The Gradual Simplification of Fighting Games

[Komatose]

I don’t even know where to begin on this matter tbh. But I agree with the OP. Yes. Fighters are being extremely over simplified. Look at MK11, SFV and GG. Take a good look. Now look at their previous counterparts... And I mean PREVIOUS. The games right before them. SFIV, MKX and GG rev.

IT IS CLEAR CUT that the games have been watered down execution wise.

Now, do I think all fighters should just flat out be hard and execution heavy? No. I have no problem with that because I consider myself a literal execution god. And I know that casuals need to have fun too, so companies need to make something they can play and have fun with as well. But having the top most popular fighting game companies all simultaneously make their games braindead makes it a very disappointing for people like myself to have fun finding the challenges in combos, execution, movement, etc. because there is none...

I also don’t think that all these companies dumbing down fighting games damn near simultaneously (might as well say it is) is a coincidence... I think that they find that casuals crowd to such things and are wanting to milk their money there because the casuals outweigh us competitive players... So they appease the money makers, not the hardcore players and hardcore fans...

Where that will fail them is when/if tournament and competitive players finally have enough of playing what we essentially feel are kiddy games at this point, and stop playing them as whole, they losing money in sponsorships, tournaments, online tournaments, streams, products, etc.

Casuals don’t bring any of that. None. Zero. Base sales out the store only get you so far. And gamers in general are getting fed up with micro transactions and planned DLC so... I don’t know. We will see where this takes us. I’m more or less for playing all the older versions of these games as they are more fun to me. They present more of a challenge. SFV? Not a challenge. I think I completed every character’s trials day 1, minimal effort. MK11? Not a challenge. My main character’s bnb is literally two buttons with a slight walk in between. Strive? Not a challenge. Haven’t played up, but have seen it, played every GG before and I can pretty much tell those little 7 hit combos and basic air buttons bring no challenge to the table... And as a heads up I played Elphelt in the previous GGs so that tells you where I’m at intensity wise aa she was a setup heavy character WITH a stance as well...

Only games that haven’t been dumbed down yet is Tekken and SC but they’re getting there as Tekken has the rage arts and rage drive now which are essentially comeback factors, which I don’t mind since the execution and combos are still there. Plus it’s one of those games where mashers can’t really win against a good player. SC is in the same boat but I feel like those two are next, even tho I hope not. Because guess what? Those are the fighters I will be maining if these others don’t get their stuff together.

I’m not mad about it. I don’t even care that much about it. But I’m going to play what I find fun, I find a challenge fun. And these new games aren’t really challenging. Again, I find them lackluster and braindead. So I rather play the games that have that challenge and that aren’t braindead or at least not AS braindead.

At this point I’m just rambling, but those are my thoughts on that and where I stand. I love fighting games but if this is the permanent path of FGs as a whole, I simply won’t play them anymore. I love them but I surely find enjoyment in other kinds of games as well. It would suck and I don’t want to see that, but at the end of the day I’m not going to force myself to play games I don’t like nor support companies that don’t care what I think and doesn’t care about what anyone else on this website thinks either. It’s about the monaaayyyy. Lol.

 

[M2Dave]

1. Why is limiting combos the same as taking away depth? Most combos in MK11 you have the same choices as in other games: Go with the most damage, go with screen position, or go for a harder knockdown.

Breakaways, which are on average accessible two or three times a round because of the auto-generated meter system, limit combos for characters with substandard anti-armor attacks. Going for the most damage, or even screen positioning depending on the character, is rarely an option because you will get punished. Breakaways restrict creativity, self-expression, and lab time, which are components of depth. Most players dislike Mortal Kombat 11's combo system for this reason, and they like krushing and fatal blows masquerading as combo replacements even less.

2. How does MK11 limit offense?

Very few characters have advantageous frames on block while the game's wake up system is the antithesis of anything resembling an efficient okizeme game.

3. A meta of strike/throw/jump kick/low poke is a fairly vague meta, one which could easily apply to almost any fighting game. And I'm not sure that's even an accurate description of the MK11 meta.

Unless your character has traditional 50/50 mix ups, which only two do, and command grabs, which some do, your character's best mix up is strike or throw so my description is perfectly accurate. While strike or throw may apply to some fighting games such as Street Fighter 4 and 5, their meta is significantly more complex than Mortal Kombat 11's. There is no comparison.

4. Who cares about the amount of depth custom moves give? Main thing is, it gives people just a bit more customization over the character they choose to main.

Well, you may be content with "just a bit more", but I am not. If they are going to include additional special moves in an attempt to provide variety to characters, I expect to see lots of differences. Besides, most tournament players use the same moves for the same characters anyway. I think I speak for 90% of the community when I say I would like the variation system and custom moves gone. Bring back traditional character archetypes and balance the game around them.

 

[NaCl man]

In my opinion they shouldn't make the hard to do shit easy. But also not make the hard shit a necessity. It should exist for those who want to do it and if you can do it it should be rewarded. That and nerf comeback mechanics. One of the biggest issues I see in the current games is come backs. They don't mean anything any more because it happens every day. I have no problem with giving the loosing player an opportunity with some sort of buff but the amount of options and mechanics in current games feel like they are designed for the lesser player to win behind mechanics instead of skill. Take moment 37, and compare it to sfv ryu parry. It does not even compare.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

Sonic Fox opened a can of worms a couple of days ago when they tweeted that Guilty Gear Strive feels "limited", alluding to initial concerns that the game had been simplified in contrast to previous Guilty Gear games that were more demanding to play. I cannot opine on the nuances because I never played Guilty Gear to make any educated comparisons, but the reality is that developers have been gradually simplifying fighting games since the 1990s in order to attract a wider audience and expand sales. To play devil's advocate, it is possible to remove depth from certain gameplay elements and implement depth to certain others. For example, developers simplified throw escapes and okizeme options in Tekken 7, yet they introduced new layers of depth with rage arts, rage drives, armor moves, wall bounces, etc.

The question is, or questions rather, which audience do developers appease? The casual gamers who are responsible for the vast majority of the sales? Or the competitive players who are the most vocal on social media? Or perhaps both? But is appeasing both even feasible? How does this conversation correlate to Mortal Kombat 11 and the new project? Or is this conversation senseless in the first place because the market makes these decisions for developers?

Tom and I will discuss these topics and more on a podcast. Please let us know what you think. We want to consider as many diverse opinions as possible.

Sounds on level with your older podcast back with REO when REO mentioned multiple gaming modes....Casual and Competitive (to keep it simple) where everything is simplified for those who want it, but can be more nuance for the competition side of things.

 

[Marlow]

@M2Dave Fair enough. Thanks for the reply.

 

[craftycheese]

In Mortal Kombat 11, most characters will ultimately try and do one very specific kombo string that's the same very time for optimal damage. It certainly works, is consistent, and gets the job done, but it's not creative since it's always the same over and over again.

Ya, but isn't that how most fighting games work? I feel like in most games, you're going to see the same combos. KI seems to be one of the only ones I'm aware of that doesn't really do this because of how combos and breakers work in that game.

 

[Tony at Home]

Remember when people freaked the fuck out when they changed the EX button to be a dedicated button rather than a randomly assigned face button (pre-release)- and said that it was oversimplifying the game to make a sensible decision on control scheme?

I member

 

[Gooberking]

I don’t even know where to begin on this matter tbh. But I agree with the OP. Yes. Fighters are being extremely over simplified. Look at MK11, SFV and GG. Take a good look. Now look at their previous counterparts... And I mean PREVIOUS. The games right before them. SFIV, MKX and GG rev.

IT IS CLEAR CUT that the games have been watered down execution wise.

Now, do I think all fighters should just flat out be hard and execution heavy? No. I have no problem with that because I consider myself a literal execution god. And I know that casuals need to have fun too, so companies need to make something they can play and have fun with as well. But having the top most popular fighting game companies all simultaneously make their games braindead makes it a very disappointing for people like myself to have fun finding the challenges in combos, execution, movement, etc. because there is none...

I also don’t think that all these companies dumbing down fighting games damn near simultaneously (might as well say it is) is a coincidence... I think that they find that casuals crowd to such things and are wanting to milk their money there because the casuals outweigh us competitive players... So they appease the money makers, not the hardcore players and hardcore fans...

Where that will fail them is when/if tournament and competitive players finally have enough of playing what we essentially feel are kiddy games at this point, and stop playing them as whole, they losing money in sponsorships, tournaments, online tournaments, streams, products, etc.

Casuals don’t bring any of that. None. Zero. Base sales out the store only get you so far. And gamers in general are getting fed up with micro transactions and planned DLC so... I don’t know. We will see where this takes us. I’m more or less for playing all the older versions of these games as they are more fun to me. They present more of a challenge. SFV? Not a challenge. I think I completed every character’s trials day 1, minimal effort. MK11? Not a challenge. My main character’s bnb is literally two buttons with a slight walk in between. Strive? Not a challenge. Haven’t played up, but have seen it, played every GG before and I can pretty much tell those little 7 hit combos and basic air buttons bring no challenge to the table... And as a heads up I played Elphelt in the previous GGs so that tells you where I’m at intensity wise aa she was a setup heavy character WITH a stance as well...

Only games that haven’t been dumbed down yet is Tekken and SC but they’re getting there as Tekken has the rage arts and rage drive now which are essentially comeback factors, which I don’t mind since the execution and combos are still there. Plus it’s one of those games where mashers can’t really win against a good player. SC is in the same boat but I feel like those two are next, even tho I hope not. Because guess what? Those are the fighters I will be maining if these others don’t get their stuff together.

I’m not mad about it. I don’t even care that much about it. But I’m going to play what I find fun, I find a challenge fun. And these new games aren’t really challenging. Again, I find them lackluster and braindead. So I rather play the games that have that challenge and that aren’t braindead or at least not AS braindead.

At this point I’m just rambling, but those are my thoughts on that and where I stand. I love fighting games but if this is the permanent path of FGs as a whole, I simply won’t play them anymore. I love them but I surely find enjoyment in other kinds of games as well. It would suck and I don’t want to see that, but at the end of the day I’m not going to force myself to play games I don’t like nor support companies that don’t care what I think and doesn’t care about what anyone else on this website thinks either. It’s about the monaaayyyy. Lol.

It’s fine to get enjoyment out things like high execution, and clever setups. It’s fine for a game to kind of exist around those things if it really wants to. Characterizing a game without them as “braindead” doesn’t seem apt to me.

These are things that literally try to bypass the mental part of fighting games. You are trying scrape out the most damage so you don’t need to score as often as the other person. You are trying to prey on any found ignorance so your opponent doesn’t have a way to fight back. There is no “I know that you know that I know” going on. It’s not a battle of “brains” at that point. It’s a battle of preparedness, mass education, and going through the motions.

That’s fine. That stuff has a place. I don’t have a problem with winning with whatever works if that is the goal, but I personally find that imbalance the least interesting a fight can be.

If I know someone doesn’t know what I’m doing to them, then there just isn’t much point. It’s not fun beating up on the helpless while learning nothing other than maybe bad habits about over using things that don’t always work.

On the other side if a game isn’t sending me some kind of useful information about what is happening to me, then there isn’t much chance I can figure it out on the fly and I’m just going to die until I can lab whatever it was. At which point I’m going to 1. never see that situation again, or 2. later run into that person and have them RQ because they don’t play people that don’t just let them auto pilot their sick attack strat.

Sometimes "depth" it just weird stuff. Like why does Tekken have a punish counter only in training? It’s already an extreme example of an education heavy game, why make it deliberately hard to get to that basic information? Why shouldn’t I get feedback on if I actually hit the punish timing or just got lucky, or be able to discover if some move is punishable while playing a game with thousands of moves and an absurd number of characters? It’s not spoon feeding to meet people half way.

A game doesn’t need high execution, or infinite options to allow for mental counter play, and conditioning, and if you aren’t being forced into thinking about that stuff, then a fight probably is brains off.

 

[Juxtapose]

Ya, but isn't that how most fighting games work? I feel like in most games, you're going to see the same combos. KI seems to be one of the only ones I'm aware of that doesn't really do this because of how combos and breakers work in that game.

While you'll absolutely see optimals in, say, Mortal Kombat XL, you also see a wider variety of kombos per character overall. Having many viable strings that lead to kombo paths help with this.

 

[Marinjuana]

Guilty Gear and Skullgirls are niche

Mortal Kombat, Smash and Street Fighter consistently sell well. Maybe Tekken too

 

[M2Dave]

Sometimes "depth" it just weird stuff. Like why does Tekken have a punish counter only in training? It’s already an extreme example of an education heavy game, why make it deliberately hard to get to that basic information? Why shouldn’t I get feedback on if I actually hit the punish timing or just got lucky, or be able to discover if some move is punishable while playing a game with thousands of moves and an absurd number of characters? It’s not spoon feeding to meet people half way.

Your point is taken, but I am not certain that the lack of feedback is the issue as much as the lack of educating your casual audience on how to play your game. You would think that a game with so many characters and moves would categorize each attack and string by pokes, punishers, combo starters, combo fillers, combo enders, etc. to help guide new players in the right direction. Mortal Kombat 11's move list does some of this categorization, but fighting game developers have generally been egregious in teaching fans how to play their games outside of demonstrating basic combos. I guess the mentality is that those who want the information will find it on social media, but new players are more likely to learn and study your game when the information is front of them.

 

[Juggs]

I’ve been thinking about this for years now. But, I truly think that NRS could come out with a game that is built from the ground up to solely be a competitive fighting game without taking casuals into account at all. And I think it’d be successful. I think they have that luxury, at least in regards to the Mortal Kombat franchise. And I don’t think there’s very many, if any, other fighting game franchise that could also do this. Or rather, no other fighting game franchise would be remotely as successful as NRS would be with a game like this.

Other fighting game franchises HAVE to make their games more accessible. They can’t just come out with a hardcore, execution heavy, and super hard to get into game in todays world. I mean, they could, but what I mean is, that I believe that NRS could release any type of fighting game that they wanted to and it’d be successful.

MK is kinda like the “Call of Duty” or “Madden” of fighting games. No matter what, tons of people are going to buy the game based on the name alone even if they have never seen a single trailer, played any demo, played the game at all, seen any gameplay, etc. That’s how much power the franchise has, that’s how much power I believe “Mortal Kombat” possesses. For the record, I’m definitely not saying MK is the CoD/Madden of the FGC because it’s the “same game released over and over”, because MK is really one of the few FG’s that are actually almost the exact opposite of that. But that also goes to my point. NRS has the freedom to completely change up the new MK game in anyway they like. They have so much more creative freedom than any other FG franchise imo.

Anyway, I could talk about this subject for hours. I could get super detailed, point out tons of examples, cite sales numbers and sales numbers in comparison to other FG’s and even other genres, etc etc. But I think most of those who have taken the time to read this get my point. And it’s not like I’m making some huge revelation or having some sort of epiphany. I’m sure a lot of people have thought about this, at least in some way or another.

Now, would NRS actually ever do this? I doubt it. Even though they could make a hardcore competitive MK game built from the ground up to be specifically for tournament players down to every last detail and be successful in doing so, it still most likely wouldn’t be AS successful as a game that is a balance of “easy to get into, difficult to master” with a bunch of new bells and whistles. I don’t see them sacrificing a massive profit for just a “pretty decent profit” for the sake of the competitive NRS community, or the FGC. That’s not to say a game like this is guaranteed to not sell as well as their traditional type of MK game, it definitely COULD be a revolutionary fighting game that changes fighters and the video game industry as a whole forever, kinda like Dark Souls did. But… that isn’t very likely, lol.

 

[Dogeofthesea]

While you'll absolutely see optimals in, say, Mortal Kombat XL, you also see a wider variety of kombos per character overall. Having many viable strings that lead to kombo paths help with this.

One obvious thing should pointed out: in MKX, strings and special moves usually work well when you hit them on both grounded and airborne opponents, this allow many versatile combo conversion path from different situations. For example Demo Sonya's grenades always have a fixed on-hit reaction, Kitana can always use the rule 1 ground fan 1 air fan 1 lift in any combo, Cassie's main jab string 212 can be either cancelled into flip as a launcher, or she can continue to juggle it that string hits airborne, Johnny has 2 launchers: F24 and MB nut punch, both allow him to follow up easily after hitting airborne.
In MK11 Sonya only has 1 launcher and it doesn't work when hitting airborne, your enemy will be knocked down instantly on the 2nd hit. After win an air to air trade, Kitana can't dash forward into 12 lift because it's very unreliable (and breakaway will punish her), so she can only do jab into ass. Not to mention her infamous B231 string being punishable on hit. Cassie's 111 string will whiff when hit airborne (12 will whiff very often as well), her B14 string is a garbage launcher, and in the corner her knee cap launcher is disabled by the game design. Johnny has 2 launchers (that replace each other in the moveset), neither of them works when he hits someone airborne, and his main strings 244 and F344 don't work either.
This is what I don't like about MK11. Strings and special moves weren't tested properly before released.

 

[trufenix]

Weird how the last game these guys played with any depth was the last one they were any good at.

You think the reason there are more fighters and more comp now than ever is because they are more shallow?

How's that work? Are we too dumb to know what bad games are anymore?

 

[Chernyy Volk]

I'm pretty much checked out of NRS games and am taking an extended hiatus from FGs but I figured I'd pop in and offer my take on this topic.

First of all, combo variety is a kind of depth but it certainly doesn't offer the depth that matters. I felt like chiming in here since M2Dave is one of the homies and also because this is an important topic. Fighting games as we grew to love them and embrace them are dying with the exception of a few holdouts.

The real problem when it comes to the depth issue is not execution, it's not combo variety, it's the depth of the decision making. Fighting games are both being designed to have less options while also being designed to create more situations that are variable, I.E constant 50/50's and mixups.

Tekken 7 is a really good example of this. Block punishment has basically been comparatively gutted in that game. Your most important punish is what your character gets at 10 frames, the minimum punish window. This used to not be the case. Characters used to be more defined by what they got at every punish point, but very rarely now do these punishment disparities matter. This is less depth on every level. Character variety is reduced or invalidated, the risk/reward of things lacks dynamics and so on and so forth.

Tekken 7 is also characterized by, like every other modern fighting game, of being extremely driven by 50/50 mixups and oppressive loopable situations. This reduces depth. The neutral now only turns into how can I get into the situation to run my slot machine? Playstyles no longer matter or factor in, because the game itself is built to force you to play one particular way. This is one of the biggest criticisms of t7, it's nothing but 50/50's or safety. The best characters are currently the ones who can both do the 50/50's while being safe.

The thing is design decisions like this COMPLETELY eliminate the strategy element of the games altogether. Developers keep taking away advanced options on both the mechanical and the yomi layer, while either removing or adding things into legacy franchises that require less brain power on the part of players. This is why I and so many others hated MK11. It is a game with no strategic depth to it what so ever. A matchup is just bad for elementary mechanical purposes and there is a distinct lack of risk/reward nuance that compounds this even further. That is a game lacking depth.

My go to example when addressing MK11's lack of mechanical depth is Johnny Cage's 124 and 121, or 34U3 and 34D3. 124 and 34U3 are FREE PLUS FRAMES devoid of any risk or calculated decision. I consistently said, all you had to do to make this more interactive and apply more depth to the game was make it so that the plus frame kick could be ducked so that the Johnny had to do 34D3 or 121 and commit to spending resources for safety or basically lose their turn. This was an example of a baked in design decision that literally absolved the Johnny Cage player from having to apply any critical thinking to their gameplay.

This is why Virtua Fighter 5 Ultimate Showdown is a breath of fresh air. Everything has some degree of risk to it, the offensive and defensive layers are numerous and varied, moves have a risk/reward dynamism that requires both players to really think about what they decide to do because flow charting is literally not possible. Virtua Fighter 5 is a good example of a game that has actual depth.

Oh yeah and let's not even get started on discussing Tekken 7's butchering of movement. They gutted a defensive skill to further facilitate the emphasis on offense and 50/50's by gutting the one thing in the series that forced players to have to think with their other tools to achieve victory.

 

[spidey300]

the problem is that arcsys thought was gg needed to succeed compared to previous entries was simplification when that's only a very small part of the plan with some changes here and there (mechanical bloat and some mechanics changed around) gg needed rollback netcode and good marketing to actually be a success as far as anime games go. most of the changes they did to baby/appease/or help new players were either unnecessary or counter intuitive.

 

[Komatose]

It’s fine to get enjoyment out things like high execution, and clever setups. It’s fine for a game to kind of exist around those things if it really wants to. Characterizing a game without them as “braindead” doesn’t seem apt to me.

These are things that literally try to bypass the mental part of fighting games. You are trying scrape out the most damage so you don’t need to score as often as the other person. You are trying to prey on any found ignorance so your opponent doesn’t have a way to fight back. There is no “I know that you know that I know” going on. It’s not a battle of “brains” at that point. It’s a battle of preparedness, mass education, and going through the motions.

That’s fine. That stuff has a place. I don’t have a problem with winning with whatever works if that is the goal, but I personally find that imbalance the least interesting a fight can be.

If I know someone doesn’t know what I’m doing to them, then there just isn’t much point. It’s not fun beating up on the helpless while learning nothing other than maybe bad habits about over using things that don’t always work.

On the other side if a game isn’t sending me some kind of useful information about what is happening to me, then there isn’t much chance I can figure it out on the fly and I’m just going to die until I can lab whatever it was. At which point I’m going to 1. never see that situation again, or 2. later run into that person and have them RQ because they don’t play people that don’t just let them auto pilot their sick attack strat.

Sometimes "depth" it just weird stuff. Like why does Tekken have a punish counter only in training? It’s already an extreme example of an education heavy game, why make it deliberately hard to get to that basic information? Why shouldn’t I get feedback on if I actually hit the punish timing or just got lucky, or be able to discover if some move is punishable while playing a game with thousands of moves and an absurd number of characters? It’s not spoon feeding to meet people half way.

A game doesn’t need high execution, or infinite options to allow for mental counter play, and conditioning, and if you aren’t being forced into thinking about that stuff, then a fight probably is brains off.

You literally just tried to correct something that I said was my personal preference and personal opinion. It didn’t need correcting. That’s what I like. And no matter how you try to explain it or define it, my opinion won’t change. I wasn’t looking for an argument so I’m not going to argue. I was making a statement and it still stands.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, it still makes a sound. Fact.

I don’t like what I consider an oversimplification of fighting games. Fact.

This statement and opinion doesn’t need any correction or a reply unless you simply wanted to tell me what your taste and opinion is on fighting games in contrast to mine. NOT trying to correct MY personal preference.

That’s like you saying you like Kitana because she’s blue and I tell you why you should like Mileena because she is purple... Like, no... Actually no... You like the color blue, that’s fine. But I’ll tell you why I like purple... That should have been what your response was like and then maybe I would have read it.

 

[Gooberking]

You literally just tried to correct something that I said was my personal preference and personal opinion. It didn’t need correcting. That’s what I like. And no matter how you try to explain it or define it, my opinion won’t change. I wasn’t looking for an argument so I’m not going to argue. I was making a statement and it still stands.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, it still makes a sound. Fact.

I don’t like what I consider an oversimplification of fighting games. Fact.

This statement and opinion doesn’t need any correction or a reply unless you simply wanted to tell me what your taste and opinion is on fighting games in contrast to mine. NOT trying to correct MY personal preference.

That’s like you saying you like Kitana because she’s blue and I tell you why you should like Mileena because she is purple... Like, no... Actually no... You like the color blue, that’s fine. But I’ll tell you why I like purple... That should have been what your response was like and then maybe I would have read it.

Yeah, ok but the entire point of this discussion is for people to have opinions and have opinions about other people's opinions.

Not trying to change your opinion. Just trying to have dialogue about a topic related to what the site is about.

 

[Juxtapose]

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, it still makes a sound. Fact.

Does it sound like this?

 

[Wrenchfarm]

 

[Komatose]

Does it sound like this?

Yes. Precisely.

 

[M2Dave]

Weird how the last game these guys played with any depth was the last one they were any good at.

You think the reason there are more fighters and more comp now than ever is because they are more shallow?

How's that work? Are we too dumb to know what bad games are anymore?

Which aspect of the old NRS games is anyone praising aside from depth? I placed top 8 at Evolution for Mortal Kombat 9 and I think the game is virtually unplayable at a high level.

Tekken 7 is a really good example of this. Block punishment has basically been comparatively gutted in that game. Your most important punish is what your character gets at 10 frames, the minimum punish window. This used to not be the case. Characters used to be more defined by what they got at every punish point, but very rarely now do these punishment disparities matter. This is less depth on every level. Character variety is reduced or invalidated, the risk/reward of things lacks dynamics and so on and so forth.

Huh? Characters have more punishers than ever before. You are required to study and memorize frame data and apply the appropriate punisher in a match. Some characters in the old games had access to broken punishers that covered multiple options. As an example, check out Devil's punishers (and overall design) from the first Tekken Tag game below. What a joke.

Tekken 7 is also characterized by, like every other modern fighting game, of being extremely driven by 50/50 mixups and oppressive loopable situations. This reduces depth. The neutral now only turns into how can I get into the situation to run my slot machine? Playstyles no longer matter or factor in, because the game itself is built to force you to play one particular way. This is one of the biggest criticisms of t7, it's nothing but 50/50's or safety. The best characters are currently the ones who can both do the 50/50's while being safe.

Wrong game? Very few characters in Tekken 7 have 50/50 mix ups, much less safe and loop-able ones. You want to run your slot machine? Play Tekken Tag 1 or Tekken 4, which have lots of safe options, including unblockable ones.

Oh yeah and let's not even get started on discussing Tekken 7's butchering of movement. They gutted a defensive skill to further facilitate the emphasis on offense and 50/50's by gutting the one thing in the series that forced players to have to think with their other tools to achieve victory.

The previous backdashes and side steps were broken. Every character moved like pre-patch Fakhumram, with reduced hitboxes while side stepping, and there were no homing moves and tracking throws.

Please stop listening to these so-called "critics" on Twitter. They know nothing about Tekken. Tekken 7 is imperfect and has problems, but safe and loop-able 50/50 mix ups are not one of them. LOL.

 

[Revy]

I think if you go back to the best game of each franchise it’s kinda obvious: Tekken 5, Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike, Mortal Kombat 9, Guilty Gear XX Accent Core Plus R, Dead or Alive 3 & Marvel vs Capcom 2 (or Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3) then play the newest game of that franchise, Tekken 7, Street Fighter V (It’s better now), Mortal Kombat 11, Guilty Gear -Strive-, Dead or Alive 6 & Marvel vs Capcom Infinite it’s obvious that they’re reducing the skill gap.

-

The only reason why Virtua Fighter 5: Ultimate Showdown is a breath of fresh air to new players who haven’t played Virtua Fighter 5 is because it’s a 14 year-old game that came out in an era before developers started to fuck around with shit.

I’ve played Virtua Fighter 5 Version B when it came to North America (arcade: 2007) & Final Showdown (console: 2012) & during that time of Final Showdown’s release in 2012 barely anyone from other fighting game communities gave it the time of day because it was during a massive boom where every community was at a good if not a great place as their games were
at their best, a new release or at least in a great place: Mortal Kombat 9, Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition, Tekken Tag Tournament 2, Dead or Alive 5 (Buggy at release but it’s the first DOA on PlayStation), Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 & Guilty Gear XX Accent Core Plus. People were happy, every community was happy & it was during an exciting time. So when people look at Virtua Fighter 5: Ultimate Showdown as a breath of air I’m not surprised as it came from an era where every game like it was at a good place & talks about reducing the skill gap were pretty much nonexistent but now in 2021 now we are in an era where those talks are constant & have been since 2015.

 

[carrion4worm]

If it wasn't for fighting games, I would have never learned to throw fireballs in real life. Thanks, Ryu!

Also, NO THANKS to that Progressive Insurance agent. "Flo", my ass!

 

[Kiss the Missile]

It comes down to player expression for me. It doesn't feel like there's too much room to be unique in MK11.

http://imgur.com/a/2tKIDlZ

There's hardly anything at all like this in MK11. Thats not even optimal, its just fun. Like there's no fighting game I play as much as MK, but in MK11 I've still yet to find a main because there's no character I like. In MKX I couldn't find a secondary because my main was too fucking fun to stay away for too long. Offense is just so limited. You figure out your character in a day and then there's hardly much else to learn. Whats your stagger, whats your combo, you're done.

And I know this just begs for the "just go back" response, but my main concern is this stifled offense being NRS' main focus going forward. I adore Mortal Kombat, I want to love every game as much as I do my favorite one. So of course I'm going to voice my concerns instead of just playing MKX for the next 30 years.