Question design principles in practice

[PainForge]

What options/restrictions do designers have in terms of creative leeway when making a fg, that might not result in it becoming a broken mess (whether it be the animations, hit effects, camera angles, amount of on screen characters, etc.), and how could they apply them?

Also what design principles have designers adhered to throughout the inception of versus fighters?

Which games have some of the more unique mechanics not seen in others? Does anyone have any concepts of their own they want to share?

 

[Protagonist_1]

Interesting questions, wish I had a clear cut answer to this but I'm not a game developer. I'm sure there are some limitations on frame data/startup/projectile speed/walk speed/jump distance/active frames/cancel advantage/ etc to prevent things like infinites on hit/block or taking note of the individual character frame data so that there aren't character specific block infinites also.

 

[WidowPuppy]

TTT2 has the best practice mode in my opinion. And one thing that they have which should definitely be apart of this online lagfest, is the ability to apply latency in training. 5,4,3,2 Bars, even 1 etc... This makes getting timing down for non optimal conditions better, for combos anyway... Still not gonna make something that requires a 1 window frame punish possible with more than 1 frame of lag.

 

[MrProfDrPepper]

TTT2 has the best practice mode in my opinion. And one thing that they have which should definitely be apart of this online lagfest, is the ability to apply latency in training. 5,4,3,2 Bars, even 1 etc... This makes getting timing down for non optimal conditions better, for combos anyway... Still not gonna make something that requires a 1 window frame punish possible with more than 1 frame of lag.

the thread isnt about literal practice mode, it is about how fighting games are evolving and what should and shouldnt be incuded, how the game should be presented and played, which high level deep game mechanics should be kept for all fighting games (things like fundamentals and footsies) and some should be unique and different in all fighting games (combo systems, ways to get out of combos, ways to make things safe or no way to make things safe)

 

[WidowPuppy]

Ahh, I see.

Whoops, lol.

 

[buyacushun]

Mike Z had a panel at UFGT where he covers some of the things fighting games should keep do and some of things they should bring back. From how buttons are set in options, to having static hitboxes. At least in 2D because that's where most of his high level experience is. I'll look for a link.

One design theme I'm wary about is things like stun, block meter, MK stamina bar. They have to be implemented almost perfectly who you have a game that favors offense or defense in the wrong way. ( block meter in alpha would punish you for having good defense. I don't know how bad this was in alpha but say a very offensive character was pressuring someone without a viable reversal. Their only real option is to block and look for that one spot to jump, throw, or counter poke. But now they have a limited time and must do it before their opponent get's a free opening from depleting the block meter.)

Blazblue has a set of systems with health, barrier block, and in older versions how many certain heavy hits you could take without barrier blocking. The amount of each besides barrier varied between characters. I don't think every game should have stuff like that but it's nice to see differences with such basic things as adding on how blocking works.

When it comes to extra non gameplay things like camera effects and backgrounds sometimes I think less is more. Some stages have too much or look just plain ridiculous like the research facility added to SF from SFxT. Or make it hard to play like SF's volcanic rim or MvC Resident Evil Lab. Those kind of things need to be looked at carefully.

Really wish there was like a 3-5 second minimum on supers and other animations. I don't know exactly how long the ok ones are but there are cases of supers that WILL be used all the time just completely taking you out of the game. I'm sure there is more but that's what I got.

EDIT: Found it:

 

[Colares]

Most different from SF formula is Smash MK.

 

[Pakman]

There's no real text book answer for what makes a proper FG, but I will touch on briefly is FG Philosophy. I am going to use SF and MK for this example (if you don't like this, ts)

Essentially, in SF there tends to be a strong emphasis on the neutral game (spacing meta and the SF dance) and controlled offence (you can win the footsie battle but that doesn't mean you have won the match for example)

The pacing is often "slow", methodical and calculated (again, footsies and pokes)

The controls themselves are relatively smooth and the moves have a lot of visibilty to them (start up and active frames are often clearly visible)

It is very easy to reverse engineer the design choices and come up with some logical under pinning for why they are what they are (e,g: Dragon Punch motion starting with a F input creating an element of risk reward; Zangief's Green Hand/Banishing Flat allowing him go phase through projectiles and also giving him mobility; Guile's play style in general and so on)

Compare this to say the MK games where generally speaking they tend to be less controlled (heavy rush down - see chip damage on normals and not just on specials and dial a combos, as well as the flashy nature in general)

It gets a little tricky from this point on as MK games have gradually adopted a more "controlled" perspective to their games.

In any case, there's a lot less deliberateness in the move set in MK games (again, emphasising the flashy natured combat) - try and reverse engineer your favourite characters combos and tools, you will find a number of them serve no real purpose other than padding said characters move set out and/or looking awesome (isn't neccesarily a fault, in fact it is literally part of the design philosophy of MK games and their appeal: FUN)

Similarly, the neutral game works differently with many characters having teleports and/or capture type projectiles (and projectiles themselves not colliding, rather going through each other - iircc this was actually a deliberate design choice by the team way back in MK1)

The dial a combo nature of the combat makes pokes and footsies work differently - your spacing has to account for the dial a combo range. You are by extention rewarded heavily for opening someone up as a result (not so disimilar to SFxT actually).

Also, the controls tend to have this weird I am going to say clunky delay to them which I am not sure is deliberate or not (d,f motions are literally d then f, and not smooth qcf motions for example), there are also no charge based characters (again, highlighting the flashy aggressive nature of the combat but also emphasising the pick up and play factor)

I don't want to bore anyone with too big a post, so I will leave with some homework instead ; reverse engineer Ryu, Zangief and Guile's movesets to get a good understanding of SF's design philosophies and Meta.

As previously mentioned the MK games have evolved so it is a little trickier to find comparable examples, but I would say look at specifically: Sub Zero, and Scorpion for MK design philosophy and Meta. Also, compare how teleports work in MK vs SF.

After that, have a look at this video for an example of complete bullshit character design philosophy...and what to avoid

 

[buyacushun]

Cool stuff

On the note about looking through a character's moves. I had a talk with a friend about how some characters moves just seem to cover all bases and you could remove moves and still have they same character. I used hellfire scorpion as an example. He has the unblockable, a fireball, plus the regular scorpion tricks. As i tried to face him from mid to fullscreen I realized that he has pretty much everything covered. Teleport is always a threat and so is spear. He has an ok fireball he can use sometimes. But then there is hellfire that has me constantly watching him and being ready to let go of block and jump or run. I thought what if he didn't have the fireball and they designed his cancels using hellfire. I'm sure it would take different frames and such but it would mean a less dominating (I was MoS Raiden at the time) but still very good neutral and offense for hellfire scorpion.

Another one that bugs me is characters like cassie who have very good offense having an option like ex flip kick. Most of the time you could throws this out midscreen and whether or not your opponent expected it won't matter. I myself don't like any safe reversal or "Get off me" type moves. Or safe "get to you" type moves like Yun's ex dash punch.

 

[Pakman]

With Scorpion, I actually think MK9 did him better overall as he had spear, hellfire and teleport which, as you identified, by themselves create a perfect synergy and move set basis; if NRS were more cogniscant of this at the time they may have been better able to capitalise on his move set (and many others) and create an archetype.

IMO, MK9 was actually very very close to being legitimately well balanced - minor changes here and there really and some toning down of characters (Kabal, KL, Cyrax etc etc). I mean, the fact that a character like Stryker only needed what 2 buffs (standing roundhouse hit box, a touch more armour on ex roll, possibly some frame data changes) to make him a solid viable but not OP character says a lot. MK9 was a good solid starting point, I wish MKX would have followed more closely in its footsteps instead of Injustice's.


For better or worse though, NRS went in a different direction in MKX and now we have more characters that have cover all bases movesets instead of just the top tier in MK9.

Curveball characters (like Yun, C viper, Fuerte) I myself would rather not have but that's because I love SF's footsie/neutral game too much. To me, that is proper SF and proper 2D FG design philosophy.

Edit: I think NRS lead designer Palo (user name is Colt something) actually made a post about MKX's design philosophy on the forums not so long ago. It was something along the lines of fun but fair - that was what they aim for.

 

[Colares]

Mk9 was really busted so it's hard to say. Specially Kenshi and Kabal.
Even sindel that wasn't near the top could have really loopsided matches with levi cancel pressure.

I like to look at Kabal and how powerful is his kit with amazing(best?) zoning, offense and fast armored nomad dash leading to full combo.

I hate all sfiv original and the 3rd strike in sfiv. Viper has 3 normal buttons everything else is specials into vortex. She tainted CapComando's name
In 3rd Yun made sense but in sfiv having divekick and command grab is too powerful specially with crouchtechs being blow up by divekick

 

[PainForge]

A sincere thank you to each and every one of you for taking the time to contribute your thoughts and analysis to the thread. You guys are the best.

I will make time to look at that whole video buyacushun, as I did with Pakman's.

Later on (hopefully today), I would like to address some of the more or less universal movement in fg's, to get everyone's thoughts on their necessity.

 

[buyacushun]

A sincere thank you to each and every one of you for taking the time to contribute your thoughts and analysis to the thread. You guys are the best.

I will make time to look at that whole video buyacushun, as I did with Pakman's.

Later on (hopefully today), I would like to address some of the more or less universal movement in fg's, to get everyone's thoughts on their necessity.

Are you going to make that a seperate thread?

 

[PainForge]

Are you going to make that a seperate thread?

Sorry for the late reply. Between all the other things I have going on in my life, I've been trying to put some concepts together in my mind, to see what clicks and could work together. I can't really figure it out though, since I literally can't visualize it in front of me. In all honesty, I'm still learning a lot as I go, which is why I wanted to get a clearer insight into the genre when I asked the questions I originally did. And I can tell you guys know a lot more about fighting games than me.

Well, I was thinking to keep the discussion here since I see it falling under the same topic. Hope that's cool buyacushun.

Here's a few of the questions I had though.

Does crouching, crouching pokes or certain attacks in general, have to exist within fg's? What about things like jumping or blocking? I take it you'd have to offset these movements with something else if you removed them, but with what? Or could you take more of the these universal moves and apply them to certain characters only?

I'm still thinking a lot of design choices go back into the whole rock, paper, scissors style of thought of adding/removing movement. Such as with high/overhead/low hit levels. Either that or something based more around 50/50's. Could be wrong here though, but if I am please enlighten me. I'm just throwing some ideas out there, hoping to get some feedback on them.

Also would something like a simultaneous 4 player, 3D fighting game work out well? Something akin to Def Jam: Fight for New York maybe. I take it would need a static camera for the most part, unless of course if the fighters were spaced out in the arena, in where the camera would zoom out too. And if not already implemented in games like this, I thought making slow throws (between 2 players of course) punishable with normal strikes, if a 3rd or 4th player are standing idly by. But then those strikes could also be countered if you time the slow throw with approaching enemies well, effectively knocking them all down with player 2. Maybe a high risk / high reward situation?

 

[Pakman]

^^
History lesson:

Heavyweight champ:

The earliest examples of standing only combat as well as "spacing", "blocking" and "pokes" as it happens. Each punch has a knockback effect on the opponent pushing them away. On a basic level this gives both players visual feedback that a punch (or attack) has been connected. But (and this may or may not have been intentional) on a technical and strategic level, it also acts as a warning to the opponent "back off, I control this space" i.e a "poke" - the effect is psychologically reinforced and as a result the player can learn the visible attack range, the consequence of entering it and strategize how to best it. When we refer to pokes in FGs, we are referring to their tactical and strategic properties - a by product of hit stun/knock back.


Yie are Kung Fu

Here we get a more eccentric, over the top style of fighting (or kung fu rather), as well as jumping and crouching attacks. We also get hit sparks for extra visual feedback in addition to the knock back on connected hits. Since the nature of the combat was more combo based the knock back wasn't as exaggerated as in the Heavyweight Champ.

You can however tell the designers were going for a flashy and more satisfying style of combat - the game practically wears it (proudly) on its sleeves!

BONUS ROUND: As a homage, Capcom recreated a few of the characters in this game into SF series.


Karate champ

This is a good example of a footsie heavy one hit ko game; A literal rock, paper, scissors. It also provides us with a more "controlled" and methodical paced combat style - there is some tactical and thus practical design to the moves as they all have their own individual ranges and angles.

Also, some attacks could avoid other attacks if timed correctly for example: sweep style attacks could low profile the roundhouse attack (I like to think this was intentional but it may have been down to inconsistent hit boxes...whatever the intended reasoning, the end result gives extra depth, strategy and fun!) = an early form of "footsies"

BONUS ROUND: In creating the SF series, Capcom was greatly influenced by both these last two games. It's not hard to see their inspiration.

4 Player Combat
As for 4 player combat at once, although there is nothing inherently wrong with it, there are a couple of issues that find their way in;
1) overwhelming franticism - irrespective of static camera or a lock on feature, there is simply too much going on to keep track of, leading to a lot of randomness.
Blocking attacks in all directions (as a means of defending yourself should your opponents decide to gang up on you) also becomes quite problematic.

Fortunately, SMASH has us covered with the Bubble shield that does exactly that. Aware that this blocking system inherently staggers the game out (the only other way to beat the shield is via grabbing), the designers new to give it a limit: the shield pops under repeated assault and gradually over time, so you can't defend indefinitely.

2) You'd have to balance the characters movesets on the basis they can face multiple opponents at once whilst also being balanced in a one on one setting - keep in mind balancing 1 v 1 is difficult enough...

Having said that, the SMASH series is the closest example of a multi man FG, but even that series on a tournament level is played 1 v 1 because any more is just utter chaos.


This is a lot to take in and my brain is kinda fried, so I will leave it here for now. Look at the videos, digest the points made and feel free to ask further questions

 

[buyacushun]

Does crouching, crouching pokes or certain attacks in general, have to exist within fg's? What about things like jumping or blocking? I take it you'd have to offset these movements with something else if you removed them, but with what? Or could you take more of the these universal moves and apply them to certain characters only?

I'm still thinking a lot of design choices go back into the whole rock, paper, scissors style of thought of adding/removing movement. Such as with high/overhead/low hit levels. Either that or something based more around 50/50's. Could be wrong here though, but if I am please enlighten me. I'm just throwing some ideas out there, hoping to get some feedback on them.

It's possible to make a game where you limit the things seen as universal, like jumping or blocking. But if you do that you would need to really design the game around that. Divekick has no blocking and one hit KOs so it's really about maneuvering using each character's different jumps, divekicks and specials. I personally wouldn't do it because I feel you'd have to "simplify" things. I say "simplify" because games like aren't lesser but just have depth in one aspect. However, I do think it'd be good to make a game like that if you want to just wet your feet, sort of speak.

Also would something like a simultaneous 4 player, 3D fighting game work out well? Something akin to Def Jam: Fight for New York maybe. I take it would need a static camera for the most part, unless of course if the fighters were spaced out in the arena, in where the camera would zoom out too. And if not already implemented in games like this, I thought making slow throws (between 2 players of course) punishable with normal strikes, if a 3rd or 4th player are standing idly by. But then those strikes could also be countered if you time the slow throw with approaching enemies well, effectively knocking them all down with player 2. Maybe a high risk / high reward situation?

Def Jam is a nice example, but my favorite 4 player, 3D fighter would have to be Power Stone. Made by capcom and came out on Arcade, Dreamcast and PSP. In that game you had light attack for combos, one hit heavy attack, jump and a pickup button. Items would litter the stage and some would have hazards. One item in particular the "Power Stones" would transform your character when you got 3 of them. You could knock this out of opponents by punching them or some "heavy" weapons. Capcom being capcom included a parry like mechanic where you would dodge around the opponent if you tapped towards them as they attacked. There is no block though.

I feel with those type of games you don't really need to try and balance around attacking 1 and multiple opponents. Maybe create a mechanic or standardize everyone to have certain attacks (like how Tekken gives everyone moves to bound or catch sidesteppers). With these type of games I would focus more on having fun and useful tools. Try to create a game where there isn't someone who dominates every aspect and give characters ways to deal with everything. Then just see what everyone does with those tools.

The best way to go about deciding what should be in the game is to decide what kind of game it is. Smash, Def Jam and Power Stone are all 4 player games but only def jam and smash have a block. In nidhogg (another one of those intense one hit kills smaller games.), has blocks and i think a parry. Divekick however doesn't. Those main system decisions heavily influence what you'd be creating. So I would say first find the main direction and theme of your game. Then design the system that best produces this.