart, if not straight ports from the arcade version. It's probably a lot easier to get people to put more money in if they are able to get some enjoyment out of it on their very first go - making button mashing a possibility allows first-timers to get a few rounds into the game or put up a decent fight against someone who has played a few times and knows a couple of characters fairly well. More coins are inserted because more people can have fun from the off, get fairly far and think "I could get further than this".

Anyway regarding new fighting game ideas, I think we have sufficient processing power to get a proper bar-room brawl faithfully realised, with pushing, shoving, throwing of chairs, grabbing of enemies and pushing them along the bar, drinks going in their face as they slide along.. since the Sixaxis was mentioned, I could see that being well suited to shoving (especially into oncoming bad guys). I've also always thought that blocking in fighting games looks a bit rubbish compared to use of procedural blocking movements. Consider the fighting in the Matrix, or lightsabre fights; in neither case do the combatants block by holding a more or less fixed pose of holding sabre / fists close to the face or body. Similarly, in lightsabre fights nobody gets hit until the last swing of the sword; only Assassin's Creed has currently realised that lethal weapons actually kill you.
Personally, I'm praying for a new Bushido Blade and for it to be as perfect as it is in my head..

 

[Crayon]

I agree, I think there are other franchises out there that will appeal to the novice player who's mostly interested in beating his friend up -- Super Smash Bros. or Power Stone come to mind. There are also games like MK or Tao Feng (???, the Xbox fighter) that may prove interesting to such an audience.

No, I'm not talking about CRAP for people who don't know any better.

I'm talking about genuine re-imagining of fighiting game mechanics. Virtual On is every bit as consistant, responsive as a "proper" fighting game. I haven't played much Smash Bros, but I've observed good players and I'd say the same for it.

The origional fighting game is rock paper scissors. Street Fighter 2 was an amazing realization of RPS the way it could only be done in a videogame. It took a few years before AM2 could deconstruct Street Fighter 2 and switch around bits and peices to make the Virtua Fighter system. There's no reason that the rules can't be radically re-arranged such as they are in Virtual On, Or Def Jam, and still have the essential qualitites that elitists prize in competition-level fighters.

 

[Acert93]

I wonder if I will ever be amazed by a fighter the way I was playing Soul Caliber on the DreamCast. It seems to me that fighting games have lost their luster since and offer very little to impress me the way Soul Caliber did back in the day. When SC was released on DC it was a massive upgrade over the version available in the arcade. Even looking at VF5 for PS3, I can't help be feel underwhelmed by the overall presentation and gameplay.

Soul Caliber was probably the last perfect fighter ever released on a console and still manages to impress today!

This genre needs to be reinvented!!!

I 100% agree that the genre needs to be re-invented.

I don't think, for example, Tekken and VF5 need to be re-invented. But the genre itself is pretty dead, stale, and uninteresting and has experience significant declines in sales and market appeal.

I think we have seen some innovation in the market though -- just not the "classics, don't you DARE change my gameplay". e.g. Wrestling games. On the N64 I played a fighter that allowed 4 players all at once in full 3D combat, a robust grapple system, multiple "rule" formats for combat, as well create a wrestler AND totally customizable move selections and styles. Asmik made some KILLER games and they did pretty well for themselves. Games like God of War have also taken some of the concepts from fighters and old fashion brawlers and filled in the gap for those wanting some innovation in the form of combat.

But in general the genre is stale in terms of innovation and gameplay development/evolution.

I think fighting games need to make a next step. One great step they can make is physics. Looking forward to it.

Agreed. I want to see something like the Endorphine videos

I respectfully disagree. Right now fighting games are highly fine-tuned clockwork machines, where knowing every frame of animation gives you advantages.

Yes. But does that mean EVERY game should follow this same formula?

Should every fighter offer a combat system that is deterministic, unsurpising, and concretely static? Should they essentially continue on the same 2Dish formula from the old Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat days? A gameplay formular built around the strengths and limitations of platforms like the SNES and Genesis?

It's really a easy to learn, hard to master system. As soon as you add physics to the mix, the whole scenario gets decidedly more "non-deterministic", and button-mashing becomes much more powerful...

Exactly. These are games of skill, timing, and strategy.

Just because a game deviates from the old formula does not mean they must abandon skill, timing, and strategy.

I could argue that a more dynamic, interactive, and flowing gameplay could open up the gameplay model to not only more styles of gameplay and intuition, but would also reward gamers to adapting to the endless variables the world provides.

This is one reason I think die hard fighter fans reject the idea. They are happy to live the limitations, bugs, and shortcomings of the current games. e.g. I walk into the fallen enemy and I do the "space walk" in place deal. Or if I hit my enemy into a thin pillar they always fall right down. Juggling is a classic example of how gameplay evolved to incorperate a limitation of the design/platforms. Why should you be able to juggle a 300lb man in the air with a series of kicks and punches? The "broken" solutions allow the designs to focus on what the systems back then did well: exacting results, hence timing and pre-canned strategy.

Now switch to a more dynamic, involving world. When your enemy flies back and hits that pole, it may break and your foe roll to the side. Or roll to the other. Or flip backwards. Or it may not break and he slide down or roll off to the side. Or it may crack and "break" his fall and he becomes dazed.

Now the game turns into a more dynamic experience -- like real life. The skill focus shifts AWAY from pre-canned memorized tactics, but into "assess and execute" style gameplay. You have to think on the fly and have a broad command of your arsenal and a good eye for dynamical gaging the status of your enemy and your distance from him.

Basically you create an entirely new gameplay dynamic that can be not only more realistic -- or over the top, depending on game design -- but gives a breath of fresh air to the genre as well as opening up new tactical and strategical approaches to the gameplay that dovetail with the "whippie!" features the new consoles offer.

As it stands, DoA4 and VF5, while nice looking games of exacting gameplay balance and design, are not fundamentally different from the games that came out in the genre in 1996. I am not saying there hasn't been innovation or evolution, but it has been minor compared to the market. Hence the slowing of sales in the genre.

I say keep VF5 as it is, but breath new life into the genre with some new, thoughtfully executed fighters.

 

[icecold1983]

imo they dont look better because animation hasnt improved since the ps2 fighting games.

 

[Bad_Boy]

imo they dont look better because animation hasnt improved since the ps2 fighting games.

How many fighting games have been released? I'd say the animation in VF5 alone tops any fighting game. Like I said initiailly, its hard to give next gen fighting games more credit when only 1-2 have been released.

 

[V3]

I could argue that a more dynamic, interactive, and flowing gameplay could open up the gameplay model to not only more styles of gameplay and intuition, but would also reward gamers to adapting to the endless variables the world provides.

They did that in VF3. VF3 has friction co-efficient on different surfaces which effect your movement. And also undulation which effects all your attacks and hits. Though not endless but it did introduce alot of variables into the fight. But in the end most players just wanted balance, so they favor flat surface with constant surface like Akira or Taka stage. Though its still nice to have those stages.

Why they were thrown out in VF4, from what I heard, the team just couldn't code it in. The VF3 implementation has alot of bugs if you play it enough to encounter them, you'll know what I mean. I heard they couldn't fix those, and they threw out Taka, a character that the whole VF3 was design around.

This is one reason I think die hard fighter fans reject the idea. They are happy to live the limitations, bugs, and shortcomings of the current games. e.g. I walk into the fallen enemy and I do the "space walk" in place deal. Or if I hit my enemy into a thin pillar they always fall right down.

Well in VF5 the short wall is back. So there is more chance for characters to flip over those walls when they hit it.

Juggling is a classic example of how gameplay evolved to incorperate a limitation of the design/platforms. Why should you be able to juggle a 300lb man in the air with a series of kicks and punches? The "broken" solutions allow the designs to focus on what the systems back then did well: exacting results, hence timing and pre-canned strategy.

Juggling is a reward system. The game of assess and execute was already played out before the juggle happend. Its just a way of rewarding the player that won it.

Basically you create an entirely new gameplay dynamic that can be not only more realistic -- or over the top, depending on game design -- but gives a breath of fresh air to the genre as well as opening up new tactical and strategical approaches to the gameplay that dovetail with the "whippie!" features the new consoles offer.

I think fighting games like the UFC probably will benefit from it rather than the VF clones.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Do you have any real examples of how changing the physics model will improve gameplay?

No, none has been made yet

Dodging and feigning are already implemented in VF and have nothing to do with the physics model you are using. Have you ever worked with Havok or Novodex? Have you ever used the SIXAXIS controller? I assume that by writing the above post, the answer to both questions is 'No'.

I don't understand your attitude at all. Have I ever driven fast cars around Nürburgring? No. Does that mean I can't have any input into car games? Have I ever uncovered lost treasures in deep tombs, evading traps and thieves? No. Does that mean I can't comment on whether the latest Tomb Raider is any good or not? Have I ever taken a broadsword to a posse of goblins and then taken a fireball in the chest from their shaman? Or picked up a car and thrown it at an invading army of robots? Or ran 70MPH in loop-the-loops collecting gold rings? No. Most things computer games do are things people don't get to do in real life. And these things no-one did until someone created the first games. That's the job of the game designer, to imagine what is possible. That's what gave us Elite when games were just Space Invaders, PacMan, and Manic Miner. That's what gave us Populous when platforms and shooters reigned supreme. Footballers worked on canned animations until PES gave us physics based football, and that's by far the better system. The fact there's no example in existence to look at doesn't stop us being able to use our imaginations...

In my Physics Fighter, you can tilt the sixaxis forwards or backwards to shift weight onto the front or back foot. You have a button each for left and right hands and feet. A tap is a 'jab' and a hard press is a powerful move. You use jabs to open up your opponent's defenses, and then follow up with the big moves.

So, Thug the Boxer (Player 1) is picking on Mung How Fung Shi Li Po Qu (Player 2). The sixaxis is
level for balance. P1 is jabbing now and then. A couple connect, so he tilts the sixaxis to the right to add extra force as he slams the punch button, and knocks P2 to the ground...

Alternatively, P1 is jabbing and a couple connect. He leans the sixaxis right and does a power hit. P2 leans back and the punch misses. Thug is off balance with all his weight forwards, seen by the way the character is moving. P2 grabs him in a throw...

Alternatively, P1 is jabbing and a couple connect. He leans the sixaxis right and does a power hit. P2 leans back and the punch misses. Thug is off balance with all his weight forwards, seen by the way the character is moving. P1 tips the controller left to shift the weight back onto the back foot for stability and is able to shrug off P2's throw.

That's just off the top of my head, a system that I can see being intuitive and in-depth. Have I ever played such a game? No? Can I prove it works (in that it's fun to play)? No. But then, have you ever played such a game? Can you prove it doesn't work? No! The difference here is you're blind to alternatives, and take it in faith that nothing can change the fighter model without being rubbish, poo-pooing any ideas that are different just because they're different! Some of us want something new. You can stick with VF16 if you want, and if that makes you happy, gret. But don't deny the rest of us the possibility of more interesting fighters.

 

[V3]

Alternatively, P1 is jabbing and a couple connect. He leans the sixaxis right and does a power hit. P2 leans back and the punch misses. Thug is off balance with all his weight forwards, seen by the way the character is moving. P2 grabs him in a throw...

Alternatively, P1 is jabbing and a couple connect. He leans the sixaxis right and does a power hit. P2 leans back and the punch misses. Thug is off balance with all his weight forwards, seen by the way the character is moving. P1 tips the controller left to shift the weight back onto the back foot for stability and is able to shrug off P2's throw.

Just pick Brad from VF5, he can shift his weight all over the place. What you describe is a typical occurance in VF5, those type of play are already in, without the headache of the sixaxis.

 

[doob]

I'v thought of a similar potencial use of the sixaxis i'd like to see implemented would imply a new camera angle imo for best visual feedback.
Instead of the typical sideway horizontal look, either set it in a typical back/behind 3rd person gameplay or a more isometrical 3rd angle view between sideways and upper/back. This would allow for a better view on wich direction the player would then be able to dodge/lean with the controller to swing and/or sidestep(by pressing some Lx/Rx button to actually move the character positon instead of just dodging/leaning with the feat relatively in the same position) to avoid attacks or make counter-attack moves.


I agree, for quite some i'v lost interest in fighting titles. Despite now at a 'new-gen' skin shading is what prevents me to find them more visually more impressive, animation physics need more fine tunning. I would like to see if this gen devs do something about the lack of backwalking animations when the adversary keeps punching and moving foward while the other guy just slides literally with his feet sticked on the ground instead of backwalking and maybe even loosing balance and stumble. Things like this is one example of what makes me agree with the lack of... i wouldnt say impressivness but visual interest/appealing.

There was some title (GTA alike in-dev cant recall its name or the devs company name) wich had some great physics in the animation system which showed pretty well how they should react when physically hit deppending on the force/direction and type of object.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Beyond that applying physics to fighting models would remove the skill and playability that make them fun.

Kind of like the way real physics take away the skill from real fighting? I'm pretty sure there's got to be some other skills in the human brain beyond memorizing frames and button combos. How is tilting a controller to tilt your character a "headache" compared to buttons?

 

[ban25]

Just pick Brad from VF5, he can shift his weight all over the place. What you describe is a typical occurance in VF5, those type of play are already in, without the headache of the sixaxis.

Exactly, and this is why the uninitiated should not be having this conversation. Many of these ideas have already been implemented properly or tried and canned (i.e. undulating and sloped terrain in VF3 and T4). As for the SIXAXIS -- a headache is putting it nicely.

 

[blakjedi]

Kind of like the way real physics take away the skill from real fighting? I'm pretty sure there's got to be some other skills in the human brain beyond memorizing frames and button combos. How is tilting a controller to tilt your character a "headache" compared to buttons?

How does "tilting" a two handed controller without force feedback help you translate the physics better on a 2D display?

Physics is about how materials react with one another. Weight, speed, texture, composition, and temperature... NONE of those attributes translate well to a two handed controller based around teh horizontal axis for normal play. Especially since the display representation is fundamentally 2d... If you were talking eyetoy then maybe... but the six axis controller is not designed to aid in your argument whatsoever. The wii mote would be way better in that regard.

 

[Acert93]

Exactly, and this is why the uninitiated should not be having this conversation. Many of these ideas have already been implemented properly or tried and canned (i.e. undulating and sloped terrain in VF3 and T4). As for the SIXAXIS -- a headache is putting it nicely.

The unitiated?

As for your point about some games trying this, it could easily be pointed out that slopping a new idea onto a game already defined around a traditional fighting system wouldn't work well. Keeping the unrealistic mechanics of a game like Tekken or VF and slapping physics ontop surely woulnd't work -- it would be about as usefull as slapping the really effective perry/grapple system from Asmik fighters into VF. But that doesn't invalidate the idea or even the benefit of such ideas.

Ironically, this is the same complaint I have with fans of any genre or franchise that get angry at suggested evolutions of the genre. The FPS genre is rife with such... luckily the market is large enough that when a franchise sits on their butt you get new up and comers who challenge the market with new ideas. e.g. Duke Nukem in response to Doom, CoD in response to MoH, HL in response to Quake, and so forth.

The fighter genre is pretty small (VF, DoA, Tekken, SC... and maybe counting Smash Brothers) for the most part and are spread over a number of platforms. Although the market has shrunk for fighters, the fan base will rabbid about the games that are released.

As a former fan (what? I was initiated? #$#@ yeah if my hundreds upon hundreds of hours in SF2, VF2, and the Tekken series has anything to say about it!) of the genre I would like to see the genre rethought. I don't care if the current games jump aboard, but there is plenty of room for a game that isn't bound by all the issues I outlined above. If you love those issues and the end result, cool! But I would really like to see something different, more involving, and more fluid and dynamic. That would attract me back to the genre. As it is the current fighters are "more of the same". This may not be true to fans who hang on every little change in the games dynamic -- and who would be pissed anyhow if the entire game changed because they have all their time invested in mastering it anyhow -- but for others it is. It is like Madden: for rabbid football fans a new roster, cleaned up game, with a couple new features is worth $60. For more casual football fans or casual football game fans, picking Madden up every 3 or 4 years is enough because annually they don't see the value in the evolution of the game.

That is all most of us are asking for: Give some of us long time fighter fans, tired of game mechanics from 1996, something to get interested in again. We are tired of "Madden Updates" -- we want a new take on fighters.

 

[RollingBalls]

Some of you guys are describing platform beat em ups (Devil May Cry) and party games (Super Smash Brothers). I played one of the newer Mortal Kombats over at a friends, and it had ragdoll physics so bad it was laughable. I'm pretty sure that was intended though. Good fighting games require moves to be so consistent that the outcome is already known. Once you start throwing in random attributes you break the flow of the game.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Good fighting games require moves to be so consistent that the outcome is already known. Once you start throwing in random attributes you break the flow of the game.

That's the existing model, and yes, you can't mess about with that without breaking it. But there's also the possibility of a new model that from the ground up is redesigned to work differently using the principles of Natural Motion's Endorphin. I'm not going to try exaplining it anymore as this is like talking to a brick wall. The idea here has not been tried at all in any other game, full stop. The technology to have characters move in relation to their environments and actions is barely with us now. If you think Brad from VF5 is the embodiment of the physics based fighter, you are sorely mistaken. You can't take a character who's every motion affects his ability to execute every other motion, and drop them into a game against a competitor who can switch from realing from a punch to executing a throw in an instant when the canned animations and switched, and call that physics based combat!

I will bow out of this conversation, somewhat disappointed that those wanting to discuss different ways to create fighting games are 'harassed' by fans of the genre who don't want to see any new gaming styles. I don't know any other genre fans like it. In every other genre, new ideas are discussed and welcomed when they work. FF has gone realtime. Soccer has gone physics based. Shooters have been first and thrid person. Lots of diversity to appeal to everyone. Why are fighters to be shackled into 1990s technology and not given scope to reinvent themselves? Given that the existing gameplay doesn't appeal to most gamers, there's surely scope for new games that do? If you don't want to see things different to what they are, why not stay out of the conversation? Or at least answer the OP and explain why fighting games are impressive to you. Or offer up alternative ideas how to make fighters impressive once again.

 

[V3]

I don't care if the current games jump aboard, but there is plenty of room for a game that isn't bound by all the issues I outlined above. If you love those issues and the end result, cool!

Most of your issues can be taken care by having tons more animation for special cases. Take juggle for example, instead of juggle, every hit can be animated accordingly. Instead of moonwalk the character can take a step back, etc. It won't make that much different to gameplay but it'll increase developers work tremendously, if you don't use cheap solution like physics driven like rag doll which looks bad anyway.

It'll be too much work for a cast of 20 unique fighters. In an old interview AM2 complained about how much work Taka Arashi needed, since he got alot of special cases animations. (Also another reason why he was drop) I can't imagine they would do such change. Though considering all things is finish now with VF5, they could do it for the plan refresh if there is one.

 

[doob]

Animations giving allot of work? hmm im very skeptical about that. Only if new ones, they probably re-use more animations (with some tunning) peer tittle than textures.

 

[V3]

That's the existing model, and yes, you can't mess about with that without breaking it. But there's also the possibility of a new model that from the ground up is redesigned to work differently using the principles of Natural Motion's Endorphin. I'm not going to try exaplining it anymore as this is like talking to a brick wall. The idea here has not been tried at all in any other game, full stop. The technology to have characters move in relation to their environments and actions is barely with us now. If you think Brad from VF5 is the embodiment of the physics based fighter, you are sorely mistaken. You can't take a character who's every motion affects his ability to execute every other motion, and drop them into a game against a competitor who can switch from realing from a punch to executing a throw in an instant when the canned animations and switched, and call that physics based combat!

Well you can have fighting game where characters doesn't have a predetermined moveset. Intead you manipulate them like a doll to fight.

Characters don't have fighting style but different character has different body type and weight, like fat ones, muscular ones, lanky ones, etc.

No health bar, just body and limb damage, etc.

Camera will be third person cam from the back.

Detailed graphics to show all the damage and stuff.

A new controller that resemble a wooden doll to drive your characters every move with force feedback. That controller will auto adjust to the size of your chosen characters. One to one mapping to your character. If the character fall, it will fall too. That would be an interesting fighting game.

 

[Acert93]

Most of your issues can be taken care by having tons more animation for special cases.

The work required to create, and then test, tens of thousands of animations is not possible.

Take juggle for example, instead of juggle, every hit can be animated accordingly.

How do you correct animate such? With a physics driven model every inch and every millisecond will impact the distance, angle, and power of any such move. So if the player is in the air I could be approaching from any number of angles, distances, and timings for my punches or kicks.

This is the reason developers dumped 2D sprites for characters in 3D games in the early 1990s.

At first full 3D models were a lot more work and computationally expensive. But when you had a character model with 500 animation frames, and had to get nearly dozens of angles for each animation frame, you are looking at each character having over 1000 frames.

So the reward to following this system diminished because it required a ton of memory, and it never could approach the fluidity of full 3D models which could be views from infinate angles and distances, with any number of animation positions.

Just look at your juggling situation. It violates all the laws of physics to begin with, so lets say the developer says, "This mechanic is broken, lets drop it". Well, your animators are going to KILL you if they just created 500 special animations to account for hundreds of divergent attack angles and timings for juggling.

Instead of moonwalk the character can take a step back, etc. It won't make that much different to gameplay but it'll increase developers work tremendously, if you don't use cheap solution like physics driven like rag doll which looks bad anyway.

Cheap system? I thought that described a system that refused to progress beyond the mechanics of 2D sprite games.

There has been a lot of progress in inverse kinematics / ragdoll, physics driven models, and quality motion tweening. Havok's site has a number of examples of how technology has progressed since HL2.

And the Indiana Jones videos from E3 likewise demonstrated the benefits, and current quality, of physics driven systems. They do NOT exhibit any nasty "ragdoll" responses. The characters animate seemlessly and flowingly, and react dynamically to their environment with no two encounters looking the same. I dare say the jarringly fast and unrealistic movements of a game like VF5 (jerky with completely unrealistic responses to contact as well as recoveries from hits) look extremely dated to the Indiana Jones tech demo.

I have to agree with Shifty here. Instead of solutions to expanding the genre with new technologies, the arguement seems to be that fighters are perfect and in no need of evolution. I disagree, and is one of the reasons the genre no longer interests me at all. It is stale and the mechanics are totally broken. The gameplay isn't broken, but the mechanics are because they are very, very limited in the scope in regards to the results that can be garnished from them. With completely precanned animation systems with fairly lineary, 2Dish combat you will always be limited to the explicit design of the animators and designers.

This is NOT a bad thing, but when did it become the only way to make a fighter?

I guess it is all perspective. Hardcore fighting fans, like Halo fans, only assess what can be added/subtracted within the box to make the game better. Whereas Shifty and I are suggesting growth, thinking outside the box. We understand that our ideas would make a horrible VF5.

But that doesn't mean it would create a horrible fighter.