Not so much anymore. Mostly it's the music in Street of Rage that is the win, the game itself is meh nowadays. You should have asked about River City Ransom.
Ok, it's perfecting patterns....and? Every game is oh wait, Crem and Rym already made this point. Also, agreeing on SoR2 music being lovely. Yuzo makes me want to learn to rehash his beats into loops for rapping.
A note about the Pokemon MMO talk. I just saw a few hours ago that the Pokemon Company International is looking for a Game Producer, one that specifically has shipped 2 PC or web games. Which seems to indicate either a PC or web based Pokemon game is in the works.
The difference is that God Hand is about adapting to different situations given the types of enemies you're fighting and building a moveset that fits your style of play. Also it's fun as hell.
Dave from Fast Karate would hit Scott in the throat if he heard him talking about Bayonetta like that. As someone previously said, it's not the mass killing of enemies that's what's appealing about the Japanese action games. It's in the style points and the different combos you come up with.
I can beat games like that, but my overall score is pretty lame and unspectacular.
My idea to tweak an MMO is that players would have a house where they stored their stuff, and as you grind, you fortify your house; only people of a certain level can successfully destroy it.
Also, [this obviously is not a new idea] if you die a certain amount of times, you would lose a level or a certain amount of experience, which would add some penalty to dying, but not make it too punishing.
It's in the style points and the different combos you come up with.
If I want style points, I'll just watch an action movie. All the animations and combos are already built by the developers of the game. You aren't coming up with them, you're just playing them. They might as well just send you a disc full of a hundred short avi files showing each and every one they came up with.
Well, all animations and combos for Street Fighter have already been built by the developers. You're not coming up with them either, you're just playing them. I'll just watch an action movie, right?
They might as well just send you a disc filled with a hundred short .avi files showing each and every one they come up with.
...that argument really doesn't work, Scott. Every action in every video game is pre-determined by a developer. It then becomes up to the player to choose which moves to implement at which time, in conjunction with which other move.
...that argument really doesn't work, Scott. Every action in every video game is pre-determined by a developer. It then becomes up to the player to choose which moves to implement at which time, in conjunction with which other move.
But in Streetfighter, each of those moves is different and has it's own function, you can't win without using them.
I'd buy tickets to what would happen if we put Scott Ruben and Yahzee Crowshaw in a room together. They'd either Fight to the death, or make sweet, sweet love, and I'm really not sure which.
Street fighter is a versus game. There are no set patterns to winning.
But in Street Fighter there is only a limited number of things to do, so in theory you could come up with optimal reaction to every action you opponent takes. After that it's just Simon Says.
But in Street Fighter there is only a limited number of things to do, so in theory you could come up with optimal reaction to every action you opponent takes. After that it's just Simon Says.
If this is true, how come I can beat any action game no problem, but still suck (relatively speaking) at Street Fighter?
Street fighter is a versus game. There are no set patterns to winning.
There are, or else it's just paper-rock-scissors, what with causality and all. But with causality, assuming locality is also universal, then there cannot even exist free will: whether or not you would win in a versus fighting game was already determined by the feedback loops of the respective players' lives up to that point, themselves just the causal effects of earlier events stretching back to the origin of causality.
See, I too can distill an argument down to its bare, essential, pointless reality, removing all meaning or usefulness.
...how come I can beat any action game no problem, but still suck (relatively speaking) at Street Fighter?
Look at how you would defend yourself against a real punch! SF doesn't have a swoon & cower button.
I'm sure it to do with reaction time and though process. Action games are slower paced then fighting games. This gives your grey matter more time to process what to do. You've learned all the SF super moves, counters, and other junk; BUT all that's done is weigh your brain down with indecisions. You don't know what your opponent is going to do next and by time you figure out what's going on. It's too late to press A.
I think that is definitely one key difference. In an action game, even on hard levels, almost all enemies heavily telegraph their moves where in a game like Street Fighter, the telegraphing is minimal, often non-existent, and sometimes cancelable.
Someone should make a 3D action game that has exactly the same controls and AI as Soul Calibur and a 2D action game with exactly the same controls and AI as street fighter. Achieve the full potential of the original intent of Final Fight. That would be really interesting.
Harder in action games means they speed it up, add more badguys/bullets, make you easier to kill, or make jump/landing tolerance tighter. Mario would be a much different game if each Goomba's had a life bar, and wasn't suicidally depressed.
Someone should make a 3D action game that has exactly the same controls and AI as Soul Calibur...
They already did that. It's called Bayonetta. You hate it.
Comments
Also, aren't you a fan of Streets of Rage?
Which is awesome
I really hope the new Hokuto No Ken game has the same mechanics.
I can beat games like that, but my overall score is pretty lame and unspectacular.
My idea to tweak an MMO is that players would have a house where they stored their stuff, and as you grind, you fortify your house; only people of a certain level can successfully destroy it.
Also, [this obviously is not a new idea] if you die a certain amount of times, you would lose a level or a certain amount of experience, which would add some penalty to dying, but not make it too punishing.
They might as well just send you a disc filled with a hundred short .avi files showing each and every one they come up with.
...that argument really doesn't work, Scott. Every action in every video game is pre-determined by a developer. It then becomes up to the player to choose which moves to implement at which time, in conjunction with which other move.
I'd buy tickets to what would happen if we put Scott Ruben and Yahzee Crowshaw in a room together. They'd either Fight to the death, or make sweet, sweet love, and I'm really not sure which.
See, I too can distill an argument down to its bare, essential, pointless reality, removing all meaning or usefulness.
Therefore, just enjoy a game because you enjoy it. It's all meaningless in the end anyhow. :P Reaction time. That's what keeps a fighting game fresh; there's a physical input requirement that adds a new dimension of challenge.
I'm sure it to do with reaction time and though process. Action games are slower paced then fighting games. This gives your grey matter more time to process what to do. You've learned all the SF super moves, counters, and other junk; BUT all that's done is weigh your brain down with indecisions. You don't know what your opponent is going to do next and by time you figure out what's going on. It's too late to press A.
Diagnosis: Think less. React Faster.
EDIT: DAMN IT PETE! Stop drinking my brain juice!
Someone should make a 3D action game that has exactly the same controls and AI as Soul Calibur and a 2D action game with exactly the same controls and AI as street fighter. Achieve the full potential of the original intent of Final Fight. That would be really interesting.