Destructiod.com talkin' shit about MK 9.

Anyone saying that MK "devolves into button mashing" either doesn't have a firm grasp on the concept of button mashing or has mistaken MK for another game entirely. Actually, MK is just about the only fighting series I can think of where it's almost impossible to achieve any amount of success through button mashing. Most fighters let you limp your way through a few matches with random button hacking, and even Street Fighter allows it to an extent, but the best you're likely to do in MK is look like an idiot while showcasing dozens of amazing two-hit combos.
 
I dont think we need vulgar language in thread titles.

i am all for cussing up a shit storm if need be, but it shouldnt be allowed in the thread titles. IMO
 
Totally a family-oriented game and place :roll:

The guy clearly wrote the article in a douchey tone, but he is right: Mortal Kombat has/will never be considered a great fighter. MK is edgy, gritty and wholly different, but not great. However, MK has something that other fighters don't: a great story. I can't think of many other fighters with a story as interesting, consistent and complex as Mortal Kombat. I find that most conversations about Mortal Kombat overlook the story entirely, and instead focuses far too much on "what is better; 2D or 3D." The story doesn't receive nearly as much credit as it deserves. In fact, I credit the story as the main reason why I have remained interested in Mortal Kombat. I just hope MK9 furthers the story, instead of moving backwards, or heading into a direction that is nothing more than a nostalgic circle jerk.

But, I will be disappointed if the next game goes right back to only using the same characters we've already played to death. I never played Kitana and Sonya all that much in the previous games, and I doubt MK9 will peak my interest in playing them in a new game. Also, how many more times can Kano and Johnny Cage cheat death? Shouldn't Raiden become an elder God by now, and deem another warrior as the protector of Earthrealm?
 
Regarding the character selection, I feel like the Street Fighter model once again proves itself worthy of imitation.

Instead of introducing a slew of new, generic characters (as per the 3D MK trilogy), bring back a handful of the more interesting characters introduced in the aforementioned titles. Havok was damned interesting, and Li Mei's story makes her worthy of inclusion. In addition, adding one or two new characters would be admissible. If utilized correctly, these new characters could service the story in a way that furthers the lore without cheating the face time of any of the established, popular characters. Adding an additional character or two means the team can spend that much more time on each character's design and story without having to negotiate how to shoehorn nine or ten new characters into established canon.
 
Shit is a swear? I think it's fine. We want to control very harsh languge here but shit isn't vuglar.

And to those who say we should allow all swears because it's an M rated game look back to how old you were when you started playing MK. We want to keep things clean here, but even though shit my be dirty it sure isn't vulgar. Just saying!

As far as determining if anyone should hype MK9 before anyone has seen it is just silly. It may not be universally loved anymore but I believe the team is hard at work trying to breathe new life into the franchise along with a new owner looking to add value to it's newest brand.

Look how good Batman AA did with the backing and support of WB Games. Should it have been dismissed as there wasn't a great Batman game since the NES days? Of course not!
 
Just teasing, Pat.:hahaha:

Anyway, I just hate it when prejudice conceptions are made about a game when the developers haven't shown a pre-alpha build of the game to the press yet. So unfair.:soapbox:
 
That guy's shtick is to shit on games or whatever it is he's posting about. It's not like he ever says anything positive in his "rants", so taking anything he says to heart is pointless. He's just a smarmy troll.

Based on the name of the site, that could be the whole idea of that site, but I just read some of Razak's recent posts, so I'm not sure.
 
For the record, if a game like Street Fighter that seems unapproachable unless you have a PhD in game theory is the standard all fighters should strive for, I'll stick with button mashers.

Like I really want to play games like SF IV and Tekken 6, but it's like you have to almost put in full time hours to be good at it and even then you go online and get destroyed by some 12 year old who does nothing but sit on Xbox Live or PSN all day.
 
[sek] said:
For the record, if a game like Street Fighter that seems unapproachable unless you have a PhD in game theory is the standard all fighters should strive for, I'll stick with button mashers.

Like I really want to play games like SF IV and Tekken 6, but it's like you have to almost put in full time hours to be good at it and even then you go online and get destroyed by some 12 year old who does nothing but sit on Xbox Live or PSN all day.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should stick with the Wii since it's for "casual gamers" who "don't have time" to learn how to play a game. Nothing wrong with having other priorities, but you're shitting on the entire fun of games. When I beat someone who obviously has no idea how to play, I feel like I've wasted my time. It's when I beat somebody that I know is on my level or better that I get the most enjoyment out of a game.

I've yet to see a good fighting game that's purely button mashing. Anyone who actually knows how to play the game has NOTHING to fear from button mashing.
 
The fact there are many passionate gamers out there and MK fans are always bait for conflict on strong opinions. Theres no doubt that not a MK fan out there is aware of the problems of the games but theres not a MK fan around right now who wants to see where things are going.

Though as with Sonic, I think even if MK produced the BEST fighter ever they'd still hate it because its MK. ^_^'

Some folks are just too predictable, besides, if half the games of the same genre had half of MK's storyline things would be different.
 
Every thing and every one will have its critics. I don't really give a shit if people don't like what I like. All that matters is that I like it, and I really don't care if people agree.

For the record, I also run into the same problems in playing with people who spend too much time playing video games online. But, I don't really get mad; sometimes, if you get your ass handed to you, it will help you improve your approach and strategies. Sure, it's annoying when people spam to oblivion, but that's just the nature of people like that. Not everyone can straight-up fight.

I personally don't want to get as good as the people who devote 6 ****ing hours a day to playing a video game. I couldn't imagine playing a video game that long, and personally don't want to. Sure, its more enjoyable and competitive to play with someone who doesn't devote most of their days to playing video games, but I'll occasionally try my hand at (and therefore improve) playing the online "warriors."
 
Considering in the last week, I went from playing a Flahs Game called "Brick yard 2", the Sims 2, Heroes of Might and magic 5, and another game that slips my mind, you get the idea of my playing styles. I can spend 6 hours on a game, but I can't play the SAME game every day. No, I need varity and if you like me you know that every games has its pros and cons and playing ONE game doesn't let you expand your opinions of games in general.

I stopped playing on-line long ago. Too many jerks, too many going too quick to call you "noob"when you make a mistake. Plus I like to work at my own pace and not someone else's. Pressure stops you enjoying a game and theres nothing worst then when an idiot screws up what you want to do because he wanted to do his own thing rather then the better for the groups.
 
I have only ever really devoted myself to learning how to fight in Soul Calibur. I don't like Street Fighter or it's many derivatives including but not limited to the Capcom Vs. series and Darkstalkers. That comment about requiring a PhD in gaming is totally true. You need a game with diverse levels of play and the fighters from these long accepted series are extremely unopen to new players. I refuse to study a fighter and lose 800 times in a row before I get one worthwhile win. While the sense of accomplishment is nice to have I get frustrated to the point of destructive anger long before I reach satisfaction. The net emotion wrought of it is unhappiness.

Now, that's not to say that doesn't apply to MK as well. Any fighter that's going to be considered deep that someone can play for a long time will be practically like a sport. If you want to still be playing it in 2 months time you don't want to become good at it in a day. But that's a problem. I don't want to still be playing it in 2 months time. In 2 months I should have been through, beaten, gotten all collectibles, and beaten again 4 games including that one. 2 games a month, that's what I play. It's not that I can't devote the time to learning a fighter, it's that I won't. Only if I really really like it will I ever spend more than 2 weeks on it. I did that for Soul Calibur 2, 3, and 4. I also did that for MKDA and MKD. I didn't devote nearly as much time to MKA or MKvDC because they were just plain lacking.

What Kurtis said is true and it echoes what I've been saying on these boards for half a decade. MK stands out because if it's style, it's mythos, and it's ability to keep a coherent plot going for more than 2 games without needing a remake or retcon. MK's story is it's strongest element. MKD and MKSM were more adventure games than fighters and I loved that. I could have all the brilliance of a fighting game system with the story of an action-adventure. That's why I stay a fan of MK and MK9 better show me some serious content or I might start to lose faith. After MKA and MKvDC I'm getting seriously annoyed at the lack of plot development.
 
Glamador said:
That comment about requiring a PhD in gaming is totally true. You need a game with diverse levels of play and the fighters from these long accepted series are extremely unopen to new players.
Click to expand...
Because the characters in most 3D fighters have different fighting styles, their moves (basic, or otherwise) vary greatly. With 2D fighters, most of the basic attack buttons produce similar results for all of the characters. The moves lists for 3D fighters is typically MASSIVE compared to a 2D fighters, too. Reversals are typically a crucial part of 3D fighters, so there's another complexity point for them.

How anyone can consider SF (or anything similar) more complicated, I'll never understand.

Do you actually play other people, or just the CPU? If you're looking for a game to beat and unlock stuff, then I can see why you might not like 2D fighters, but arguing on a "complexity" level doesn't make sense.
 
Patrick McCarron said:
Look how good Batman AA did with the backing and support of WB Games. Should it have been dismissed as there wasn't a great Batman game since the NES days? Of course not!
Click to expand...

Eidos started the project actually and WB jumped in to co-produce much later after seeing the quality of the title (they do own DC Comics after all), and then bought Rocksteady after the game sold extremely well. Good investment I'd say since it was a fantastic game.

I don't think anything wrong with the notion that MK9 may not be as good of a fighter but sell well nonetheless. We're in 2010 now after 4 (or 5 if you count MK4) games that relied on gore porn and extra modes rather than solid fighting engines of other fighters... even the 2D MK's.

Perhaps being under the umbrella with the likes of Monolith would mean better technology in the new MK. Not just engine but mo-cap and general animation quality.
 
Eks said:
How anyone can consider SF (or anything similar) more complicated, I'll never understand.

.
Click to expand...

Complexity and depth are totally different things in fighters. VF for example is the most complex fighter series out there (execution and learning curse wise), but depth wise, Tekken is comparable but much easier to get into.

SF is never complicated at face value but is deep. SFIV may have simplified the system for entry level players with forgiving input windows and whatnot, but it still requires dedication to be good at. You just need to look up Daigo Umehara on Youtube (or just Daigo) to see how incredibly deep SF can be.

Btw, reversals are rarely used in mid to high level play. Too easy to punish. That's why DOA at high levels is basically a poking game.
 
Just because the moves list is longer doesn't mean it's more complicated. And just because every button does basically the same thing for each fighter doesn't make it simple. The timing and strategies for combat in 2D fighters are outrageously precise. In Soul Calibur or Tekken I can partly rely on reaction time, ducking out of the way or moves I can see coming or at the very least just holding the block button for a second's breathing room while I figure out what's coming next.

When I try to play MvC I've lost before the match even starts. Attacks come out so blazingly fast in those old 2D fighters. I only have to see a combo a couple times in a 3D fighter to see it coming, because it usually starts out slower and the 3D model goes through the whole realistic motions of combat. I've learned to read how people move through actually living and that means I've gotten practice at reading moves for a 3D fighter already. For a 2D fighter though you need to carefully observe everything before you can even think about trying to counter it. It requires study. 3D fighters, despite a longer moves list, don't require as much effort to learn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top