Does extra complexity always translate to more fun?

I tried to post this on a comment regarding Mk9 but it was too long. The argument was Mk9 lovers are just looking through rose colored glasses.

People that love Mk9 (like myself) are well aware that the game was not perfect. Nobody likes terrible netcode, nobody likes infinites, nobody likes P1 advantage, limited training mode, bugs, etc. So why would we be any different? When we say we love Mk9 and that it was more fun than 10,11,1 I think we are just talking about the gameplay mechanics and overall feel.

Now here I may lose some of my fellow Mk9 lovers, but honestly, I think the biggest charm of MK9 was the general simplicity compared to the subsequent games:

-You had one character. If you wanted to get good with a character, you play and you lab. Now you gotta worry about 19 different "variations" of your character due to kameos and have to lab against an infinite list of variable opponents due to all possible combinations of characters and kameos.

-50/50 situations were kept to a minimum. The game was more about reading and reacting to your opponent instead of constant guessing.

-You had one type of block. Now you also have flawless block and up block. I wouldn't even mind the extra block types if it was just an optional path to successfully compete in high level gameplay. But now you are forced to use up block to just prevent some scrub from winning by spamming you with some bullshit e.g. Omni man Tiebreaker

-You had one meter. So much easier to focus on and manage.

-Chunky bnb's didn't require meter. Now it's like "Ok, time to punish. Wait, I have to see if I have enough meter for option A or option B, then i have to look at my kameo's meter to see if have to take option C or option D, then I have to...oh damn i missed my punish window"

-You had armored wake ups that you can mash and don't require meter. Now you need meter and split second timing to execute it in a super high pressure situation just to get someone off you.

-Meter burning jumps is an option? Really?

-This one might just be for the old guys out there, but characters felt like their characters. Now you have Kung Lao with no teleport. Mileena with no full screen projectile. Really?

The list goes on and on, I feel that every single game is just becoming more and more complex. Like where does it end? Will Mk2 have 3 meters, 5 different types of blocks and 40 variations for each character? Does all the extra complexity actually translate to more fun?

 

I think a lot of the talk about rose-colored glasses comes from comments that seem true at first glance, but really aren’t when you remember how the game played.

For one example, take the comment about not having 50/50s and just reacting to everything without having many guessing situations. The truth is you were guessing against Kabal in-close. You were guessing with Cage f3 random advantage. You were guessing against Sonya and guessing if she or Kenshi would lolSafe/Plus armor because there was practically no downside to it at all. You were not reacting to Cyrax’s command grab shenanigans, etc.

Nearly all the best characters did force you to guess, repeatedly, because they were given tools that were excessively strong, that many other characters did not have, and many times these were not options that were reactable. So this is one of many examples of falling into revisionist history when it comes to MK9, as much fun as that game was to play.

 

I think a lot of the talk about rose-colored glasses comes from comments that seem true at first glance, but really aren’t when you remember how the game played.

For one example, take the comment about not having 50/50s and just reacting to everything without having many guessing situations. The truth is you were guessing against Kabal in-close. You were guessing with Cage f3 random advantage. You were guessing against Sonya and guessing if she or Kenshi would lolSafe/Plus armor because there was practically no downside to it at all. You were not reacting to Cyrax’s command grab shenanigans, etc.

Nearly all the best characters did force you to guess, repeatedly, because they were given tools that were excessively strong, that many other characters did not have, and many times these were not options that were reactable. So this is one of many examples of falling into revisionist history when it comes to MK9, as much fun as that game was to play.

Hi Crimson. Yeah I get what you are saying, but I would argue that Kabal in general is one of the things that needed to be fixed in that game. His pressure was far beyond any other character in the game. As for the other characters, I was only playing Kitana, so I spent most of my time running away and throwing fans like a bitch! lol.

And when I mentioned "reacting" I was really just talking about punishing. For example if you blocked Scorpions teleport, you can react and are guaranteed full punish. But in subsequent games like 11 and 1, blocking his teleport doesn't mean anything, you still then have to guess if he's gonna meter burn or use a kameo to make it safe.

It's like the new games require so much more work overall because of all the extra layers of complexity. And I'm wondering if it's becoming detrimental. It surely is to old guys like me, lol. That's all I was trying to say, thanks.

 

on topic of the OP's last point, (Does all the extra complexity actually translate to more fun?)

It depends. In general, I would say yes. But I think the high levels of play being sort-of obfuscated from the casual audience is what helps a game have a more mas appeal and become more enjoyable overall. Having to learn complex controls/mechanics up front does not usually translate to a fun or successful game.

I think its totally different when we are talking complexity in terms of things we have to pay attention too. I don't think additional mental stack is enjoyable and I'm not sure that I've ever heard someone say they enjoy it. Having to pay attention to time, health, spacing/general gameplay like scouting jump-ins or dashes AND two different bars of meter is often too much. I think this is right at the limit of what people will accept, so I don't have a fear that future games will have any additional types of meter or blocking without first reducing something else.
-
IRT MK9 vs MK1,

MK9 was more simple up front. You could get away with just playing your game. Like you said, just throwing fans and running away, swing with F21 here n there, D1-cutter or not after its blocked, w/e. Pretty simple and effective. It took a long time for people to get good at movement and punishes before this didn't work anymore.

Although, I'd argue that due to the increased control of your movement in MK9, that it inherently has more skill expression and complexity.

I could also go further and say that individual characters had more options and had to use more of their tools to be successful, but since there are a few exceptions to this I'm sure someone will cherry pick that point.

 

My opinion is less about MK, or even video games. I think when more complexity equals more fun is when the extra complexity is worth it. There's a ton of literature out there about the science of choice in general, and there's a big takeaway that people get easily overwhelmed with choice. When you apply that to games, it means that if I need to make a decision, make it worth my while.

If I apply that to MK1, I think where it falls short is that there are many aspects of the game where there's a bunch of stuff I can choose to manage, but don't need to, so it's just cluttering my life and attention up. Take Invasions, where there's this whole elemental system, talismans I can create, buffs I can gain/buy, etc., but none of it matters at all. I'm a decent player, so I just generally beat the snot out of every opponent while ignoring all that stuff. If it's super stacked against me, I'll choose a character that happens to have an elemental advantage, look up some BnBs real quick if I've never played that character, and just cycle between the BnB and lows/overheads to trick the computer into letting me BnB them to death.

I know this post isn't about Invasions, so apply that to the game itself. I rarely see people care about upblock, rarely see people do the mechanic that costs me two meter to launch into the air. There are characters whose schticks you can just ignore. People basically never use Johnny's hype thing which was kinda billed as his core mechanic. I know this recently changed, but for a while it was an immense amount of work to go invisible as Reptile, his core thing (which by the way another character can do more easily, and the payoff is better). You can kick people's asses handily as Ashrah without even knowing she's a stance character. I'll be honest I haven't really dug into MK1 for a while, so maybe those facts have changed.

Regardless, for me the answer is no. Extra complexity can be more fun in the same way that spending money can be a good investment. But if you recklessly make a game more complex by just adding "stuff", it's not a good fun investment.

 

Regardless, for me the answer is no. Extra complexity can be more fun in the same way that spending money can be a good investment. But if you recklessly make a game more complex by just adding "stuff", it's not a good fun investment.

Agreed. I'd like to point out DOOM Eternal as an excellent example of a game with significant depth that actually matters. The game, it's combat progression and encounters, as well as your tools, all revolve and evolve around guiding the player to effectively use their tools properly to deal with the "one more thing then they can handle" that is slowly ramped up to them.

 

But in subsequent games like 11 and 1, blocking his teleport doesn't mean anything, you still then have to guess if he's gonna meter burn or use a kameo to make it safe.

I thought at some point they changed it so that in MK11 his teleport was a high, and there was a big enough gap between that and the meter burn, so that you could punish the teleport, or at least get a free D1.

 

I thought at some point they changed it so that in MK11 his teleport was a high, and there was a big enough gap between that and the meter burn, so that you could punish the teleport, or at least get a free D1.

Correct, in Mortal Kombat 11 Ultimate his Flameport is indeed a High. Guessing or not, you can simply do a D1 to stuff any Amplify he'd attempt. Time things right and you can also do a full kombo punish.

 

People that love Mk9 (like myself) are well aware that the game was not perfect. Nobody likes terrible netcode, nobody likes infinites, nobody likes P1 advantage, limited training mode, bugs, etc. So why would we be any different? When we say we love Mk9 and that it was more fun than 10,11,1 I think we are just talking about the gameplay mechanics and overall feel.

I've said this before, but I think that a big reason that a lot of people who enjoy MK9 Enjoyed MK9 was because mostly likely at the time MK9 came out they were likely in their teens or early 20s, it was probably one of their first "modern" era fighting game, and they had a lot more time to pour into the game and get good and enjoy it. It was also one of the first times there was a legit competitive MK game that could actually sustain a competitive community and be a legit tournament game, and it was really early in the NRS scene's life, so there were just a lot more positive vibes in general. MK9 was a plucky underdog of the FGC without the the weight of any expectations. There wasn't much of anything to live up to.

It was also a smaller scene, which likely made it feel a bit more close knit if you were someone who was in the know, and the average casual knew way less about things like frame data, optimal combos, and fighting game fundamentals, so if you were someone who actually took the time to learn that stuff you probably were pretty good and rocked it online.

Nowadays someone who grew up with MK9 is likely in their late 20s or 30s, they probably don't have the time to keep up and put into the newer fighting games because they have other things like career/family/other hobbies, and nowadays the overall talent pool is deeper and casuals are better from having better training modes and better resources like Twitter/YouTube, so they're probably not able to win or succeed at the same rate they did when playing MK9, which probably also makes the newer game a less enjoyable experience.


I think MK9, MKX, MK11, and MK1 are all great games. If someone prefers MK9 to the others that's great, but I don't think it's because of the games, at least not entirely.

 

Regardless, for me the answer is no. Extra complexity can be more fun in the same way that spending money can be a good investment. But if you recklessly make a game more complex by just adding "stuff", it's not a good fun investment.

Yes, great point. If complexity leads to depth, it can be very enjoyable. But complexity for complexity's sake doesn't do anything.

 

I've said this before, but I think that a big reason that a lot of people who enjoy MK9 Enjoyed MK9 was because mostly likely at the time MK9 came out they were likely in their teens or early 20s, it was probably one of their first "modern" era fighting game, and they had a lot more time to pour into the game and get good and enjoy it. It was also one of the first times there was a legit competitive MK game that could actually sustain a competitive community and be a legit tournament game, and it was really early in the NRS scene's life, so there were just a lot more positive vibes in general. MK9 was a plucky underdog of the FGC without the the weight of any expectations. There wasn't much of anything to live up to.

It was also a smaller scene, which likely made it feel a bit more close knit if you were someone who was in the know, and the average casual knew way less about things like frame data, optimal combos, and fighting game fundamentals, so if you were someone who actually took the time to learn that stuff you probably were pretty good and rocked it online.

Nowadays someone who grew up with MK9 is likely in their late 20s or 30s, they probably don't have the time to keep up and put into the newer fighting games because they have other things like career/family/other hobbies, and nowadays the overall talent pool is deeper and casuals are better from having better training modes and better resources like Twitter/YouTube, so they're probably not able to win or succeed at the same rate they did when playing MK9, which probably also makes the newer game a less enjoyable experience.


I think MK9, MKX, MK11, and MK1 are all great games. If someone prefers MK9 to the others that's great, but I don't think it's because of the games, at least not entirely.

Which also boils down to something I've said before to: I know I'm no longer the target audience for most modern games, and I'd wager that also applies to most of the people here on TYM.

Not being said target audience makes a big difference with any product.

 

I've said this before, but I think that a big reason that a lot of people who enjoy MK9 Enjoyed MK9 was because mostly likely at the time MK9 came out they were likely in their teens or early 20s, it was probably one of their first "modern" era fighting game, and they had a lot more time to pour into the game and get good and enjoy it. It was also one of the first times there was a legit competitive MK game that could actually sustain a competitive community and be a legit tournament game, and it was really early in the NRS scene's life, so there were just a lot more positive vibes in general. MK9 was a plucky underdog of the FGC without the the weight of any expectations. There wasn't much of anything to live up to.

It was also a smaller scene, which likely made it feel a bit more close knit if you were someone who was in the know, and the average casual knew way less about things like frame data, optimal combos, and fighting game fundamentals, so if you were someone who actually took the time to learn that stuff you probably were pretty good and rocked it online.

Nowadays someone who grew up with MK9 is likely in their late 20s or 30s, they probably don't have the time to keep up and put into the newer fighting games because they have other things like career/family/other hobbies, and nowadays the overall talent pool is deeper and casuals are better from having better training modes and better resources like Twitter/YouTube, so they're probably not able to win or succeed at the same rate they did when playing MK9, which probably also makes the newer game a less enjoyable experience.


I think MK9, MKX, MK11, and MK1 are all great games. If someone prefers MK9 to the others that's great, but I don't think it's because of the games, at least not entirely.

I 100% agree with this. I certainly had more time in the Mk9 days. If I had as much time now as I did then, I'd spend more time putting in the work with MK1 rather than complaining on TYM. lol.

But I still maintain that if MK1 was as simple as Mk9, then I'd be a halfway decent player because there would no longer be this mountain of work to get through which is impossible with my limited time.

I guess in a way I'm kind of resentful because I've been playing since MK2, I was in the arcades, I bought all the games, strategy guides, movies etc.. I lived and breathed MK for decades and now it's like us old guys that were there from the beginning, just get left out because we can't possibly find the time to "get good".

All that being said, I think it's cool. MK has always been a young man's game. Sometimes I think just best to accept that and just cherish the memories. I also think that 10,11,1 are fantastic games (especially 11 since I think it was the closest to 9) and I think it's awesome that this younger generation is experiencing that same passion that I did back in the day. ggs.

 

I think it can but there is a balancing act between mechanical depth and complexity, and when complexity goes up so should depth proportionally. I would say that balance is off for MK1 and it doesn't have the depth to justify its complexity. Really MK1 feels like dropping a V12 engine into a Honda Civic, pushing what are essentially really basic core systems to the absolute limits.

I still enjoy MK1 but I find myself doing carpel tunnel inducing inputs with intricate timing and not necessarily feeling adequately rewarded for it. MK9 is comparatively a simpler fighting game, less complex (absolutely) and less depth (debatable). But the difference in complexity is way, way bigger than the difference in depth so MK9 was better at pulling off balancing act.

I think it would serve NRS well to accept that barring some massive overhaul, they have a pretty simple fighting game engine on their hands and they should scale back some of the complexity to suit.

 

Yes, great point. If complexity leads to depth, it can be very enjoyable. But complexity for complexity's sake doesn't do anything.

Exactly, and I think crucially depth that I want to engage with because it's fun, not because it's extra bookkeeping. I'm more experienced with tabletop game design than video game design, but I think the following example works for either.

I make a distinction between real depth and fake depth. Real depth to me is the interesting puzzle you've signed up for when you play the game, and supporting systems that make solving that puzzle more interesting. Fake depth is all the busy work bullshit that you groan through so you can get back to doing fun stuff. In the board game world, real depth is stuff like the delicate balance of "how long do I make short term investments in my engine before I start to execute end game plays?". Fake depth is stuff like "here's a worker placement aspect to this game that you can choose to engage in that doesn't have much to do with the core engine but it's a Thing You Can Do, and since that's true, you have to do the thing because everyone else is too and you'll lose if you don't dutifully engage in this contrived side game".

This is why Invasions upsets me so much. I'm constantly getting stuff like Diluted Energy Syringe that gives me 1% whatever resistance. I use it and it's like "ARE YOU SURE?" ...am I sure that I want to apply this buff that has no downside at all, I got at random, interacts with a system I'm never incentivized to care about, has basically no discernable effect, makes an already easy game negligibly easier, etc etc? It's just there to waste my time. It doesn't even have the effect I was talking about where I have to care somewhat to avoid losing the game, which I guess is merciful, but then why put it there at all?

I get that the whole thing about Invasions is making a casual friendly experience, but why does it have to be so boring and rote? Launch all the resistance potion RPG accounting hogwash into the sun, and give me stuff that makes me want to interact with what's cool about the core game. When I open a chest, I want to open the capability to equip Sub Zero's ice ball or an Ermac cancel to my character so I can do totally broken combos. Or if there must be RPG items, make them have properties that I notice. When I inject my shady ice syringe into my veins, let me freeze the enemy if I get a whatever-hit combo. And I'm not talking about konsumables that do some animation that does effectively zero damage and I can use a limited number of times.

Anyway, end long rant. I think whatever the next iteration of Invasions is should ask with every design decision "is this thing making players have more fun?" and if the answer is no, choose a different design decision. Kill 3 okay ideas so that one great idea can exist.

 

I prefer the more simple fighting games that have far less stuff to memorize, where the execution isn’t super high, but that also have a lot of depth and a large skill gap. With these same parameters, I also prefer games that have very limited 50/50’s, and very limited randomness.

It allows me to focus more on fundamentals like spacing, footsies, etc but also mind games. I can’t stand FG’s that force a ridiculous amount of mental stack, as it just becomes a pure guessing game at that point in most situations. There’s a ton more I can say on this topic but no one really cares anyway so what’s the point?

 

I don't know anything about MK9, but more broadly speaking, I tend to think "complexity" when it comes to systems and mechanics, can be fun but at some point just give people that want stuff, more stuff to do.

By that I mean it buries the human interaction part under "stuff" and there by making it easier to avoid the "two player" game with razzle and whatnot. Full aggro mode gains a lot of stock in low, mid, and even near high level play.

Maybe that's fun to a point but it can add an education burden to get through in order to start shutting down shenanigans players in a given game.

I almost feel like when people complain about lack of depth and getting bored, they are not actually someone that likes fighting games that much. They want a combo maker with a win screen. Two people playing each other where both actually know what all is going ends up being rare in something where there is a lot of stuff or a high education barrier.

It's good that all kinds exist and something like Tekken is really cool, but it's not for everyone and it's work getting to that point. Hard work.

 

I prefer the more simple fighting games that have far less stuff to memorize, where the execution isn’t super high, but that also have a lot of depth and a large skill gap. With these same parameters, I also prefer games that have very limited 50/50’s, and very limited randomness.

It allows me to focus more on fundamentals like spacing, footsies, etc but also mind games. I can’t stand FG’s that force a ridiculous amount of mental stack, as it just becomes a pure guessing game at that point in most situations. There’s a ton more I can say on this topic but no one really cares anyway so what’s the point?

I personally think this an interesting topic. And now that you mention it it reminds me of the upcoming League of Legends fighting game. I read that it wont have motion inputs. All special moves will be just one direction and a button. This is just one of hopefully many features that favors simplicity without sacrificing depth. Makes me hype for it.

You also have SF6 with modern controls option. So maybe the winds are changing in this regard. Hopefully mk2 will take some of this into consideration and tone down the mental stack at least a little.

 

I personally think this an interesting topic.

I meant no one cares what I have to say about it, lol

 

For me, there is a fine line of complexity where the game is simple enough to learn in a few hours but takes some months to get really good at. I fucking hated Mk11's barebones no combo freedom policy and found it too simple and unrewarding. In the same vein, I never really got into Tekken because there are hundreds of moves per character, that is just far too much to memorize/account for when playing. UMK3, MK9, MKX and MK1 strike the perfect balance for me (despite each having it's own quirks that work to varying degrees).

 

I think complex games can be fun, because sometimes it's cool to test players on their mental stack ability. In my mind most Tag/Assist fighters are like this, or games like Strive, Blazblue, Mark of the Wolves. These games are all mechanically dense, with a lot going on at any given moment, and a lot of mechanics to give the players strong choices on both offense and defense.

For me personally, I don't typically care for those games. The pacing is too fast for me to follow, and I don't have the time to put into them to really learn them, but I can see why other people appreciate them. Watching Blazblue was what got me interested in the FGC in the first place. As much as I think MK1 is a cool game, it's not my favorite. I think my two favorite NRS games would be Injustice 2 and MK11.

In my mind Injustice 2 is peak NRS. Many different archetypes, very colorful, solid mix between flow-chart strategy and improv strategy for most characters.


On the other end of the spectrum I think games like Virtua Fighter can be great examples of simple games that still offer a ton of depth and are really fun to play. I think there's probably a market for a 2D game that's closer to SFIV, although the current trend seems to be building fighting games with Drive Systems and a lot of other mechanics to learn.

 

One other test case:

Think of sports games. Specifically Basketball.

Nowadays sports games are getting more complex with each year. More player controls, more moves assigned to more buttons. But arguably one of the best basketball games ever is the NBA Jam series, which was as simple as Turbo, Shoot, and Pass.

I do find myself missing those kinds of games.

 

I'm a big fan of "easy to learn, hard to master." Generally, Blizzard Entertainment has been good at this. Look at StarCraft II. It's a game who's concept is very easy to learn and play, regardless of race, and the more you put into it, the more you'll learn and grow as a player and advance in ladder ranks.

 

It depends on the kind of complexity the game offers and what kind of decision making it leads to. I've been playing a lot of Fightcade lately and it's really interesting to see the choices developers have made over the years and how that affects player decision making. Vampire Savior is honestly the game that I've been the most impressed with. It has a lot of systems, some being incredibly obtuse, but the game is overall intuitive and has a fun, fast paced neutral. Garou is one I've struggled with the most. You may not like the emphasis on meter management in MK1, but imagine if you played a character whose only 100% consistent anti air was Just Defend Guard Cancel with a down charge move, making sure to Brake just in case they delayed their jump-in.

The key is making the game remain intuitive. SF6 is still an intuitive game despite the extremely complex meter management and decision making involved. Your gameplay develops as you improve, so you can start playing for burnout and perfect parrying on your own minus frames when you feel you've outgrown DI mashing and raw Drive Rush after you've been anti-aired. And when it comes to changing your routing to fit your meter situation, (stHK, stHPxxDP) is almost never optimal and still almost always a valid choice.

With Kameos, Drive Meter, the Rev System, with Strive's flavor of Roman Cancels, we're in an age of games becoming more complex, just after being simplified. They're trading out the high execution and esoteric mechanics for flexibility and decision making and I think that's a great direction. The complexity needs to be in service of depth and that's where MK1 is struggling. It's adding new mechanics and meters but the meta is solved and NRS is having a tough time wrangling it in a meaningful way. I think that's why people keep getting bored of it, despite it being an objectively mechanically rich game.

 

I'm curious - I would say MK1 falls under the "easy to learn, hard to master" bucket, as well. There are plenty of characters that have really simple gameplans, even more so depending on kameo choice. Would people disagree?

So many of the mechanics you can just choose not to interact with, if you don't want to. The best example is that no one ever does the uppercut counter hit mechanic, but at a lot of levels of the game you really don't need to know how to up block, flawless block, wave dash, or even tech throws.

There's lots to learn that will make your experience better, everyone learned really quick how to punish Sareena use on block for example, but even with stuff like that you could just not lab it and respect it, and its not going to hurt you too much outside of higher levels of play.

 

I'm curious - I would say MK1 falls under the "easy to learn, hard to master" bucket, as well. There are plenty of characters that have really simple gameplans, even more so depending on kameo choice. Would people disagree?

So many of the mechanics you can just choose not to interact with, if you don't want to. The best example is that no one ever does the uppercut counter hit mechanic, but at a lot of levels of the game you really don't need to know how to up block, flawless block, wave dash, or even tech throws.

There's lots to learn that will make your experience better, everyone learned really quick how to punish Sareena use on block for example, but even with stuff like that you could just not lab it and respect it, and its not going to hurt you too much outside of higher levels of play.

I agree and it is why I personally like MK1's gameplay as much I do.