How they can turn mk1's image around and bring hype for their next gsme

[Juxtapose]

This has never worked once in the history of fighting game design.

"Making everyone OP" has never really worked.

In Killer Instinct, this worked very well, actually. Every character is "busted" by design, and every character's Instinct is designed to break the rules of the game in a different way. The game is considered very well balanced, though there are tiers.

It took a bit to get there, and the Roster was released over seasons and things did shift as time went on, but the final product is fantastic.

 

[Revy]

In Killer Instinct, this worked very well, actually. Every character is "busted" by design, and every character's Instinct is designed to break the rules of the game in a different way. The game is considered very well balanced, though there are tiers.

It took a bit to get there, and the Roster was released over seasons and things did shift as time went on, but the final product is fantastic.

It worked for Street Fighter Alpha 3 vanilla too to the point it's considered to be one of the best versions of the game & even though there were other versions where they removed all the infinites (most notably the crouch-cancel infinite) & added more characters but here's the thing is when it comes to busted fighting games: People will grow into the busted elements of them which ends up making everyone happy & both vanilla SFA3 & Killer Instinct Season 1 are good examples of that, when it came to Killer Instinct as everyone thought it was better when they had 8 characters & was at it's most broken, come Season 2 with the company change when they added Marvel vs Capcom elements to it & even more so with Season 3 & how it is currently.

I do agree with @CrimsonShadow when it came to MKX & it's early DLC, that was an NRS issue of not understanding fighting game mechanics: We saw a fuck-ton of Tanya (Kobu Jitsu) because NRS had zero business of adding rekkas as they didn't understand them, Tremor is just retarded & everyone who plays him is hard carried & he's piss-poor character design & the same can be said about Jason even to this very day, Predator is fine but Goro was also ridiculous. Then they made the exact same mistakes for Kombat Pack 2.

 

[Marlow]

Maybe it's just a testament to good design, but with KI the characters don't really feel busted to me, just more like stronger versions of SFIV characters. I think the combo breaker mechanic helps a lot with that though.

Maybe sometimes it's less about character balance and more about mechanics balance. You can have strong "busted" offense options for characters, but then you need to balance it with some strong defensive options.

 

[Juxtapose]

Maybe it's just a testament to good design, but with KI the characters don't really feel busted to me, just more like stronger versions of SFIV characters. I think the combo breaker mechanic helps a lot with that though.

Maybe sometimes it's less about character balance and more about mechanics balance. You can have strong "busted" offense options for characters, but then you need to balance it with some strong defensive options.

That's a good way of putting it. They are "busted" in that game, but it's a solid example of "if everyone is busted, no one is."

There are, as I mentioned, still Tiers though. Sadira is bottom tier and does have to work harder then most of the cast, but her Instinct is considered one of if not the best in the game.

 

[Eji1700]

In Killer Instinct, this worked very well, actually. Every character is "busted" by design, and every character's Instinct is designed to break the rules of the game in a different way. The game is considered very well balanced, though there are tiers.

It took a bit to get there, and the Roster was released over seasons and things did shift as time went on, but the final product is fantastic.

While i hate the "just make everyone" broken framing, since it leads to these pointless arguments, I do think there's more than just killer instinct, and that Crim's response totally misses the point most people are (poorly) conveying with that argument.

Some of the longest lasting and best remembered fighting games are ST, 3s, and MvC2.

All 3 games have absolutely dominate top tiers, but that doesn't matter as much as in other games. Why? Because even if you're playing gief/remy/jugg there's something fun/wacky/crazy to do. Many of the characters have actual depth, and even if your character is garbage tier, you can usually make results happen if you want to put in the work, except vs the very best. One of the most recent EVO moments is some out of this world play by a fucking Hugo main.

MvC2 is especially interesting to look at, because while half the cast is objectively unplayble at any serious level, it still has a larger viable roster than most games have characters. Yes your team will likely have at least one of the god tiers, but if you aren't looking to top 8, you can make a showing with spiral/doom/command or whatever off brand nonsense makes you happy.

And that's what the "make them all broken" framework is trying to get at. I think DBFZ is a great example of missing the point because I'd say it's the exact opposite problem. You literally have characters who's entire kit (muck like mk9) just does not fucking function. It's as if someone said "ok this will be our trap gimmick character" and all development stopped there. That's not what anyone is arguing for.

What people want are clear and unique characters who can do fun things

KI is great partly because the core systems do a wonderful job at allowing this. Yes i'll be bored watching yet another killgore vs Aria matchup, but just about everything else is super hype and all over the map. Raam and Aganos are probably THE best large body characters ever made, Cinder is a hilarious setup/combo expression guy, and Glacious/Kan are some of the best examples of zoners every created. Everyone in that game has, from the ground up, super unique kits and gimmicks even without instinct.

And it all works up until the top of the pyramid. You will actually play against these characters in matchmaking. Not 35 sessions of johnny/lao doing the same setups. It's why MK1 has tried (and to some extent succeeded) at getting the fuck away from that.

 

[Marlow]

That's a good way of putting it. They are "busted" in that game, but it's a solid example of "if everyone is busted, no one is."

There are, as I mentioned, still Tiers though. Sadira is bottom tier and does have to work harder then most of the cast, but her Instinct is considered one of if not the best in the game.

Yes. But in that case I guess to me it's more about the mechanics around the characters, which allow them to be busted but still fun, that's the big difference.

I also wonder how much it would change if the game actually got super popular and competitive with bigger prize pools. You might see more pro's shifting to higher tiers and then more balance complaints. KI has a solid community, but most play it as a passion game because it's the only KI they have, so it's ok to play low tier characters. If they come out with an actual new KI game I wonder how it might change.

I wonder the same for VF6. VF5 has tiers, but most of the time it doesn't matter and people don't complain too much, but when VF5 came out it was a different era.

 

[SaltShaker]

Maybe it's just a testament to good design, but with KI the characters don't really feel busted to me, just more like stronger versions of SFIV characters. I think the combo breaker mechanic helps a lot with that though.

Maybe sometimes it's less about character balance and more about mechanics balance. You can have strong "busted" offense options for characters, but then you need to balance it with some strong defensive options.

Maybe sometimes it's less about character balance and more about mechanics balance.

This is one of the statements I disagree with the most in these conversations. Too many times when games are balanced around the system rather than the characters we end up with games where most of the characters play the same. You're playing the system. When balanced around characters the gameplay is much more diversified.

 

[Marlow]

Some of the longest lasting and best remembered fighting games are ST, 3s, and MvC2.

If games were released in that kind of state today they'd get slaughtered by online opinions.

 

[Marlow]

This is one of the statements I disagree with the most in these conversations. Too many times when games are balanced around the system rather than the characters we end up with games where most of the characters play the same. You're playing the system. When balanced around characters the gameplay is much more diversified.

Good point. I'm not trying to say that the mechanics should over-shadow character diversity, just that if you're going to give characters strong offense and a lot of OP stuff, then you should probably have some kind of strong mechanic, whether character or system, to offset that. For example, Breaker in MKX. Or giving something like Push Block in MK1 could be nice.

 

[SaltShaker]

Good point. I'm not trying to say that the mechanics should over-shadow character diversity, just that if you're going to give characters strong offense and a lot of OP stuff, then you should probably have some kind of strong mechanic, whether character or system, to offset that. For example, Breaker in MKX. Or giving something like Push Block in MK1 could be nice.

Oh yea that I agree with. Like a push block would be a GOAT addition to MK1, not sure why they're so against it. Or like having burst in GGST. Things like that are definitely needed.

 

[Eji1700]

Yes. But in that case I guess to me it's more about the mechanics around the characters, which allow them to be busted but still fun, that's the big difference.

I also wonder how much it would change if the game actually got super popular and competitive with bigger prize pools. You might see more pro's shifting to higher tiers and then more balance complaints. KI has a solid community, but most play it as a passion game because it's the only KI they have, so it's ok to play low tier characters. If they come out with an actual new KI game I wonder how it might change.

I wonder the same for VF6. VF5 has tiers, but most of the time it doesn't matter and people don't complain too much, but when VF5 came out it was a different era.

VF and SSVSpecial were the other examples I was going to include but I didn't want to dilute the conversation too much. VF is, again, an example of every character having a shitload of depth. If you're willing to put in the time and adapt, you have options. Yes the tier list is real, but you're not feeling it right out of the gate (if you're the kind of person who wants to actually learn)

This is one of the statements I disagree with the most in these conversations. Too many times when games are balanced around the system rather than the characters we end up with games where most of the characters play the same. You're playing the system. When balanced around characters the gameplay is much more diversified.

I think this is again many people meaning the same thing but not quite having a good way to discuss it. Powerful core mechanics are often vital to keeping games in line. GG has a shitload of great core mechanics that allows you to make nonsense characters. KI was much the same. 3s/MvC2/ST are much less so, but there's also a shitload of games from those era's that didn't accidentally or intentionally thread the needle and instead wound up trash.

If games were released in that kind of state today they'd get slaughtered by online opinions.

Eh, I somewhat doubt that. And it's worth remembering that those games ARE patch 9.x or whatever for each of their series. Since you couldn't just push patches to all the games, you just released a new version. I think 3s is the "least" iterated version of the group, but they're all learning from previous fuckups.

 

[ImpostorOak]

Yall Warner Brothers is okay with letting SESAME STREET die.

Mortal Kombat is gonna be a live service casual ass party game best case scenario without major changes at WBD.

This is dark times.

 

[Liquid Swordsman]

MK1 might be a lost cause at this point. I think in order for their next game to improve, western gaming needs a turning point and people just have to let their wallets do the talking.

 

[just_2swift]

NRS needs to Remove themselves from ultra realistic realism design of their games. This takes away from the creativity and imagination.

 

[M2Dave]

If games were released in that kind of state today they'd get slaughtered by online opinions.

Correct.

3s, MvC2, and ST were released at a different time for a different audience. The same holds true for other classics like Smash Melee, Tekken Tag Tournament 1, and UMK:3.

In the contemporary era of social media, streaming, and esports, these old fighting games would probably not last for very long, not even among the competitive players. According to the developers themselves such Harada and Nara, Tekken Tag Tournament 1 and MvC2, respectively, had a low budget and were never anticipated to be played seriously.

In my humble opinion, some content creators and critics, including my good friend Tom Brady, are overanalyzing Mortal Kombat 1's mixed reception and arriving to wrong or biased conclusions.

The release version of Mortal Kombat 1 was objectively bad for a multitude of reasons, but I am not entirely convinced that the low power levels were one of them. Casual gamers cannot distinguish low power levels from high power levels. Neither can players who are new to the competitive scene as they typically lack the historic frame of reference.

Besides, if you pay attention to the meta in modern fighting games, there is a preference for aggression over turtling, offense over defense, "active" gameplay over "inactive" gameplay, rush down over zoning, etc. Mortal Kombat 1 is certainly no exception, and its meta, in fact, could arguably be the worst culprit. Nobody is going to be persuade me that defense/turtling/zoning is even remotely in the same realm as something like Havik's reset and Kenshi's Sento sandwich.