Printable View
"Turns out Virtua Fighter 5 isn’t a PlayStation 3 exclusive, as Sega announced today that the title is also headed to Xbox 360."
OUCH...
"Sega said that the title will hit Microsoft’s console in late summer 2007 in North America and Europe. The arcade-native fighter is scheduled to arrive on PS3 on February 20 in North America."
I've never been so happy in my life.
I have now ZERO reason to spend 500 dollars.
lol Sony.
This makes me grin, I'm glad I won't need a PS3 to play VF5. I'm getting a 360 anyway.
Is anything PS3 exclusive anymore? First Assasin's Creed now this. I lost all hope of a ps3 for Assasins Creed. Goodbye over the top visuals:cry: Ill miss you.:(
Sony still has Final Fantasy and Metal Gear. That's about it, though.
It's coming out a lot earlier on PS3, so I'm sure it will still sell a few systems. *coughJKTrixcough* But this is still a big blow.
Unless FFXI did good enough on the Xbox for them to want a creation of FFXIII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
And the fact Sony lost GTA (though personally not a big deal to me) is going to hurt them greatly. GTA is a big seller. Things are looking even worse for the PS3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Lol you bet your boots. I'm still gonna get it on PS3, i'm sure I can sell it afterwards if I must.
still posting on my wii, btw.
How is it Sony exclusive when it's been on Nintendo products?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
Ill probably still end up getting the PS3 version but if the 360 version has online Im definately getting that.
The Next Big Installment in each franchise still goes to Sony. By far, that's what draws the most cash.Quote:
Originally Posted by KhaoticHow is it Sony exclusive when it's been on Nintendo products?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
All of the original FF's were Nintendo. Plus, you can't say it's Sony exclusive if other titles were made for other systems. Old or not, the original FF's make it not exclusive.
He's not saying the series are exclusive, he's saying FFXIII and MGS4 are PS3 exclusive, which is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khaotic
Misunderstanding then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22He's not saying the series are exclusive, he's saying FFXIII and MGS4 are PS3 exclusive, which is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khaotic
Virtua Fighter 5 unfortunately will not have online multiplayer on any system. They don't want to compromise perfection with the limits of internet latency. I heard that it will use the VF.Net service though--while it's not multiplayer, it tracks stats and replays and all this sort of stuff. I saw it in Japan, it's actually quite awesome if they're going to be bringing the whole VF.Net/VFTV to the consoles.
I'm not even trying to be a dick here, really!
But how does Virtua Fighter even matter anymore? Its only draw back in the day was that it was it was 3D when nothing else was in 3D. What's so special about it in 2007?
The fact that Virtua Fighter 4 was the greatest fighting game in the world and was only dethroned by Virtua Fighter 5?
And by every iteration of Tekken, Soul Caliber, DoA, Mortal Kombat, and pretty much any other fighting game I'd like to pull out of my ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Seriously, the only thing VF ever had going for it was being 3d when everything else was still 2d. Once other companies started making 3d fighters, VF became pretty much a footnote. I am with Kane on this.
Oh, and it's good to see that we all know what's going to be worth getting a console for over the next what, five years?
Because ICO, Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, everything by Nippon Ichi, the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance games, Conflict: Desert Storm, Destroy All Humans!, Stubbs the Zombie, Psychonauts, and god only knows how many other games came out for the last generation of consoles, which weren't known about in any significant manner (If at all) when the the consoles were released, which weren't killer apps, which weren't hyped up massively; yeah - everyone saw all those games coming and made decisions on which consoles to get at release time based on those.
It is a demonstrable fact that exclusive games from popular franchises sell consoles by their own strengths. Less exclusives, less consoles sold.
Also,No.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
I didn't realize we were talking about what was going to sell costumes, I thought we were talking about what was worth buying a console for.
And yeah, it is. VF is average, on a good day.
FFXI was pretty crap on the XBOX.Quote:
Originally Posted by Avarice-nessUnless FFXI did good enough on the Xbox for them to want a creation of FFXIII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
Virtua Fighter 4 was crap, it was sluggish good thing I didn't pay for it. Tekken knocks it out the box. DOA which I really don't like just because it's on Xbox, is even better than it.
I dont think anyone here actually knows anything about VF when they say that, its all about the execution and the limitless possibilities you can chain your combos into another one. I personally dont play alot of 3-D games, but to say that VF4 was just a footnote or just slow really shows you dont know much about fighters in general...and i dont mean anything offensive by that too but it just shows...try some competition searching in your local area maybe...VF4 is very deep..so deep in fact that some say its not even worth to learn because its that hard.
One thing i loved about VF was the updated AI where they could mimick top players and 'learn' from them...while is no replacement to actual human competition, does give people more incentive to play single player and improve themselves. I hope that makes a return.
FFXI on xbox was ok...it was just a lil old Dx
People still play fighters?
Don't know anything about fighters, I've been playing them since the 80's son!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionx
Does a game get worse because it is on a platform you don't have? ;_;Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley Schovitz
I think DoA3 on the Xbox is better than DoA2 on my PS2, and I don't have an Xbox. Both are eaten by SC though.
You are only two years older than me Dx.. And it really doesnt matter about how long..its how you play them really....i know someone who used to be quite newb...he trained alot and has the right mindset and i think he is like #13 EVO or something..Charlie is the name. Thats crazy...
i dunno if you guys are being sarcastic though and i dont mean anything offensive of course, but it just feels the way people view the game as if they didnt play it at all competitively which is what it should be played as.
and people still play RTS/FPS?!? X3
I was going to say "RTS> urface imo", then I remembered I play fighters more than RTS nowadays.
Nah it was a joke...unless i completely missed yours...>_>; I love RTS and FPS too if done right.
On a seperate note to try to keep on topic and off....I hope VF5 is EVO compatible...#1 way of getting competition if its famous. And Guilty Gear Accent Core is out since Wednesday on the a-cho arcade in japan. I cant wait til people import the machine sooner or later.
I've said several times on this site that Virtua Fighter should be its own genre. It stands out far apart from the Tekkens and Soul Caliburs. They really shouldn't be compared, because they are on very different levels.
Tekken and Soul Calibur are very newbie-friendly games with a lot of depth for people who like to get deep into the system. They are accessible enough so that even the average non-skilled gamer can go in, kick some butt and have fun.
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.
It's a shame.
Don't forget Devil May Cry which I still haven't played.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
Or you know, maybe it just sucks. That's another plausable explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by JKTrix
I like the way anyone who doesn't like the Virtua Fighter games is dismissed as simply being not hardcore enough. :)
Edit: corncracker wins xD
If by "plausable" you mean "plausible", and by "plausible" you mean "implausible". :PQuote:
Originally Posted by corncrackerOr you know, maybe it just sucks. That's another plausable explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by JKTrix
Personally, I think that VF really only sucks in the aspect that unlike other games in the genre, it's not as much of a pick-up-and-play game. If you play on an easy setting, your habbits develop in a way unfit for harder difficulties or more advanced players. Hopefully, in VF5, it will be more accessible to a more casual player, such as myself.
Honestly I've never even played any VF, and can't bring myself to care.
Then, how can you say whether it sucks or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
I just gave a reason why people hate it. Never actually said it sucked.
I like the way anyone who isn't hardcore enough to like the Virtua Fighter games dismisses it as simply being a bad series. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
You're losing your touch, Roto :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13I like the way anyone who isn't hardcore enough to like the Virtua Fighter games dismisses it as simply being a bad series. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Hey, it works both ways. Don't judge it as a bad series just because you haven't given it the effort it takes to learn it. Watch a tournament (or at least a good professional single match) and then try to call it a bad game with a straight face.
Games are made to be played, not watched. I mean come on, if someone said to you "Yeah, the first 50 hours in FFXIII is total :skull::skull::skull::skull:, but go through the last dungeon and tell me it's a bad game!" They'd be quite the stupid asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Gaming isn't like playing the guitar, there's tons of games that make it fun to learn, as well as still being complex, failure to do that is a failure in that aspect of the game no matter how cool you think you are for getting good at it.
Of course they're meant to be played and not watched. If you're not going to learn the game, though, the only way to get a general idea of how deep it goes IS to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by MecaKaneGames are made to be played, not watched. I mean come on, if someone said to you "Yeah, the first 50 hours in FFXIII is total :skull::skull::skull::skull:, but go through the last dungeon and tell me it's a bad game!" They'd be quite the stupid asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
I had a great time playing Virtua Fighter 4 and learning what I could about the gameplay nuances and mechanics. I only borrowed it for a week so I didn't get that good at it, but it's not like I was stuck in button mash mode for more than a day. If it's not within your ability to pay attention and learn to appreciate it's complexity, it's your fault, not the games.Quote:
Gaming isn't like playing the guitar, there's tons of games that make it fun to learn, as well as still being complex, failure to do that is a failure in that aspect of the game no matter how cool you think you are for getting good at it.
Oh my. I don't play Virtua Fighter anyway because I suck at all fighting games, but it's never good to lose an exclusive. And it's coming to the 360 later, but you just know it's going to be some Super Special Golden Edition that gets extra stuff.
Ah well, I still want a Ps3 and not a 360 :jess:.
I had a friend who enjoyed watching me play final Fantasy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
I like the way this news as been received as, "Haha, Sony sucks! My console > Your Console!" rather than, "Hey, now twice as many people get to play the next installment of an acclaimed fighting series! That's fantastic!".
I'm also thrilled to see a thread in which MILF is dead wrong. It's about damn time.
I'm going to go try this VF just to prove MILF right.
Man, I loved Virtua Fighter 1 and 2 back in the day. Oh Saturn, how I miss you. :( I don't really see how anyone can dismiss the series as being any worse than other 3D fighters out there. The times I've played Tekken it's been nothing more than a button-mashing competition. Obviously there can be more to the game than that, and the same goes for Virtua Fighter.
The series has developed considerably in complexity since then, and anyone who bothered to check the ratings for such a game would get that. Sure, you can argue you hate reviews and only form your own opinions, but those reviews are nothing more than the opinions of people who play videogames for a living. If scores are pretty uneven, it's obvious people love it or hate it, but when nine out of 10 people say something is kickass, they're probably onto something.
I'm personally looking foward to playing this one on my 360. =3
Comparing Final Fantasy to a fighting game is totally stupid. Final Fantasy strategies are always going to be about the same, once you find a way to beat the boss its over, once you see the story its not gonna change. However a fightinig game can dramatically change depending on what people find out, and the person sitting next to you with their skill/attitude.
Oh hell, i thought Smash was pretty much a party game until i saw some of the things you can pull off at high level play compared to the run-of-the-mill casual play with friends of newb level. Sometimes though, not even videos show how complex it is...many a time you can say "I can do that easy"...but when you do it in training mode..it doesnt seem so..and even if you can do it in training well..can you do it in a match with pressure and a thinking opponent? How about with tournament pressure/money match? All of a sudden you appreciate how some can do it in a match with consistancy and know how some top famous players, are top. Everyone can button mash, but would you take the effort to try to go into the game and take it to another level? Thats up to you...
Everyone is hating the PS3 right now...its not unwarranted but...yeah XD This IS good though, we need more different types of fighters on different consoles, this will increase competition as long as they stay arcade perfect. And of course if someone doesnt like the game, they will start hating it without reason. >_> <_< I hope people develop for the Wii too as well, they are not thinking about how there are still GC ports and making more GC Sticks might not be a bad idea.Quote:
I like the way this news as been received as, "Haha, Sony sucks! My console > Your Console!" rather than, "Hey, now twice as many people get to play the next installment of an acclaimed fighting series! That's fantastic!".
I'm also thrilled to see a thread in which MILF is dead wrong. It's about damn time.
Uh, yeah, that's the thing. You are presuming I've never taken the time to learn any VF games, because you're apparently of the opinion that anyone who takes the time to learn it will come to love it. I'd counter that by saying the opposite is true - people who like it will play it and play it and play it. I'm not saying it doesn't take plenty of skill, I've enough experience with VF to know that it does (Got pretty good at number 2, for that matter). I still don't think it's a fantastic series. Good? Arguably. Worth playing? Probably. Better than Soul Caliber, or Tekken, or Dead or Alive? No. And those games are easier to pick up, it's true - but a master at those will absolutely decimate a button basher, just the same as a master would beat a newb at VF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
(Contrary to my earlier post, which was mostly to rile up some talk, I don't think VF sucks in any way. I just don't think it's anything to be excited about.)
And I still think it's cute that people think I'm not hardcore enough.
You said that there's nothing special about it, and it's just another 3D fighting game. There are enough serious tournament players out there who have taken the time to see what you're not seeing to tell you that there IS something there besides ten-year-old 3D graphics.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILFUh, yeah, that's the thing. You are presuming I've never taken the time to learn any VF games, because you're apparently of the opinion that anyone who takes the time to learn it will come to love it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Your entire argument rests upon the fallacy that I simply haven't bothered to like the game. Especially effective because by your logic anyone who has bothered will love it, but anyone who doesn't love it hasn't bothered. I can't even begin to categorize how intellectually derelict that is. But I am going to go ahead and say that a game I have to make an effort to enjoy - not to get good at, but merely to enjoy - is inherently inferior to a game which is fun to learn as well as fun to be good at.
*facepalm* That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying you haven't bothered to see the DEPTH that's there. You don't have to like it. That's entirely up to the individual.
O RLY? Because it's clear to me that, throughout the entire thread, your not-very-subtle implication has been that my disliking the VF series is evidence of my failure to properly learn it.
Edit: Sorry, did I say not-so-subtle implication? I meant outright, overt statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
Personally disliking a series and calling it a bad series are two different things.
THis feels like a thread in EoEo now.
And if you read my posts in the Zelda thread, you'd know I know as much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
So which is it? Is Virtua Fighter just another generic fighter or do you just not like it?
I don't like it because it's just another generic fighter, now that there are many other 3d fighters. It is not, as I have said, a particularly bad one, but not a particularly good one, either. Whatever might lie at the end of a long, boring road of practise and training is not worth discussing because... well, it's meant to be fun.
Now, if all the "lulz nub" posts of yours have quite sufficed, I'm going to reiterate that if a game can't make me enjoy it enough to even bother getting good at it, it's by definition not as good as games which do manage that, no matter how it might play when one does get good at it. I'm not interested in tournament gaming, and if I were it'd be RTS games, and I wager the vast majority of gamers aren't interested in entering such. The fact that one tiny subset of players finds it good for that one purpose is hardly evidence that it's a fantastic series. Especially as I wager there are way more SC and Marvel vs. Capcom tournies.
Wrong.Quote:
it's just another generic fighter
You don't have to like it, you just have to admit that there's more to it than you originally thought. It's not a bad game. The most hardcore fighting game fanatics say so.
Wrong.Quote:
I'm going to reiterate that if a game can't make me enjoy it enough to even bother getting good at it, it's by definition not as good as games which do manage that
A game that you personally don't enjoy is not the definition of a bad game.
I stand corrected. This argument is becoming stupider then most EoEo threads.Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
Fine then: It's just another generic fighter which has difficult to perform combos and moves. I have little doubt that someone really good at using Akira is deserving of respect for having put the effort in - I know, I've tried using him, it's bloody hard to be competent, let alone masterful. I just don't care that someone's put the effort in beyond a cursory "Good for you".Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
I still fail to see where difficult to master, or complexity, equates to high quality.
That's because you know nothing at all about fighting games.
It's difficult to master, but when someone can master it it's so much more satisfying than a simpler game like Dead or Alive or Tekken or even Soul Calibur (which I am a rabid fanboy of).
A master at Virtua Fighter has mastered more than a master at Tekken.
:cool: Oh snap, I've been pwnd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
And... uh... I've argued this when? I haven't. In fact I've stated that I've tried using Akira, and I'm no good at all, and I recognize someone who can use him well has put in a lot of time. I have also said that I do not care that it's more difficult because I don't equate difficulty with quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Then STFU because the only gamers who can talk about actually having skills (And apparently by your logic the only people who play good games) are the people who can do ten-step DDR and complete a bullet hell game on the hardest setting with one credit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Yes, compare a rhythm game to a fighting game. I'm sure that makes perfect sense in your mind. DDR isn't complex at all, anyway. It's incredibly simple. Step where it tells you to step on one or two of four spots on a mat.
Not that it matters since the only thing they have in common is that they're video games.
Anyway, difficulty doesn't equal quality, but in fighting games the reward for the learning curve does equal quality. Complex fighting games offer more rewards than button mashers. Deal.
Yeah okay, you just go ahead and enter a DDR contest and we'll see how much skill it takes. :rolleyes2
I'm with MILF all the way.
When you compete against other humans, it doesn't really matter if a game is "easy to get into", because even then, one of the two players will have a better knowledge on what moves do what, and when, and how fast, along with one part having better reflexes than the other. A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Even with "simple" game mechanics, the person with the firmest grasp of those simple mechanics will be the best player. Being the best in the world at DDR is just as hard as being the best in the world at VF, or any other fighter out there. Well actually, the game that's hardest to be the best at, would be the game that has the biggest number of competitors. For example, if I programmed my own fighter game, 10 times as advanced and deep as VF, it would still be easier to be the best at that game if only 2 persons in the entire world played it. Even being the world champion at Pong would be harder. More competition = harder to be the best.
I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Yes, and you're equating compexity with quality, which I don't see follows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
But chess isn't inherently any better than RPS.Quote:
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.
That's not comparable, because RPS is much more dependent on random chance than fighters are. Well, the fighters I've played are. For the record, I prefer my games to have as little random chance as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Actually, it's very comparable. DOA is incredibly rock/paper/scissory.Quote:
Originally Posted by MirageThat's not comparable, because RPS is much more dependent on random chance than fighters are. Well, the fighters I've played are. For the record, I prefer my games to have as little random chance as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
-edit- Actually, screw that.
I disagree, it all depends on which player has the quickest reflexes and most easily see which moves are high- mid- or low. A seasoned player can see that much more easily than a random newbie who buttonmashes, and then counter him to hell and back.
Of course it's not exactly like Rock Paper Scissors. :P
Beating a more complex game means nothing.
If in order to do a simple punch you would need to hit the following sequence of buttons: Up, down, A, X, B, Z, A, A, left
and to kick: Left, Y, Z, Z, L, Up
And decent combo's involve punches and kicks linked together by one of these three linking combo's which must be entered in between each punch or kick, XXYA, XYBA, BBAY, that would be en extremely complex game.
However anyone who could become a master wouldn't be called a good gamer for learning it, but you would state he clearly had no life whatsoever to be able to easily pull off the games simplest comboes.
In conclusion, Complexity does not equal Good in any way shape or form, as this is clearly far more complex then any other Fighter in existance, but also Clearly sucks.
That's a bit of an extreme example, don't you think? :rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
Virtua Fighter is complex in that the really juicy bits take a lot of practice and experimentation. Obviouly a punch is still one button.
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.