Thanks to MANSCAPED for sponsoring today's video! Get The Beard & Balls Bundle for 20% OFF + Free International Shipping this holiday season with promo code "LORDKNIGHT" at mnscpd.com/lordknight
It's because the moves and fight mechanics are unbalanced and the moves for characters are constantly being changed! Then instead of fixing the move sets and balancing game mechanics, they end up releasing dlc nobody asked for!😂
seeing the melee meta evolving rapidly and midtiers getting top 8s 20 years later because now they can get consistent practice goes to show just how much good netplay can speed up a game's optimization
12:20 fun fact, the reason people miss the airdash isn't because of buffer, but because in melty blood there is a minimum airdash limit, meaning you have to be X pixels off the ground before an airdash can come out. Typically when people rise jB instead of airdash, they do the dash too fast as opposed to missing the A+B. In fact, in order to give more leniency to people who dashed with A+B, you can Kara cancel a and b normals into dash on their first frame.
The worst part is when the old game good new game bad makes people so tired that they start saying old game bad even if the old game is good and they don't actually believe that. Like J. Cole said, "they act like two legends cannot coexist."
For me I used to enjoy the old games much more than I currently do. I have not gotten into the new games because I have moved on from the fighting genre. I was a dark horse who never played in a tournament at my best in the Street Fighter Àlpha 3 for PlayStation 1 era. I just do not have the patience having lost my previous ability dropping down to a 3 star player. The same thing happened with Dark Souls as well. These games are most enjoyable when you can fully enjoy them. Though, being able to fully enjoy them means being able to use all systems in the game.
Fun fact: the MAIN stable of fighting games which is COMBOES was ALSO an accident. In sf2 it was apparently a glitch but capcom thought that links and comboes were so neat that they decided to expand on that system. Without that "glitch" in sf2, we wouldn't get guilty gear, mk or any combo crazy fighting game today
I defintely feel the slowdown thing a lot in a negative way for modern games. It feels like part of a package which prioritizes the viewer experience over the player experience where you want people who see it on a stream or something similar to get what is happening when they have never seen the game before you need to spend a lot more effort to make things read well. The slowness of modern games compared to a lot of old games is definitely what gets me the most.
Idk man. Slowing it down let's u actually tell what's going on, on both ends. Otherwise, it's all twitchy with no flow. I understand that after dumping hours into a game, everything becomes clearer. But it doesn't look good. N visuals are half of the appeal
The games were fast and attacks did a lot of damage because it was designed around an arcade model. Which is make the AI cheap ( read inputs ) to eat quarters, make attacks have high dmg ( to speed up the round so fights don’t drag out ) so another player doesn’t have wait long to play same goes for the speed of the game.
Just play EO mode on the upcoming capcom fighting collection 2. No more roll canceling and significant changes to P and S grooves. Looking forward to it
Okay, you've activated my "fighting game dark age" rant. It really wasn't just CAPCOM. SNK went bankrupt, was bought out, and made bad/irrelevant games. NRS games at the time were trash, and nobody else in the west was even still making fighting games as far as I know. The only other people making 2d fighters were smaller Japanese companies, and how long were you waiting past the Japanese release, and how many arcades in the US were actually keeping up to date with the recent games? How many US cities actually had scenes, and how many of those Japanese games had scenes even in the big cities? Do you remember how fucked the PAL console releases were? (That lasted well past the dark ages, but when it was your only source of new 2d fighters it hit hard). GG was second biggest 2D fighting game getting active releases in the mid 2000s, but my friends who actively played KoF/3s/SoulCal had never heard of it when I bought a copy in 2008. Even if you played 3D Fighters or Smash which were still getting timely and large releases, arcades were dying and online either didn't exist or was absolutely terrible. If you wanted to get better competitively, or even just play real people at all you had to personally know people who played and were around your level, and go to their house. I understand that as a smash player that feels normal to you, but that wasn't the case in 1997, and obviously it's not the case now. I agree that when some people talk about the dark ages, there's a narrative of "all fighting games weren't getting good releases, SF4 saved the community" which is stupid when GG/Tekken/Smash/Soul Calibur/VF/MB had good games come out, but there's a lot more to why 2003 to 2008 sucked for the FGC beyond Capcom releases sucking/not existing.
The people who invented that tale are or were capcucks. Simple. Nothing matters outside of Capcom fgs. That attitude is also exposed in the way the American fgc that was engaged in competition in the early 00s (Capcom fanboys, starting with the Evo founders) didn't fully invest into GG - that was the hot new thing in the scene, that was very well made and authentic and with an excellent roster. It should have become the center of the 2d fg community since SF died. At the very least GG should have been promoted to the same ranks of CvS2, that was the latest Capcom fg at the time Evo began. But no... GG was treated almost like the Evo founders were jealous of a brand new promising 2d fg in the scene.
The main thing I find different about games now vs the 90s/2000s is what I think of as play style compression, a great example is SF6, 5 had the same issue to some extent, but 3rd strike was an early example. Games are more and more enforcing a play style with game mechanics, in 6 all characters end up at the same range doing the same things because the universal mechanics are so strong, parry in 3s did the same thing. If you look at games with weaker universal mechanics like SF 2 and 4 you get characters that want to stay at different ranges, some that play more rush down, some that keep away and some mid range but all are viable. A great example is Guile in SF4, Dieminion and NuckleDu played the character very differently but both were successful. Now there is a "correct" way to play each character, and all matches end up looking the same because universal mechanics dominate the game meaning that play style is compressed into a single boring method and character strength is defined by how well they interact with the universal mechanics. If Universal mechanics were removed, or kept very weak then there would be a lot more creativity in how people approach characters and matchups.
@Yaarmehearty also the eternal 50/50. Sf6 is pretty much a 50/50 game where you end up most of the time. You can't set neutral properly if the opponent sets you guessing every time. It doesn't help you with the overly aggressive UM. Sf3 is old and aggressive but you can set up neutral. Nowadays it's not the case.
Impossible to realistically imagine the industry going back to the early fg model. Like SF playing like SF2, TK playing like TK1, MK playing like the og MK1, etc. The practical solution would be to tone down the impact of those mechanics, like you said later in your comment.
I really wish fighting games would stop with the cinematic bs, I know it brings in the casuals but cutting away from the match for a movie really kills the flow.
I think cinematic supers are a good idea to enhance the product in the modern era, because this is a formulaic genre, that tends to repetitive sequels, and using mostly the same characters with the same moves, and the sequels even became less creative than they were in the past, and rosters can't grow gradually in every sequel. So it's good that fg devs came up with ways to make the sequels look less cheap and less like remakes of 90s/00s games. For example, Ryu's Shin Shoryuken debuted in 97, it's 24 years already... It would be bad (imo) if the move continued being done in "2d" like in 97 and not in cinematics. I'm really grateful for Ryu's Ultra 2 in SF4 and Lv3 in SF6. But I can also understand that some longer than average supers can become bothersome. In that case the problem is the longer time. Also particular parameters, like it's easier to do supers per match in TK7 and 8 than do Lv3 supers in SF6.
@@carlosaugusto9821 nothing feels more repetitive than seeing the same canned LVL3 cutscene every match over and over and over. At least the old supers looked cool and were over pretty fast. I'll take a SF3 or Super Turbo super over these little movies any day of the week.
I think there's a happy medium to be found with including the fun, pretty cinematics but also not making them too intrusive. Like, just making them a bit snappier and less drawn out would make a world of difference.
i think xrd is an interesting game in that arcsys deliberately added in a lot of those 'happy accidents' that originated in the older games. i really doubt things like drill cancel or jump install were originally intended, but come xrd they now were. so it's a modern, very deliberately designed game, complete with (some) balance patches, that still has some of those weird bugs/features that make it feel like an old game. i can't really think of another game like that.
You know LK finally made it when there's a manscaped ad in the middle of the video lol. Glad some ppl finally noticed, you're kinda GOATed at doing videos and I hope the sponsors can make it more sustainable in the long run
May be my nostalgia glasses talking but I really do think the best era for fighting games as we know them was the 2009 - 2015 era. Also, I think a lot of people take for granted how crazy it is that companies can just alter content of their game that you have already received without launching a new disc. It was really fun getting those discs for the new versions from a collector standpoint though lol.
No 90s arcade was absolutely the time to be a player. That was something I constantly have explain to my friends is the pureland that was the arcade. By 2000 arcades were already struggling because of home console.
@carlosaugusto9821 very fair. I was born in 96 so I missed out on arcades but really admired people who got to experience arcades. I just mean from a perspective of, game difficulty, ease of knowledge, and player skill. Games like AC, BB, MVC3 were challenging and rewarding, but SRK and Dustloop were bustling so it was easy to find tournaments, places to play, guides, etc. Nowadays games feel a bit cookie cutter, info is scattered all over Discord and Twitter posts, and things like evo and CPT aside from the prize pool feel a little less prestigious than they used to due to what I think is them cannibalizeing each other a bit.
in a way it feels like a double edged sword since on one hand there;s the "yay i don't have to buy another version" factor but on the otherhand you could potentially find you liked a previous version of the game that you can now never go back to because the devs drastically changed the game you already bought since as well as the fact that we no longer have cases where a game has some minor seeming jank that people just have to live with, over time the game evolves around said jank in exciting 7 charming ways nobody expected.(ie: we will likely never get games like sailor moon s, super smash bros melee, or heck even mvc2(mvc3 making everyone able to touch of death easily instad of just like removing the infinites while still giving the player the same relative freedom of options will always be the wrong move imo.) again)
For the beginning of the video, in reference to balance patches, I think it wasn't stress quite enough how unintended mechanics shape entire genres, and the effects it could have. Tf2 has entire character archetypes based off mechanics that John Carmack wanted to patch out of the game. As for patch cycles, it's also not stressed enough how the versions of the game you like stop existing. Another FPS example, but Apex legends had some really cool movement tech. It was advanced, and if you did it, you had a major advantage, so it was patched out of the game. In terms of older games, that might have just lived on in the game even if it never came back to the series, or eventually have been incorporated into later games as part of the series DNA. But because it was an exploit, it just goes away and is forgotten. This makes the same games from their release unrecognizable to the games you play now. I'm not a huge Strive fan, but I played it. I went away, came back, and now the game feels very different than it did when I played it in the first month of release. Every character is a different character and all the system mechanics change. Strive is ephemeral. When we had Street Fighter 4, Super Street Fighter 4, and Ultra Street Fighter 4, if you didn't like the system mechanic changes or characters, just play the old game. I know +R is never going to be as popular as Strive today, but I can just go play it. Same with Smash. I don't like new Smash games after Melee (except some nostalgia for brawl as a for fun game), but I can just go play that original version of melee. And when the game isn't "the same" as when I was younger, it's strictly just people getting better and having explored the game for 20 years. I personally find that beautiful, and love all the BS emergent systems and gameplay that come from this cycle. I was even part of Lost Planet lobbies where every single person was doing some super meta build and there was strictly one valid playstyle, but we all enjoyed ourselves. I understand this perspective is no good for modern games, the massive audiences they try to reach, and the tournament cultures around the products, but it's really annoying hearing people say over and over again "you are old so everything you are saying is because of that." I'm not even that old, I'm literally just 30. Not everything is simply an old man on a porch who hates new things.
I agree 100%, most recently it happened to me in skullgirls, apparently my character (umbrella) was still in beta or whatever so they decided to balance her by completely changing her character resource management system to a very simplified version because previously one of her modes was deemed too desirable, so they said the meta was for her to try to balance into being always in that mode (which is pretty fun for me) but her other modes were deemed to weak. So they made that one mode kinda bad, and the other ones stronger but also overhauled how you change between modes and now rhere is no reason to try to balance your mode, it is now just an afterthought
This makes me think about how many people nowadays consider an online game "dead" after its final update/content is released, and that always bothered me. Its not dead, its COMPLETE. Now people can dig into it and establish the true meta, rather than constantly worry if the character/strategy they were using will fundamentally change in a week. Melee wouldn't be what it is if it was getting constant patches. Its just a very dissapointing modern thing that makes me really feel for the developers of these games trying to pump out mOrE cOnTeNt for the kids to consume.
It's tough when there aren't many people interested in playing the old game you like so I kinda feel their pain but whining in every thread isn't going to change anything lol
Maybe cause games in active development and receiving patches can potentially change with feedback. Talking about them an make a difference, specially if the opinion becomes majoritary on the playerbase. For example, meaty throws were patched on sf5. The only problem i see with this is people downplaying their chars all the time on tierlists, it just freeze the discussion when people are not honest.
@@caiooa People need to stop with this mentaltiy that they can somehow shift ideals. Sure, you can provide feedback but that doesn't mean you go on social media and complain. They utilize data now when they develop alot more than they did back in the day. What developers are looking at isn't neccesarily what your talking about. Its like your going to the doctor and your telling them about symptons. You may THINK this is what you have but the doctor will diagnose the symptoms and figure out what you actually have. The Patches in SF6 and in SFV generally has a ton of things most players are like....why are you doing this. However they have to account for everyone, even casuals who might just play world tour or extreme battles or avatar battles. They may not make sense to you when your just playing really two modes of a game but for others maybe lower skill than you it does make sense. Again, I'm not saying feedback is bad, I'm saying that when you think the feedback your giving translates doesn't neccesarily into exactly what you gave as feedback. Generally, the feedback you give is a symptom and they are using that to diagnose an actual problem.
BIG THING I think impacts the different feel is the amount of pushback on moves and how much frame data plays into the feel. What I mean is that a game like 3rd strike, block strings are often short with a lot of pushback on moves and I can say from personal experience that you can play competently just by feel and not studying frame data. On the other side of our spectrum with street fighter 5, I felt much more of a need to study the frame data so I'm not caught in knowledge checks. I can say just about the same with +R and Strive. When it comes to how widespread information is and how fast we "Figure out" games, I think having more available information is good. Having more available info earlier lets high level players be able to more quickly figure out the real stuff while lower level players will have an easier time getting to a level of competency. I am under the impression that fighting games have become easier, or simpler rather. Hard stuff still exists, but matches and answers tend to be more structured and predetermined which is what really separates level of play. I don't really know where I'm going with this, but I think that older games tend to be a bit more complex or deep, but the modern age of widespread information is just awesome.
I feel this as well. For instance, going back to Super Turbo the fireballs are disgusting and do an incredible amount of pushback... but it also means they are the most FUN fireballs to use. Even with normal moves in that game, pushback means a lot of what you can do is safe... you don't have to lab out what is safe and what isn't because it is so easy to tell just from playing. It also means that blockstring isn't going to last long and you can tell when you are able to push a button in most cases. You don't HAVE to study the frame data, and back in the day that didn't even exist. Think about the old term "priority" that basically told you which move had the better frame data in any given interaction; you don't need to know the frame data itself, just which moves win against which other ones. Then you have the input windows that aren't as lenient, and ESPECIALLY in that title. It's considered "execution heavy" but much of that is trying to get your special moves to come out and landing 3-5 hit combos lol. It's the perfect example of something that is easy to tell what is going on, but difficult to replicate. I don't play third strike, but I can sit down and watch a tournament much easier than a newer fighting game since, like you said, there aren't a bunch of knowledge checks that you have to learn via frame data. So I'm always hyped to watch that third strike tournament, while I get kind of bored watching a new game.
Honestly even on the smaller side of things I also feel like games trend towards slower frame data as well. 3 frame normals used to be incredibly commonplace, but these days they're kinda rare for most games, and everything also trends towards being way more negative which has the compound effect of making it so pressure is slower to push on someone and more often (compared to older games) ends in a more neutral-ish positioning if not actually just returning to neutral.
We just live in an era where games cost more to make and take far longer and games are typically created by people with decades of experience either creating or playing fighting games. In the 90s and eatly 2000s you'd have games that took a year or less to pop out where designers cared little about balance or competitive longevity so much as they just cared about putting their neat ideas in this new genre into a game. The end result was a lot of experiments (most of which failed on some level) that led to many unique experiences that felt less rigid and over-designed. Many mechanics or techniques that would make these games eternally playable and beloved would either be unintentional stuff like crouch tech in SF3/SF4 or intentional mechanics like Melee wavedashing blowing open offensive and defensive play potential beyond the creator's wildest dreams (or nightmares if you're Sakurai). Combo theory/structure in games is more rigidly defined, offensive and defensive mechanics ate far more deliberate and specific in scope, with every system or design decision being tightly wound together in ways that are more logical and therefore solvable. It isn't inherently bad that games are "over-designed" compared to the games of yesteryear, but it definitely is a bit sad.
Idk what to say about this, its also about the internet culture nowadays. People bitched about release Sol for Strive, and how he's ruining the game, how unfair it is to have a + on block mid, etc, and there's a good chance that a lot of people got sick of that and quit early. So if Arcsys wanted to have a financially viable product for a few more years, they would have to do something about it. Same thing happened when Luke released in SFV, it was super overtuned to the point that 90% of the top 8 in tournaments were Lukes. If that was the only SF we would have for the rest of time, I don't think many people would still play it competitively. Same thing happened with Tekken 7 DLCs, all were super broken on release, and they all got toned down up to a point where tekken was playable again for the majority of the community. So, unless we want these games to be played by 200-300 dedicated people online, these products need to be financially viable, which means they have be able to be maintained, tested across iterations and to also survive the online gaming culture. If Strive, SF6 and Tekken 8 would have been just "previous games but with rollback", we wouldn't even be having these discussions, because there would be so little incentive to have them. I wouldn't even be typing this comment if it weren't for Strive, me being able to play it online from Eastern Europe, where fighting game culture is non-existent.
I do think some of the devs are experienced and over designing their game, but I do think some fg devs are hacks that just got lucky and are fucking it up now
Because new games are designed by fans of fighting games who grew up to become game devs. I have the same type of problems with anime as I do fighting games. They share a lot of the same tropes in terms of the feel of gameplay vs animation and directing.
This is a great point. The over-designed-ness people mention is kind of because the new games are all aware of the genre boundaries, and the devs set out to make fighting games, rather than end up making a game that happens to fit the genre, which means they are aware of and intentionally include many familiar elements, basically the equivalent of overt tropes and cliches.
roll grooves in CVS2 are C, A and N, not K K is the top tier groove that doesn't have roll cancels but instead has just defense, short hops and gaining meter through taking damage
It's not the developers. It's the audience. Fighting games take time and dedication and nobody is willing to roll with that. So the devs try to accommodate by making things easier, completely undoing what made the games good to begin with.
@6:05 I was just talking about this same thing today on bluesky - patch culture changed the FGC’s pH tolerance to adapting to the mechanically obscene, whether that obscenity is perceived or actual
People wouldn't stop crying if hyper viper beam existed in a new game today. That shit was just accepted. Not to mention you can time a shot on an incoming character and get it for free 😂.
On any other series, you are right, but MVC2 brought people's expectation that the vs series is by all intents and purposes a kusoge. People accept MVC3's relatively poor balance as a feature rather than a bug because of MVC2. When and if a new MVC releases, I think it will get way more leeway than any other game in terms of balance.
Playing MvC2 now is frustrating because everybody is just trying to do infinites which really impedes my oldschool endless Viper/Air Viper/Hyper Viper Beam gameplan.
Everything was new literally, there were no set standards, no developed culture about the games, and people were younger and had little critical sense. Also it was just arcade games released every 1-2 years and had no updates. Those factors made a big difference. But now the industry is mature, there are development standards, more attention to frame and damage data, balance, etc. And the culture is mature, the old schoolers are naturally experienced and became more critical and demanding, and even new players enter any modern game with a bigger load of concepts to grasp, pushed by the own tutorial. And now each game is purchased, they are not cheap, and there's waves of dlc, so it's natural to have different expectations and demands. Especially because online updates are normalized in gaming. That made a big difference in how to deal with these products.
I love content going in depth on fighting game mechanics and how they've changed over the years. I want to understand all of it so I can know why I like what I do. Honestly, I really like old games like ST or Vampire Savior, but newer games just don't appeal to me and I can't get enough in depth info to figure out WHY. In general, in these old games you can go look up frame data, but you NEVER NEED it to figure out the game... both games mentioned are super easy to pick up and play, visually you can tell what is going on, etc. I think something is lost especially with so much talk nowadays for "accessibility."
Side note: Strive has way more ways to break the pace of the game. Not just RC, but the COUNTER-slowdown, the wallsticks, wallbreaks and on top of all of that the supers which are also way more common than in previous titles as well due to the knockdown post wallbreak. Additionally, while BRC only slows down the opponent when in range, the screen space of Strive is generally way smaller so you are more often closer, making the use of (B/P)RC in neutral easier and more frequent. Also, BRC has a way longer time freeze than YRC did in Xrd. So Strive's slowdowns are not only more frequently occuring during a match (despite not having a 25 meter RC option) but also have longer "pauses" for each of them.
You didn't mention that rounds are also much shorter, and every round ends with "SLASH! ... victory pose ... wipe to new round ... LET'S ROCK!". More rounds = more downtime. There's probably something to say about removal of air tech also leading to more effective downtime, as there are no choices you can make while you're in hitstun besides burst. I'm glad people like Strive, but I can't ever get into it personally, and my main complaint is that it feels too start-stop. Neutral feels very fast, but after the first touch it feels like the game halts for seconds at a time while one player does their thing or both players watch animations.
@@user-et3xn2jm1u Valid criticism but I think that goes too far into a different territory than artificial slowdowns the game introduces. If we're talking about the moment-to-moment decision making and the overall decision space of Strive, that's obviously a whole other can of worms like you mentioned. (Also, the neutral of Strive just feels bad due to being more of a forced anime-footsies-type of hybrid which doesn't harmonize well. The slower movement and unresponsive feeling airdashes don't help either.)
The answer to this is the same to similar questions regarding other genres; you've been playing these games for decades of your life, and they all tend to share the same basic formula. You have seen it all, and are comparing your current experienced self to your past self. Back when you knew little and every little thing felt like a brand new revelation. The games haven't changed that much, but you have.
And they are strictly purchased now, and are not cheap if the dlc is counted. I believe that factor also makes people feel like demanding a solid product, better balance, etc.
The simple answer is that 1: the design philosophy of *most* games is radically different because there's actually some degree of thought put into balance. And 2: we're old and cynical and we know about frame data and effective strategies and yearn for the times we enjoyed the games by just hitting buttons but we can't do that anymore because we know too much.
I think it’s also self-disrespectful to believe knowing the mechanics of a game well is what ruins it. Knowledge isn’t some damn tragedy: and it especially isn’t when we stop ramming into one another for improving cause “ew meta.”
Big disagree one of the reasons fighting games are my favorite is BECAUSE of all the knowledge and learning that goes into it. One of my favorite things is sitting in training mode, labbing tech, learning frame data, practicing match ups, learning different combos, etc. Your second point makes it sound like you're just nostalgic for your childhood lol
I agree with this. I'd say this applies to every game honesty. I think when you master(or know too much) the mechanics of a game, it ruins the tricks and surprises the game has in store. I'm not saying s3 > sf6, but i think i had the most fun in sf6 when experimenting with the drive mechanics
Couldn't disagree more. The era of game I long for the most is the 2014 era, where games like Xrd, BBCF, and UNI were coming out. It's nonsense to believe that the developers didn't know what they were doing making those games at this point, OR that the players were simply "hitting buttons". It's the perfect middle ground era between XX, a game that can be fun but can also be extremely grating, and Strive, a game where it feels like they personally sanded off all the stuff I thought was fun in the game.
Imo, it's partially because fighting games all have a bunch of systems, and are geared heavily toward offensive play and very high damage per interaction. They were simpler, and despite the lack of qol features they had, were more endearing.
@@zeywopdepends on the game, tekken is more mechanically bloated than ever, same with street fighter. The only games this really rings true for was anime games as strive is less mechanically dense than anime games that came before. But if you aren’t an anime player FG’s are gonna feel a lot more complicated than ever before
On the other hand the franchise would look cheap if it never tried to grow further from the SF2 formula. I think this process of becoming more elaborate and complicated is impossible in this genre. The debatable part is only about specific gameplay ideas.
TBH "Old Game Good New Game Bad" discourse is honestly not the problems we should be talking about. I think the only thing that truly matters is if the game is fun. What people find fun is different, but if the game is fun, people keep playing it. MvC2/3 are unblanced clusterfucks of design but people have been playing them for decade because they're fun. Modern games are certainly more well designed, but fun is subjective and some people may not enjoy it. Strive may have classic Guilty Gear bullshit, but stuff like guard crush loops and safe looping pressure are obnoxious, and whilst present in other games, the modern design puts emphasis on it. This is also why I think things like Pot losing kara had so much backlash, whilst it wasn't hard to do with practice, some people found it a fun and interesting part of Pot's kit (for year 1 when I played Pot I agreed.) I also like the point about slowdowns. I swear every special now has to have an anamatic close up cutscene before it even hits, and it'll play even if you don't get the sweet spot. I think it's especially worse because devs don't give invul specials anymore and instead opt for invul supers which randomly just pauses the game for like 5 seconds in the middle of it for no reason. Lastly, on your point about inputs and how they feel, I do wish SOME games would opt for making execution hard and rewarding, like I appericate being able to pick up and play characters, but I think it feels sad when you can pick up Happy Chaos and start doing wall-to-walls within like 2 hours which kinda ruins the whole "He's hard to play but he's good because of it" which just puts him in a balancing nightmare situation. Good vid tho!
In the 90s, because of the yearly release schedules, we literally witnessed innovations through the whole year and in every year. It was really like that. But now games are repetitive and focused on small refinements and graphics quality. Even though I understand that it's probably not possible to continue innovating the genre in the same way of the 90s, my problem with the modern generation is that it became too uncreative and doesn't try enough to change that situation.
I concur. In the 90’s it felt like game devs were always trying something new, partially due to it being a fairly new genre. Not everything worked, but not for lack of trying. Now, though many games are technically sound, they all feel very much the same to me. I’m sure this will change at some point. I’m awaiting the next evolution/innovation in the fighting game genre.
@@Matayis_Patchbelly Some months ago, as a i was commenting on a fgc video i was taken by a worrying realization, that the large majority of recent fgs have more offensive game design; cinematic supers that look similar in their "scene directing" style; a "cancelling" mechanic that is used in the middle of an action to extend combos (not only but mostly)... like V Trigger cancel and Drive Rush in SF, Max Mode in KOF, Roman Cancel in GG, Heat Engager in TK, and Rev Accel and Feint cancel in the upcoming Fatal Fury. Also modern TK and SC games have meters like 2d fgs. And the biggest recent (kinda) fg release that isn't from a veteran franchise was DBFZ, that is a MvC imitation. All that convinced me that we are in the worst time for fgs creatively. Like i said in my early comment, it's not that i'm expecting the genre to be explored and tested in the same pace of the 90's... but this current situation became ridiculous. Like, the first time TK does a robust gameplay change, it's basically SF5's V Trigger (loosely) with the autorun of Heat Engager based on KOF's Max mode. Tragic.
11:00 Ult's blessing and curse is that there is a 9f input buffer, as well as a second (infinite window, in a way) hold buffer that will give you an action as long as you are holding that button on your First Actionable Frame It's more often the hold buffer that gets in the way, imo
It's great that players don't get to exploit games' mechanics like they did due to patches, but now the over-reliance on system mechanics integrated into a character's gameplan is making games stale faster.
I'd love to see you watch a whole ass Slash tournament and comment on how things used to be. Like, i think a lot of younger players would really have their eyes opened by seeing the old crazy stuff.
The main issue I have with more modern fighting games is the constant "balance patching". It's not only that they often patch the fun out of the game, but it makes it really hard to come and go. You may stop playing for a few months then come back and bam! SSJ Goku's 2M is slow as a snail and old combos don't work anymore. Older games have busted stuff, for sure, but they stay the same so you can develop techniques or ways to work around them. And you can always come back to the game regardless if you were out for a month or 5 years.
The new game has different production conditions and belongs in a different context for the genre. The old game was available at arcade, or at a friend's house, or could be traded with a friend, or rented, etc. The new game is purchased by the user, it's the standard launch price, and there's dlcs. And the old game was made in yearly schedule, with the next one immediately in the plans. But the new game is made with a long term vision and a serious sense of balance... And the fact is that balance is always hard and launch versions particularly will always be a challenge to make. And given those costs it's natural and expected to demand a better balance. There's also the factor that people only get older, more experienced with different fgs, and become more aware and critical. So that's why balance patches are a good idea in modern fgs. But what can be criticized more legitimately is a frequent pace of patches.
There's a weird absence in newer games of implimented character specific interactions. Like those interactions characters have because of things like character height, weight, hurtboxs, etc that cause certain unique things to play out. I'd venture a guess that the large absence of this is because game devs being able to learn and understand and patch games to keep them in their view of how they want character interactions to reflect their design and not these esoteric parts of their implimentation.
for the record LK, they did change the short hop laser example 😂 aerial projectiles are across the board usually safer than the grounded versions but they are not comboable like falco laser used to be and have little hitstun (again as a generalization)
Patches changed things drastically. It was great when you could actually learn a game once but now you have to relearn it every season because moves and mechanics change.
It was practically the same before, since new games came out every year, so there was no time for the meta to develop the same way it that later on. But that view can be distorted by a misunderstanting about the 00s fg scene, with Evos and such. Only because there were no longer yearly new games after CvS2 (2001), so the fgc was forced to behave differently just for the sake of their addiction to the same Capcom fgs... instead of changing to an actual new game like GG, KOF 02, etc. But in the 90s the basic idea was to move to the next yearly game, that's all.
@carlosaugusto9821 I see what you're saying but a different game is just that. You can jump back and forth playing different games. Once a patch or new season comes out for a fighting game nowadays, the old one is gone as far as playing competitively. People still have tournaments for old games but no one is gonna go back to Tekken 8 version 1.06 or something
I know they keep games fresh and balanced but I still cant help but find patches frustrating / disheartening. As someone who doesn't have loads of time to sink on fighting games when they change up what moves link or cancel into others etc it can really throw off your muscle memory.
This part. It stops me from going to tournaments often because I feel like I gotta learn the entire game all over again when they add in more mechanics or overhaul a character I main. Hell, I even have to learn someone else entirely when they change my main too much.
To me the principle is perfectly fine, but the execution of patches must just be more carefully planned and paced. In the old times that dynamic was represented by the revision releases like in SF2 CE, HF, etc, SFA2g, SFA3u, etc... Those used to come in the following year and all had a rebalance.
Yeah i get what you're saying but I'm a die hard MVC2 player, an old head. What felt different compared to now was the freedom. There's more than one way to play any character and that includes top tiers. In newer games, characters are created to play exactly as intended, it doesn’t seem like there's any wiggle room. So Cable for instance is intended to fight long range but he's got beefy normals and can def hold his own close up. Nowadays i just dont see that versatility or utility with character archetypes. I think in recent memory DBFighterZ did it best. It felt a little more forgiving when experimenting, and you could create custom combos outside of the automated ones. But nowadays i dont see that with SF6 and especially not with SNK games.
I grew up with "old" fighting games and still, i'd rather play the more recent stuff. Only criticism i think is genuine towards most modern fighting games is the hyper-agressiveness/nerfing defense, wich is why i play UNI2/BBCF aka the best modern fighting games.
@@VDViktor Let me put this another way. It can make both players more afraid to throw out anything in neutral, considering what one stray hit can do. Now that I think about it, perhaps passive would be a better word here.
@@killercore007 I've learned that if a game favors offense, most people will rush you the hell down. What you described only happens in high level play.
C, A, and N groove have rolls, not K. I would make a note on your video with the correction. Also, CVS2 did have a "patched" version of it. EO. No one liked it and it was never talked about again. Similarly to Alpha 3. No one liked the updated "patched" versions and the competitive scene stuck with the original.
I found the Falco thing on my own *because* I knew about stuff like Cable. I doubt I would have if I wasn't doing instant air fireballs in other games and I didn't come to that on my own in those games.
I think I like patches for balance updates, but not for how most companies deal with glitches. Too many companies have a blanket unintended=remove policy. In an unpatched game the players get to decide whether to ban tech that gets discovered, which is usually way better. However, with online ranked being so much more important now, and tournament tech/glitch/exploit bans really having no power over random online players (if they even know about them) I don’t think that really works for a modern game, even if the devs did balance related patches to intended mechanics only and left any unintended tech untouched. Really I think the way forward is for companies to change their policy towards glitches, getting rid of stuff that is broken and unfun, but keeping stuff that isn’t. Some companies (usually only ones founded by competitive players) even make fun tech more consistent to perform or expand upon it, turning it into a feature. This is really the ideal attitude to have.
I don't play a ton of different fighting games, but i think my biggest "new game bad" take is with Guilty Gear +R compared to Strive. I just cannot stand the way strive feels to play. I definitely don't think +R is perfect, but everything about that game just comes together in such a specific way that tickles my brain in a way most other FGs ive played cannot
hey mr. editor man can you please check when you're inserting music into the video to make sure you don't accidentally pick a version of the song that loops the first 7 seconds for 5 minutes straight, this pitch black intrusion edit is making things a bit rough.
Bro as an old head from Melee and hearing you say short hop lasers are beginner tech I lost it. Also, wave dashing wasn't a bug like people have claimed. They were just mistaken about Sakurai's wording. He intended for the mechanic of air dodging into the ground, he just didn't expect it to be used in the way it was being utilized; i.e. fast ground movement and directional control. There's a reason each character has different speeds in how they interact with wave dashing that doesn't correlate to their ground or air speed. Luigi is a good example as he doesn't have great air or ground speed, but has the longest wave dashes in the game outside of Samus using actual bugs for a near infinite one.
For all those people who feels new games are too easy to "figure out", you just need to choose a better game or character to explore. I'm a Lei player since 1996, and I have never felt left without stuff to learn and master. Now researching Ling has been a joy, even though I don't like T8 very much. Cagliostro setups = thousands of hours of new ideas to try. Old games weren't more rich or complex than modern ones: they just were more obscured and gatekeept by those who hoarded the knowledge. The depth to explore is still there, its just that the diving equipment is better now.
Imma keep it real with you FGC legend LordKnight. My brain can no longer process anything related to this topic but I shall leave a like and comment for the almighty algorithm. 🙇
Speaking for the games I played mostly, things that change that didn't please me (although they're not necessarily bad) are that both SF6 and GGST seems way more linear and streamlined than the previous games in their franchises. SFV was a bit slower as well, which made me feel less overwhelmed. What I mean by this is gameplans and gameplay seems much less varied and nuanced in general than they were, with characters feeling more distinctive between them than they are now. This is a reason why I feel way less compelled to even watch newer games for longer periods of time
So you’re talking about the short hop it’s funny because I didn’t even think about that being an accident. You play non fighting game old games there was stuff like that. Like less recovery on jumping attacks. So that’s how I found it. Stuff like that just seemed normal to me. Halo 2 had a bunch of glitches as well. Cancelling animations and stuff like that. All found out on accident or testing stuff. I didn’t even have internet back that.
19:25 wdym fair, it's not, cos the other player literally needs that time to get in and set things up, that's just frame advantage, then you get mixed so you have to engage lol. Cinematics aren't that though. I don't think CH slowdown is a good solution also, it kinda invalidates skill of confirming these situations on the fly. Beyond that it's a little too in your face and pace breaking imo. Persona does it better cos it's more lowkey and CH hitstun addition is even bigger than strive sometimes.
I am 36. I slept over at my friends house every other week to play Tekken 2 and then he would come to mine to play perfect dark. I played my copy of SFA2 for SNES until it broke. I played more Tekken 4 and SC2 than should be legal. In my twenties I would play any fighter that came out on PS3 or 360, particularly BlazBlue, T6, and MK9. Before I had my son and started my PhD program, I played 5k plus ranked matches of MK11, not including the thousands of matches against my best friend (along with DBFZ and T7). I really enjoy SF6, Strive, T8, and MK1 (shoot me), but I’m not really PLAYING them. But I have learned that fighting games never really change. Some are good and some aren’t, some I am terrible at (looking at you KoF) and others I am pretty good at, some feel novel and others scratch a nostalgic itch. But they are part of what I enjoy most about video games. Sitting down and going 1v1 with a friend or stranger and seeing who is better.
People forget that what is new now will soon become old in ten years strive will have been in it's final state for an extended duration. Design ideas will shift again away leaving it as the others were.
Fighting games have "progressed" and left certain elements behind in totality, irrespective of how they may work holistically. Obviously, new games need to introduce new things but they seem limited in how they can be implemented by ignoring how some new mechanic may mesh to "archaic" designs. Ignoring controversial things like input leniency or meterless invincible reversals, something like dashing is in everything and it has an incredible impact on how space is controlled. It's clearly a temping thing to include as it is very versatile with other systems, but itself homogenizes styles of games and limits alterative movement mechanics. There is lots of this going on. It's the insidious things that get taken for granted that limits the diversity of games.
This is a good point. Universal mechanics do help whatever you throw together to be more likely to work, but it does limit the design space. Look at dash in an old title like Vampire Savior. They all function differently; some grounded, some are a hop, others let you fly in the air. A few characters have an air dash while most of the cast does not. The normals you can use also changes from character to character (one character can only use crouching normals when dashing while another only standing normals). It's a big reason why all the characters play so differently from one another.
46 years old here. Playing fighting games in general since 1994, more seriously dedicated since 2015. Not going to lie, in some modern games you can clearly perceive the dirty hand of the execs manipulating stuff to pressure cashmilking no matter the consequences. Like T8 battle pass and season pass drama, and the very poorly implemented heat and invuln mechanics to trick new people into a false sense of power. All this IS and feels really bad. However, this doesn't invalide all the amazing good stuff new games offer: years of experience polishing and correcting everything, superior tools to understand and practice the game, simpler and free access to information, many more players to compete with, faster and better technology to actually get into the game, the ability to repair problems and test new ideas without having to wait years to see the results. While I love emergent play when it arises, it is also true than 90% of the time it is not great stuff. And that is just what happened with old games: 90% of the time they were clunky, unbalanced and hermetic, full of glitches which kicked you out of the competence unless you used them too, and you had to endure that for years until a new game finally came out. Not only that. Since the rythm of interchange was limited by physical interaction, and many of the top players actively hoarded the knowledge for their own gain, they often were games of slowly figuring out cheap garbage out of the elitists in the top. I wouldn't get back to that era for any price. So in the end, I prefer modern games over old ones in most cases, except when the corporate manipulation hits too hard. I still prefer T7 over T8, for example, but wouldn't change SF6 for any of its predecesors. I don't value MvC in general very much, it is fun, but not really good as a game for two players. 2XKO is looking way more mature, polished and apt for actual competitive fun, in comparison. I love Granblue Rising, but I also miss Soul Calibur 2 a lot.
I get you my take on it that when you not patch a game like in the past(their where none) players got too explore the game more and yes that is it but i must say today it goes faster the exploring as in the 90s because of the internet.
For me it's the rise of online. I'd enjoy a lot of these games in person but online just doesn't do it for me, and we have no locals here anymore, so..............
Maybe I missed it in the video, and I feel like you touched on it in the past a bit, but I feel like a big thing that makes me like older games more is that newer games are "too good" in a certain way. They really try very hard to make sure every character in the game gets consistent combos off of everything for low resources. I know this isn't as true for anime games, but I feel like you watch 3rd strike or any game before it, and compare it to any SF game that came after, there is a lot more single hits going on in the older games. In older KoF games a lot of combos happen, but it still wasn't all that consistent, a lot of characters couldn't get full combos off of lights or far heavy attacks compared to what we see in XV, so while in older games you might get anti aired and lose a quick 10%, in XV you get hit by DP super for hopping and end up losing potentially 60-70%. It's not as true for anime games, since from the beginning with chains and stuff they have made combos pretty easily accessible from most hits, but for a lot of other games I feel like that makes a huge difference
I wasn't really playing fighting games in that 2013 and around age, but for me (I bought and tried lots of the games from that time frame) and for me those are the best games in the genre. Just bbcf, mvc3, p4 arena, skullgirls, IJ1. When I see those games I can't find a current (or older) game that surpasses that level of creativity in characters, system, combo game, etc.
For characters you could look at an older game that influenced your favorites, like Vampire Savior. Not only creative character design but in movesets; in this game even dashing does completely different things (grounded, hop dash, flying, etc.) and some characters will have air dash while others do not. It's an interesting example that has a bunch of crazy things thrown in that I don't think most modern developers would allow, and it means each character plays very different from each other. It's the direct inspiration for something like Skullgirls.
My issue is over paying for content thats available on release thats locked behind a paywall. Like bs season passes. I just miss the days of complete releases. Ill either like the game or not.
The games are straight up different when I played third strike or whatever even with zoomers or whatever the teenagers are now it is still just as wonderful
Hold on, so instead of just skipping the sponsor like a normal person, you actually decided to up your volume and seriously listen to it? Why on earth would you do that to yourself?
They don’t feel the same because everyone takes them way too seriously. It’s not just a fun game anymore it’s a way that people try to boost their ego in a weird way. They have way more structure and everyone is obsessed with ranks and crap like that.
Thank you for mentioning the game slowdowns. I've been saying it for a while but heat freezing the screen is literally the worst thing about the game for me, not even the actual heat mechanics, I've played enough anime games to be used to that There's other stuff that does that in Tekken but they're far less ubiquitous in games - your basically stupid if you don't use your heat, but you don't always wall break or rage art or land the like hitgrab moves. I didn't really notice until i played some t5dr and it was like i didn't get a headache while playing, if you can understand that as an analogy.
The funny thing about wavedashing in Melee is that while it *feels* unintentional, it isn't. In the old smash bros dojo website that sakurai made for melee there was a Q&A section where a JP Luigi player talked about it and Sakurai recommended using it like backdash, which is still how it's often used today. Still the dev team most certainly had no idea of the full breadth of movement that wavedashing opened specially on platforms. Like, wavedashing is in ultimate, only its utility is considerably more niche as it has about the same frame data as a character's normal dashback only it keeps you facing forward and the distance is different. Even so, it tells about how different the design landscape was back in the day, Sakurai described his design style as making games that anyone could play but had "hidden techniques/modes" for advanced players. There wasn't much of a concept of big time competition for videogames back then, so this kind of stuff was really done just for the people that liked playing these games for the sake of playing them. There was a widely accepted idea that there could be multiple different games in a single game that you'd have access to depending on how much time you invested on it, and they saw execution as the correlation to that time invested. Nowadays, execution is seen as just one aspect of gameplay flavor rather than something that developers use to separate levels of play and there's more this idea of trying to let new players play the "true game" without investing as much time on it, which indirectly means removing execution requirements.
Thanks to MANSCAPED for sponsoring today's video! Get The Beard & Balls Bundle for 20% OFF + Free International Shipping this holiday season with promo code "LORDKNIGHT" at mnscpd.com/lordknight
It's because the moves and fight mechanics are unbalanced and the moves for characters are constantly being changed! Then instead of fixing the move sets and balancing game mechanics, they end up releasing dlc nobody asked for!😂
seeing the melee meta evolving rapidly and midtiers getting top 8s 20 years later because now they can get consistent practice goes to show just how much good netplay can speed up a game's optimization
bruh King saying "I'm going into heat" is contextualy and thematicly terrifying
LK definitely became my favorite FGC content creator at some point and I never even noticed.
12:20 fun fact, the reason people miss the airdash isn't because of buffer, but because in melty blood there is a minimum airdash limit, meaning you have to be X pixels off the ground before an airdash can come out. Typically when people rise jB instead of airdash, they do the dash too fast as opposed to missing the A+B. In fact, in order to give more leniency to people who dashed with A+B, you can Kara cancel a and b normals into dash on their first frame.
today i learned
Probably a bit of both though. Hitting two buttons at the exact same time in those oldschool games can be a bit harder than people realize.
@@BusyCasual It is super hard, Garou is a prime exemple.
The worst part is when the old game good new game bad makes people so tired that they start saying old game bad even if the old game is good and they don't actually believe that. Like J. Cole said, "they act like two legends cannot coexist."
I have definitely been guilty of this, but then I tried Virtua Fighter 5, and holy hell turns out old games can be brilliant.
I was confused because it's Tekken 8 on my mind where it's generally "old game good, new game bad - No, old game bad, new game WORSE"
@@andrewmirror4611 we tekken players are in a special position here imo. If t7 had t8 budget, we would play t7 like the mk11 guys.
I feel like every iteration of BB had this after CT. No one said CT good CS bad. But i def heard CSE good CP bad. CP good CF bad.
For me I used to enjoy the old games much more than I currently do. I have not gotten into the new games because I have moved on from the fighting genre. I was a dark horse who never played in a tournament at my best in the Street Fighter Àlpha 3 for PlayStation 1 era. I just do not have the patience having lost my previous ability dropping down to a 3 star player. The same thing happened with Dark Souls as well. These games are most enjoyable when you can fully enjoy them. Though, being able to fully enjoy them means being able to use all systems in the game.
Fun fact: the MAIN stable of fighting games which is COMBOES was ALSO an accident. In sf2 it was apparently a glitch but capcom thought that links and comboes were so neat that they decided to expand on that system. Without that "glitch" in sf2, we wouldn't get guilty gear, mk or any combo crazy fighting game today
yeah him not mentioning this is hella sus
I defintely feel the slowdown thing a lot in a negative way for modern games. It feels like part of a package which prioritizes the viewer experience over the player experience where you want people who see it on a stream or something similar to get what is happening when they have never seen the game before you need to spend a lot more effort to make things read well. The slowness of modern games compared to a lot of old games is definitely what gets me the most.
Idk man. Slowing it down let's u actually tell what's going on, on both ends. Otherwise, it's all twitchy with no flow.
I understand that after dumping hours into a game, everything becomes clearer. But it doesn't look good. N visuals are half of the appeal
The games were fast and attacks did a lot of damage because it was designed around an arcade model. Which is make the AI cheap ( read inputs ) to eat quarters, make attacks have high dmg ( to speed up the round so fights don’t drag out ) so another player doesn’t have wait long to play same goes for the speed of the game.
Slight correction. K groove doesn't have a roll thats N groove.
K is the only Competitively Viable Groove with No Roll.
bro I literally asked someone who played the game to check this part for me and they said it was fine lmao. Thanks for the clarification
There’s decades of top8s with P and S all grooves are enough to be competitive
i still dont know why v-ism was allowed to exist in competitive play...
@@lordknightfgc Damn.... they tried to set you up for failure lol
Just play EO mode on the upcoming capcom fighting collection 2. No more roll canceling and significant changes to P and S grooves. Looking forward to it
Okay, you've activated my "fighting game dark age" rant.
It really wasn't just CAPCOM. SNK went bankrupt, was bought out, and made bad/irrelevant games. NRS games at the time were trash, and nobody else in the west was even still making fighting games as far as I know.
The only other people making 2d fighters were smaller Japanese companies, and how long were you waiting past the Japanese release, and how many arcades in the US were actually keeping up to date with the recent games? How many US cities actually had scenes, and how many of those Japanese games had scenes even in the big cities? Do you remember how fucked the PAL console releases were? (That lasted well past the dark ages, but when it was your only source of new 2d fighters it hit hard). GG was second biggest 2D fighting game getting active releases in the mid 2000s, but my friends who actively played KoF/3s/SoulCal had never heard of it when I bought a copy in 2008.
Even if you played 3D Fighters or Smash which were still getting timely and large releases, arcades were dying and online either didn't exist or was absolutely terrible. If you wanted to get better competitively, or even just play real people at all you had to personally know people who played and were around your level, and go to their house.
I understand that as a smash player that feels normal to you, but that wasn't the case in 1997, and obviously it's not the case now.
I agree that when some people talk about the dark ages, there's a narrative of "all fighting games weren't getting good releases, SF4 saved the community" which is stupid when GG/Tekken/Smash/Soul Calibur/VF/MB had good games come out, but there's a lot more to why 2003 to 2008 sucked for the FGC beyond Capcom releases sucking/not existing.
The people who invented that tale are or were capcucks. Simple. Nothing matters outside of Capcom fgs.
That attitude is also exposed in the way the American fgc that was engaged in competition in the early 00s (Capcom fanboys, starting with the Evo founders) didn't fully invest into GG - that was the hot new thing in the scene, that was very well made and authentic and with an excellent roster. It should have become the center of the 2d fg community since SF died. At the very least GG should have been promoted to the same ranks of CvS2, that was the latest Capcom fg at the time Evo began. But no... GG was treated almost like the Evo founders were jealous of a brand new promising 2d fg in the scene.
2003 sucked for Latin America because that year kof died... also without kof the arcades died too...
The main thing I find different about games now vs the 90s/2000s is what I think of as play style compression, a great example is SF6, 5 had the same issue to some extent, but 3rd strike was an early example. Games are more and more enforcing a play style with game mechanics, in 6 all characters end up at the same range doing the same things because the universal mechanics are so strong, parry in 3s did the same thing. If you look at games with weaker universal mechanics like SF 2 and 4 you get characters that want to stay at different ranges, some that play more rush down, some that keep away and some mid range but all are viable. A great example is Guile in SF4, Dieminion and NuckleDu played the character very differently but both were successful. Now there is a "correct" way to play each character, and all matches end up looking the same because universal mechanics dominate the game meaning that play style is compressed into a single boring method and character strength is defined by how well they interact with the universal mechanics.
If Universal mechanics were removed, or kept very weak then there would be a lot more creativity in how people approach characters and matchups.
This.
Plus modern games are more focused on aggressiveness rather than setting up the neutral.
@@DPL58 True, the risk/reward in a lot of modern games is tilted heavily towards aggressive play rather than defence or patience.
@Yaarmehearty also the eternal 50/50. Sf6 is pretty much a 50/50 game where you end up most of the time. You can't set neutral properly if the opponent sets you guessing every time. It doesn't help you with the overly aggressive UM. Sf3 is old and aggressive but you can set up neutral. Nowadays it's not the case.
Impossible to realistically imagine the industry going back to the early fg model. Like SF playing like SF2, TK playing like TK1, MK playing like the og MK1, etc. The practical solution would be to tone down the impact of those mechanics, like you said later in your comment.
@@carlosaugusto9821 agreed. I don't mind aggressive gameplay but tone down the rush mechanics and establish a better neutral.
answer: you're 40 years old
Am 17 but he is spitting facts
Older games hit different
The true answer
Bars
Stop calling me out
@@halimalnami1560 Back when you were 2 years old SF4 hit different fr fr
I really wish fighting games would stop with the cinematic bs, I know it brings in the casuals but cutting away from the match for a movie really kills the flow.
screw that, that can stay, just make a non cinematic super too
I am also so so so so so tired of the supers that break out of the 2D perspective. It’s so annoying.
I think cinematic supers are a good idea to enhance the product in the modern era, because this is a formulaic genre, that tends to repetitive sequels, and using mostly the same characters with the same moves, and the sequels even became less creative than they were in the past, and rosters can't grow gradually in every sequel.
So it's good that fg devs came up with ways to make the sequels look less cheap and less like remakes of 90s/00s games. For example, Ryu's Shin Shoryuken debuted in 97, it's 24 years already... It would be bad (imo) if the move continued being done in "2d" like in 97 and not in cinematics. I'm really grateful for Ryu's Ultra 2 in SF4 and Lv3 in SF6.
But I can also understand that some longer than average supers can become bothersome. In that case the problem is the longer time. Also particular parameters, like it's easier to do supers per match in TK7 and 8 than do Lv3 supers in SF6.
@@carlosaugusto9821 nothing feels more repetitive than seeing the same canned LVL3 cutscene every match over and over and over. At least the old supers looked cool and were over pretty fast. I'll take a SF3 or Super Turbo super over these little movies any day of the week.
I think there's a happy medium to be found with including the fun, pretty cinematics but also not making them too intrusive. Like, just making them a bit snappier and less drawn out would make a world of difference.
Imo kof xv is one of the most underrated fighting games
it’s a shame it’s not more popular but hopefully city of wolves will get people to stick around for future snk games
i think xrd is an interesting game in that arcsys deliberately added in a lot of those 'happy accidents' that originated in the older games. i really doubt things like drill cancel or jump install were originally intended, but come xrd they now were. so it's a modern, very deliberately designed game, complete with (some) balance patches, that still has some of those weird bugs/features that make it feel like an old game. i can't really think of another game like that.
Strive super prc, kara dash cancels, kara supers, frc momentum, brc overheads
You know LK finally made it when there's a manscaped ad in the middle of the video lol.
Glad some ppl finally noticed, you're kinda GOATed at doing videos and I hope the sponsors can make it more sustainable in the long run
May be my nostalgia glasses talking but I really do think the best era for fighting games as we know them was the 2009 - 2015 era. Also, I think a lot of people take for granted how crazy it is that companies can just alter content of their game that you have already received without launching a new disc. It was really fun getting those discs for the new versions from a collector standpoint though lol.
That made me feel old. Nostalgic fgs for me are only in early-mid 90s. PS3 stuff is "modern" in the sense of time period.
No 90s arcade was absolutely the time to be a player. That was something I constantly have explain to my friends is the pureland that was the arcade. By 2000 arcades were already struggling because of home console.
@carlosaugusto9821 very fair. I was born in 96 so I missed out on arcades but really admired people who got to experience arcades. I just mean from a perspective of, game difficulty, ease of knowledge, and player skill. Games like AC, BB, MVC3 were challenging and rewarding, but SRK and Dustloop were bustling so it was easy to find tournaments, places to play, guides, etc.
Nowadays games feel a bit cookie cutter, info is scattered all over Discord and Twitter posts, and things like evo and CPT aside from the prize pool feel a little less prestigious than they used to due to what I think is them cannibalizeing each other a bit.
You clearly never gamed in the 90s. Nothing beats the feeling of destroying people in the arcade.
in a way it feels like a double edged sword since on one hand there;s the "yay i don't have to buy another version" factor but on the otherhand you could potentially find you liked a previous version of the game that you can now never go back to because the devs drastically changed the game you already bought since as well as the fact that we no longer have cases where a game has some minor seeming jank that people just have to live with, over time the game evolves around said jank in exciting 7 charming ways nobody expected.(ie: we will likely never get games like sailor moon s, super smash bros melee, or heck even mvc2(mvc3 making everyone able to touch of death easily instad of just like removing the infinites while still giving the player the same relative freedom of options will always be the wrong move imo.) again)
For CvS2, it's N-Groove with a roll. K doesn't have rolls so you can't roll cancel in it.
For the beginning of the video, in reference to balance patches, I think it wasn't stress quite enough how unintended mechanics shape entire genres, and the effects it could have. Tf2 has entire character archetypes based off mechanics that John Carmack wanted to patch out of the game. As for patch cycles, it's also not stressed enough how the versions of the game you like stop existing. Another FPS example, but Apex legends had some really cool movement tech. It was advanced, and if you did it, you had a major advantage, so it was patched out of the game. In terms of older games, that might have just lived on in the game even if it never came back to the series, or eventually have been incorporated into later games as part of the series DNA. But because it was an exploit, it just goes away and is forgotten.
This makes the same games from their release unrecognizable to the games you play now. I'm not a huge Strive fan, but I played it. I went away, came back, and now the game feels very different than it did when I played it in the first month of release. Every character is a different character and all the system mechanics change. Strive is ephemeral. When we had Street Fighter 4, Super Street Fighter 4, and Ultra Street Fighter 4, if you didn't like the system mechanic changes or characters, just play the old game. I know +R is never going to be as popular as Strive today, but I can just go play it. Same with Smash. I don't like new Smash games after Melee (except some nostalgia for brawl as a for fun game), but I can just go play that original version of melee. And when the game isn't "the same" as when I was younger, it's strictly just people getting better and having explored the game for 20 years.
I personally find that beautiful, and love all the BS emergent systems and gameplay that come from this cycle. I was even part of Lost Planet lobbies where every single person was doing some super meta build and there was strictly one valid playstyle, but we all enjoyed ourselves. I understand this perspective is no good for modern games, the massive audiences they try to reach, and the tournament cultures around the products, but it's really annoying hearing people say over and over again "you are old so everything you are saying is because of that." I'm not even that old, I'm literally just 30. Not everything is simply an old man on a porch who hates new things.
Is the fps mechanic rocket jumping?
@@nlharringI assumed it was spy disguise.
@@nlharringits bunny hopping
I agree 100%, most recently it happened to me in skullgirls, apparently my character (umbrella) was still in beta or whatever so they decided to balance her by completely changing her character resource management system to a very simplified version because previously one of her modes was deemed too desirable, so they said the meta was for her to try to balance into being always in that mode (which is pretty fun for me) but her other modes were deemed to weak. So they made that one mode kinda bad, and the other ones stronger but also overhauled how you change between modes and now rhere is no reason to try to balance your mode, it is now just an afterthought
This makes me think about how many people nowadays consider an online game "dead" after its final update/content is released, and that always bothered me. Its not dead, its COMPLETE. Now people can dig into it and establish the true meta, rather than constantly worry if the character/strategy they were using will fundamentally change in a week. Melee wouldn't be what it is if it was getting constant patches. Its just a very dissapointing modern thing that makes me really feel for the developers of these games trying to pump out mOrE cOnTeNt for the kids to consume.
i wish people just played what they liked instead of saying the same things over and over on social media
It's tough when there aren't many people interested in playing the old game you like so I kinda feel their pain but whining in every thread isn't going to change anything lol
That's why social media is a mistake
Maybe cause games in active development and receiving patches can potentially change with feedback. Talking about them an make a difference, specially if the opinion becomes majoritary on the playerbase. For example, meaty throws were patched on sf5.
The only problem i see with this is people downplaying their chars all the time on tierlists, it just freeze the discussion when people are not honest.
@@caiooa People need to stop with this mentaltiy that they can somehow shift ideals. Sure, you can provide feedback but that doesn't mean you go on social media and complain. They utilize data now when they develop alot more than they did back in the day. What developers are looking at isn't neccesarily what your talking about.
Its like your going to the doctor and your telling them about symptons. You may THINK this is what you have but the doctor will diagnose the symptoms and figure out what you actually have.
The Patches in SF6 and in SFV generally has a ton of things most players are like....why are you doing this. However they have to account for everyone, even casuals who might just play world tour or extreme battles or avatar battles. They may not make sense to you when your just playing really two modes of a game but for others maybe lower skill than you it does make sense.
Again, I'm not saying feedback is bad, I'm saying that when you think the feedback your giving translates doesn't neccesarily into exactly what you gave as feedback. Generally, the feedback you give is a symptom and they are using that to diagnose an actual problem.
@Shodan130 only xbox got t6 and tag 2 😭 and us ps players got the mf PSP version of t6 shits sad
BIG THING I think impacts the different feel is the amount of pushback on moves and how much frame data plays into the feel. What I mean is that a game like 3rd strike, block strings are often short with a lot of pushback on moves and I can say from personal experience that you can play competently just by feel and not studying frame data. On the other side of our spectrum with street fighter 5, I felt much more of a need to study the frame data so I'm not caught in knowledge checks. I can say just about the same with +R and Strive.
When it comes to how widespread information is and how fast we "Figure out" games, I think having more available information is good. Having more available info earlier lets high level players be able to more quickly figure out the real stuff while lower level players will have an easier time getting to a level of competency. I am under the impression that fighting games have become easier, or simpler rather. Hard stuff still exists, but matches and answers tend to be more structured and predetermined which is what really separates level of play. I don't really know where I'm going with this, but I think that older games tend to be a bit more complex or deep, but the modern age of widespread information is just awesome.
I feel this as well. For instance, going back to Super Turbo the fireballs are disgusting and do an incredible amount of pushback... but it also means they are the most FUN fireballs to use. Even with normal moves in that game, pushback means a lot of what you can do is safe... you don't have to lab out what is safe and what isn't because it is so easy to tell just from playing. It also means that blockstring isn't going to last long and you can tell when you are able to push a button in most cases. You don't HAVE to study the frame data, and back in the day that didn't even exist. Think about the old term "priority" that basically told you which move had the better frame data in any given interaction; you don't need to know the frame data itself, just which moves win against which other ones.
Then you have the input windows that aren't as lenient, and ESPECIALLY in that title. It's considered "execution heavy" but much of that is trying to get your special moves to come out and landing 3-5 hit combos lol. It's the perfect example of something that is easy to tell what is going on, but difficult to replicate. I don't play third strike, but I can sit down and watch a tournament much easier than a newer fighting game since, like you said, there aren't a bunch of knowledge checks that you have to learn via frame data. So I'm always hyped to watch that third strike tournament, while I get kind of bored watching a new game.
Honestly even on the smaller side of things I also feel like games trend towards slower frame data as well. 3 frame normals used to be incredibly commonplace, but these days they're kinda rare for most games, and everything also trends towards being way more negative which has the compound effect of making it so pressure is slower to push on someone and more often (compared to older games) ends in a more neutral-ish positioning if not actually just returning to neutral.
We just live in an era where games cost more to make and take far longer and games are typically created by people with decades of experience either creating or playing fighting games.
In the 90s and eatly 2000s you'd have games that took a year or less to pop out where designers cared little about balance or competitive longevity so much as they just cared about putting their neat ideas in this new genre into a game. The end result was a lot of experiments (most of which failed on some level) that led to many unique experiences that felt less rigid and over-designed. Many mechanics or techniques that would make these games eternally playable and beloved would either be unintentional stuff like crouch tech in SF3/SF4 or intentional mechanics like Melee wavedashing blowing open offensive and defensive play potential beyond the creator's wildest dreams (or nightmares if you're Sakurai).
Combo theory/structure in games is more rigidly defined, offensive and defensive mechanics ate far more deliberate and specific in scope, with every system or design decision being tightly wound together in ways that are more logical and therefore solvable.
It isn't inherently bad that games are "over-designed" compared to the games of yesteryear, but it definitely is a bit sad.
Idk what to say about this, its also about the internet culture nowadays. People bitched about release Sol for Strive, and how he's ruining the game, how unfair it is to have a + on block mid, etc, and there's a good chance that a lot of people got sick of that and quit early. So if Arcsys wanted to have a financially viable product for a few more years, they would have to do something about it.
Same thing happened when Luke released in SFV, it was super overtuned to the point that 90% of the top 8 in tournaments were Lukes. If that was the only SF we would have for the rest of time, I don't think many people would still play it competitively.
Same thing happened with Tekken 7 DLCs, all were super broken on release, and they all got toned down up to a point where tekken was playable again for the majority of the community.
So, unless we want these games to be played by 200-300 dedicated people online, these products need to be financially viable, which means they have be able to be maintained, tested across iterations and to also survive the online gaming culture.
If Strive, SF6 and Tekken 8 would have been just "previous games but with rollback", we wouldn't even be having these discussions, because there would be so little incentive to have them. I wouldn't even be typing this comment if it weren't for Strive, me being able to play it online from Eastern Europe, where fighting game culture is non-existent.
I do think some of the devs are experienced and over designing their game, but I do think some fg devs are hacks that just got lucky and are fucking it up now
"games cost more" - myth spread by corpos to make you comfortable with paying 60-70$ for base game and 20$ for dlcs. Stop spreading that sht further.
VF 5 revo is gonna show you just how good a FG can be w/o being overdesigned lmao
@@MastaGambit the people are not ready for a game like VF I’m afraid
Me who absolutely loves DOA6 & MBTL despite being around since Tekken 1 and MvC
Because new games are designed by fans of fighting games who grew up to become game devs. I have the same type of problems with anime as I do fighting games. They share a lot of the same tropes in terms of the feel of gameplay vs animation and directing.
This is a great point. The over-designed-ness people mention is kind of because the new games are all aware of the genre boundaries, and the devs set out to make fighting games, rather than end up making a game that happens to fit the genre, which means they are aware of and intentionally include many familiar elements, basically the equivalent of overt tropes and cliches.
roll grooves in CVS2 are C, A and N, not K
K is the top tier groove that doesn't have roll cancels but instead has just defense, short hops and gaining meter through taking damage
whenever i’m tired of getting my ass kicked in strive, I go get my ass kicked in +R and it resets the rage nicely. wild how perspective can help 😂
It's not the developers. It's the audience. Fighting games take time and dedication and nobody is willing to roll with that. So the devs try to accommodate by making things easier, completely undoing what made the games good to begin with.
This.
@6:05 I was just talking about this same thing today on bluesky - patch culture changed the FGC’s pH tolerance to adapting to the mechanically obscene, whether that obscenity is perceived or actual
People wouldn't stop crying if hyper viper beam existed in a new game today. That shit was just accepted. Not to mention you can time a shot on an incoming character and get it for free 😂.
On any other series, you are right, but MVC2 brought people's expectation that the vs series is by all intents and purposes a kusoge. People accept MVC3's relatively poor balance as a feature rather than a bug because of MVC2. When and if a new MVC releases, I think it will get way more leeway than any other game in terms of balance.
Playing MvC2 now is frustrating because everybody is just trying to do infinites which really impedes my oldschool endless Viper/Air Viper/Hyper Viper Beam gameplan.
dont rmeember who said it, but i'd rather have a busted character or a busted move than a busted mechanic.
@@HellecticMojo MvC became a franchise that can get away with everything, that won't be accepted in other games by this same community.
Everything was new literally, there were no set standards, no developed culture about the games, and people were younger and had little critical sense. Also it was just arcade games released every 1-2 years and had no updates. Those factors made a big difference.
But now the industry is mature, there are development standards, more attention to frame and damage data, balance, etc. And the culture is mature, the old schoolers are naturally experienced and became more critical and demanding, and even new players enter any modern game with a bigger load of concepts to grasp, pushed by the own tutorial. And now each game is purchased, they are not cheap, and there's waves of dlc, so it's natural to have different expectations and demands. Especially because online updates are normalized in gaming. That made a big difference in how to deal with these products.
I love content going in depth on fighting game mechanics and how they've changed over the years. I want to understand all of it so I can know why I like what I do. Honestly, I really like old games like ST or Vampire Savior, but newer games just don't appeal to me and I can't get enough in depth info to figure out WHY. In general, in these old games you can go look up frame data, but you NEVER NEED it to figure out the game... both games mentioned are super easy to pick up and play, visually you can tell what is going on, etc. I think something is lost especially with so much talk nowadays for "accessibility."
Side note: Strive has way more ways to break the pace of the game.
Not just RC, but the COUNTER-slowdown, the wallsticks, wallbreaks and on top of all of that the supers which are also way more common than in previous titles as well due to the knockdown post wallbreak.
Additionally, while BRC only slows down the opponent when in range, the screen space of Strive is generally way smaller so you are more often closer, making the use of (B/P)RC in neutral easier and more frequent. Also, BRC has a way longer time freeze than YRC did in Xrd.
So Strive's slowdowns are not only more frequently occuring during a match (despite not having a 25 meter RC option) but also have longer "pauses" for each of them.
You didn't mention that rounds are also much shorter, and every round ends with "SLASH! ... victory pose ... wipe to new round ... LET'S ROCK!". More rounds = more downtime. There's probably something to say about removal of air tech also leading to more effective downtime, as there are no choices you can make while you're in hitstun besides burst.
I'm glad people like Strive, but I can't ever get into it personally, and my main complaint is that it feels too start-stop. Neutral feels very fast, but after the first touch it feels like the game halts for seconds at a time while one player does their thing or both players watch animations.
@@user-et3xn2jm1u Valid criticism but I think that goes too far into a different territory than artificial slowdowns the game introduces.
If we're talking about the moment-to-moment decision making and the overall decision space of Strive, that's obviously a whole other can of worms like you mentioned.
(Also, the neutral of Strive just feels bad due to being more of a forced anime-footsies-type of hybrid which doesn't harmonize well. The slower movement and unresponsive feeling airdashes don't help either.)
The answer to this is the same to similar questions regarding other genres; you've been playing these games for decades of your life, and they all tend to share the same basic formula. You have seen it all, and are comparing your current experienced self to your past self. Back when you knew little and every little thing felt like a brand new revelation.
The games haven't changed that much, but you have.
And they are strictly purchased now, and are not cheap if the dlc is counted. I believe that factor also makes people feel like demanding a solid product, better balance, etc.
The simple answer is that 1: the design philosophy of *most* games is radically different because there's actually some degree of thought put into balance. And 2: we're old and cynical and we know about frame data and effective strategies and yearn for the times we enjoyed the games by just hitting buttons but we can't do that anymore because we know too much.
I think it’s also self-disrespectful to believe knowing the mechanics of a game well is what ruins it. Knowledge isn’t some damn tragedy: and it especially isn’t when we stop ramming into one another for improving cause “ew meta.”
this is not the answer at all
Big disagree one of the reasons fighting games are my favorite is BECAUSE of all the knowledge and learning that goes into it. One of my favorite things is sitting in training mode, labbing tech, learning frame data, practicing match ups, learning different combos, etc. Your second point makes it sound like you're just nostalgic for your childhood lol
I agree with this. I'd say this applies to every game honesty. I think when you master(or know too much) the mechanics of a game, it ruins the tricks and surprises the game has in store. I'm not saying s3 > sf6, but i think i had the most fun in sf6 when experimenting with the drive mechanics
Couldn't disagree more. The era of game I long for the most is the 2014 era, where games like Xrd, BBCF, and UNI were coming out. It's nonsense to believe that the developers didn't know what they were doing making those games at this point, OR that the players were simply "hitting buttons". It's the perfect middle ground era between XX, a game that can be fun but can also be extremely grating, and Strive, a game where it feels like they personally sanded off all the stuff I thought was fun in the game.
"A long, long, long, long time ago way back in the year 2009..." Wow I feel old now
My brother blinks for every word
Imo, it's partially because fighting games all have a bunch of systems, and are geared heavily toward offensive play and very high damage per interaction.
They were simpler, and despite the lack of qol features they had, were more endearing.
the last time fgs as a whole had simpler + fewer mechanics than modern games was before 1999
@@zeywopdepends on the game, tekken is more mechanically bloated than ever, same with street fighter. The only games this really rings true for was anime games as strive is less mechanically dense than anime games that came before.
But if you aren’t an anime player FG’s are gonna feel a lot more complicated than ever before
On the other hand the franchise would look cheap if it never tried to grow further from the SF2 formula. I think this process of becoming more elaborate and complicated is impossible in this genre. The debatable part is only about specific gameplay ideas.
TBH "Old Game Good New Game Bad" discourse is honestly not the problems we should be talking about. I think the only thing that truly matters is if the game is fun. What people find fun is different, but if the game is fun, people keep playing it. MvC2/3 are unblanced clusterfucks of design but people have been playing them for decade because they're fun. Modern games are certainly more well designed, but fun is subjective and some people may not enjoy it. Strive may have classic Guilty Gear bullshit, but stuff like guard crush loops and safe looping pressure are obnoxious, and whilst present in other games, the modern design puts emphasis on it. This is also why I think things like Pot losing kara had so much backlash, whilst it wasn't hard to do with practice, some people found it a fun and interesting part of Pot's kit (for year 1 when I played Pot I agreed.) I also like the point about slowdowns. I swear every special now has to have an anamatic close up cutscene before it even hits, and it'll play even if you don't get the sweet spot. I think it's especially worse because devs don't give invul specials anymore and instead opt for invul supers which randomly just pauses the game for like 5 seconds in the middle of it for no reason. Lastly, on your point about inputs and how they feel, I do wish SOME games would opt for making execution hard and rewarding, like I appericate being able to pick up and play characters, but I think it feels sad when you can pick up Happy Chaos and start doing wall-to-walls within like 2 hours which kinda ruins the whole "He's hard to play but he's good because of it" which just puts him in a balancing nightmare situation. Good vid tho!
My problem is that they feel the same. Very little significant innovation in fighting games.
In the 90s, because of the yearly release schedules, we literally witnessed innovations through the whole year and in every year. It was really like that.
But now games are repetitive and focused on small refinements and graphics quality. Even though I understand that it's probably not possible to continue innovating the genre in the same way of the 90s, my problem with the modern generation is that it became too uncreative and doesn't try enough to change that situation.
I concur. In the 90’s it felt like game devs were always trying something new, partially due to it being a fairly new genre. Not everything worked, but not for lack of trying. Now, though many games are technically sound, they all feel very much the same to me. I’m sure this will change at some point. I’m awaiting the next evolution/innovation in the fighting game genre.
@@Matayis_Patchbelly Some months ago, as a i was commenting on a fgc video i was taken by a worrying realization, that the large majority of recent fgs have more offensive game design; cinematic supers that look similar in their "scene directing" style; a "cancelling" mechanic that is used in the middle of an action to extend combos (not only but mostly)... like V Trigger cancel and Drive Rush in SF, Max Mode in KOF, Roman Cancel in GG, Heat Engager in TK, and Rev Accel and Feint cancel in the upcoming Fatal Fury. Also modern TK and SC games have meters like 2d fgs. And the biggest recent (kinda) fg release that isn't from a veteran franchise was DBFZ, that is a MvC imitation. All that convinced me that we are in the worst time for fgs creatively.
Like i said in my early comment, it's not that i'm expecting the genre to be explored and tested in the same pace of the 90's... but this current situation became ridiculous. Like, the first time TK does a robust gameplay change, it's basically SF5's V Trigger (loosely) with the autorun of Heat Engager based on KOF's Max mode. Tragic.
not the Manscaped mixup
jumpscare
need the bag, sorry
just use the skip ad os bro
Not gay but this guy is getting more handsome as he ages
Nothing gay about giving a man a compliment
Yeah he looks good but man that is the weirdest ive ever seen anyone go gray. Not that its bad, just strange
Vampire Savior also dealt with your first topic.
11:00 Ult's blessing and curse is that there is a 9f input buffer, as well as a second (infinite window, in a way) hold buffer that will give you an action as long as you are holding that button on your First Actionable Frame
It's more often the hold buffer that gets in the way, imo
It's great that players don't get to exploit games' mechanics like they did due to patches, but now the over-reliance on system mechanics integrated into a character's gameplan is making games stale faster.
Uhhh if you're gonna drop in your ad reads like that, you might want to double check the volume balance.
I'd love to see you watch a whole ass Slash tournament and comment on how things used to be. Like, i think a lot of younger players would really have their eyes opened by seeing the old crazy stuff.
thanks for the warning on the ad read lol
The main issue I have with more modern fighting games is the constant "balance patching". It's not only that they often patch the fun out of the game, but it makes it really hard to come and go. You may stop playing for a few months then come back and bam! SSJ Goku's 2M is slow as a snail and old combos don't work anymore.
Older games have busted stuff, for sure, but they stay the same so you can develop techniques or ways to work around them. And you can always come back to the game regardless if you were out for a month or 5 years.
The new game has different production conditions and belongs in a different context for the genre.
The old game was available at arcade, or at a friend's house, or could be traded with a friend, or rented, etc. The new game is purchased by the user, it's the standard launch price, and there's dlcs.
And the old game was made in yearly schedule, with the next one immediately in the plans. But the new game is made with a long term vision and a serious sense of balance...
And the fact is that balance is always hard and launch versions particularly will always be a challenge to make. And given those costs it's natural and expected to demand a better balance. There's also the factor that people only get older, more experienced with different fgs, and become more aware and critical.
So that's why balance patches are a good idea in modern fgs. But what can be criticized more legitimately is a frequent pace of patches.
There's a weird absence in newer games of implimented character specific interactions. Like those interactions characters have because of things like character height, weight, hurtboxs, etc that cause certain unique things to play out. I'd venture a guess that the large absence of this is because game devs being able to learn and understand and patch games to keep them in their view of how they want character interactions to reflect their design and not these esoteric parts of their implimentation.
for the record LK, they did change the short hop laser example 😂 aerial projectiles are across the board usually safer than the grounded versions but they are not comboable like falco laser used to be and have little hitstun (again as a generalization)
Patches changed things drastically. It was great when you could actually learn a game once but now you have to relearn it every season because moves and mechanics change.
It was practically the same before, since new games came out every year, so there was no time for the meta to develop the same way it that later on.
But that view can be distorted by a misunderstanting about the 00s fg scene, with Evos and such. Only because there were no longer yearly new games after CvS2 (2001), so the fgc was forced to behave differently just for the sake of their addiction to the same Capcom fgs... instead of changing to an actual new game like GG, KOF 02, etc. But in the 90s the basic idea was to move to the next yearly game, that's all.
@carlosaugusto9821 I see what you're saying but a different game is just that. You can jump back and forth playing different games. Once a patch or new season comes out for a fighting game nowadays, the old one is gone as far as playing competitively. People still have tournaments for old games but no one is gonna go back to Tekken 8 version 1.06 or something
Im curious how do you instant air dash in melty blood?
I believe it’s forward, up forward, neutral and then forward
@@michaelburleson2687 Leverless+SOCD makes this not really hard at all thankfully 😅
I know they keep games fresh and balanced but I still cant help but find patches frustrating / disheartening.
As someone who doesn't have loads of time to sink on fighting games when they change up what moves link or cancel into others etc it can really throw off your muscle memory.
This part. It stops me from going to tournaments often because I feel like I gotta learn the entire game all over again when they add in more mechanics or overhaul a character I main. Hell, I even have to learn someone else entirely when they change my main too much.
To me the principle is perfectly fine, but the execution of patches must just be more carefully planned and paced. In the old times that dynamic was represented by the revision releases like in SF2 CE, HF, etc, SFA2g, SFA3u, etc... Those used to come in the following year and all had a rebalance.
It's actually N Groove not K Groove. C, A and N let you roll cancel.
6:30 you're right about roll canceling. Most, if not all home ports of CvS2 (the ones marked EO) had roll canceling removed, back in the day.
RC is in dreamcast version
@genejas correct, dreamcast version is not marked EO on the box
Xbox and Gamecube versions (EO) didn't have RC. Dreamcast and PS2 ports have it.
@@sabishiihito that's what I said in my original comment
Yeah i get what you're saying but I'm a die hard MVC2 player, an old head. What felt different compared to now was the freedom. There's more than one way to play any character and that includes top tiers. In newer games, characters are created to play exactly as intended, it doesn’t seem like there's any wiggle room. So Cable for instance is intended to fight long range but he's got beefy normals and can def hold his own close up. Nowadays i just dont see that versatility or utility with character archetypes. I think in recent memory DBFighterZ did it best. It felt a little more forgiving when experimenting, and you could create custom combos outside of the automated ones. But nowadays i dont see that with SF6 and especially not with SNK games.
I grew up with "old" fighting games and still, i'd rather play the more recent stuff.
Only criticism i think is genuine towards most modern fighting games is the hyper-agressiveness/nerfing defense, wich is why i play UNI2/BBCF aka the best modern fighting games.
The thing is, I feel that having too much aggro can actually have the opposite effect and start promoting turtling.
@@killercore007 good luck turtling against offense built on guesses
@@VDViktor Let me put this another way. It can make both players more afraid to throw out anything in neutral, considering what one stray hit can do.
Now that I think about it, perhaps passive would be a better word here.
@@killercore007 I've learned that if a game favors offense, most people will rush you the hell down. What you described only happens in high level play.
Centralfiction was 10 years ago bro...
Slow downs, long combos and super animations are my main issues with modern games. Except for this, I prefer modern games much more than old FG.
C, A, and N groove have rolls, not K. I would make a note on your video with the correction. Also, CVS2 did have a "patched" version of it. EO. No one liked it and it was never talked about again. Similarly to Alpha 3. No one liked the updated "patched" versions and the competitive scene stuck with the original.
I found the Falco thing on my own *because* I knew about stuff like Cable. I doubt I would have if I wasn't doing instant air fireballs in other games and I didn't come to that on my own in those games.
I think I like patches for balance updates, but not for how most companies deal with glitches. Too many companies have a blanket unintended=remove policy. In an unpatched game the players get to decide whether to ban tech that gets discovered, which is usually way better. However, with online ranked being so much more important now, and tournament tech/glitch/exploit bans really having no power over random online players (if they even know about them) I don’t think that really works for a modern game, even if the devs did balance related patches to intended mechanics only and left any unintended tech untouched.
Really I think the way forward is for companies to change their policy towards glitches, getting rid of stuff that is broken and unfun, but keeping stuff that isn’t. Some companies (usually only ones founded by competitive players) even make fun tech more consistent to perform or expand upon it, turning it into a feature. This is really the ideal attitude to have.
I don't play a ton of different fighting games, but i think my biggest "new game bad" take is with Guilty Gear +R compared to Strive. I just cannot stand the way strive feels to play. I definitely don't think +R is perfect, but everything about that game just comes together in such a specific way that tickles my brain in a way most other FGs ive played cannot
What's this "cursed" input for IAD in Melty Blood? He mentions at about 12:00. Is it somehow worse than like uf,f?
hey mr. editor man can you please check when you're inserting music into the video to make sure you don't accidentally pick a version of the song that loops the first 7 seconds for 5 minutes straight, this pitch black intrusion edit is making things a bit rough.
Banger video you still play melee at all?
Bro as an old head from Melee and hearing you say short hop lasers are beginner tech I lost it. Also, wave dashing wasn't a bug like people have claimed. They were just mistaken about Sakurai's wording. He intended for the mechanic of air dodging into the ground, he just didn't expect it to be used in the way it was being utilized; i.e. fast ground movement and directional control. There's a reason each character has different speeds in how they interact with wave dashing that doesn't correlate to their ground or air speed. Luigi is a good example as he doesn't have great air or ground speed, but has the longest wave dashes in the game outside of Samus using actual bugs for a near infinite one.
For all those people who feels new games are too easy to "figure out", you just need to choose a better game or character to explore. I'm a Lei player since 1996, and I have never felt left without stuff to learn and master. Now researching Ling has been a joy, even though I don't like T8 very much. Cagliostro setups = thousands of hours of new ideas to try. Old games weren't more rich or complex than modern ones: they just were more obscured and gatekeept by those who hoarded the knowledge. The depth to explore is still there, its just that the diving equipment is better now.
Imma keep it real with you FGC legend LordKnight.
My brain can no longer process anything related to this topic but I shall leave a like and comment for the almighty algorithm. 🙇
Speaking for the games I played mostly, things that change that didn't please me (although they're not necessarily bad) are that both SF6 and GGST seems way more linear and streamlined than the previous games in their franchises. SFV was a bit slower as well, which made me feel less overwhelmed. What I mean by this is gameplans and gameplay seems much less varied and nuanced in general than they were, with characters feeling more distinctive between them than they are now. This is a reason why I feel way less compelled to even watch newer games for longer periods of time
So you’re talking about the short hop it’s funny because I didn’t even think about that being an accident. You play non fighting game old games there was stuff like that. Like less recovery on jumping attacks. So that’s how I found it. Stuff like that just seemed normal to me. Halo 2 had a bunch of glitches as well. Cancelling animations and stuff like that. All found out on accident or testing stuff. I didn’t even have internet back that.
19:25 wdym fair, it's not, cos the other player literally needs that time to get in and set things up, that's just frame advantage, then you get mixed so you have to engage lol. Cinematics aren't that though. I don't think CH slowdown is a good solution also, it kinda invalidates skill of confirming these situations on the fly. Beyond that it's a little too in your face and pace breaking imo. Persona does it better cos it's more lowkey and CH hitstun addition is even bigger than strive sometimes.
I totally agree. Strive does suck.
19:39 Mans speaking to my soul
i dont know but like, come play blazblue yall, it's a fun ass game
that's what I'm saying!!!
"way too long super animation thing" LOOKING AT YOU, STREET FIGHTER X TIMEOUT
I am 36. I slept over at my friends house every other week to play Tekken 2 and then he would come to mine to play perfect dark. I played my copy of SFA2 for SNES until it broke. I played more Tekken 4 and SC2 than should be legal. In my twenties I would play any fighter that came out on PS3 or 360, particularly BlazBlue, T6, and MK9. Before I had my son and started my PhD program, I played 5k plus ranked matches of MK11, not including the thousands of matches against my best friend (along with DBFZ and T7).
I really enjoy SF6, Strive, T8, and MK1 (shoot me), but I’m not really PLAYING them. But I have learned that fighting games never really change. Some are good and some aren’t, some I am terrible at (looking at you KoF) and others I am pretty good at, some feel novel and others scratch a nostalgic itch. But they are part of what I enjoy most about video games. Sitting down and going 1v1 with a friend or stranger and seeing who is better.
People forget that what is new now will soon become old in ten years strive will have been in it's final state for an extended duration. Design ideas will shift again away leaving it as the others were.
for me it's fighting game not holding same interest as it did when i was younger
No games have no turbo mode feature like that all used too.
Only Capcom games, and not all them either
@@carlosaugusto9821 definitely not just capcom, SNK did as well.
Fighting games have "progressed" and left certain elements behind in totality, irrespective of how they may work holistically. Obviously, new games need to introduce new things but they seem limited in how they can be implemented by ignoring how some new mechanic may mesh to "archaic" designs. Ignoring controversial things like input leniency or meterless invincible reversals, something like dashing is in everything and it has an incredible impact on how space is controlled. It's clearly a temping thing to include as it is very versatile with other systems, but itself homogenizes styles of games and limits alterative movement mechanics. There is lots of this going on. It's the insidious things that get taken for granted that limits the diversity of games.
This is a good point. Universal mechanics do help whatever you throw together to be more likely to work, but it does limit the design space. Look at dash in an old title like Vampire Savior. They all function differently; some grounded, some are a hop, others let you fly in the air. A few characters have an air dash while most of the cast does not. The normals you can use also changes from character to character (one character can only use crouching normals when dashing while another only standing normals). It's a big reason why all the characters play so differently from one another.
46 years old here. Playing fighting games in general since 1994, more seriously dedicated since 2015.
Not going to lie, in some modern games you can clearly perceive the dirty hand of the execs manipulating stuff to pressure cashmilking no matter the consequences. Like T8 battle pass and season pass drama, and the very poorly implemented heat and invuln mechanics to trick new people into a false sense of power. All this IS and feels really bad.
However, this doesn't invalide all the amazing good stuff new games offer: years of experience polishing and correcting everything, superior tools to understand and practice the game, simpler and free access to information, many more players to compete with, faster and better technology to actually get into the game, the ability to repair problems and test new ideas without having to wait years to see the results.
While I love emergent play when it arises, it is also true than 90% of the time it is not great stuff. And that is just what happened with old games: 90% of the time they were clunky, unbalanced and hermetic, full of glitches which kicked you out of the competence unless you used them too, and you had to endure that for years until a new game finally came out. Not only that. Since the rythm of interchange was limited by physical interaction, and many of the top players actively hoarded the knowledge for their own gain, they often were games of slowly figuring out cheap garbage out of the elitists in the top. I wouldn't get back to that era for any price.
So in the end, I prefer modern games over old ones in most cases, except when the corporate manipulation hits too hard.
I still prefer T7 over T8, for example, but wouldn't change SF6 for any of its predecesors.
I don't value MvC in general very much, it is fun, but not really good as a game for two players. 2XKO is looking way more mature, polished and apt for actual competitive fun, in comparison.
I love Granblue Rising, but I also miss Soul Calibur 2 a lot.
cool Marth clip
I get you my take on it that when you not patch a game like in the past(their where none) players got too explore the game more and yes that is it but i must say today it goes faster the exploring as in the 90s because of the internet.
For me it's the rise of online. I'd enjoy a lot of these games in person but online just doesn't do it for me, and we have no locals here anymore, so..............
Maybe I missed it in the video, and I feel like you touched on it in the past a bit, but I feel like a big thing that makes me like older games more is that newer games are "too good" in a certain way. They really try very hard to make sure every character in the game gets consistent combos off of everything for low resources. I know this isn't as true for anime games, but I feel like you watch 3rd strike or any game before it, and compare it to any SF game that came after, there is a lot more single hits going on in the older games. In older KoF games a lot of combos happen, but it still wasn't all that consistent, a lot of characters couldn't get full combos off of lights or far heavy attacks compared to what we see in XV, so while in older games you might get anti aired and lose a quick 10%, in XV you get hit by DP super for hopping and end up losing potentially 60-70%.
It's not as true for anime games, since from the beginning with chains and stuff they have made combos pretty easily accessible from most hits, but for a lot of other games I feel like that makes a huge difference
Whoa! Your hair is graying so cool!! You look so cute and dynamic!
I wasn't really playing fighting games in that 2013 and around age, but for me (I bought and tried lots of the games from that time frame) and for me those are the best games in the genre. Just bbcf, mvc3, p4 arena, skullgirls, IJ1. When I see those games I can't find a current (or older) game that surpasses that level of creativity in characters, system, combo game, etc.
For characters you could look at an older game that influenced your favorites, like Vampire Savior. Not only creative character design but in movesets; in this game even dashing does completely different things (grounded, hop dash, flying, etc.) and some characters will have air dash while others do not. It's an interesting example that has a bunch of crazy things thrown in that I don't think most modern developers would allow, and it means each character plays very different from each other. It's the direct inspiration for something like Skullgirls.
Tekken becoming a 2d fighter suddenly is deeply frustrating for me who started in T2
Nah as long as a fighting game has neutral, wake-up dp and a mid/low tier grappler, I’m in!
Old games had unlockable characters. No DLC
Why did you loop the beginning of Slayer theme from Xrd, i hate it
My issue is over paying for content thats available on release thats locked behind a paywall. Like bs season passes. I just miss the days of complete releases. Ill either like the game or not.
The games are straight up different when I played third strike or whatever even with zoomers or whatever the teenagers are now it is still just as wonderful
Get your man to fix the audio for the sponsor spot, I got jump scared by the volume change afterward.
Hold on, so instead of just skipping the sponsor like a normal person, you actually decided to up your volume and seriously listen to it? Why on earth would you do that to yourself?
23 minutes to say "nostalgia" is crazy
Wonder how fighting games will be in the future, I’m convinced street fighter 8 will be close to an anime game
Marvel Vs Capcom Collection is selling well, Capcom FC 2 will probably sell moderately well, what do you think is gonna happen when Capcom sees this?
A new collection
They don’t feel the same because everyone takes them way too seriously. It’s not just a fun game anymore it’s a way that people try to boost their ego in a weird way.
They have way more structure and everyone is obsessed with ranks and crap like that.
Thank you for mentioning the game slowdowns. I've been saying it for a while but heat freezing the screen is literally the worst thing about the game for me, not even the actual heat mechanics, I've played enough anime games to be used to that
There's other stuff that does that in Tekken but they're far less ubiquitous in games - your basically stupid if you don't use your heat, but you don't always wall break or rage art or land the like hitgrab moves. I didn't really notice until i played some t5dr and it was like i didn't get a headache while playing, if you can understand that as an analogy.
The funny thing about wavedashing in Melee is that while it *feels* unintentional, it isn't. In the old smash bros dojo website that sakurai made for melee there was a Q&A section where a JP Luigi player talked about it and Sakurai recommended using it like backdash, which is still how it's often used today. Still the dev team most certainly had no idea of the full breadth of movement that wavedashing opened specially on platforms.
Like, wavedashing is in ultimate, only its utility is considerably more niche as it has about the same frame data as a character's normal dashback only it keeps you facing forward and the distance is different.
Even so, it tells about how different the design landscape was back in the day, Sakurai described his design style as making games that anyone could play but had "hidden techniques/modes" for advanced players. There wasn't much of a concept of big time competition for videogames back then, so this kind of stuff was really done just for the people that liked playing these games for the sake of playing them.
There was a widely accepted idea that there could be multiple different games in a single game that you'd have access to depending on how much time you invested on it, and they saw execution as the correlation to that time invested. Nowadays, execution is seen as just one aspect of gameplay flavor rather than something that developers use to separate levels of play and there's more this idea of trying to let new players play the "true game" without investing as much time on it, which indirectly means removing execution requirements.