Extreme's are how I work Roto. But I still stand by my statement. Just because you spend more time to get good at a game doesn't make it better.
Printable View
Extreme's are how I work Roto. But I still stand by my statement. Just because you spend more time to get good at a game doesn't make it better.
I think depth would be a better word to use than complexity, as demonstrated by corncracker's complex game design :P
I don't have too much of a problem with people not liking the game, because there are some things that people won't like if it's not your style. I don't like Tekken, but I know it's a quality game.
Still, corncracker, if you do want to check out VF4/Evolution, it's one of those 'PS2 Best' titles, so if you're in the states you can get it brand new for $20. Should be much cheaper used or in a bargain bin. I'd reccomend Evolution over the original VF4, mainly because of the 2 extra characters, but the Quest mode is quite robust as well.
Depth if purely up for opinion though. Look at all the FF VIII fans. I say the game was extremely shallow and stupid, with a horrible cast of characters.
Others believe it to be a beautifly told love story with far more depth then I can imagine.
OThers believe R=U theories.
Thus, regardless, Roto's argument fails.
When talking about game systems, fighting mechanics in this case, depth is less of an opinion than it would be for a game's story.
To show a simple and very shallow comparison of depth (oxymoron? maybe not) compare the move lists of these characters:
Pai Chan from VF4 Evolution (there is a newer version of VF4 but it's not on consoles)
Ling Xiaoyu from Tekken 5: DR (not quite available on consoles in the west, but it's on PSP)
Pai is probably the most newbie friendly character in VF, which is why I chose her. Her closest comparison in another game would be Xiaoyu, so I chose her as well. They both have a couple of stances. I haven't checked the entire list yet, cuz it is kinda boring :P but in particular I looked at the throws. Pai and Xiaoyu are not throw/grapple-centered characters (whereas the likes of Wolf or King are), so I thought it would be a decent comparison.
Xiaoyu has 10 different throws, with 3 of them being situational (meaning requiring something other than standing face-to-face with the opponent and hitting 'grab', i.e. from the left side, right side, behind...) A couple of them are even out of certain stances which adds a couple more options than what another average Tekken fighter would have (Raven, the character I use more often, has 8).
Pai has 21 throws. A couple of them are the same throw from a different side, so the number of unique throws may be closer to 18, and 8 of those are situational.
As I mentioned at the top, this is just the most basic way of comparing the depth of the 2 games, though it probably isn't the most thorough way to display it. There's a chance that one of the Tekkenites will have more moves than one of the VFers. I was going to include Lei Fang from DOA4 in the comparison, but I can't find a decent visual representation of her moves. Deadoralive.jp had official lists back when the game was released (I still have the file for Hitomi), but it's taking way too long to load.
Also, what's an 'R=U theory'? It might be something simple, but I just wanna make sure.
OOC: That would be a Rinoa = Ultimecia topic.
More moves doesn't mean more depth. In tecken there are a lot of different situational throws, some only aplicable to certain characters.
I can turn around and say soul Caliber is a more indepth fighting game due the the many different weapon choices for every character.
Tekken because all of its fighting styles are based of real fighting styles.
Like I did mention, it probably isn't the best/most thorough way to show it, especially since you haven't played it so you wouldn't quite understand. It was probably the most basic level of comparison.
VF is based off real fighting styles as well, as is DOA and possibly Soul Calibur. Can't quite use your Soul Calibur claim of more weapons as 'more in-depth', because that's a one-time option before a match, and everything after that is the same (whereas by comparing the movelists, those are available at all times during the course of a match).
Did you ever consider that people might not want to spend thier game time "Diving into" a fighter. I thought the point was to have fun, not overcome a learning curve.Quote:
Virtua Fighter on the other hand doesn't have the same level of accessibility of those other 2. There are a couple of characters that are easy to use and be fairly effective with, but it's not until you really sink your teeth into it and get past the button-mashing stage that you really see how deep it is. VF is a game you have to commit to to really learn, and a lot of people just can't handle it. So they write it off.
With every game that jumps on the multi-platform bandwagon, the PS3 loses lifeblood. Lets hope they hold on to MGS4, and FFXIII.
I think that PS3 will ose out big time as the Wii launched spectacularly, it's loosing a lot of its exclusive games and, here it is, mabye even Final Fantasy. Yes it sounds insane but think. FF was originally ninty and now they have re-made 1-4 on ninty comnsoles and 5and 6 are on their way to the ds. DragonQuest Might be starting on the DS. Its seems sony's slowly loosing all thier allies apart metal gear solid because Ubisoft are with ninty.
Uh... what the heck does Ubisoft have to do with FF, MGS, or DQ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Verdi666
No, Final Fantasy 5 and 6 was remade for the GBA, and they are both released as I post this post. FF6 still isn't out in English though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Verdi666
I think the point is, if you dont 'dive' into one, you wont realy know how good a game is. I never was into fighters as much as i am now without diving into one and finding good competition to play with, if i just had 'fun' like i did with what most of you guys said, the game would be pretty boring to me too and i would be saying the exact same thing. Half the fun is doing the learning curve and being able to beat other people with what you learned. Of course if its not your game, dont play it, but without diving into it and saying its bad really doesnt hold much water in terms of fighting games...Quote:
Did you ever consider that people might not want to spend thier game time "Diving into" a fighter. I thought the point was to have fun, not overcome a learning curve.
Its kinda why i feel most fighters have all these extra color modes and etc stuff...most people who play the game competitively or 'dive' into the game a lil more wouldnt really care about modes...arcade port is best and only thing needed...while others need all this extra to compel them..-_-; Cant remember last time finding a color edited character on youtube that actually had decent skill to watch/learn.[/rant]
Kekeke, and I thought roto was elitist.
As I've said before, the point about learning to play is valid, but a good game will make the learning process itself fun.
Who say it isnt fun? I was just ranting at the second paragraph though, but really for just about any decent fighter you need to spend some time diving into it to know what its about(if you dont then that doesnt help..), its just VF requires more, which does not make it a bad game. It may even be better. Just because i dont agree with you doesnt make it a bad game.