32 year old gamer who’s been playing FG since MK on genesis. My opinion most casuals didn’t know how to actually play the game back then we just played for fun now with the growth of the FGC and more info im getting decent at SF and Tekken for the 1st time ever. More in depth training modes, the ability to play people online whenever you want, ability to TH-cam combos and guides, watching pro players all contribute to me being better now than ever. The info was much harder to find back in the day so less people were getting good.
Yes I’m 36 years old and back then there wasn’t much info on the older games today it’s so much info now and the competition is much harder but I feel like it’s just too easy for everybody
I mean, let's not pretend that those games aren't hard as hell to pick up even going back with a modern mindset, tools, and knowledge. Stuff like Street Fighter 2 was created before the idea of balance, which offsets a lot of things. Like, people absolutely cannot deal with Super Turbo Vega. Like the mechanics of the game are simpler, but that just makes what characters can do all the more oppressive.
True. I'm a 39 years old gamer who's been playing fighting games since '91 / or SF II at arcade. Back then, my only 'sparring partner' was my childhood friend and his brother who loves playing video games in general. But they always have some obsession to experiment combos in MK 3 and DBZ Sega Genesis. We're playing for hours after we got home from school and some time we played at local arcade too. But we only played for fun and there's no talk like we want to be competitive or win a tourney. Heck, i don't think we even have local tourney back then...
Same pretty much, mid 30s, sf2sce was my first fg on mega drive, been casually playing fgs most of my life it's only been since getting on fightcade a few years ago that I'm finally actually learning how to play these games. I hate that if took over 25 years for me to realise how deep fgs really are, but same time, better late than never!
On top of that fighting games nowadays are much more accessible in terms of execution and fundamentals. Inputs are much more lenient and the mechanics of most games practically force you to play aggressively so you don't gotta worry about unothordox playstyles.
One of the biggest advantages to gameplay now is accessibility and knowledge. There are millions more potential players now vs. back in the early 2000s and there are a lot of ways to better understand (and manipulate) gameplay now. We had the arcade and GameFAQs and Shoryuken, that's it. I still remember when MvC2 came out in 1999 at my local arcade in NC (lol). It always had a massive queue to play (at least 20-30 ppl deep to play) but no one really would last beyond 4-5 matches. That was until someone came in from the local college that happened to be from NYC. He chose Cable, Magneto and Colossus. Dude won every match (30+) until the arcade shut down for the night. It was the first time we had seen someone do HVBx3, guard break, Magneto's Magneto Tempest x 3 and actually connecting Colossus' super within a combo for +60% dmg - it was literally nuts. We had never even seen that high level gameplay before and the game had been out (in the arcade) for almost a year at that point, but because we didn't have online play and guides (accessibility and knowledge), we couldn't come close to competing. It's not like that now....and I love that as an old timer!
I remember before we had internet going down to the local library and we'd look through the Nintendo Powers to try to find any tips for games we'd play (that's how desperate we were). We would bring a pad and pen to write anything useful down. Not much of an arcade scene where I was at, so it was usually sleepovers where we could play others in fighting games. Compare that to today where there is a wiki and guides at your fingertips, the games for free to play on fightcade against people all over the world with roll back netcode, and legit arcade sticks you can buy to play on instead of a SNES controller. The only thing we've lost is the social interaction, but I suppose that is a much larger problem effecting most aspects of society.
Exactly. I was a VF player in the mid-late 90’s in NY, playing at 51st street, 49th street, Le Cue down on 12th street. We’d be hitting up Asahiya bookstore to look for new issues of Gamest or Mooks…. Scouring for any information. Now w T8, you have hour long specific matchup guides, more combo videos than I have time to watch, all the features in the game And not to mention, back then, it was 50 cents to have your ass handed to you in under a minute. When VF3 first came to 51st street, it was a dollar to continue! So many people just didn’t have 5, 10, 20 bucks to spend in a day at the arcade. Part of the reason scenes were so much smaller: without some amount of disposable income, no way you could even play. And when you did, you got on a broken stick w some prick next to you who was gonna exploit every knowledge check he could to stay on & not have to spend $ himself
the "accessibility / knowledge" thing is only true to a point. A lot of today's fighting games (T8, SF6 for example) artificially create situations where the player on defense has to guess. Before, putting your opponent in 50/50s or situations where there were layers was a skill. Now in SF6 or T8 you block a simple button and you're forced to guess right away. I understand the newer generation of the new fighting games feels attacked when their skill levels are somewhat being "attacked" but the proof is in the pudding. There's a lot of Rock, Paper, Scissors being played now and i think what's really happening is the older generation doesn't really care about "everybody being good" but that a lot of the fun was the grind to that high level of play and now that climb isn't so high. the guy you described....as an nyc native myself, i've seen that many times lol.
I wish there were more of a middle ground. For example, I can watch, study, read about MVC2 but that doesn't amount to much. I could never do things that a player like Sanford Kelly could do in that game, so his talent provides him with advantages. Or a 3S player like Hayao I could never do what he can do in lifetime. The only modern game I've played is SF6 and there's nothing I can't do with an hour of practice. It's a different skill set to be a top player in that game, not very entertaining to me.
@@Yoloslides You say putting your opponent in a 50/50 back had layers of skill involved. What does that actually mean? The way I'm understanding it currently is that there were many factors that could lead to a 50/50, but it's possible your opponent wasn't aware of it. They weren't aware of it because of a lack of accessibility to knowledge or there were so many factors that their mental stack was overloaded. Today, it's easier to recognize the 50/50 because the game is simpler; therefore, less factors and less things to put on your mental stack. But, again, where is the skill that's being developed here? Either I'm aware of the 50/50 scenario or I'm not, and today I'm more likely to be aware due to the accessibility of knowledge. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, accessibility to that knowledge was paramount in distinguishing good players and not as good players. Not attacking you, just trying to understand what skill is being developed here, and what made the grind so hard besides just being aware of new scenarios dictated by the spread of knowledge.
Justin has my favorite take so far. Hit the nail on the head in separating that newer games are easier by design to the point that anything confusing or advanced tends to get patched out nowadays. But to be a top player in newer versus older games is a different question, and personally i think that newer games are harder to be a consistent performing top player. If a game is designed to be easier, then that ease of play will apply to literally everyone, novice or pro. And the number of attendees in notable tournament events have increased by a factor of 10 to even 50 fold for some games between the mid 90s and today. So even if a game is easier to learn, it doesnt matter when you have to deal with a much larger number of strong players due to information sharing and access to competition making the development process a bit easier. Doesn't mean that information alone makes those older games any easier to execute though...that is still objectively tougher. But the number of strong players in FGs now exist far beyond just the old handful of hubs like Chinatown Fair or SHGL, or beyond just Japan for Intl. My one hot take though is that there are numerous players on both sides of the argument that put a lot of their sense of value and pride as a person into their gaming skill and accomplishments, so they take these debates as personal attacks. A person isnt extra special because they are stronger at ST compared to SF6, and vice versa. One might make more money or garner more attention, but that's it. Superficial reasons. It's still just a fun hobby for the majority.
I'm an old school Tekken player and have sort of just observed how different FGs have developed, I think what I see these days is that what gave the old games depth (and conversely, became the difficult things for casuals to overcome) were kind of removed/nerfed and then more systems have been added. Fundies will typically take longer to develop depending on the game because of the amount of bloat. For example: - TTT1: no frills, just spacing and movement, move lists weren't as big as now either, but movement and spacing take a LONG time to get good at - T5DR: walls were added, move lists started getting bigger, still a large emphasis on movement and spacing. The meta was still spacing and movement - T6 and TTT2: walls got stronger, rage, homing moves, bound and wall/floor break added, combos became huge, movement and spacing got nerfed compared to older games, movement became difficult. TTT2 had ludicrous risk/reward for using launching and going for the biggest combo possible. Meta shifted towards comboing - T7: all movement nerfed yet again, throws nerfed, power crush, rage arts/drive added, move lists got bigger, huge amount of chars (traditionally system breaking chars added too mind you, ie: Akuma, Geese), bound replaced with tailspin (everyone gets better wall carry). Meta shifted toward timing and "better buttons" than your opponent. - T8 (so far): backdash nerfed, sidestep buffed, rage drive removed, inputs made simpler, special style added, chip damage added, heat system added (changes the meta severely), throws slightly buffed. Meta currently is about locking opponent down with heat. Key things that gave older fighting games their identity/uniqueness were removed/nerfed and then new things were added to make them convoluted/bloated. This has meant that landing damage and winning/making comebacks has become easier. I think one of the key telling things in the past (at least for Tekken) was that in newer games, you kind of need a FT5 or even FT10 to determine who's a better player. In the older games you could already tell if you beat them, maaaaaybe a FT3/FT5 was needed if things were very close.
Watching great players of older games consistently respond to the litany of complex situations that exist and/or execute difficult sequences is thrilling, and makes me appreciative of their mastery of the game. Watching the top players of modern games impresses me for how they somehow stand out amidst extremely dense competition and for the way they contribute to rapidly developing metagames. I hope people can spend more energy appreciating the stuff all these competitors bring to the table (and that they can spend that energy just enjoying fighting games lol).
What Justin said about back in the arcade days you were limited until you met a guy that would at times challenge you with the same character just to gage your skill level and crush you with the same character forcing you to learn something new and that's how you grew as a player
@@bloodeagle6458he's not talking about practice, he's talking about barrier of entry which means how difficult is it to pick up and play. A game like dive kick has low barrier of entry. Whereas mvc2 or tekken tag 2 would be considered high barrier of entry.
I really love the insight you bring into the conversation, with you being considered as a very techinical player and having a high understanding of universal fg knowledge that translates through the generations. Really good stuff!
My opinion is this: (most) Newer Fighting games are easier to play, but the competition in every fighting game has become more difficult. Side point: I think it needs to be said that just because games are easier, doesn't mean the game is better. Too many other variables in the mix.
Yup, some of these very variables used ot make the game casual appealing, are now used as an extensively central nexus for competitive players to knowledge check and subtly pick up on and abuse information, that is otherwise beyond initial surface level comprehension. If you think there isn't a factor that isn't abused in competitive play, then you just aren't playing at a high level enough. And modern games always need to innovate and add something new... Game designers idea of balance or mass broad casual appeal is to add new mechanics and overhead - and you know what that means, MORE complexity!
Games are def easier now but it's wild how folks assume they're easier to the point where people are winning "easier" which isn't the case Also the fact that people seem to forget that most of the complexity in older fighting games are *unintentional*
That discussion in the beginning that pretty much said SF6 players can't handle SF3. The games may be in the same series but they're so different that you can barely compare them. It's the equivalent of saying "You can beat me in Fortnight, but try and beat me at CS 1.5 at LAN! ", the games may have some elements they share but they're so different that they're barely comparable. I feel like modern fighting games are just as complex as they've always been, sometimes they feel a lot more complex than older games when they add a bunch of new mechanics. Like in SF6. The reason why so many are so good these days are not because games are simpler, it's because devs gotten a lot better at explaining the game to players, we have much better online multiplayer now than ever so people can fight countless more opponents, also players can with relative ease find any info about any game at any time. What we have now is info and the ability to learn things a lot easier than ever. If a player today decides to get good at SF3, they'll most likely will have a much easier time to learn all the important things than people did when the game was new. Heck, in the X360/PS3 version of SF3 they had a bunch of parry trials and they literally taught you how to do the Daigo Parry! Just in case you encountered Justin online :P
Agreed with you Mr. Wong! We do have that conversation somehow often,specially when we are from the old players. It's just how you said(I think) somewhere in the video that if we compare the first version of a new fighting game with the first version of a old fighting game the old one would be a better overall construction to keep you hyped at. Otherwise people get emotional with those things 'cause everybody want's to be the best!
The arrogance of the younger pros is what blows my mind away, but soon enough they will be "old" and experiencing the same treatment they dish out to the older guys. I remember sf2, street fighter vs xmen, third strike, cvs2, mvc2, then eventually the online era sf4, mvc3, sf x tekken, i skipped sf5 but play sf6. After I got some online experience initially through sf4 and was able to watch replays of top players my skill sky rocketed, the 10-15 years prior to that I was totally trash, never played anyone outside of my hometown on fighting games. Age is catching up to me now, I don't feel the need to play competitively online anymore, I do enjoy watching the best players go at it though, I just wish there was respect paid to each era of fighting games, and competitive gaming in general tbh.
There's something more fun about the old ones I can't put my finger on. I played CvS2 (fightcade) for the first time about a year ago and I was addicted to it, nothing like that happens for the new ones and I'm definitely not a tourny player.
For me, a big part of cvs2 appeal is just the huge breadth of characters and how the grooves let you play them all a bit differently. And when you aren't playing in a tourney and focused on top tiers, it makes the playing experience really varied and enjoyable. Mvc2 is extremely similar in that way too, just swapping team composition in place of grooves for that variety.
“The scene is growing. Be happy,” is the best, healthiest take about of all this. I’ve gotten exhausted with the constant doomsaying peddled online, because it gets clicks and attention. It’s nice to hear someone take the time to really think about a topic, and still land on a positive outlook of, “this is fine, chill out, have fun.”
Just to come in as an old head who was around for the OG SF and the hype that was SF2 then watchin it all unfold up till today....players are gonna get good according to the options they're given (in game), the competition around them, and access to sources of info. There's more good players now because there is more of those 3 things. Doesn;t make em better or worse than OGs. Everyone gets older and reactions fade or interests wane, etc. If X person can beat X person in their prime for 2 different eras is a debate that's forever in any competition of human history. Straight up. Only thing I can personally do, like Justin does, is spread awareness of our prime time periods. Because we do love to see newer generations pick up the older stuff. Just as I'm sure the younger gets a kick out of it when we try that new new too. That's what potential makes the FGC like family despite any squabbles.
Of course is harder to win for all the bad reasons behind this. Risk reward factor is broken , input buffer is bigger now making tight combos a thing of the past.To pull those 1frame link combo at the heat of the moment was something that need it strong mental resources. 50/50 game is a crucial part in sf5 and sf6 throw loops etc. zoning what is that , footsies a thing of the past. randomness is the vital part in this game with that way you can have casual players feel that they pull something special. Playing sf5 and sf6 feels like those games are the older ones, the archaic fighting system make those supposed new gen fighters boring and repetitive , if there where not for the big prize pools those games will have been left in the dust from all those pro players.
Idk, all i know is that its getting tiring that everytime i open TH-cam, a “omg Tekken 8 is scrubby and sf6 killed neutral” video pops up even if i avoid clicking on the vast majority of them. I’m 30 and i see mostly people around my age zerging out because their glory days in Tekken 6 or 3rd strike is gone and they refuse to adapt to new mechanics that simply make games more fun than they were before and want them removed out of pure nostalgia. Meanwhile fighting games are on a level of popularity that was never seen before
Yeah, I've played many SF games, and for the longest time I thought 3rd Strike would always be my favorite. Now, I love SF6 and I think I can actually say I like it the most, despite the nostalgia of past games. It's also the game I've put the most effort into and gotten the best at.
If there's a group of people that were that kid in the arcade, they're probably the ones watching JWong on YT. So I'd bet lots of us were that arcade stomper @NoName-cn3cp
That takes me back, yeah. Not a lot of FG heads in the area back in the day, so I could make that quarter last for at least 30 minutes to an hour on CVS2 or MVC2.
Ime 39. I think it was 2 quarters. Two tokens. Cnt remember. Some guy had a crippled like cerebral palsy hand and could do all kings chain throws. And that thing where he rolls you around on the ground in tekken 3. It was amazing.
Back in my days, there are only limited SF2 machines in arcade, and kids will occupy/ claim it by doing all sort of dirty play against anyone who dare to challenge their machine, that include tick throw loop and Guile invisible grab. Getting good is very difficult cos you don't get to play.
I've been hearing this conversation of 'you're only good cause the game lets you be' for awhile now and sitting down and thinking about it... Why is that a problem? More good players means more good matches and its more fun. The only downside I can see or assume is more along the lines of Pro players hating their scene being more crowded, but as a bystander, I just wanna see more good matches. I dunno man, I feel like people are complaining too much about things and just need to play more and enjoy it.
Well, hypothetically, Capcom could just announce a grand tournament in December 2025, featuring every Street Fighter series from 2 onwards. They could set equal prize money for each game, aiming to determine both the most beloved Street Fighter game and the one players feel most confident in winning.
At least from an execution standpoint games gave certainly gotten easier. Inputs are considerebly more forgiving than older games. I tried playing 3rd strike recently and i could not get supers to come out consistently, which is a skill issue but the inputs have undeniably become more forgiving
I think the last video you posted where competitors at TNS played Footsies showed that newer players lack basic fundamentals and want to skip neutral and heavily rely on input leniency and system mechanics and frame data. Games are easier now, and ease of information have made it so players have a better understanding of newer games. Unintended glitches have been patched out, which probably would've happened back in the day too if the games were updated after release. But to say newer games and newer players are outright better is crazy. The oldheads have been forged through trials these new age players will never even begin to hope to understand. Sometimes, just getting a quarter to go run a set was an ordeal. Much less getting good at the game when there's no practice mode or home version.
I grew up in the 90s. I know how yo play old Street Fighter games so newer ones are a piece of cake for me. And personally the older games have more charm & more content than most of todays fighting games
I think one issue if you had a modern player play an old game to prove a point, is that they'd be playing old players with a lot more time in that game. I think the only fair test would be take 2 players, one old one new, put them into 2 games, one old one new, that neither of them play; and even then whatever the result is speaks more to those 2 player's ability than the old school players or new school players abilty as a whole.
Even then, even if they magically had the same innate skill level the person playing the new game will be playing against a lot of new people too, with an abundance of resources on which to learn the new game and the person playing the old game would not have that luxury and would need information from who knows what corner of the internet. Some of the older games do have good modernized resources, but many don't.
I just got into fighting games off the back of SF6 and fgc TH-cam. I’ve started been playing Hyper fighting and I can barely beat some level 3 cpus in that game. They’re hard as hell for a newbie like me but I love the older games and I’ll keep playing them till get better.
This is the realest take I've seen regarding the debate. I liked that fighting games are easier to play, that unfair and unintended tech like option selects are actively removed. What I generally dislike on any game is when they make the game play for you, to the point that you don't have to put the time and effort to be good at it.
I got to C rank in say 200 hours or so on fightcade in third strike. I think if you have the will to learn you will always naturally get better. Fighting games are really a big learning process I remember when I discoverd just from getting my ass kicked oh you can standing heavy kick with ryu to stop jump ins you dont have to do the whole shoryu every time and its safer, oh if I just watch carefully I can tell the difference between an empty jump and if their pushing buttons and just throw them when they land. All those things come from accesibility and getting to play so many players. You learn through losing. Now I can perfect people my oki's really good and people cant even get out of the corner sometime. I remember I didn't even know what corner pressure was! I get what Ryan's saying but its not just that some games are easier more players want to get better and have the tools to get better. Like for example I've watched hours of Kuni destroying people in Third strike just subconciously being able to watch great players like that and study things they do, that will soak into your game. Just watching Justin play seeing his neutral and his play helps subconciously too even if your just watching for enjoyment. I bet if Ryan Hart enters Third strike at Evo he would run into a lot of newer Third strike players that are really good, you see alot of them on the Jazzy circuit.
In the modern age the floor is lower but there's still gimmicks, and match ups change every other month with updates. In the classic age the ceiling was shallower but you had to go thirteen rounds with the cabinet figuring each machine's kinks before even throwing a fireball, if you even knew how to throw a fireball. True hell was the FGC dark age and early on SFIV's run. Controllers and input interpreters were still crap, and there was a deluge of hidden tech, gimmicks and esoteric systems. First you had to break your fingers to play the game, and know the opponent's zodiac sign and what phase the moon was on, then you could worry about twenty different OSes for that particular match up. It was the worst of both words, the middle ground of piss and shit, the diarrhea age.
I play 3rd strike for a long time , i also play sf6 , from an execution standpoint sf6 has much more input leniency, so much so that i often get a srk or super when trying to do hadouken or srk fast , now in terms of actual gameplay , i think that sf6 has a MUCH higher skill ceiling than 3rd strike , there's so many things to look out for it's incomparable . I think sf6 is a much more difficult game to master than 3rd strike ever was . I'm good at both games , rank a on fightcade in 3rd strike , and master rank in sf6 .
Completely agree, people pretend like third strike is hard mechanically while it literally is only that for like 3-4 combos that get used. E.g. makoto TOD, Urien aegis setups, Oro unblockable is what I can think of. Most of third strikes "optimal" combos were just cr.mp/cr.mk hit confirmed into super into a vortex of strike throw. Nothing really changed. People act like characters weren't cheap/ didn't make you guess back then. The mental stack on sf6 is way heavier. B rank third stike player.
I think the main controversy with Ryan Hearts take was he didnt mean it in the sense of random people playing the game have an easier time learning. He was talking about there being way more good players than there used to be, which is true but arguing its because the games are easier is absolutely not true. The current top players would still be the top players even if 3rd strike or SF2 were the current games.
@@weaponx8263 i dont think it was only execution though. the mind stack is still ridiculously large not to mention setups. for instance, akuma in sf4, every sweep could result in high low mix-ups from both sides or even if you did guess the correct side you could get hit by another option select. newer games have fewer offensive and defensive options hence if your character is good at throw loops, its probably already a s-tier character
@cloudstr Hmm... you're making sense. I think newer fighting games have more offensive options though but less defensive options. An obvious example is sf6
It's because people are taking this conversation the wrong way. They just throw "Its easier" and thus people assume the games are that, easy and everyone can be a Pro. The reality is that the conversation is a bit more complex than that. The Skill Floor has been lowered by making the game more accessible to players, both new and old by making them less execution heavy and providing much more info and better tools built into the game to help players. The Skill Ceiling, however, is still as high as it has ever been. To be good and even more, to become a Pro you still need to devote, hundreds, thousands of hours to improve, just like before. The Pro players that were Pros in SF5, SF4, Tekken 6, Tekken 7, etc are still Pros in the new releases. But thanks to easier and more ways to learn, more people are climbing and getting better, thus growing the competitive scene and making it, well, more competitive.
the way he said it made it seem like if you got into fighting games in the last 5 years in his head you just can't be a good player which is insane to gatekeep being a pro
It is an undisputed fact that games now are easier. Developers have even come out and stated that they're made easier and to say they're not is denial and cope. Strive added a dash button that allowed you to block from it. Previous GG you HAD to cancel the dash momentum to actively block by using FD, removed air teching to streamline combos, Input buffer and hitstun is extremely lenient, hell baiken yozansen was changed to a quarter circle motion instead of a DP motion to make it easier lmao. This is just one game and i didnt even list everything that was made easier.
I can testify if it weren’t for my local arcade ( Omaha Nebraska ) I wouldn’t have achieved any sort of skill on 3rd Strike, CVS, GG, etc. I used to record our local comps as well and watch them at home. Games are 100% easier all across the board. Not just fighters. I just got SF6 this month after being out the last two SF games and it’s wild how easy it feels to me by comparison of the last time I played. The point you made about people being in it for the money was something I never really thought about until now. I really dislike it. Simply because I love fighting games, as do many of us. Really leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
I think this feeds back into the argument against intentional design. Advanced techniques that were strong rewarded the understanding of the game's mechanics in order to use them to your advantage, but I think today the more accessible mechanics that DON'T require a great understanding of the game are made to be dominant Why are the easy things being made to be good if we have more access than ever to so many resources to improve?
Great point about degrees of difficulty/easiness. Even in traditional sports, there's always at least two things to factor: ease of executing basic fundamentals, and ease of beating your opponent. It doesn't matter how easy the former is if there are so many good opponents. You're going to struggle to win. In fact, making the execution part easier probably makes it harder to emerge victorious over the rest of the field.
It's important for devs to "follow the fun". If players discover something unintended but fun, they should keep it and balance it. If they just keep removing fun things, the whole point of the game is lost. I get not every unintended bug can be balanced, but they should at least think and see why players choose those options and try to fix the issues that come with removing said options.
I find SF 6 has lot of fun stuff to do including universal mechanics that gave me more tools to express my playing style. But i'm just sad to see people got angry and wants Capcom to nerfed Drive Rush to the ground including remove the ability to do fireball > Drive Rush or normal into Drive Rush combos, remove Perfect Parry (Punk is the most vocal player about this), etc etc. Like, why these people wants less tools and options? The game will be dull and boring af with less tools and options in your disposal.
Golden Boy Neo and Matrix had some interesting thoughts on the modern players. They believe that new players are very skilled, but not very precise. They do amazing advanced things you've never seen before... and drop b&b.
I think a big thing skipped over is how much information streamers/numbers guys/social media has allowed people to evolve/improve as well. The same discussion happens about MMOs all the time. Compare the vast majority of Vanilla WoW raid bosses to say Kil'Jaeden. Same thing has happened to fighting games and its community where the general casual level is more skilled than it was in the past because so much information is out there for people to improve their skills.
It’s just that information is more accessible than it’s ever been. Therefor making it easier to get good at them. That said the competition is way higher because of that. So no, it’s as hard as it was.
You're wrong by definition. SF6 has no 1 frame links. 1 frame links are HARDER to do than 3 frame links. It's not debatable. That alone makes the old games harder.
@DoctorDoom84 that's not really making the game harder tho. People just lacked the know . If 3 strike came out now people would say it's easy. Why cause now info I'd more abundant. So the average person would also be more skilled than the average person back then. I hear the argument u making but it don't make sense
@@DoctorDoom84execution isn't what makes fighting games hard, its the competition, and the competition for sf6 is much much much higher than usf4. also yes there are 1 frame links and 2 frame links, you just don't know about them. example is ed. i started with sf2-3 so my nostalgia is here, even then, i know that i got good really really fast at them because i picked them up about 5 years ago. same with sfiv sfv. the info was there and i got better way faster than i wouldve if i needed to play on arcades. knowledge is power bro, the only thing thats harder in sfiv is the links, same with sf3. other than that, sf6 has much more depth and mechanically is harder. its also much more balanced.
@@DoctorDoom84 Once you get 1 frame links down with muscle memory they become just as easy as 3 frame Still yeah 1 frame by definition is harder, but not by a lot, it’s all down to practice
@michaelmayers3622 I'm not talking about the players. I'm talking about the game itself. If 3rd Strike was released today, I'm sure they'll be a ton of great players because of the internet and information resources. 3rd Stike is still a harder game than SF6 based on execution alone.
Really interesting topic and such a great video from Justin. I think one aspect that some people don't think about is that due to the larger pool of players in modern games, there are, in numerical terms, more top players now than before...but if you look at the statistics released by SF6 (as an example, but I imagine if other games released their stats the same would be true there) you can see that the people in Masters are still out on the far right-side of the bell curve. Games today are easier and there are also more people playing but regardless of both of the above the reality is that the majority of players fall in the middle of the bell-curve despite some people making wildly ignorant claims about what being in Masters actually says about your position on the bell curve. Overall it's a really tough topic to tackle because for a lot of people their emotions get rolled up in all this talk of old vs. new. It would be nice if more players dipped their feet in the old game well, there's a lot of fun to be had in older games :-)
It's not a bad thing that there are more good players. The OG players had a tendency of withholding tech. It does suck that all the tech pretty much gets figured out in months, rather than years, but it's great seeing gameplay at the highest level. Aside from that, controls have become much easier. I would have loved to have SF6 or T8 controls back in the day just playing casually. Soul Caliber 2 would have been so much more fun with the knowledge and resources that are available now. I still played the crap out of it with my brothers, it just would have kept us engaged longer. However, strict inputs from the older SF and KOF games are amazing to witness in action and that is something that has been lost in some of the more modern takes on fighting games. Great news for having a lot of strong players, bad news for players with technical talent.
I get the vibe that most old fighting game players thought 'hey this is the game we got, lets make it work and abuse glitches'. Now people go on twitter to complain rather than embracing what they got (like throwloops). Like back then the games were straight up unfair and unbalanced in some ways but they accepted it and dealt w it which is fun & in good spirited imo. Sure beats complaining till a patch comes out.
Talking about old vs new got me thinking about how Disney has had success with capcom in the past marvel as well, now that they're together it would be nice to see capcom make some serious fighters for marvel whether it's a mvc or it's own thing something needs to be made .
I don't think people realized that SF4 had a "tutorial". It's in the game's manual. It has everything from special canceling to FADC. But let's be real here... how many people actually read video game manuals? In addition to being harder, information was just much more finnicky to acquire back then, lol.
Ikr. I still remember a couple of years ago, we got many people including pros and FGC contents creators complained about how niche fighting games is and how small the prize money because TO's / developers has no reasons to put a lot of money for a niche genre. Even Daigo said fighting games is a dying genre. So, the FGC wants more newcomers to join the club and keeps fighting games alive. But now when we got plenty of new players even Vtubers playing fighting games and biggest prize money in the history of fighting games tournament, suddenly the boomers going nuts with their _"old games great, modern games and new players sucks!"_ gatekeeping. SMH 🙄
I believe the REASON there's so much hatred is that their GAMER PRIDE has been HURT. Badly. These are the people who used to be UNTOUCHABLE. Now, with Easier Games, it's EASIER to place 100% of the Blame on the Games, INSTEAD of themselves and their Skills. That they have to WORK HARDER and BE BETTER, most ESPECIALLY since now ALL Players have access to the Same Tools, Data, etc. As you said, you had a Player for SF3 go from Newbie to A Rank, and that's VERY Old School Hard. I would argue that it's 40% in terms of Glitches/Cheat Mechnics/Crutches being removed for Skilled Players, and 60% that EVERYONE has access to Superior Tools, Information, AND Training!!
I was obsessed with the fighting scene since the first day I saw Street Fighter 2 The World Warrior at the arcade. At first I'd dream of being able to do special moves until I learned myself. At that point, all the special moves were pretty unknown to most people except those that plays Street Fighter 1. And then that was only for Ryu/Ken. Then I'd pull back 3 seconds and forward on the joystick and punch to do a sonic boom. It was amazing to first start doing it. Haha. This was in 1991. I'm old as f.
It’s funny because I had mentioned to my brother that the money was going to play a factor in how many people play SF6. I said the same about SF5. If older titles had the kind of prize money these newer titles do then the number of people playing probably would’ve been higher back then. I would love it if a tournament was put together comprised of both modern and older games so we can see who can hang and who can’t.
I'm gonna state facts right now, take it as you will: - old games don't get patched and likely never got significant patches ever, depending on the game in question - the people still playing old games are as a whole playing them at an equal and greater level than when the old game in question was last current - people are sharing tech about old games now, but that does not mean tech was not also shared when the old game in question was current. Fighting games have never predated the internet; quite the opposite in fact, the internet and sharing information has always grown alongside this gaming genre. If you discovered a game you like and wanted bad enough to find information or locate a group to play against IRL or play in a competitive environment (obviously online play wasn't always available), that was always possible even as far back as the early 90s. - there were less people in headcount competing at a high level for old games when they were current (with exceptions - SF2 and several other titles were massively popular worldwide), but that also means that headcount had to be more hardcore and competitive by percentage than how it is now. If you were competing back then, you took it seriously because you had to make the effort to find peers to compete against, develop tech, seek out that information when it was not as easy to find it as it is now. The biggest blessing to me when it comes to current fg scene is seeing newer and younger players embrace these old games, seeing the value of their chosen game(s) and joining an existing and matured scene. The people still playing old games or just now discovering and exploring them, they won't ditch them when the next sequel comes out nor are they worried about the next patch ruining months and years of hard work in trying to solve problems and find solutions. The game is the game and people will want to improve at it exactly as it is, which ironically will impact the meta anyway over time. This is the real beauty of fighting games when you strip everything else away. Competing and excelling in these games will always mean more to me than doing it in newer games for all of the reasons mentioned above.
I think the rise in esports and competitiveness in general is a huge factor as well. Nowadays gaming is taken more seriously by even casuals than what it use to be top it off with it being bigger than it ever was there definitely would be alot more top players if the older games came out today. You see so many games coming out and their whole basis is competitive (valorant apex warzone league even sf5) older game's metas if came out today would evolve twice as fast.
strategy wise old and new games are similar in difficulties. but execution is way harder in old games, broken technique and combos are much harder. however, being able to do hard technique that covers all options like the chun li 3s os doesn't mean you are tactically superior. but not being able to do that technique means in its impossible to complete at a high level in those games.
Relevancy, Accessibility, and Resources are the holy trinity as to why more people are good at new games. Not because they are “easier”, but because they exist in an age where guides/tutorials/tips are at the click of a button and not gatekept because that was a tool used by veterans to stay on top. The FGC is bigger and more accessible than ever, old heads gotta keep that in mind. Edit: This is what I had to say after hearing Ryan Hart in the first clip, not the whole video.
New games are much, much more lenient with inputs. DF, DF, wait some frames, Punch, is a DP in SFV and VI. In SF2 it's get wrecked, put up a new quarter. If you decide to pressure someone's wakeup and they wake up super, you get the screen freeze to realize you need to block if your strike/throw was a frame late. In ST and SFA1/2, you get to eat **** instead because you can't use the screen freeze to hold back. So the newer stuff is generally more forgiving on those fronts.
less tighter input windows, wider hit link windows, baby mode control schemes, older technology/high skill high reward mechanics that heightened the skill ceiling = nerfed/completely patched, the list goes on and on easier game = higher accessibility factor more accessibility = more people can play more people that can play = more purchases of their game more purchases = more money
11:00 - I think that's part of it. It's more about who's playing than the game itself in a lot of cases. SF4 might objectively be a harder game than SF6, but since everybody's moved on, winning a SF4 tourney now doesn't mean as much as it used to. That being said, I think 3S is kind of an exception 'cause a lot of the 3S heads only play 3S and never really moved on to other games. This goes for both the west and Japan. I do think neutral was harder in older games to an extent though. Movement was generally faster/stronger and you had more buttons to work with, since they got rid of proximity normals and made a lot more moves unsafe on block, which limits your options. So I think really basic fundamentals took you further in older games, whereas tech is a lot more important in newer games even if the execution itself is easier sometimes. That being said, neutral is always gonna be the thing that separates the best from the rest in any game. I think that's why someone like Smug was able to adapt quickly to older games because he was always known for having a crazy ground game.
Old games had some tech but most of the strategy and tech you had to come up by putting the time in and experimenting matchups and situations or even finding exploits,glitches and combos that give you an advantage. Nowadays everything is shown to you and you can find kind of the same but more information is accessible now than back then and that is the big difference
The world has changed so much. Young players won't ever really know what it was like at an arcade, bowling alley, skating rink, etc. when you'd be standing shoulder to shoulder with the person you're fighting on controls you didn't have at home. To buy a Super NES or Genesis port of a fighter just to get a close enough approximation of your favorite fighter... and play it with a D-pad that didn't quite prep you for next time with the joystick. To lose money for every try at the cabinet, and to wonder if you might end up in a real fight after. The culture was completely different, as the times would dictate. New fighters are definitely easier. Every now and then I'll pick one up, and it's almost universally easy to blow through an arcade mode on the first try on hardest difficulty. Compared to classic M Bison spamming charge moves without having to charge, staring at Rugal, the secret Akuma fights, or, I don't know, winning more than 3 rounds in Art of Fighting 2 is a different story. I have nephews in their teens and 20s who try getting into new fighters, and even not having played the new much, I crush the kids, even though they play online regularly. Then, I'll get them to play some Real Bout Fatal Fury or Guilty Gear X with me, or something weirder like World Heroes Jet or Savage Reign, and they'll just call it impossible. To their credit, though, they enjoy the games, and are at least curious enough to want to see what's out there. Pretty sure a 4 year old not looking at the screen can beat me at Tekken, though.
Right. tutorials and ease of information exchange makes a huge difference. That makes sense. I love fighting games. But they are all difficult for me lolol. Old and new alike.
In Street fighter IV the gap between pro players and me felt completely insurmountable. Now it feels more like a measure of knowledge and catching people on the right day. I can play blaze blue for 3 hours against my friend Ray and pick up one match. In Street fighter 6 though I'm taking way more even against a higher ranked player than my BB friend
maybe the inputs had to be more precise as well as the frames to put together a combo the difficulty curve is what has been reduced from being a beginner to being a decent player It's what has become easier over time.
If new game is so much easier than old game then why doesnt the old player (whos better because they played old game) win all the time. If the game is easier that means its easier for both sides, so all these god gamers shouldnt ever lose. Really, its just salt flowing.
Old players have a better sense of timing without relying as much into frame data. There isnt as much incentive to explore outside of the meta nowadays.
Mmm…. I’ve really only played SF6 (of the new games, like SFV, T7/T8, Strive), and I think the ubiquity of Parry in SF6 is part proof that FGs have become more accessible than older games. It’s a strong defensive mechanic that older games would either require more skill / risk to utilize, or it would be character-based. Making Parry-for-All as a major selling point means one of the coolest-albeit-difficult / risky-execution mechanics from Third Strike (the EVO 37 machine) is now something we all can do without much risk, which pulls in players of varying skill levels, as well as varying commitment levels. Still, I sat in on GO1 going 40-0 in the SF6 Battle Hub, taking on any and all challengers, so it’s not like just anyone could beat him; there are just more options for more players to enjoy the game, especially now that Online play is ubiquitous as well.
Hey Schala, it's Aph! Fancy meeting you here. I think it's interesting how they went about parry, because as you said, it's much easier and more accessible than before, but it also has the risk of being thrown of course. More than that, though, Perfect Parry is actually a much smaller window than 3rd Strike parry. At a glance, that might make it seem way harder, but in SF6 you only parry 1 thing and then counter; in 3S you could parry a whole super hit-by-hit, etc. Overall, though, there are more options and the general execution level is easier, while access to information is at an all-time high. Also, it must have been awesome watching G01 dominate in BH!
@@ryo-kai8587 Oh! Aph! I’d wondered if I’d run into one of my Hub friends on the ‘tubes someday, you’re the first! Hellloooo! 😁 All great points! I remember when SF6 info was first coming out, Maximilian Dood also pointed out that, while SF6 has mechanics and modes to bring in new players / non-FG gamers, the Perfect Parry is still a 3-frame mechanic, so there’s enough depth to keep all players of any level engaged. Oh! And yes, I ran into that GO1 cab in one of the Asia servers, it was so awesome to watch! He seemed to have an answer for any matchup, I loved watching his Chun play ❤
I will say this: It's a lot easier to get into newer fighting games. In particular, to be able to practice against the AI. Old fighting games, especially arcade fighting games, are designed to beat you up in the parking lot and steal your lunch money. You don't learn how to play MK2, for example, playing against the AI. You learn how to exploit the AI. But that doesn't necessarily translate to playing against another person. Not being able to practice a game means you're not able to get into it. Newer games have plenty of ways of letting you practice, and the AI is closer to (though, obviously, nothing really like) a real player. Less cheap. So you can get an actual feel for your character in combat.
Imagine: A show that follows the journey of new top players and old top players practicing/learning 1 game from the others’ respective era for like 6-12 months…then they have a tournament. Team style
I think like the main benefit I've gained is the ability to adapt on the fly quickly, since a lot of old games the training mode is just getting knowledge checked/cheesed over and over until you learn it lol. The movement shortcuts have definitely lowered the required skill floor though - depending on the game this is a plus. Accessibility shortcuts are a different bag but generally fine too, people that don't need it that abuse it I see as a potential issue. I feel it removes nuance in gameplay and that leads to it feeling less fun to play (and watch) over time.
lol, talking about old games reminds me of SF2 when we used to go down to 7/11, and wait to play putting our quarters on the rail of the machine. I then got glue stick aka Handcuff Glitch during a fight, and the guy did not know how to break it, and they had to restart the machine....
One thing I can think of is devs showing off their game Showing off the mechanics and going in-depth with it, basically handing us all the info we need instead of us just figuring it out ourselves
there is also one very important issue people seem to forget , back in the day people grew up in the arcade when the newer generation has consoles or a pc to play at home at all times , that makes the games way more accessible to younger ages and believe me when i grew up playing compare to a younger player now , it's day night comparison younger people are insanely good in video games, but ,that doesn't mean at the same time that the games didn't become easier. There are just too many variables to take into consideration.
I think one of the biggest things that people are missing from this discussion is the application of the training room. Older games didn't have that and so I find that if you can sit in the lab for hours at a time and practice specific scenarios with a robot, it's easy to see why there are a lot of new players that are all excellent
Back in the day it was impossible to practice. As a entry level player I would pull up to a hopefully empty machine, get 2-3 easy wins against the computer trying to learn moves, then either the machine or someone better would wipe you then there goes your quarter.
It'd be great to see a prize money tourney for new FGC players playing 3rd Strike. Give em all 4 weeks notice with the game and then run a bracket. (obvs nobody can learn a game like 3rd Strike in that time, but it'd be fun to see what new players can figure out).
My "friends" would invite me to parties all the time but when it came to tournaments I only heard whispers or winning 1st or 2nd in out of town events.
I started playing Fighting Games in the 90s. I don't know how anyone can even debate if they easier. They are, but I'm glad because I'm old lol. I can still pull off Purple Rank in Tekken 8 ttttttthankkkkkkkkkksss to all the helppp.
I think you hit the nail on the head in saying new games aren't necessarily easier to win, but they're easier to pick up. Conscious effort has been put towards making the skill floor lower, input buffers, simplified specials, more generous motion inputs and so forth all work to make the games easier to pick up. The provlems come when people want to just say "new games are easier now" as a way to discredit the accomplishments of people that only play newer games. An old school arcade pro should be able to pick up sf6 pretty easily because the game is designed for anyone to get in on and the community is young, people are still actively discovering tech, developing matchup knowledge, finding situational combos and all that. Someone who started in recent years is going to have a much harder time getting into 3rd strike because the game doesnt really have anything to help people learn. Learning the game in current year means sifting through literal decades of collective knowledge and then actively seeking out players who are also learning or are just willing to spar with you. Fightcade is a huge game changer in that regard, but its yet another barrier to entry for truely getting good at old fighters. All in all, modern fighters are definitely easier, but its important to have conversations about precisely HOW they're easier to stamp out the elitist perspective that modern pros are somehow less capable, or that winning majors is somehow less of an accomplishment because a modern zangief in silver can spd your drive rush on reaction
For the major part yes, some of the Modern game became more easier to new players, and the majority of old FG are much harder without having knowledge legacy or be a full Retro FG player.
This is also true with CS with players like Monesy and Donk who are very young compared to their peers and are well renowned players. Counter-Strike has been fundamentally the same since 1.6.
32 year old gamer who’s been playing FG since MK on genesis. My opinion most casuals didn’t know how to actually play the game back then we just played for fun now with the growth of the FGC and more info im getting decent at SF and Tekken for the 1st time ever.
More in depth training modes, the ability to play people online whenever you want, ability to TH-cam combos and guides, watching pro players all contribute to me being better now than ever. The info was much harder to find back in the day so less people were getting good.
Yes I’m 36 years old and back then there wasn’t much info on the older games today it’s so much info now and the competition is much harder but I feel like it’s just too easy for everybody
I mean, let's not pretend that those games aren't hard as hell to pick up even going back with a modern mindset, tools, and knowledge. Stuff like Street Fighter 2 was created before the idea of balance, which offsets a lot of things. Like, people absolutely cannot deal with Super Turbo Vega. Like the mechanics of the game are simpler, but that just makes what characters can do all the more oppressive.
True. I'm a 39 years old gamer who's been playing fighting games since '91 / or SF II at arcade. Back then, my only 'sparring partner' was my childhood friend and his brother who loves playing video games in general. But they always have some obsession to experiment combos in MK 3 and DBZ Sega Genesis. We're playing for hours after we got home from school and some time we played at local arcade too. But we only played for fun and there's no talk like we want to be competitive or win a tourney. Heck, i don't think we even have local tourney back then...
Same pretty much, mid 30s, sf2sce was my first fg on mega drive, been casually playing fgs most of my life it's only been since getting on fightcade a few years ago that I'm finally actually learning how to play these games. I hate that if took over 25 years for me to realise how deep fgs really are, but same time, better late than never!
On top of that fighting games nowadays are much more accessible in terms of execution and fundamentals. Inputs are much more lenient and the mechanics of most games practically force you to play aggressively so you don't gotta worry about unothordox playstyles.
I can testify that no matter what, old or new, I'm going to suck at them, but all that matters is how much fun I'm having.
Great comment!
Me irl
This. In the end we play fighting games mainly because we want to have fun.
Hear hear! 🎉 👏
Ma man!
I respect the hell out of Justin for playing anything in the genre, and for recognizing the quality of Melee and MKX.
One is a party game and one is Melee
One of the biggest advantages to gameplay now is accessibility and knowledge. There are millions more potential players now vs. back in the early 2000s and there are a lot of ways to better understand (and manipulate) gameplay now. We had the arcade and GameFAQs and Shoryuken, that's it. I still remember when MvC2 came out in 1999 at my local arcade in NC (lol). It always had a massive queue to play (at least 20-30 ppl deep to play) but no one really would last beyond 4-5 matches. That was until someone came in from the local college that happened to be from NYC. He chose Cable, Magneto and Colossus. Dude won every match (30+) until the arcade shut down for the night. It was the first time we had seen someone do HVBx3, guard break, Magneto's Magneto Tempest x 3 and actually connecting Colossus' super within a combo for +60% dmg - it was literally nuts. We had never even seen that high level gameplay before and the game had been out (in the arcade) for almost a year at that point, but because we didn't have online play and guides (accessibility and knowledge), we couldn't come close to competing. It's not like that now....and I love that as an old timer!
I remember before we had internet going down to the local library and we'd look through the Nintendo Powers to try to find any tips for games we'd play (that's how desperate we were). We would bring a pad and pen to write anything useful down. Not much of an arcade scene where I was at, so it was usually sleepovers where we could play others in fighting games.
Compare that to today where there is a wiki and guides at your fingertips, the games for free to play on fightcade against people all over the world with roll back netcode, and legit arcade sticks you can buy to play on instead of a SNES controller. The only thing we've lost is the social interaction, but I suppose that is a much larger problem effecting most aspects of society.
Exactly. I was a VF player in the mid-late 90’s in NY, playing at 51st street, 49th street, Le Cue down on 12th street. We’d be hitting up Asahiya bookstore to look for new issues of Gamest or Mooks…. Scouring for any information. Now w T8, you have hour long specific matchup guides, more combo videos than I have time to watch, all the features in the game
And not to mention, back then, it was 50 cents to have your ass handed to you in under a minute. When VF3 first came to 51st street, it was a dollar to continue! So many people just didn’t have 5, 10, 20 bucks to spend in a day at the arcade. Part of the reason scenes were so much smaller: without some amount of disposable income, no way you could even play. And when you did, you got on a broken stick w some prick next to you who was gonna exploit every knowledge check he could to stay on & not have to spend $ himself
the "accessibility / knowledge" thing is only true to a point. A lot of today's fighting games (T8, SF6 for example) artificially create situations where the player on defense has to guess. Before, putting your opponent in 50/50s or situations where there were layers was a skill. Now in SF6 or T8 you block a simple button and you're forced to guess right away. I understand the newer generation of the new fighting games feels attacked when their skill levels are somewhat being "attacked" but the proof is in the pudding. There's a lot of Rock, Paper, Scissors being played now and i think what's really happening is the older generation doesn't really care about "everybody being good" but that a lot of the fun was the grind to that high level of play and now that climb isn't so high.
the guy you described....as an nyc native myself, i've seen that many times lol.
I wish there were more of a middle ground. For example, I can watch, study, read about MVC2 but that doesn't amount to much. I could never do things that a player like Sanford Kelly could do in that game, so his talent provides him with advantages. Or a 3S player like Hayao I could never do what he can do in lifetime.
The only modern game I've played is SF6 and there's nothing I can't do with an hour of practice.
It's a different skill set to be a top player in that game, not very entertaining to me.
@@Yoloslides You say putting your opponent in a 50/50 back had layers of skill involved. What does that actually mean? The way I'm understanding it currently is that there were many factors that could lead to a 50/50, but it's possible your opponent wasn't aware of it. They weren't aware of it because of a lack of accessibility to knowledge or there were so many factors that their mental stack was overloaded. Today, it's easier to recognize the 50/50 because the game is simpler; therefore, less factors and less things to put on your mental stack. But, again, where is the skill that's being developed here? Either I'm aware of the 50/50 scenario or I'm not, and today I'm more likely to be aware due to the accessibility of knowledge. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, accessibility to that knowledge was paramount in distinguishing good players and not as good players.
Not attacking you, just trying to understand what skill is being developed here, and what made the grind so hard besides just being aware of new scenarios dictated by the spread of knowledge.
Justin has my favorite take so far. Hit the nail on the head in separating that newer games are easier by design to the point that anything confusing or advanced tends to get patched out nowadays. But to be a top player in newer versus older games is a different question, and personally i think that newer games are harder to be a consistent performing top player. If a game is designed to be easier, then that ease of play will apply to literally everyone, novice or pro. And the number of attendees in notable tournament events have increased by a factor of 10 to even 50 fold for some games between the mid 90s and today. So even if a game is easier to learn, it doesnt matter when you have to deal with a much larger number of strong players due to information sharing and access to competition making the development process a bit easier. Doesn't mean that information alone makes those older games any easier to execute though...that is still objectively tougher. But the number of strong players in FGs now exist far beyond just the old handful of hubs like Chinatown Fair or SHGL, or beyond just Japan for Intl.
My one hot take though is that there are numerous players on both sides of the argument that put a lot of their sense of value and pride as a person into their gaming skill and accomplishments, so they take these debates as personal attacks. A person isnt extra special because they are stronger at ST compared to SF6, and vice versa. One might make more money or garner more attention, but that's it. Superficial reasons. It's still just a fun hobby for the majority.
I went from Modern SF6 to learning 3rd strike, it can be done. The basics of spacing and normal selections always carry over
I'm currently doing that with street fighter 4 lol I'm just trying to get advanced with combos
Street fighter has had same gameplay only upgrading the graphics
@@antoniorolle6577Sf3 is so much more free form. I get that some things carry over but it's way more than just a graphics update
I'm an old school Tekken player and have sort of just observed how different FGs have developed, I think what I see these days is that what gave the old games depth (and conversely, became the difficult things for casuals to overcome) were kind of removed/nerfed and then more systems have been added. Fundies will typically take longer to develop depending on the game because of the amount of bloat.
For example:
- TTT1: no frills, just spacing and movement, move lists weren't as big as now either, but movement and spacing take a LONG time to get good at
- T5DR: walls were added, move lists started getting bigger, still a large emphasis on movement and spacing. The meta was still spacing and movement
- T6 and TTT2: walls got stronger, rage, homing moves, bound and wall/floor break added, combos became huge, movement and spacing got nerfed compared to older games, movement became difficult. TTT2 had ludicrous risk/reward for using launching and going for the biggest combo possible. Meta shifted towards comboing
- T7: all movement nerfed yet again, throws nerfed, power crush, rage arts/drive added, move lists got bigger, huge amount of chars (traditionally system breaking chars added too mind you, ie: Akuma, Geese), bound replaced with tailspin (everyone gets better wall carry). Meta shifted toward timing and "better buttons" than your opponent.
- T8 (so far): backdash nerfed, sidestep buffed, rage drive removed, inputs made simpler, special style added, chip damage added, heat system added (changes the meta severely), throws slightly buffed. Meta currently is about locking opponent down with heat.
Key things that gave older fighting games their identity/uniqueness were removed/nerfed and then new things were added to make them convoluted/bloated. This has meant that landing damage and winning/making comebacks has become easier. I think one of the key telling things in the past (at least for Tekken) was that in newer games, you kind of need a FT5 or even FT10 to determine who's a better player. In the older games you could already tell if you beat them, maaaaaybe a FT3/FT5 was needed if things were very close.
Watching great players of older games consistently respond to the litany of complex situations that exist and/or execute difficult sequences is thrilling, and makes me appreciative of their mastery of the game.
Watching the top players of modern games impresses me for how they somehow stand out amidst extremely dense competition and for the way they contribute to rapidly developing metagames.
I hope people can spend more energy appreciating the stuff all these competitors bring to the table (and that they can spend that energy just enjoying fighting games lol).
What Justin said about back in the arcade days you were limited until you met a guy that would at times challenge you with the same character just to gage your skill level and crush you with the same character forcing you to learn something new and that's how you grew as a player
The barrier of entry for a game like MVC2 is extremely high and the ceiling is even higher. And Justin is the GOAT.
It's called practice especially for older games
@@bloodeagle6458he's not talking about practice, he's talking about barrier of entry which means how difficult is it to pick up and play. A game like dive kick has low barrier of entry. Whereas mvc2 or tekken tag 2 would be considered high barrier of entry.
@@BilalKhan-ng3ex in new or old just put in the time even in as simple as dive kick
Look at LT in the UMVC3 scene tearing it up with a high barrier of entry.
@@Duldinga UMVC3 is way easier than mvc2 tho. Stuff like unrollable 2 seconds hard knockdowns and x factor levels the field quite a lot.
I really love the insight you bring into the conversation, with you being considered as a very techinical player and having a high understanding of universal fg knowledge that translates through the generations. Really good stuff!
My opinion is this:
(most) Newer Fighting games are easier to play, but the competition in every fighting game has become more difficult.
Side point: I think it needs to be said that just because games are easier, doesn't mean the game is better. Too many other variables in the mix.
Yup, some of these very variables used ot make the game casual appealing, are now used as an extensively central nexus for competitive players to knowledge check and subtly pick up on and abuse information, that is otherwise beyond initial surface level comprehension.
If you think there isn't a factor that isn't abused in competitive play, then you just aren't playing at a high level enough. And modern games always need to innovate and add something new... Game designers idea of balance or mass broad casual appeal is to add new mechanics and overhead - and you know what that means, MORE complexity!
Capcom should announce a 1M Hyper fighting tournament so we can put these theories to the test.
Games are def easier now but it's wild how folks assume they're easier to the point where people are winning "easier" which isn't the case
Also the fact that people seem to forget that most of the complexity in older fighting games are *unintentional*
That discussion in the beginning that pretty much said SF6 players can't handle SF3. The games may be in the same series but they're so different that you can barely compare them. It's the equivalent of saying "You can beat me in Fortnight, but try and beat me at CS 1.5 at LAN! ", the games may have some elements they share but they're so different that they're barely comparable.
I feel like modern fighting games are just as complex as they've always been, sometimes they feel a lot more complex than older games when they add a bunch of new mechanics. Like in SF6.
The reason why so many are so good these days are not because games are simpler, it's because devs gotten a lot better at explaining the game to players, we have much better online multiplayer now than ever so people can fight countless more opponents, also players can with relative ease find any info about any game at any time.
What we have now is info and the ability to learn things a lot easier than ever. If a player today decides to get good at SF3, they'll most likely will have a much easier time to learn all the important things than people did when the game was new.
Heck, in the X360/PS3 version of SF3 they had a bunch of parry trials and they literally taught you how to do the Daigo Parry! Just in case you encountered Justin online :P
Agreed with you Mr. Wong!
We do have that conversation somehow often,specially when we are from the old players.
It's just how you said(I think) somewhere in the video that if we compare the first version of a new fighting game with the first version of a old fighting game the old one would be a better overall construction to keep you hyped at.
Otherwise people get emotional with those things 'cause everybody want's to be the best!
The arrogance of the younger pros is what blows my mind away, but soon enough they will be "old" and experiencing the same treatment they dish out to the older guys.
I remember sf2, street fighter vs xmen, third strike, cvs2, mvc2, then eventually the online era sf4, mvc3, sf x tekken, i skipped sf5 but play sf6.
After I got some online experience initially through sf4 and was able to watch replays of top players my skill sky rocketed, the 10-15 years prior to that I was totally trash, never played anyone outside of my hometown on fighting games.
Age is catching up to me now, I don't feel the need to play competitively online anymore, I do enjoy watching the best players go at it though, I just wish there was respect paid to each era of fighting games, and competitive gaming in general tbh.
There's something more fun about the old ones I can't put my finger on. I played CvS2 (fightcade) for the first time about a year ago and I was addicted to it, nothing like that happens for the new ones and I'm definitely not a tourny player.
Granblue is the only modern game I like as someone who put over $2K in quarters between KoF'98, Vampire Savior and CvS2 back in the day.
For me, a big part of cvs2 appeal is just the huge breadth of characters and how the grooves let you play them all a bit differently. And when you aren't playing in a tourney and focused on top tiers, it makes the playing experience really varied and enjoyable. Mvc2 is extremely similar in that way too, just swapping team composition in place of grooves for that variety.
Execution on SF4 was hella hard
I spent the half of sunday trying to get Elf Run Stop Fierce down. ooof 1f link
Focus canceling is a bitch lol
Compared to 5 and 6 maybe. Not compared to something like CVS2 or 2K2, or countless other games that came before it.
it's called the internet. speed of information is faster than word of mouth. 🤯
“The scene is growing. Be happy,” is the best, healthiest take about of all this.
I’ve gotten exhausted with the constant doomsaying peddled online, because it gets clicks and attention. It’s nice to hear someone take the time to really think about a topic, and still land on a positive outlook of, “this is fine, chill out, have fun.”
Just to come in as an old head who was around for the OG SF and the hype that was SF2 then watchin it all unfold up till today....players are gonna get good according to the options they're given (in game), the competition around them, and access to sources of info. There's more good players now because there is more of those 3 things. Doesn;t make em better or worse than OGs. Everyone gets older and reactions fade or interests wane, etc. If X person can beat X person in their prime for 2 different eras is a debate that's forever in any competition of human history. Straight up. Only thing I can personally do, like Justin does, is spread awareness of our prime time periods. Because we do love to see newer generations pick up the older stuff. Just as I'm sure the younger gets a kick out of it when we try that new new too. That's what potential makes the FGC like family despite any squabbles.
They're easier to play, but harder to win at, because now EVERYONE can do what used to be an obtuse combo/punish.
Of course is harder to win for all the bad reasons behind this.
Risk reward factor is broken , input buffer is bigger now
making tight combos a thing of the past.To pull those 1frame link combo at the heat of the moment was something that need it strong mental resources.
50/50 game is a crucial part in sf5 and sf6 throw loops etc.
zoning what is that , footsies a thing of the past.
randomness is the vital part in this game with that way you can have casual players feel that they pull something special. Playing sf5 and sf6 feels like those games are the older ones, the archaic fighting system make those supposed new gen fighters boring and repetitive , if there where not for the big prize pools those games will have been left in the dust from all those pro players.
Idk, all i know is that its getting tiring that everytime i open TH-cam, a “omg Tekken 8 is scrubby and sf6 killed neutral” video pops up even if i avoid clicking on the vast majority of them. I’m 30 and i see mostly people around my age zerging out because their glory days in Tekken 6 or 3rd strike is gone and they refuse to adapt to new mechanics that simply make games more fun than they were before and want them removed out of pure nostalgia. Meanwhile fighting games are on a level of popularity that was never seen before
Preach!
It's cause they want to be "special". It's like doods, shut up and fight lol. It's a fighting game for fukk's sake. 🔵✨💨
Yeah, I've played many SF games, and for the longest time I thought 3rd Strike would always be my favorite.
Now, I love SF6 and I think I can actually say I like it the most, despite the nostalgia of past games. It's also the game I've put the most effort into and gotten the best at.
Nah, the 3S equivalent of Tekken is always T5 and T5DR while T6 is like SF4, people miss them yet none of those people actually love them
The best thing about playing the old games at the arcades was being the kid to beat. Making that quarter last an hour or more was a great achievement.
If there's a group of people that were that kid in the arcade, they're probably the ones watching JWong on YT. So I'd bet lots of us were that arcade stomper @NoName-cn3cp
@@NoName-cn3cp It sounds like you lost a lot of quarters back in the day. 😄
@@NoName-cn3cp 🤣🤣🤣
That takes me back, yeah. Not a lot of FG heads in the area back in the day, so I could make that quarter last for at least 30 minutes to an hour on CVS2 or MVC2.
Ime 39. I think it was 2 quarters. Two tokens. Cnt remember. Some guy had a crippled like cerebral palsy hand and could do all kings chain throws. And that thing where he rolls you around on the ground in tekken 3. It was amazing.
Back in my days, there are only limited SF2 machines in arcade, and kids will occupy/ claim it by doing all sort of dirty play against anyone who dare to challenge their machine, that include tick throw loop and Guile invisible grab. Getting good is very difficult cos you don't get to play.
I've been hearing this conversation of 'you're only good cause the game lets you be' for awhile now and sitting down and thinking about it... Why is that a problem?
More good players means more good matches and its more fun. The only downside I can see or assume is more along the lines of Pro players hating their scene being more crowded, but as a bystander, I just wanna see more good matches.
I dunno man, I feel like people are complaining too much about things and just need to play more and enjoy it.
Well, hypothetically, Capcom could just announce a grand tournament in December 2025, featuring every Street Fighter series from 2 onwards. They could set equal prize money for each game, aiming to determine both the most beloved Street Fighter game and the one players feel most confident in winning.
its easier today to get good at these harder games. its not the paradox it sounds like.
At least from an execution standpoint games gave certainly gotten easier.
Inputs are considerebly more forgiving than older games. I tried playing 3rd strike recently and i could not get supers to come out consistently, which is a skill issue but the inputs have undeniably become more forgiving
I think the last video you posted where competitors at TNS played Footsies showed that newer players lack basic fundamentals and want to skip neutral and heavily rely on input leniency and system mechanics and frame data. Games are easier now, and ease of information have made it so players have a better understanding of newer games. Unintended glitches have been patched out, which probably would've happened back in the day too if the games were updated after release.
But to say newer games and newer players are outright better is crazy. The oldheads have been forged through trials these new age players will never even begin to hope to understand. Sometimes, just getting a quarter to go run a set was an ordeal. Much less getting good at the game when there's no practice mode or home version.
I grew up in the 90s. I know how yo play old Street Fighter games so newer ones are a piece of cake for me. And personally the older games have more charm & more content than most of todays fighting games
I think one issue if you had a modern player play an old game to prove a point, is that they'd be playing old players with a lot more time in that game. I think the only fair test would be take 2 players, one old one new, put them into 2 games, one old one new, that neither of them play; and even then whatever the result is speaks more to those 2 player's ability than the old school players or new school players abilty as a whole.
Even then, even if they magically had the same innate skill level the person playing the new game will be playing against a lot of new people too, with an abundance of resources on which to learn the new game and the person playing the old game would not have that luxury and would need information from who knows what corner of the internet. Some of the older games do have good modernized resources, but many don't.
pero ahora los juegos no son tan exigentes. los inputs son muy flexibles . un intento de media U para un hadoken y ya te sale. un chiste.
What are you even testing?
I just got into fighting games off the back of SF6 and fgc TH-cam. I’ve started been playing Hyper fighting and I can barely beat some level 3 cpus in that game. They’re hard as hell for a newbie like me but I love the older games and I’ll keep playing them till get better.
This is the realest take I've seen regarding the debate. I liked that fighting games are easier to play, that unfair and unintended tech like option selects are actively removed. What I generally dislike on any game is when they make the game play for you, to the point that you don't have to put the time and effort to be good at it.
I got to C rank in say 200 hours or so on fightcade in third strike. I think if you have the will to learn you will always naturally get better. Fighting games are really a big learning process I remember when I discoverd just from getting my ass kicked oh you can standing heavy kick with ryu to stop jump ins you dont have to do the whole shoryu every time and its safer, oh if I just watch carefully I can tell the difference between an empty jump and if their pushing buttons and just throw them when they land. All those things come from accesibility and getting to play so many players. You learn through losing. Now I can perfect people my oki's really good and people cant even get out of the corner sometime. I remember I didn't even know what corner pressure was! I get what Ryan's saying but its not just that some games are easier more players want to get better and have the tools to get better. Like for example I've watched hours of Kuni destroying people in Third strike just subconciously being able to watch great players like that and study things they do, that will soak into your game. Just watching Justin play seeing his neutral and his play helps subconciously too even if your just watching for enjoyment. I bet if Ryan Hart enters Third strike at Evo he would run into a lot of newer Third strike players that are really good, you see alot of them on the Jazzy circuit.
In the modern age the floor is lower but there's still gimmicks, and match ups change every other month with updates.
In the classic age the ceiling was shallower but you had to go thirteen rounds with the cabinet figuring each machine's kinks before even throwing a fireball, if you even knew how to throw a fireball.
True hell was the FGC dark age and early on SFIV's run. Controllers and input interpreters were still crap, and there was a deluge of hidden tech, gimmicks and esoteric systems. First you had to break your fingers to play the game, and know the opponent's zodiac sign and what phase the moon was on, then you could worry about twenty different OSes for that particular match up. It was the worst of both words, the middle ground of piss and shit, the diarrhea age.
Your stuff is always fresh and fire and the same time.
Thanks for your content!
I play 3rd strike for a long time , i also play sf6 , from an execution standpoint sf6 has much more input leniency, so much so that i often get a srk or super when trying to do hadouken or srk fast , now in terms of actual gameplay , i think that sf6 has a MUCH higher skill ceiling than 3rd strike , there's so many things to look out for it's incomparable . I think sf6 is a much more difficult game to master than 3rd strike ever was . I'm good at both games , rank a on fightcade in 3rd strike , and master rank in sf6 .
If no one tells you SF3's bonkers option selects you are not going to find them on your own. So what is "hard"?
Completely agree, people pretend like third strike is hard mechanically while it literally is only that for like 3-4 combos that get used. E.g. makoto TOD, Urien aegis setups, Oro unblockable is what I can think of.
Most of third strikes "optimal" combos were just cr.mp/cr.mk hit confirmed into super into a vortex of strike throw. Nothing really changed.
People act like characters weren't cheap/ didn't make you guess back then.
The mental stack on sf6 is way heavier. B rank third stike player.
Finally someone gets it. But apparently most people are still on the "back in my day, see me on sf1" copium about why they get clapped in 6.
I think the main controversy with Ryan Hearts take was he didnt mean it in the sense of random people playing the game have an easier time learning. He was talking about there being way more good players than there used to be, which is true but arguing its because the games are easier is absolutely not true. The current top players would still be the top players even if 3rd strike or SF2 were the current games.
Only thing that got easier was execution. Fighting games are still hard and competitive.
I agree with what you said
@@weaponx8263 i dont think it was only execution though. the mind stack is still ridiculously large not to mention setups. for instance, akuma in sf4, every sweep could result in high low mix-ups from both sides or even if you did guess the correct side you could get hit by another option select. newer games have fewer offensive and defensive options hence if your character is good at throw loops, its probably already a s-tier character
@cloudstr Hmm... you're making sense. I think newer fighting games have more offensive options though but less defensive options. An obvious example is sf6
It's because people are taking this conversation the wrong way. They just throw "Its easier" and thus people assume the games are that, easy and everyone can be a Pro. The reality is that the conversation is a bit more complex than that. The Skill Floor has been lowered by making the game more accessible to players, both new and old by making them less execution heavy and providing much more info and better tools built into the game to help players. The Skill Ceiling, however, is still as high as it has ever been. To be good and even more, to become a Pro you still need to devote, hundreds, thousands of hours to improve, just like before. The Pro players that were Pros in SF5, SF4, Tekken 6, Tekken 7, etc are still Pros in the new releases. But thanks to easier and more ways to learn, more people are climbing and getting better, thus growing the competitive scene and making it, well, more competitive.
the way he said it made it seem like if you got into fighting games in the last 5 years in his head you just can't be a good player which is insane to gatekeep being a pro
It is an undisputed fact that games now are easier. Developers have even come out and stated that they're made easier and to say they're not is denial and cope. Strive added a dash button that allowed you to block from it. Previous GG you HAD to cancel the dash momentum to actively block by using FD, removed air teching to streamline combos, Input buffer and hitstun is extremely lenient, hell baiken yozansen was changed to a quarter circle motion instead of a DP motion to make it easier lmao. This is just one game and i didnt even list everything that was made easier.
I can testify if it weren’t for my local arcade ( Omaha Nebraska ) I wouldn’t have achieved any sort of skill on 3rd Strike, CVS, GG, etc. I used to record our local comps as well and watch them at home.
Games are 100% easier all across the board. Not just fighters. I just got SF6 this month after being out the last two SF games and it’s wild how easy it feels to me by comparison of the last time I played.
The point you made about people being in it for the money was something I never really thought about until now. I really dislike it. Simply because I love fighting games, as do many of us. Really leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
I think this feeds back into the argument against intentional design. Advanced techniques that were strong rewarded the understanding of the game's mechanics in order to use them to your advantage, but I think today the more accessible mechanics that DON'T require a great understanding of the game are made to be dominant
Why are the easy things being made to be good if we have more access than ever to so many resources to improve?
One old fighting game named Capcom vs SNK 2 is a legendary old classic that holds up better than most of today's fighting games
Great point about degrees of difficulty/easiness. Even in traditional sports, there's always at least two things to factor: ease of executing basic fundamentals, and ease of beating your opponent. It doesn't matter how easy the former is if there are so many good opponents. You're going to struggle to win. In fact, making the execution part easier probably makes it harder to emerge victorious over the rest of the field.
It's important for devs to "follow the fun". If players discover something unintended but fun, they should keep it and balance it. If they just keep removing fun things, the whole point of the game is lost. I get not every unintended bug can be balanced, but they should at least think and see why players choose those options and try to fix the issues that come with removing said options.
I find SF 6 has lot of fun stuff to do including universal mechanics that gave me more tools to express my playing style. But i'm just sad to see people got angry and wants Capcom to nerfed Drive Rush to the ground including remove the ability to do fireball > Drive Rush or normal into Drive Rush combos, remove Perfect Parry (Punk is the most vocal player about this), etc etc. Like, why these people wants less tools and options? The game will be dull and boring af with less tools and options in your disposal.
Golden Boy Neo and Matrix had some interesting thoughts on the modern players. They believe that new players are very skilled, but not very precise. They do amazing advanced things you've never seen before... and drop b&b.
I think a big thing skipped over is how much information streamers/numbers guys/social media has allowed people to evolve/improve as well. The same discussion happens about MMOs all the time. Compare the vast majority of Vanilla WoW raid bosses to say Kil'Jaeden. Same thing has happened to fighting games and its community where the general casual level is more skilled than it was in the past because so much information is out there for people to improve their skills.
It’s just that information is more accessible than it’s ever been. Therefor making it easier to get good at them.
That said the competition is way higher because of that. So no, it’s as hard as it was.
You're wrong by definition. SF6 has no 1 frame links. 1 frame links are HARDER to do than 3 frame links. It's not debatable. That alone makes the old games harder.
@DoctorDoom84 that's not really making the game harder tho. People just lacked the know . If 3 strike came out now people would say it's easy. Why cause now info I'd more abundant. So the average person would also be more skilled than the average person back then. I hear the argument u making but it don't make sense
@@DoctorDoom84execution isn't what makes fighting games hard, its the competition, and the competition for sf6 is much much much higher than usf4. also yes there are 1 frame links and 2 frame links, you just don't know about them. example is ed. i started with sf2-3 so my nostalgia is here, even then, i know that i got good really really fast at them because i picked them up about 5 years ago. same with sfiv sfv. the info was there and i got better way faster than i wouldve if i needed to play on arcades. knowledge is power bro, the only thing thats harder in sfiv is the links, same with sf3. other than that, sf6 has much more depth and mechanically is harder. its also much more balanced.
@@DoctorDoom84
Once you get 1 frame links down with muscle memory they become just as easy as 3 frame
Still yeah 1 frame by definition is harder, but not by a lot, it’s all down to practice
@michaelmayers3622 I'm not talking about the players. I'm talking about the game itself. If 3rd Strike was released today, I'm sure they'll be a ton of great players because of the internet and information resources. 3rd Stike is still a harder game than SF6 based on execution alone.
I think this might be my favorite video of yours so far
Really interesting topic and such a great video from Justin.
I think one aspect that some people don't think about is that due to the larger pool of players in modern games, there are, in numerical terms, more top players now than before...but if you look at the statistics released by SF6 (as an example, but I imagine if other games released their stats the same would be true there) you can see that the people in Masters are still out on the far right-side of the bell curve.
Games today are easier and there are also more people playing but regardless of both of the above the reality is that the majority of players fall in the middle of the bell-curve despite some people making wildly ignorant claims about what being in Masters actually says about your position on the bell curve.
Overall it's a really tough topic to tackle because for a lot of people their emotions get rolled up in all this talk of old vs. new.
It would be nice if more players dipped their feet in the old game well, there's a lot of fun to be had in older games :-)
It's not a bad thing that there are more good players. The OG players had a tendency of withholding tech. It does suck that all the tech pretty much gets figured out in months, rather than years, but it's great seeing gameplay at the highest level.
Aside from that, controls have become much easier. I would have loved to have SF6 or T8 controls back in the day just playing casually. Soul Caliber 2 would have been so much more fun with the knowledge and resources that are available now. I still played the crap out of it with my brothers, it just would have kept us engaged longer. However, strict inputs from the older SF and KOF games are amazing to witness in action and that is something that has been lost in some of the more modern takes on fighting games. Great news for having a lot of strong players, bad news for players with technical talent.
I am so glad you made this video J. These are my exact sentiments in video form. Thank you 🙏
I get the vibe that most old fighting game players thought 'hey this is the game we got, lets make it work and abuse glitches'. Now people go on twitter to complain rather than embracing what they got (like throwloops). Like back then the games were straight up unfair and unbalanced in some ways but they accepted it and dealt w it which is fun & in good spirited imo.
Sure beats complaining till a patch comes out.
Talking about old vs new got me thinking about how Disney has had success with capcom in the past marvel as well, now that they're together it would be nice to see capcom make some serious fighters for marvel whether it's a mvc or it's own thing something needs to be made .
I don't think people realized that SF4 had a "tutorial". It's in the game's manual. It has everything from special canceling to FADC. But let's be real here... how many people actually read video game manuals? In addition to being harder, information was just much more finnicky to acquire back then, lol.
I don't see how leverless would be worse with stricter input reading
ah, leave it to the FGC to actively complain about games being newcomer friendly, then complain that the genre doesn’t get enough love
Ikr. I still remember a couple of years ago, we got many people including pros and FGC contents creators complained about how niche fighting games is and how small the prize money because TO's / developers has no reasons to put a lot of money for a niche genre. Even Daigo said fighting games is a dying genre. So, the FGC wants more newcomers to join the club and keeps fighting games alive. But now when we got plenty of new players even Vtubers playing fighting games and biggest prize money in the history of fighting games tournament, suddenly the boomers going nuts with their _"old games great, modern games and new players sucks!"_ gatekeeping. SMH 🙄
Ryan Hart was totally right in that tweet from Chris podcast, we can see that in Tekken 8 and SFVI for example (even in Tekken 7).
“You couldnt beat me in this old game” -every old player ive beaten througout my life
Have you faced Old Man Justin or Mr. Calipower?
I believe the REASON there's so much hatred is that their GAMER PRIDE has been HURT. Badly. These are the people who used to be UNTOUCHABLE. Now, with Easier Games, it's EASIER to place 100% of the Blame on the Games, INSTEAD of themselves and their Skills. That they have to WORK HARDER and BE BETTER, most ESPECIALLY since now ALL Players have access to the Same Tools, Data, etc. As you said, you had a Player for SF3 go from Newbie to A Rank, and that's VERY Old School Hard. I would argue that it's 40% in terms of Glitches/Cheat Mechnics/Crutches being removed for Skilled Players, and 60% that EVERYONE has access to Superior Tools, Information, AND Training!!
if you think that you can level up with such easy in old gen fighters and especially st you can join fightcade and you will be surprised
I was obsessed with the fighting scene since the first day I saw Street Fighter 2 The World Warrior at the arcade. At first I'd dream of being able to do special moves until I learned myself. At that point, all the special moves were pretty unknown to most people except those that plays Street Fighter 1. And then that was only for Ryu/Ken. Then I'd pull back 3 seconds and forward on the joystick and punch to do a sonic boom. It was amazing to first start doing it. Haha. This was in 1991. I'm old as f.
Thank you for all you do for the FGC!!!
If there is a FGC Mount Rushmore you need to be on it.
It’s funny because I had mentioned to my brother that the money was going to play a factor in how many people play SF6. I said the same about SF5. If older titles had the kind of prize money these newer titles do then the number of people playing probably would’ve been higher back then. I would love it if a tournament was put together comprised of both modern and older games so we can see who can hang and who can’t.
I'm gonna state facts right now, take it as you will:
- old games don't get patched and likely never got significant patches ever, depending on the game in question
- the people still playing old games are as a whole playing them at an equal and greater level than when the old game in question was last current
- people are sharing tech about old games now, but that does not mean tech was not also shared when the old game in question was current. Fighting games have never predated the internet; quite the opposite in fact, the internet and sharing information has always grown alongside this gaming genre. If you discovered a game you like and wanted bad enough to find information or locate a group to play against IRL or play in a competitive environment (obviously online play wasn't always available), that was always possible even as far back as the early 90s.
- there were less people in headcount competing at a high level for old games when they were current (with exceptions - SF2 and several other titles were massively popular worldwide), but that also means that headcount had to be more hardcore and competitive by percentage than how it is now. If you were competing back then, you took it seriously because you had to make the effort to find peers to compete against, develop tech, seek out that information when it was not as easy to find it as it is now.
The biggest blessing to me when it comes to current fg scene is seeing newer and younger players embrace these old games, seeing the value of their chosen game(s) and joining an existing and matured scene. The people still playing old games or just now discovering and exploring them, they won't ditch them when the next sequel comes out nor are they worried about the next patch ruining months and years of hard work in trying to solve problems and find solutions. The game is the game and people will want to improve at it exactly as it is, which ironically will impact the meta anyway over time. This is the real beauty of fighting games when you strip everything else away. Competing and excelling in these games will always mean more to me than doing it in newer games for all of the reasons mentioned above.
I think the rise in esports and competitiveness in general is a huge factor as well. Nowadays gaming is taken more seriously by even casuals than what it use to be top it off with it being bigger than it ever was there definitely would be alot more top players if the older games came out today. You see so many games coming out and their whole basis is competitive (valorant apex warzone league even sf5) older game's metas if came out today would evolve twice as fast.
SF4 was the sweet spot of old and new.
strategy wise old and new games are similar in difficulties. but execution is way harder in old games, broken technique and combos are much harder. however, being able to do hard technique that covers all options like the chun li 3s os doesn't mean you are tactically superior. but not being able to do that technique means in its impossible to complete at a high level in those games.
Relevancy, Accessibility, and Resources are the holy trinity as to why more people are good at new games. Not because they are “easier”, but because they exist in an age where guides/tutorials/tips are at the click of a button and not gatekept because that was a tool used by veterans to stay on top. The FGC is bigger and more accessible than ever, old heads gotta keep that in mind.
Edit: This is what I had to say after hearing Ryan Hart in the first clip, not the whole video.
New games are much, much more lenient with inputs. DF, DF, wait some frames, Punch, is a DP in SFV and VI. In SF2 it's get wrecked, put up a new quarter.
If you decide to pressure someone's wakeup and they wake up super, you get the screen freeze to realize you need to block if your strike/throw was a frame late.
In ST and SFA1/2, you get to eat **** instead because you can't use the screen freeze to hold back.
So the newer stuff is generally more forgiving on those fronts.
less tighter input windows, wider hit link windows, baby mode control schemes, older technology/high skill high reward mechanics that heightened the skill ceiling = nerfed/completely patched, the list goes on and on
easier game = higher accessibility factor
more accessibility = more people can play
more people that can play = more purchases of their game
more purchases = more money
11:00 - I think that's part of it. It's more about who's playing than the game itself in a lot of cases. SF4 might objectively be a harder game than SF6, but since everybody's moved on, winning a SF4 tourney now doesn't mean as much as it used to.
That being said, I think 3S is kind of an exception 'cause a lot of the 3S heads only play 3S and never really moved on to other games. This goes for both the west and Japan.
I do think neutral was harder in older games to an extent though. Movement was generally faster/stronger and you had more buttons to work with, since they got rid of proximity normals and made a lot more moves unsafe on block, which limits your options. So I think really basic fundamentals took you further in older games, whereas tech is a lot more important in newer games even if the execution itself is easier sometimes.
That being said, neutral is always gonna be the thing that separates the best from the rest in any game. I think that's why someone like Smug was able to adapt quickly to older games because he was always known for having a crazy ground game.
SF6 has the highest mental stack of any SF.
Back in my day you had to fight the cpu on hard to know what a character was capable of!
Old games had some tech but most of the strategy and tech you had to come up by putting the time in and experimenting matchups and situations or even finding exploits,glitches and combos that give you an advantage. Nowadays everything is shown to you and you can find kind of the same but more information is accessible now than back then and that is the big difference
The world has changed so much. Young players won't ever really know what it was like at an arcade, bowling alley, skating rink, etc. when you'd be standing shoulder to shoulder with the person you're fighting on controls you didn't have at home. To buy a Super NES or Genesis port of a fighter just to get a close enough approximation of your favorite fighter... and play it with a D-pad that didn't quite prep you for next time with the joystick. To lose money for every try at the cabinet, and to wonder if you might end up in a real fight after. The culture was completely different, as the times would dictate.
New fighters are definitely easier. Every now and then I'll pick one up, and it's almost universally easy to blow through an arcade mode on the first try on hardest difficulty. Compared to classic M Bison spamming charge moves without having to charge, staring at Rugal, the secret Akuma fights, or, I don't know, winning more than 3 rounds in Art of Fighting 2 is a different story.
I have nephews in their teens and 20s who try getting into new fighters, and even not having played the new much, I crush the kids, even though they play online regularly. Then, I'll get them to play some Real Bout Fatal Fury or Guilty Gear X with me, or something weirder like World Heroes Jet or Savage Reign, and they'll just call it impossible. To their credit, though, they enjoy the games, and are at least curious enough to want to see what's out there.
Pretty sure a 4 year old not looking at the screen can beat me at Tekken, though.
Right. tutorials and ease of information exchange makes a huge difference. That makes sense. I love fighting games. But they are all difficult for me lolol. Old and new alike.
In Street fighter IV the gap between pro players and me felt completely insurmountable. Now it feels more like a measure of knowledge and catching people on the right day. I can play blaze blue for 3 hours against my friend Ray and pick up one match. In Street fighter 6 though I'm taking way more even against a higher ranked player than my BB friend
maybe the inputs had to be more precise as well as the frames to put together a combo the difficulty curve is what has been reduced from being a beginner to being a decent player It's what has become easier over time.
If new game is so much easier than old game then why doesnt the old player (whos better because they played old game) win all the time. If the game is easier that means its easier for both sides, so all these god gamers shouldnt ever lose.
Really, its just salt flowing.
Old players have a better sense of timing without relying as much into frame data. There isnt as much incentive to explore outside of the meta nowadays.
Mmm…. I’ve really only played SF6 (of the new games, like SFV, T7/T8, Strive), and I think the ubiquity of Parry in SF6 is part proof that FGs have become more accessible than older games. It’s a strong defensive mechanic that older games would either require more skill / risk to utilize, or it would be character-based. Making Parry-for-All as a major selling point means one of the coolest-albeit-difficult / risky-execution mechanics from Third Strike (the EVO 37 machine) is now something we all can do without much risk, which pulls in players of varying skill levels, as well as varying commitment levels. Still, I sat in on GO1 going 40-0 in the SF6 Battle Hub, taking on any and all challengers, so it’s not like just anyone could beat him; there are just more options for more players to enjoy the game, especially now that Online play is ubiquitous as well.
Hey Schala, it's Aph! Fancy meeting you here. I think it's interesting how they went about parry, because as you said, it's much easier and more accessible than before, but it also has the risk of being thrown of course. More than that, though, Perfect Parry is actually a much smaller window than 3rd Strike parry. At a glance, that might make it seem way harder, but in SF6 you only parry 1 thing and then counter; in 3S you could parry a whole super hit-by-hit, etc. Overall, though, there are more options and the general execution level is easier, while access to information is at an all-time high. Also, it must have been awesome watching G01 dominate in BH!
@@ryo-kai8587 Oh! Aph! I’d wondered if I’d run into one of my Hub friends on the ‘tubes someday, you’re the first! Hellloooo! 😁 All great points! I remember when SF6 info was first coming out, Maximilian Dood also pointed out that, while SF6 has mechanics and modes to bring in new players / non-FG gamers, the Perfect Parry is still a 3-frame mechanic, so there’s enough depth to keep all players of any level engaged.
Oh! And yes, I ran into that GO1 cab in one of the Asia servers, it was so awesome to watch! He seemed to have an answer for any matchup, I loved watching his Chun play ❤
I hate projectiles in fighting games. I think porjectiles should only do damage but no hit stun.
Great take, I'm on this similar line of thinking Justin.
I can't believe you put 3S for old games 😅 damn ...
I will say this: It's a lot easier to get into newer fighting games. In particular, to be able to practice against the AI. Old fighting games, especially arcade fighting games, are designed to beat you up in the parking lot and steal your lunch money. You don't learn how to play MK2, for example, playing against the AI. You learn how to exploit the AI. But that doesn't necessarily translate to playing against another person. Not being able to practice a game means you're not able to get into it. Newer games have plenty of ways of letting you practice, and the AI is closer to (though, obviously, nothing really like) a real player. Less cheap. So you can get an actual feel for your character in combat.
Imagine: A show that follows the journey of new top players and old top players practicing/learning 1 game from the others’ respective era for like 6-12 months…then they have a tournament. Team style
I think like the main benefit I've gained is the ability to adapt on the fly quickly, since a lot of old games the training mode is just getting knowledge checked/cheesed over and over until you learn it lol.
The movement shortcuts have definitely lowered the required skill floor though - depending on the game this is a plus.
Accessibility shortcuts are a different bag but generally fine too, people that don't need it that abuse it I see as a potential issue. I feel it removes nuance in gameplay and that leads to it feeling less fun to play (and watch) over time.
lol, talking about old games reminds me of SF2 when we used to go down to 7/11, and wait to play putting our quarters on the rail of the machine. I then got glue stick aka Handcuff Glitch during a fight, and the guy did not know how to break it, and they had to restart the machine....
One thing I can think of is devs showing off their game
Showing off the mechanics and going in-depth with it, basically handing us all the info we need instead of us just figuring it out ourselves
Harder to learn != Harder to play
there is also one very important issue people seem to forget , back in the day people grew up in the arcade when the newer generation has consoles or a pc to play at home at all times , that makes the games way more accessible to younger ages and believe me when i grew up playing compare to a younger player now , it's day night comparison younger people are insanely good in video games, but ,that doesn't mean at the same time that the games didn't become easier. There are just too many variables to take into consideration.
I think one of the biggest things that people are missing from this discussion is the application of the training room. Older games didn't have that and so I find that if you can sit in the lab for hours at a time and practice specific scenarios with a robot, it's easy to see why there are a lot of new players that are all excellent
Back in the day it was impossible to practice.
As a entry level player I would pull up to a hopefully empty machine, get 2-3 easy wins against the computer trying to learn moves, then either the machine or someone better would wipe you then there goes your quarter.
It'd be great to see a prize money tourney for new FGC players playing 3rd Strike. Give em all 4 weeks notice with the game and then run a bracket. (obvs nobody can learn a game like 3rd Strike in that time, but it'd be fun to see what new players can figure out).
My "friends" would invite me to parties all the time but when it came to tournaments I only heard whispers or winning 1st or 2nd in out of town events.
Old fighting games feel like a tug-o-war...new fighting games feel like sonic the hedgehog going crazy in your face...
I started playing Fighting Games in the 90s. I don't know how anyone can even debate if they easier. They are, but I'm glad because I'm old lol. I can still pull off Purple Rank in Tekken 8 ttttttthankkkkkkkkkksss to all the helppp.
I think you hit the nail on the head in saying new games aren't necessarily easier to win, but they're easier to pick up. Conscious effort has been put towards making the skill floor lower, input buffers, simplified specials, more generous motion inputs and so forth all work to make the games easier to pick up. The provlems come when people want to just say "new games are easier now" as a way to discredit the accomplishments of people that only play newer games. An old school arcade pro should be able to pick up sf6 pretty easily because the game is designed for anyone to get in on and the community is young, people are still actively discovering tech, developing matchup knowledge, finding situational combos and all that. Someone who started in recent years is going to have a much harder time getting into 3rd strike because the game doesnt really have anything to help people learn. Learning the game in current year means sifting through literal decades of collective knowledge and then actively seeking out players who are also learning or are just willing to spar with you. Fightcade is a huge game changer in that regard, but its yet another barrier to entry for truely getting good at old fighters.
All in all, modern fighters are definitely easier, but its important to have conversations about precisely HOW they're easier to stamp out the elitist perspective that modern pros are somehow less capable, or that winning majors is somehow less of an accomplishment because a modern zangief in silver can spd your drive rush on reaction
For the major part yes, some of the Modern game became more easier to new players, and the majority of old FG are much harder without having knowledge legacy or be a full Retro FG player.
This is also true with CS with players like Monesy and Donk who are very young compared to their peers and are well renowned players.
Counter-Strike has been fundamentally the same since 1.6.