There is another thing that we, the dedicated fighting game players, can do to help with the growing of the genre: don't be a dick to new players. Teach them the stuff you know, correct their mistakes, encourage them to get better. Don't use your best character and tear them apart from the first second, don't call them scrubs after you defeat them. Be supportive of new players, or at least be kind to them.
Oh man being a dick to someone's tastes in video games is an even bigger problem than just within the fighting community, it's unreal. People literally still shit on Facebook games and phone games for no reason other than they hate/don't have the platform when quite a few of them have done their job being entertaining, and you're fucked if you reveal you actually LIKED those games.
Joseph Kolberg I don't think Jonathan's point was to go easy on new players; just to not be a jerk when you body them. Trash talk is one thing when it's between people of similar skill levels who trade sets often. But if the guy who gets to top 3 at all of his locals talks shit to the guy who has never been to a tournament before, the first guy just looks like a douche. It's the competitive gaming equivalent of a school bully who only fucks with kids who are half his size. In part, it is on any player to know how to hold a loss and manage their expectations if they want to have a good time in a fighting game community. Losing is inevitable, especially when you're new. But if a new player gets trash talk because they're new, that will put an end to their desire to be a part of that community far faster than simply losing would.
being a jerk is a problem that will absolutely drive people away from a game no matter how interested they are in it. during the For Honor open beta the steam community was pretty dang unhelpful with anything. "this character keeps using this combo, how do I deal with it?" "well why dont you try playing the game more!?" "my bad, I didnt realize it only worked against people with less than 40 hours in the game" and about not needing to know all the combos, I barely even knew my own characters combos and was doing rather well. I only needed to know how to parry and counter-guard break and victory was easy.
I'm gonna give major props to the Skullheart forums for having a wealth of information about their game and a few users who will reliably answer gameplay questions.
Stuff like this is why I feel that Skullgirls is totally underated. The tutorial takes things one step at a time, introducing movement and teaching all of the things you have to know, each one in an individual tutorial that tells you what to do and when to do it, or helps you recognize things as they are. I am NOT a fighting game player- I'm just not- but Skullgirls has shown me how a fighting game can truly teach the player, before they have to get through things by themselves. In addition, each character has their own tutorial, outlining their specials, Blockbusters (Supers) and unique character traits. And, since each skill you have to learn is teached in its own tutorial, you can replay it again and again to get the hang of it, and if it's too much for you, you can go practice something else and then work your way up to it.
+Jagar Alagoria Agreed, SG's tutorial is great. And it's a fuckin awesome game created for fighting game fans by fighting game fans. I really wish more people played it.
Additonally, something that has to be understood is that the tutorial will never teach you everything. To be competitive, you have to think for yourself. But yeah Skullgirls took a huge stride even though the tutorial combos are a bit tough for just showing concepts, and then Xrd Revelator got players moving around while teaching them even if it was a bit messy (I think the advanced lessons, Missions, were fantastic though. Whiff punishes, fuzzy guard, etc.). Meanwhile Arcana Heart 3 had no tutorial, not even for the core mechanic unique to the franchise (Homing Attack), and I can only hope that apparent developer question for suggestions of additional features for AH3 Six Stars result in at least an in-game manual (there are a couple half-decent ones on the internet) when it finally comes to PC.
Sad to say this, but Virtua Fighter 4 Evolution on PS2 had exactly this approach. From a basic "tutorial" to more complex "challenge" modes, it also pitted the player in a Single Player campaign called "Quest Mode". Quest Mode was essentially simulated as visiting arcades around a map of Japan, challenging AI opponents of varying difficulties. Playing to win in order to improve your rank was obviously one incentive, but another incentive were the "quest challenges". These would have you perform certain tasks during a course of a match, or several matches, and often reward you with a rare item. The difficulty of the quest challenges started off simply, introducing players to basic concepts. But by the time you reached the final challenges, you were performing techniques expected of high-level players. So in playing through Quest Mode, one therefore couldn't rely on a FOO strategy because not only would your progression (rank) plateau, but you'd never be able to complete beyond the most basic of quest challenges. Now, I started my reply by saying "sadly" because, to my knowledge, no other Fighting Game title has replicated this level of learning aid built in and around the basic game. In watching this video, I kept thinking how VF4 Evolution ticked every box. This game was pioneering for its time, and has yet to be exceeded, let alone matched.
While I do think these are all genuinely great suggestions, the practice mode in a fighting game is possibly the greatest tutorial mode new players can get. When used for the sake of learning the mechanics of the game and not just dicking around, practice mode is effectively a freeform tutorial that lets the player learn at their own pace and get comfortable with the game.
"the practice mode in a fighting game is possibly the greatest tutorial mode new players can get." Good luck getting new players to use it any time soon in it's current incarnation, though - _after all, they came to _*_play the game,_*_ not beat the shit out of a training dummy._
I think there's a lot we can learn from games like Divekick and Bushido Blade as well. They serve as a starting point to show us how engaging we can make just learning timing before we even layer on any of the complexity of a full fighting game experience. -JP
any thought on Smash Bros ? I think it deals with the issue in a quite unique way by pleasing both the casual and competitive audience instead of forcing an experience onto the player.
Another game that the game industry could learn a LOT from here is Kya: Dark Lineage. If you haven't heard of it, thats fine, it never really took off, but it managed to pull together a lot of mechanics that would have seemed impossible if you pitched them to a design team altogether, but worked incredibly well. Even more so, they managed to teach the 6-year-old me all of the complex ins and outs of their fighting mechanics in a way that would enable me to see the strategy behind it all. I think some of their design decisions are very important with a lot to be learned from them.
Check out Skullgirls' Tutorial, it's really good (compared to the usual FG tutorials, that is). It explains basic things like low-blocking, overheads, etc...
How do you feel about "simple mode" style controls that make button inputs correspond to special amd super moves? It completely removes the excecution barrier but often what comes out of it is a player who is utterly predictable due to his entire play being thoughtless. I would be cautious in saying that once you remove the execution barrier all the work is done. As daunting as the frontload of data is, memorizing "everything" is only about 5% of what you need to do well. This ki.d of control scheme I think gives players a false sense of confidence since they may beat their friends who use normal controls but once they play anyone good they're gonna get destroyed and despiritted.
Oi! What the hell you guys? You missed the perfect opportunity to mention Divekick, the game that removes the information overload and presents the players with that top-level-chess immediately. Sure, it's simplified, or rather, concentrated and purified. Divekick gets to the core of why fighting games are fun and presents it in a very intuitive and easy to understand way.
Probably because Divekick is zoning and nothing _but_ zoning. Sure, zoning is an important part of high-level fighting game play, but it's not sufficient.
Nixitur I think you are mixing up the terms *zoning* and *spacing* Zoning is a type of play where you keep your opponent out at all times using the tools given to your character, like Dhalsim's streachy arms or Guile's fast Sonic Boom. It's also referred to "Keepaway" or (Playing) "Lame" Spacing is more akin to the footsie game where you use the attacks you have to both get in on the opponent, but keep him to a distance desirable to you. For example, you space people with Ryu by trying to keep them at his crouching medium kick, where he can use all of his tools, but also keeping them away from himself.
Yup, this is the ONLY thing keeping me away from fighting games. The ONLY reason I play Street Fighter 3rd Strike is because I know how ONE character works and that's only because someone sat down for two hours and taught me.
When I played Tekken as a kid I just mashed the face buttons, later on I spammed moves which seemed effective. From there, knowing all of a character's moves (and most importantly executing them) can be so annoying though, due to the precision necessary, that I only got as far as knowing the 3-4 or 5 hit combos
Nigel Blackman Yes, but most fighting games rely on that principle - that you've played other fighting games and can bring your existing knowledge over because you should know this already. Very few games try to teach you how to play the game from the ground up, least of all Capcom's fighters. Skullgirls and Killer Instinct made pretty decent attempts with their tutorial modes though.
You can't teach mind games and how to defeat the opponent online or at tournaments, but you can teach basic mechanics and tools the player can use. When to use the tools is really something you have to learn on your own. How to perform the tools is something you may get assistance on. Game: Okay this is how you do a counter breaker. Be careful, its unsafe and your opponent has a ton of frame advantage which gurantees a combo on you. Player: But when do I use it, how will I know my opponent will break a combo? I don't want to be stuck in 140 frames of end lag and open for a combo. Game: Mind games my friend... mind games. Your opponent will behave differently from himself or from others.
It's not some sort of arcane thing. It's just risk vs reward. Explain what the risk is and what the reward is, and explain how much risk you're taking on vs how good the payoff is. This is totally explanable.
Framing it as a kind of "rock, paper, scissors" situation can help new players get their mind around the "mindgames, predict your opponent's move" aspect.
You CAN teach mind games Psychological warfare is a somewhat different area from game mechanics but it's also universally applicable to other games or even real life
Yeah I disagree with this. Fighting games simply don’t even try to teach these things but it can be done. If someone can look over your shoulder and keep giving you advice to improve, that is proof it can be taught, and there’s no reason a game can’t be designed to help teach that. The problem is that fighting games usually out almost no effort into single player gameplay content. Having enemies that focus on a handful of basic strategies would help players both identify those strategies but also learn how to react to them. Then having enemies slowly combine two things together and slowly work up the complexity over time would probably do wonders for learning the game. But the most that most fighting games do is just tell you the controls and then throw you in a basic arcade mode against brain dead Ai
I think that the Super Smash Bros. series has the most intuitive control scheme. Its attack control scheme is based on action buttons, special attacks independent of regular attacks, a control stick in a certain direction, how fast you press a combination (smash attack vs. strong attack vs. standard attack), and circumstances when you press a combination (mid-air, ground, etc.). No memorization of complex button combinations, although you do need to know how each character plays but the base control scheme is universal.
To be honest, I have plans to make a fighting game that's gameplay is a mashup between platformer fighting games like Super Smash Bros and Rivals of Aether and traditional fighting games like Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. Replacing Smash Attacks with Light and Heavy attack buttons with Specials inspired by Terry having a forward and back special as well two super meters, one for a Final Smash-like technique, called a Desperation Technique, the other temporarily transforms the character for 30 seconds into a stronger form, though some characters "transformations" aren't really different forms but are an action with different effects such as stopping time for only 10 seconds. The game would be designed to be accessable to casual players with movesets that are simplistic and easy to understand, with a character or two designed for new players but even new players would take a little while to understand their full potential. The game also rewards players for learning combos and understanding each characters strengths and weaknesses.
fighting games would be extremely boring if all of them played under this control scheme and ditched motion inputs, what makes these games satisfying and rewarding to learn is how difficult they are, on top of that motion inputs also serve the purpose of balancing certain moves abd allow for more varied movesets since you can fit more tools onto one character by having multiple command inputs.
That is exactly what new players need to get into fighting games. Something to help them learn the move set and encourage them to keep playing to the point where they can achieve a much higher level of play. I would love to see something like this in the next gen fighting games.
I agree to a certain extent, but another thing people need is others who understand the game and helping them. I end up doing it. I'm a decent fighting game player and try to help others even if they're beating me. I agree on the video to a certain extent, but I'm completely against unlocking moves or only having a certain moves from the beginning... That sounds grate for the RPG fighter he was mentioning in the video, but it would break the fighting game genre mainly the competitive kind like Street Fighter and King of Fighters and so forth. If you're restricted to certain moves then the strategy of the game that he well explains would be gone since most moves would have to unlocked, or earned. Example: Ryu's and all the other Shodo characters didn't have their shoryuken they wouldn't have a effective anti-air, or if one character had the shoryuken, the hadoken, and the Tatsumaki Senpukyaku, while the other player only had the shoryuken and was being spammed with hadokens, they wouldn't be able to use the Tatsumaki Senpukyaku to go through the hadoken. To makes things a little worse that's only comparing like characters. If it was others like Vega, or Ibuki there might be problems bigger than I explained.
master2873 I used to do that and then stopped caring. Most of the casual players still will most likely quit... that is unless they have "gamer blood" as my uncle would say. I have an online that wanted to learn sf and quit in less than 3 days. Everyone in the stream kept trying to teach him but the salt catch'd up to him eventually. I've argued others on this video before like a month ago concerning the training mode and such. Teaching others is just a waste if time if they don't seek it out themselves. If people really wanna learn Street fighter they have the internet. You don't need a programmed tutorial to teach you.
master2873 What I got from the video was that the moves would be restricted in the single-player mode only, and the in-game opponents would be scaled accordingly to make winning feasible with the limited moves.
***** Even then it would break the game. The single player is no different then the online, other than you're playing against a AI controlled character. So in this case it would be even worse since the AI knows the inputs you're doing and almost always knows a strategy for your character. Other than that if the game was designed around it kinda like Soulcalibur's adventure mode and Street Fighter: Alpha 3's world tour I think it was called, then it would be grate.
master2873 That's assuming the AI will not go easy on you and has the full moveset. In such a system, I would bet the AI would have equally-restricted moves and likely be put on an easier difficulty on top of that. Imagine if a fighting game's single-player mode began like Divekick and ended like Guilty Gear. That's what I mean.
Oh man, you guys have completely hit it on the head as to why I've never delved much into fighting games. You're absolutely right, that there's absolutely a brick wall when it comes from the beginning moves to the more advanced ones, and a lot of us just aren't motivated to invest that much time into learning tons new button combos that will have limited crossover at best to other games even within the same genre.
Hmm. You might be right. What do you think would be some good rewards in this context? I don't know if you've ever seen One Must Fall 2097, but I really liked that whole system; upgrades for speed, endurance, etc. that you earned by winning matches, how much health you ended the match with, combos you did, etc. I've never seen another fighting game with that mechanic, which seems a real shame.
That is partly true. Infact playing Litchi(top 3 highest learning curve in Blazblue for roughly 5 games/updates) has actually greatly improves how easily I picked up other characters in other games. As well as playing Xiaoyu in Tekken, these characters taught me how to be versatile with my button commands and my execution. It is true if you want to play competitively it can be hard work compared to most games, but if you don't want to you can still practice some of the stuff. You'll improve alot and the games will feel much easier in general.
stormthrush37 they aren't in other fighting games because they are bad mechanics. Fighting Games are fundementally about learning a character and their moveset and taking full advantage of those moves against an opponent doing the exact same thing. Introducing pseudo-RPG "rewards" would ruin the competition by making the characters moves and stats change over time. Imagine a highly skilled player using a "level 1" character against a novice's "level 100" character because the novice has more health and power and doesn't actually know how to play his character well. These "rewards" don't incentivive skillful play, they just incentivive grinding and taking on less equipped opponents.
Oh god, mechanical rewards for playing a fighting game?! I don't even like unlockable characters! Unlockable cosmetics are also a pet peeve of mine, I want my cool color palette from the start, but I'll live. In the last six months I have always had the same things available to me in fighting games (barring getting new games). Yet I have seen significant progress, because when I went back and played someone in 3rd Strike after a while, it really hammered in that I had improved at general fighting game skills.
yea, but at the same time, to get good you must get bodied by real people, just playing safely with computers on an arcade mode does nothing for improvement
Hey guys, great show, glad you guys decided to tackle this topic as it's one I've often thought about. However, I'm going to disagree with your proposed solution. You can teach concepts in a single-player campaign, but you can not replicate a live opponent sufficiently. The video references reversals/countering so let's take that as an example. We agree that high-level fighting game play is not about reflexes and surely enough, counters are predictive. How would you craft an AI to teach human player tendencies? If you've boxed before, this is the difference between boxing drills on countering, hitting pads and trying to counter someone while sparring. The gap is a massive. Maybe I notice my opponent likes to throw two jabs before loading up with a right cross, perhaps I intentionally leave an opening after I throw my left hook to bait a response? Teaching these concepts without real experience is a tall order. Soul Calibur 2 attempted this with guard impacts. The result was a mess, degenerating down to the player guessing when the CPU would attack. This system may teach the timing for counters, but completely misses the fundamental skill at the heart of counters: reading the opponent. Secondly, slowly introducing moves and allowing time for the player to acclimatize sounds like a great idea for individual moves, except in fighting games, moves do not exist independently of each other. The result is the player will waste a great deal of time learning sub-optimal strategies because a yet to be unlocked move was not available. Fighting game characters are so finely crafted, there are many components that if removed, fundamentally changes the way it plays. Take for example, a seemingly basic concept like spacing. I've got a level 1 Guile against a level 1 Ryu. Level 1 Ryu does not have his bread and butter low medium kick. At this point, I've learned a very specific range that I can be successful. Enter level 2 Ryu (with low medium kick). Everything I've learned about spacing against Ryu is out the window. Multiply that across all characters in the game. The real problem isn't how to better teach potential players complicated mechanics, but how to motivate people to want to learn the game. There is no getting around the amount of work involved in becoming a skillful player of fighting games, holding their hands in a padding room will only go so far. Most people are turned off by getting beaten into a bloody pulp by a expert player and THAT is the main problem. Unless you have a PvE focused fighting game, your long term player base is going to be made up of people who get obliterated, get back up, learn more, train and improve. Not everyone has these qualities, that's why (in your own metaphor) we don't all flock to the local chess club and throw down every Saturday night.
This is why I love Mortal Kombat. For the past several iterations, even since the PS2 era, it had a robust single player experience, and while it did start out with walls of text followed by making you do the move, it had moved onto story modes of various types, that slowly acclimate the player to the fighting system, meanwhile deliver on a solid narrative. And the most recent Mortal Kombat also had the challenge tower, which didn't feel like practice mode, but essentially its own gameplay type.
Guilty Gear Xrd's tutorials are fantastic in this regard, starting from "this is how you run" to every move and mechanic, broken up into many pieces. Then each character also has tutorials as well as a separate "mission" mode that goes into strategies from high-low mixups to oki to effective blocking.
The problem I find often with learning fighting games is that learning the fundamentals is usually not intuitive like a standard action game AND that they don't introduce new concepts over time to the player. Most shooters for instance these days, even without a tutorial, are intuitive to play at the basic level. Sure, in specific games, a player that has played 100 or 200 hours will crush a player that's only put in 10, but that player that played for 10 usually can figure out WHY they lost more easily. In a fighting game, if you get destroyed by someone that has 10x the experience, you usually have little idea how they did it and learn nothing from the experience. It ends up feeling like a waste of time to play higher skill players to learn, which, is a thousand times more fun in games than sitting there and practicing alone. Becoming better via experience is always more fun that study and setting yourself up with a freaking lesson plan. The RPG suggestion here is a good idea but just getting intuitive core mechanics is important. Complicated and non-sensical combos are not at all intuitive to learn and to me they come off as the laziest design methodology and almost every fighting game uses them. The Fight Night boxing series, which outright had no combos, worked wonderfully well. Just a solid core sensible fighting game design. And there was a ton of depth. Telling people that if you don't want to sit and grind out a boring practice session to become competent that you just wont get good at fighting games are totally missing the point. If you WANT your game to be this way? Fine. Obviously there are plenty of games to choose from. In the future though, for the rest of us, we really need like, a new sub-genre within fighting games or something that ignores the old and lazy mechanic of learning combos to begin with. Until that happens, I'm perfectly happy to ignore the fighting games that come out and play games in genres with consistent, intuitive, and interesting-from-the-get-go mechanics.
Or because the kids love their gore and edgy fatalities. Killer Instinct is easy for casuals but also fun and unique for people that understand fighting games, no one gave as much of a shit.
I apologize in advance for the long comment. I want to preface it simply by saying that this is definitely the most mature treatment of the problem fighting games have reaching out to super-novice players that I have seen to date (props to Extra Credits), and I thought it merited a thoughtful response. So here I go. I would say that the only (but critical) problems with implementing the solutions suggested by this video are twofold: (1) The mechanical and logistical difficulty of programming these features into a fighting game. Time, money, programming know-how, things that might be a luxury depending on developer resources. But this is a minor problem compared to #2: (2) It can sometimes be difficult for designers to "teach" players their games because in many cases, it can be difficult (or almost impossible) to envision how the competitive metagame will shape up, even for the best designers and developers in the industry. It's very hard to anticipate what game mechanics will be unexpectedly weak or powerful, important or unimportant in a finished fighting game. No matter how genius a designer and/or developer you are, there is almost always some game-changing emergent property that won't be found in pre-release playtesting even by world-class competitive players. The best hope a designer can have when these properties emerge is that they don't radically upset the balance they EXPECTED from the game they so carefully planned. Not only that, but even in an age where re-balancing games already released is cheaper and faster than ever, community discovery of these game-changing quirks is STILL not guaranteed to be fast enough for developer support to address. People didn't find certain quirks about T. Hawk in Super Turbo and Makoto in SF3: Third Strike for over a DECADE after those games' releases (almost TWO, in Super Turbo's case!), when developer support had long since ceased, and those quirks they found DRAMATICALLY altered the competitive landscape. (Makoto went from high-mid tier in estimation to top tier with the big three of Yun, Chun-Li, and Ken. T. Hawk went from bottom-tier estimation to just shy of top tier because his safe-jump tick throw OS was literally inescapable if executed properly. He still had a hard time at neutral, but one good read by a player using his OS could literally win the round for him.) Thankfully, discoveries this radical are not TERRIBLY frequent -- but they DO happen, and the warning signs for those with access to source code and the ears of developers are often too subtle to notice. The difficulty of anticipating these emergent properties increases exponentially with the mechanical complexity of the fighting game in question. People frequently cite the Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution (PS2) tutorial mode as one of the best fighting game tutorials ever done. "Why doesn't every game do this?", people often wonder. The reason is because VF is, quite frankly, a much easier fighting game to "teach" from the designer's perspective than other games, because its system is so closed compared to other fighting games. No fireballs, no crazy animation-cancel mechanics, combos on the ground and in the air are strictly limited. You have almost no way to cancel various character states that the designers haven't already anticipated and accounted for. There's pretty much nothing in the way of game-breaking chaos to futureproof for -- the designers' imagination can easily encompass the actual possiblities of the gameplay. So if your game's really that simple, yeah, it IS appropriate for the designer to anticipate the competitive metagame and try to teach it to novices through an engaging tutorial mode. But when you try to apply that "designer teaches their game" tactic to a sandbox game like Marvel vs Capcom 3, the variables are so immense that it's completely unreasonable to expect the developers and designers to have enough knowledge to tell the novice player what their game will look like when played by crafty, merciless competitors of varying skill and technical knowledge. There's so much stuff to play with that there's NO way to know what mechanics will be critical or insignificant in competitive play until the game is turned loose to the player base for exploration and exploitation. So if your fighting game (or any competitive-focused video game, really) is truly closed and fundamental enough (like Virtua Fighter) that the designers could reasonably imagine what competitive players will come up with, then yes, the solutions in this video SHOULD be implemented. But if you're trying to teach a sandbox game like MvC3...I don't know if the developer CAN teach the player all that needs to be taught. Air combos, DHC, assists and TAC only scratch the surface. How deep do you need to go into aspects of psychology, competitive theory (team synergy! how do you know who's gonna float to the top, and why?) to make the application of those mechanics apparent to the player? At what point does the question come up of SHOULD the player have this much confusing mechanical freedom in a fighting game? Does the developer overstep their ethical bounds trying to anticipate and possibly regulate the competitive landscape? This is a lot to chew on for a UA-cam comment, I know, I'm sorry. I just don't have anywhere else to put it right now. If you have any questions or criticisms about what I've said, or just want to berate me for incorrectly describing T. Hawk's OS (which I probably did), then by all means, do so. This is definitely the most adult framing of this game-design problem I've seen yet. -- Ben Reed @internetbenreed on Twitter
I guess the shorter version of what I want to say is this: Is it really enough for designers to just have more creative ways to teach MECHANICS to the players? Or do they need to take the initiative and try to teach the METAGAME as well? I ask because even the best-designed fighting game mechanics (or competitive game mechanics, really) are sometimes used in ways their well-read designers never anticipated or intended. Hell, half the conventions in fighting games exist as institutionalized versions of cool glitches from other games that jerks in arcades found while banging around. (Special-cancels were a glitch in World Warrior. But players liked them so much that Capcom made them a feature. The rest is history.) So if you only teach players mechanics based on your necessarily limited predictions as a developer, depending on your game's complexity, you risk leaving them in the lurch when/if the competitive player base turns your game into something different entirely. (You can change the game post-release with patches and sequels to better suit your vision, if this bothers you, but this opens up a whole other discussion on if and to what extent you should.)
Well, you're right to say that developers can't really predict what gamers will do with their games... But it's so easy to get around that. You said it yourself. Things that happened in older games are reflected in newer ones' mechanics. But why not teach it to the player in an environment that's controlled by the game and not just in "practice mode" with a bunch of FAQs and tutorial videos? Why do I need to use outside material to learn a game that's been released in the 21st century? We live in an age where games teach themselves. Now, as I've mentioned above, the solution is in making new content. For example, how in later versions of SF3:3s there's a challenge to repeat the famous Daigo perry counter combo with Ken against Chun-Li. Problem is - this won't really teach you anything you could use in a real match. The real solution is to have player-made content. There's an endless list of games with player-made levels and mods and all that. Why not have a fighting game that allows players to construct tutorials? You just need the game's engine to allow frame-by-frame editing and, as I've mentioned in another comment, slow-motion or frame-by-frame playback of real-time gameplay (not just videos). Just imagine it. Someone would discover an amazing combo or trick or whatever and then they could construct a tutorial, and someone else could download that tutorial and learn that move step-by-step and then practice it in slow motion and slowly speed up to be able to perform it at any situation. The players' level in that type of fighting game would be insane! And since this is all built into the game - it's reachable to anyone!
I've taught a few people how to play from near zero, a whole lot of what I've used follows this step-at-a-time pattern of complexity ramp up. Took a lot of patience, but it's worth it to build someone you can expand yourself by fighting against.
Without someone to teach you, it's just pitting your character against a mannequin, trying to understand these arbitrary buttons and identical move sets. More like memorizing your times tables before you learn to multiply. But when you understand that 2×3 is two groups of three objects, you don't *need* to memorize everything at once because you understand a concept you can build on.
Another big issue with fighting games is the steep learning curve on execution. If fighting games are a chess match, imagine not being able to move your rook unless you could hold a handstand for 30 seconds. Even if you know what you want to do you cannot do it. And I'm not talking about quarter circles or even Z-Motion or charge moves (which are big learning gaps for people just getting into fighting games). I'm talking linked combos, frametraps, Guilty Gear XXAC false roman cancels or Sol Badguy's dust loop. Players, even high level players, are required to spend HOURS if not days sitting in a tutorial room doing the same combo over and over and over in order to execute them well enough that using it in a match becomes second nature. And I get that high level execution is fun to watch and REALLY hype when a player at a major tournament when someone like Sako does a ridiculously flashy combo full of 1-frame links and unnecessary dashing. The issue is, execution is part of the challenge of the game, it's the part of the match where the player simultaneously fights themselves and dropping combos or bad execution becomes a part of the match. But players have gotten such great and consistent execution after playing fighting games for thousands of hours that, in order to maintain that execution aspect of the game, they have to keep raising the bar to the point that even the most disciplined fighter still messes up sometimes. But that bar is raised so high (I-No in GGXXAC), it becomes impossible for someone who has only sunk a couple hundred hours into fighting games overall to even consistently pull off some stuff. On top of that, move properties are so hidden, you often times have to hack the game into debug mode to see frame data or hit/hurtboxes. A lot of these properties are incredibly hidden even to people who are looking for them, let alone a player who isn't even aware that a move could have invincibility frames.
+stormsasuke I think you can have exciting combos without such strict execution requirements. Just look at things like Blazblue, Arcana Heart or other animu fighters - they give you a few frames of buffer before the window even starts, and if you hit your next link in the combo during that it will come out frame1. You're still going to have to practice your BnBs to not drop them in real matches and such, but I personally don't feel super tight 1 frame links really add anything to the games, they're just kind of something I deal with because I like the genre. I think the great things about fighting games are the mindgames from spacing and resets, which is part of the reason I fucking hate option selects. Being able to do input multiple things and have the game OS into the best option is stupid IMO. Also I just now realized after typing this that you posted this after 3 months, but whatever.
Looks like Street Fighter 6 World Tour mode is similar to what you proposed here. A solo, leveling system, where you start with few moves and learn more from your masters as u move on. For teaching mecanics, I don't know if the solo World Tour campaign RPG mode catches some of ur propositions, but the guides menu is dope ! But could be a kind of bricks wall too. You'll need to come back from times to times there
Skullgirls has a pretty amazing and indepth tutorial system that divides up the different techniques and teaches them piece-meal before gradually asking you to put it all together. Any fighting game looking to craft a good learning experience would do well to start with that. It isn't presented in the context of a story mode, but the way it is set up it would be trivial to put story over top of it.
The thing with Fighting Games is the same thing as MOBAs, don't expect to go in and know everything, you are guaranteeing rage and saltyness from doing that. Take it slow, look at the character's movelist, and try out the moves again and again and again, get a feel for how to move your fingers, it's the same as typing without looking at your keyboard, it sounds complicated but the moment you get a feel for where every letter is, you will know what to do. That is the whole thing with Fighting Games, if you want to learn this new thing you found out about, go to the training mode, and do it until it feels right, it's not difficult at all, and I main Fukua, Robo-Fortune and Beowulf, like, it's not that hard, patience makes skill.
Learning fighting games is like learning an instrument or practicing your drawing skills. Growing and learning is as much a part of the fighting game experience as are the actual matches.
Except playing an instrument or drawing doesn't involve me doing complex dance moves or Naruto hand signs to do something like drawing a straight line.
@@boshwa20 learning an instrument or drawing both require hand dexterity, especially when you're trying to learn something hard. at a base level for most modern fighting games, you can just hold directions and press buttons, and you can get by perfectly okay. If you want to get better, thats when you can start using special moves, combos, supers, etc. the naruto hand signs aren't required, they just look cool so of course you're gonna want to do them
It's been a passive effort for years for me; I WANT to get into the genre, so badly, I love the fan base and I love watching matches of high level skills, but I just... there's some disconnect somewhere, I can't combo right, or I can't set off the moves, it's a shame, honestly, I WANT to be into it.
+Amiibo Cell If you want to get into fighting games, it's honestly gonna take a lot of dedicated practice. You even have to "learn how to practice". You can probably find videos and articles about this. Hell, fighting game community member Ryan (I forget his last name) more commonly known as Gootecks has an E-Book available called Simplifying Street Fighter.
+Amiibo Cell +El Blackimar Yeh, I think part of the problem is that to get to the kind of level the video mentions, and that you yourself have struggled with, is that so much of it is down to muscle memory, its all well and good learning the moves - but you have to be able to pull them off on reaction without thinking "oh I should anti air here" or what not. And it just gets worse with combos in Street Fighter - its not just learning the order of moves, and variants in said combo against different characters or in different situations, but the infinitely trickier bit of getting the input timings down, these often being narrowed down to windows of 1-5ms leaniency.... All of which can currently only be mastered by grinding it out for hours and HOURS on end. That being said Street Fighter V is making efforts to simplify this, and other games such as Skull Girls have much improved tutorial systems for teaching the mechanics of the game which other games can learn from.
Ian Dingle Yeah, learning inputs and combos is a barrier for a lot of people. It's hard for me to related because I can easily do most inputs and/or find simple yet effective (bread and butter) combos. But SFV does have a tutorial at least. Hopefully it has a single player mode, cause it really sucks when people ask me to help em get into fighting games, but quit cause they say it's too hard.
i cant speak for mkX but mortal kombat has the best training programs. since the first ps2 game theyve always had a challenge tower or a tlstory based tutorial seprat frome the main game to teach moves & combos & such. street fighter has the worst. mvc 3 has a great combo training program. tekken/soul caliber games are hit and miss generally pretty shitty tho.... at the end of the day tho you iust hav to remember that most games follow the same rules and button combos so just pic one learn it and you can rest assured that youll be at least decent at all the others
To be honest, I have plans to make a fighting game that's gameplay is a mashup between platformer fighting games like Super Smash Bros and Rivals of Aether and traditional fighting games like Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. Replacing Smash Attacks with Light and Heavy attack buttons with Specials inspired by Terry having a forward and back special as well two super meters, one for a Final Smash-like technique, called a Desperation Technique, the other temporarily transforms the character for 30 seconds into a stronger form, though some characters "transformations" aren't really different forms but are an action with different effects such as stopping time for only 10 seconds. The game would be designed to be accessable to casual players with movesets that are simplistic and easy to understand, with a character or two designed for new players but even new players would take a little while to understand their full potential. The game also rewards players for learning combos and understanding each characters strengths and weaknesses.
this is why i like smash bros. there's only a few basic attacks, a wealth of characters with different strengths and weaknesses, and i think it pulls off an effective depth:complexity ratio. There are tons of different ways to fight, but it's fairly easy to get used to the game.
+pewol That stuff is why fighting games are engaging. They are talking about how for a novice like me, the in accessibility of fighting games lies in the complicated move set.
+Misty Wind Simplifying fighting games doesn't address the problem though, it just works around it. As someone who is now very familiar with fighting games, I find that Smash Bros. is still just as hard to understand at a high level, as it has it's own nuances and techniques that aren't explained by the game. The "how to play" video in the Smash Bros. games gives about as little information as some of the tutorial modes in fighting games that don't teach new players well, such as Street Fighter 4. In this regard Smash Bros. is just as bad as the more traditional fighting games. It just so happens that the tools you are given in Smash are basic enough to be effective even at low skill levels, making players feel empowered, perhaps to the point of feeling more competent than they actually are. That's why more people play Smash and stick with the game than other fighting games. What this video is saying is that if we want people to "git gud" then the game should be designed in a way that encourages players to do so as well as serve as a learning platform. In depth tutorials give players access to the information necessary but can be overwhelming, so creating a proper single player experience around this can be what we need. The closest I've seen to this is the main mode in Tekken Tag Tournament 2, as it gives you challenges to complete based around a particular game mechanic or group of mechanics. For what it's worth, Smash has never done anything like this. It doesn't even give you an explanation as to why you should choose an A attack in one direction over another. I think something like what Tekken Tag 2 has would work well in other games but might be hard to pull off. It would take a lot more work and resources to deliver an effective tutorial and engaging single player experience compared to what we have in fighting games now. Also, an important aspect of high level play in fighting games is recognising that some moves are useful because of the presence or threat of other moves, so drip feeding players new attacks might be a bad idea. But, coming up with a good single player experience that teaches fighting games could be the key to making them grow and I'd really like to see a fighting game developer take a good stab at it.
+KillerSasuke44 it doesn't, however there's a theory i want your opinion on when it comes to fighting games (melee specifically). Melee at first was an accessible party game that did not rely on chess-match-fighting-game-mechanics to win. however, as the meta-game grew, players began to supersede this and play at high levels that novices could not achieve simply by playing. Fighting games are a niche genre because not only is there noticeable difference between starting a game and playing it, there's also a difference in the level of play from each opponent.
+Misty Wind The reason I think Smash is difference is because it tries to be two different things, and mostly succeeds. If you play Smash with all the items and the chaotic stages, you get a match with a lot of randomness, leading to some equalization between the highly skilled and the less so. The simple control schemes make this style of play immediately approachable. However, if you take away the items and go to Final Destination, you have the same sort of tactical thought that other fighting games utilize. Each of Melee and Brawl failed in an aspect of this. Melee wasn't polished enough and the competitive scene found a large number of work-arounds to maximize efficiency. But with sophisticated techniques like wave dashing and l-canceling, they turned the game into something that only barely resembles what the casual gamer experienced. Brawl was an over-correction for this. It slowed the game down and took away a lot of exploits. I think a lot of the mechanical improvements in Brawl, like changes to the air dodge, where fantastic. But they contributed to a slowed pace that encouraged defensive play, impairing the competitive scene. Smash 4 really is a work of art that balanced the two game styles.
Good reference point: The NES 1980s classic Pro Wrestling. All moves (and there were quite a lot) were never more complicated than double-dash + button or hold-direction + button. It was basic, but it worked.
I'd recommend Skullgirls as a good first fighting game. It has tutorials that teach basic fighting game mentality, like cross ups and hit confirms. It also might a good example of the very first point that you said would work for a whole episode, since the designer was originally a competitive MvC2 player.
I recommend marvel Vs capcom infinite The auto combo system makes combos barley a thought until you learn the game in an intermediate level Input are also very easy in this game and the open ended tag system and infinity stones system present a strategy clearly instead of focusing on your damage
I'm a doa fan big time, so I have to point out that, the story mode is a tutorial of basic controls, then you step up to a fundamental game type tutorial. Once you get that you can go to the move set tutorial that teaches every move for any character you want, then you can move to the combo tutorial that can't possibly teach every combo, yet it gives a basic idea on different set ups. Once you've graduated from all this you can go to the dojo and learn all the frame data, and other such top level mechanics. I don't think tutorials can hand feed you any more than this, yet doa is one of the least popular fighting games out.
That's great. Most people's strategy just seems to be to curb stomp you while you're still trying to figure out how "soul punch" is different than "spirit fist", what the hell "hundred cherry blossoms" is, and trying to remember if the ranged attack you want (out of your 22 combos) is ^ ^ < v ^ block+ kick, or ^ v ^ ^ < kick + block
If you can't take the time to invest in playing a fighting game, guess what, fighting games are not for you. There is no easy way to learn a fighting game. You will get bodied constantly by players who have invested more time than you. There is no easy way to teach people fighting games. I love when new people want to get into fighting games; really, I do. But if you really want to get into the meat of it, you better sit your ass down, look up a guide, and practice.
***** Yeah, pretty much. If fighting games were easy to learn, they wouldn't be nearly as entertaining to play, watch, or compete with. Sit down and learn the game through practice, or take your arcade stick/quarters you got from mommy and go play whack-a-mole. I got bodied for months at arcades and online before I got to be decent at fighting games. There are a billion different ways to learn the basics of fighting games; guides, friends who play, ingame tutorials, or, heaven forbid, actually practicing with your character.
***** Guess what, you don't need tandem combos to have fun playing JoJo, you're making it sound like the games becomes unplayable just because you can't beat the pros. If you're the kind of guy who "has a life" and has no time to waste playing silly video games all day you can easily find likeminded individuals who will play with you. Basically you have to make a choice, slam with the best or don't put in the effort.
***** Yeah, there's also the concept "Difficult to learn, satisfying to measter". Not every game will cater to the "I want to know everything without putting much effort into it" crowd. There are MOBAs a few doors down if that's more your speed.
If fighting games require the player's dedication and time, the fighting game franchises will die because they would be too much of a daunting task for the everyman. There is no detriment by making it a more hospitable place for people to get better.
A fighting game that does its teaching well is Skullgirls. It teaches you the basics at your own pace, and it doesn't have ridiculous 17 quadrillion button input supers. The most complex super movement is the dragon punch input or a full circle input, and yet it is amazingly deep and its mechanics are extremely well refined. (We're talking Super Metroid refined here.) So, for any of you who read this, and want to get into a fighting game, perhaps give Skullgirls a chance. .w.
+Dylan Hinkson when I was first starting to get back into fighting games I was asking around about which ones to get. Everyone told me Skullgirls because of the tutorials! and they were right :)
Something I would like to point out is that there is a certain point you get to in your skill that allows you play almost any fighter. Most fighters have fundamentals that apply to ALL fighters (spacing or 'footsies' is a good example) and you can apply them to any fighter, and you don't have to learn it all over again, at least to an extreme degree
But that has no bearing when we're talking about accessibility to people with lives and jobs, who didn't grow up with every weekend and snow day spent on memorizing button combinations and can't take a week off work to start now.
The best thing about fighting game is it's has a never ending learning curve physically and mentally. Even top players learn things everytime because of the depth and complexity of fighting games.
There's already a prefect example of this: Oni for the ps2 and PC. (Desperately needs a sequel btw). You began the game with a small list of moves, and through the games 14 or so long missions, at set points along the story, were given one or two new moves and the situation in which to use them. After that the game continued as normal with your (ever so slightly) bigger list of moves. By the end you had a massive arsenal to choose from and you were pulling off insane combos and fight sequences only seen in the best done kung-fu flicks.
After recently getting more into fighting games I sympathize with the experience of fighting games that throw you into the deep end but I don't feel many of the suggestions made in this video would be able to resolve that. As an example the idea of asking players what to do in a specific situation or teaching them with a few moves at a time both work off of what I believe is a faulty assumption. The challenge in learning fighting games isn't learning the basic moves it's graduating to fighting other players. In many situations the optimal response is character specific or subjective and I doubt a story mode teaching the player one or two moves at a time will help them much in online matches.
Fighting games should have more substantial single player mode. Single player mode should take place outside of a typical ring format. I can imagine a good tutorial would present you tutorials where you gradually learn the moves one by one doing with a variety of experiences.
Sucks I'm so late to this video, but what I'd really appreciate is if they just told us the timing. I get so hung up on trying to figure out when it is they want me to press certain buttons, but if they'd just tell me, I could move on to mastering the combo. Like you mentioned, slow motion would help a lot too, cause I could get an idea of which frame to aim for pressing the button on, rather than through trial and error.
This is why Smash Bros. had such a nice competitive scene. Each character has a simple number of moves but there are many hidden mechanics, high level combos and such.
Yeah. For example, it took me two battles to memorize Kirby's main moves (A UP, B DOWN, etc), and about half a battle to memorize Toon Link's. It's fairly simple, and easy to memorize.
I despise fighting games with shit tutorials such as Street Fighter 4 and UMvC because you spend hours trying to figure out if you're even doing correct button prompts because the "tutorial" just says "do this combo". Good tutorials like Mortal Kombat 9, SkullGirls and Smash bros ease you into combat where you can grow into it rather than "unless you played and memorized the last fighting game we made don't bother playing this one"
breaking down special moves through leveling goes against the whole idea and concept of a fighting game. for example, how would you break up a character like Guile who literally only has 2 specials and someone like Yun who has about 4 specials but tons of target combos, and special command normals? The best thing a fighting game can actually offer is a Robust Tutorial mode. One that does more just teach the players the character's special moves and combos (trials). If you need an example, look to games like the Virtua Fighter series especially Virtua Fighter 4.
I get the feeling that if this were shown to a place with a lot of competitive fighting game people, this video would get laughed out. I've seen proposals for a greater focus on the single-player mode at Shoryuken, and it was dismissed largely with the argument that it's time and money sacrificed against game balance. Ideas about beginning with few moves and easing newcomers into a game gets a similar argument, and on top of that some players are insulted that their game would need something like that. Regrettably, it all boils down to the mentality of the exclusive club: After mingling among some communities, a lot of fighting game people, I found out, do not want beginners joining them unless they can compete at their level. They loathe the idea that they could go online, for instance, and have problems finding people they know. The "fighting game community" is exactly that: A community. It's their neighborhood, their turf, and they don't take kindly to influxes of people moving in. Personally, a community like that is toxic to the franchise, and it's best to discard them and find a new one. However, it seems that companies like Capcom and Arc System Works are absolutely terrified of abandoning them because to throw away one group for another is an extremely risky business move in any industry.
+Overhazard It's people like you that discourage new players from entering fighting games. You hype and build up this nonexistent monster that is this community that acts that they don't want any newcomers. You're not only barking up the wrong tree you're not even in the right forest. There are so many tutorials made by high level players for each FG series that a simple google or youtube search can show you: Aris for Tekken and Soul CalTom Brady and Ketchup for MKInfiltration and Geoff the Hero for Street FighterMaximilian for simple but all around points for all fightersEven Gootecks made a whole book about teaching fundamentals in street fighter (and by extension most other fighting games). Why do you think they made these, for their ego? no. This is also not including people in forums and communities that are good to decent that still wish to help players when asked. The fighting game community is anything but exclusive because they always want other people of equal or above skill level to play against. What no fighting game player wants is to be good at a game then find out that there is nobody to play. As for how a greater single player focus cutting into the budget of balancing, that is undoubtedly true. Fighting games' strength lies in it's player vs player combat BECAUSE they are players with patterns, reasoning, as well as being able to develop mind games and strategies. An AI simply can not do that, and no amount of beating an AI will prepare you for a game against a human player (except for maybe combo consistency). Fighting games because of their niche market also have tight budgets. How about instead of pretending you know the community, how about you go to a forum or tournament scene and actually ask for help? Because right now you're talking so far out of your ass that its hard to tell whether you're farting or yawning.Also inb4 LOL THIS COMMENT IS A YEAR OLD!
YOURFACEOUCH What I found were based on comments at places like Shoryuken.com and Event Hubs. There were multiple articles on both of the sites asking what should be done with fighting games in general to make them more accessible to a mainstream audience. For the most part, the responses were to add in tutorials, but there were a few who said that they wanted the genre to remain a niche. External tutorials and guides made by players is also not part of the issue. This video is about how the games THEMSELVES can promote wider audiences. When someone plays a game and they find themselves unable to compete at multiplayer, whether online or off, they're not necessarily going to look at what other people have done or have written. Many will just stop playing the game altogether. External help will not solve anything until the game itself tells the player something like, "If you're having trouble, look up this guide online!" This help, at least the ones I've looked up myself, is also not that helpful. Explaining something to a beginner like myself is not that easy from the perspective of someone experienced. They might wind up skipping a lot of steps or explaining things without content assuming the reader is already familiar with them. Have you ever tried to use any "how to draw X" kind of books? If so, you've likely seen how they seem to go from rough contruction lines to the full drawing in one or two steps. Some don't even explain what construction lines, action lines, or types of shading are. This is what nearly all fighting game guides are like. And I have asked directly, and while I'm not stonewalled, they predominantly say, "It's easy, just A" and then I have to ask like six or seven times about more detail on A until I either get it, I give up, or they give up. I tried to get better at BlazBlue and Marvel vs. Capcom 3, but whatever help I tried to find or get wasn't helpful, and I wasn't really getting better. Most likely, neither side was able to explain what was going on properly; I probably needed someone behind my back watching me play directly. As for single-player modes, that's a way to get used to the mechanics of a game. You mention getting used to combos; that's not beginner level. Beginner level is understanding what buttons do what, how to move properly, how to jump properly, where to aim what each character's moves do, and how to do particular directional inputs. You move up to playing human opponents later. Splatoon is a game with a complex competitive scene and was designed from the ground up to be competitive. It has an extensive single-player mode (about 5 or 6 hours, I'd say), and people repeatedly say that they jumped into multiplayer, got crushed, then went to the single-player mode and became noticeably better. No doubt the single-player modes for other shooters like the Call of Duty series and the Halo series function in similar ways. Shooters can have these training wheels to get people ready. Fighting games, logically, can do that too.
Overhazard I know that this is an old post but it strikes the right cords for me. This is the same philosophy I have teaching my brother. I have play dates with him using the Skull Girls tutorial as an aid.
Yes, thats how it is. User made content is the only real way to learn how to play fighting games and even MOBAS or RTS. It really isnt a new concept, if you want to get good you have to look for the things you need yourself.
Eh... while I don't like half-circles for anything other than super moves, there's a reason that charge specials are charge specials, and z-inputs are z-inputs. Otherwise that's pretty much how it is in Skullgirls and Guilty Gear Xrd.
The thing with fighting games is that it's completely up to the player to get to that higher level of understanding that makes fighting games so immersive. As a player, you have to be willing to put yourself through the hundred-hour grind in the training area to build that muscle memory. You have to be willing to do your research, learn match-ups, and frame-data. You have to be willing to get your ass handed to you, look over your losses, and learn from your mistakes. Sure, tutorials can help with some tech-skill, but no amount of hand-holding is going to truly prepare you to go head-to-head with another human being.
And that's why they're so niche and relatively less popular. Which is fine, but if they want a bigger cultural impact then having alterations to mitigate the early tedium.
I couldn't agree more. VF 4 Evo also had a display for a (supposed) max damage combo for each launcher. How could one possible top that in a tutorial? I also love how VF Final Showdown has program mode and shows the essential frame data in free training. That alone got me hooked to learn more. VF does it well, VF Evo just did it best.
Skullgirls is a truly underrated game in this respect, because it has an extremely comprehensive tutorial, that you can always go back and replay. i'm a reeeally casual video game player, and I think skullgirls is a very good entry point if you want to get into fighting games
6 років тому+2
Absolver handles this so well that I'm wondering if they didn't actually watch this video while designing the game. There's a brief tutorial proper, in which you're taught which buttons do what; but after that, the whole single-player campaign effectively functions as an extended tutorial for the true endgame, the PvP. At first you only have 10 slots in which to assign moves; you simply don't have that much scope to fill out your deck, and must level up quite a bit before the full 16 slots are given to you (and given how your movelist's complexity grows exponentially with every aded slot, this is a major deal). And rewards for defense are built into the game: you gain "mana" only by executing defensive techniques like dodge or absorb, and you learn moves only by successfully defending against them & defeating the opponent afterwards.
This is how i feel with Super Smash bros, there aren't many "moves" you need to memorize so i can play the game strategically rather quickly. More complex fighting games are confusing and i don't stand a chance *unless* i button mash and get lucky, and while it's fun(ny) beating someone experienced by button mashing it's never an experience i would initiate, a friend always has to goad me into playing.
I personally think that using a MMO fighting game is a bad idea. Because it brings the in balance of the actual game. Take Mortal Kombat X for Mobile. You just need to rack up Lvling up and you never lose. It's too easy
Oh man, I have wanted to rag on fighting games for so long. Thanks to EC for keeping it positive and showing areas they could keep their spirit, but still improve. I definitely agree that steadily unlocking moves would work great - I think when I look at the final array of moves I have in Devil May Cry, or even certain action MMOs I play, I realize this would be super-complicated to anyone who didn't know what I was doing. But, they taught me the important bits first, presented problematic enemies, and then allowed new moves to overcome them. Some tend to be unlocked during the story, and should be core to your play, while others tend to be more to a player's style, and are often unlocked in a "Skill shop". If a seasoned fighting game player wants to feel what it's like being thrown into the genre, try out The Witcher 2. Specifically, try out its tutorial, which was thrown in after release, and even admitted by the developers to be not so good. About an hour into a tutorial, they're teaching you how to set traps, use potions, use the hotkeys for about 5 different magic spells, and the sword-fighting strategies for about 3 different types of opponent. Then, they send those enemies at you all at once, give you one chance to beat them all, and then evaluate your performance. It's not even humorously fun. And, I'd like to request all fighting games give up these ridiculous sequences of actions. If my A, B attack stuns someone just long enough that I can always follow up with X, Y, up-Y for the most damage...who is playing the game at that point? The opponent can't react, so I'm not playing against them - just proving my memorization and timing of a particular button input. Why not just automatically deal that damage? Fighting games are games of strategy, spacing, and decision-making; NOT combo-inputting, so why not just turn the controller into the "decision-maker", rather than some kind of bizarre instrument of proof of personal dexterity? (In the same way, in Mirror's Edge your obstacle is the environment and circumnavigating it, so the controls are not perfectly simple and navigation challenging. Conversely, in Titanfall, the environment is just a tool to maneuver around your REAL enemies - so in that game, parkour is correctly made ridiculously easy)
Mainly cause doing combos is lots of fun really. They are the reward for managing to lamd that solid hit and now you get to show off how awesome your imagination and execution are. You've never been one to invent optimal combos, I can tel that much. There's a certain degree of emotional attachment to specific combos believe it or not. Be it they are col or awesome or use some unusual property in am imaginative way. Putting combos together in impressive ways could be called an art form and it is an expression of ones self to pull them off. This is what makes them compelling.
Besides the freedom and fun that dreikoo mentioned, sometimes different players want different stuff out of moves. Combo A might get you better damage, but combo B will get you better corner carry, and combo C will get you more meter. I might prefer combo B, while you might prefer combo A but in a game that auto pilots combos you've removed that choice. There's also a matter of some things just not being reactable. Maybe A>B is better on hit, but A>C is better on block, you can't tell if your move is going to hit or not, so you might go for A>C since it's safer, but if you're sure that I'm not going to block A, then you'd go for the riskier A>B combo.
Just to add what the others have said. Big combos are good for the game flow, player and audience. It's high tension with the two players spacing and positioning, then when there's an opening a flashy combo is the reward and tension release. The characters are usually reset back to the beginning, unless the player decides to do a combo that puts them at an advantage afterwards which you usually have to sacrificed damage to do. These are resets or hard knock down enders or what not.
friendofphi That's cool, but I've seen quite a few fighting game combos where that choice doesn't matter. You hit them and they lose somewhere between 60 and 80% or their HP every time and it's annoying/infuriating. When you have the combo choice you've spoken of it's awesome and something I found in Super Smash until I ran into glitchers and chain-grabbers that made 95% of the roster useless. However, those are unintended exploits. I just like it when a match doesn't come down to what's essentially 2 hits for one side, but rather a constant exchange of blows with a focus on repositioning. And I really want an alternative to quarter-circle movements because they're not very reliable for most ppl and complicate things. This is also aggrivating when you consider that most fighting games barely use the L1/L2 and R1/R2 buttons, they could just make them correspond to that thumbstick movement so you could combo them like you would for a grab(Square & Triangle, Triangle & Circle, etc...). Like L1 = left quarter-circle up, L2 = left quarter-circle down, etc - so you can people can immediately use their desired move on command and don't a barrier to their specials(which are a requirement for some characters).
CtisGaming If you can't do a quarter circle reliably there are 2 possibilities, either you lack the physical dexterity or you aren't doing it correctly. If you're not doing it correctly there is a simple solution, practice. That's what most people do when they run into a pit they can't jump in a game like mario or an enemy they can't beat in devil may cry. If you actually just lack the dexterity you should probably spend less time playing video games and more time in physical therapy, because it's a very simple command.
My personal trick to learning a new character in BlazBlue is to practice the inputs until I'm comfortable with them and then do some basic combo and move practice until I have a good feel. Then I switch the practice dummy, which has the same charater as the one I'm using, to AI controlled and ramp up the diificulty to the highest level. This way, while fighting I can practice the combos I've already figured out and at the same time observe what the CPU does with the same tools. Once I've learned a few new tricks, it's back to the training dummy to solidify them with repetition. I have yet to gather any real competitive experience though.
Button mashers almost always beat someone like me when I try to think strategically. Button mashing is very unpredictable, which makes the opponent's strategy a waste of time if they are trying to predict their moves based on their play style, or waiting for an opportune moment to attack. I also find some games just allow you to spam your favourite move over and over again, some of them I can never figure out how to avoid, and frequently lose by being continuously kicked/punched into the ground. The game doesn't really teach you anything about those situations, but if I looked them up I would actually understand what was going on.
I know the feeling. But I would argue that there are ways to beat button-mashers. Otherwise there wouldn't be a competitive fighting scene. I believe its more about staying back and then doing the 'safe' option. You know they're going to charge and throw attacks at you, thus you need to get control of the map, stop them from making you retreat and then do the safest attack option. Because once you have them on the defensive you know they're going to attack probably with that character's easiest and quickest option. Like with a rising shoryuken. So step back, let him and then confirm into another combo. But I'm the same lol. Nothing more frustrating than losing to someone you know you're better than.
If your losing to mashing, then you dont know spacing, how to create safe pressure or condition an opponent. Mashing = counterhits and whiff punishes. If your losing to mashing, you dont know how the game works.
The button masher's worst enemy: blocking. That's honestly all you really have to do. Block and wait for them to use an ability that has a high recovery time then punish.
Kurt Horsting But what's teaching you wiff punishes? Spacing? Counterhits? Safe pressure? Fighting game design is a lovely shitpile of messy information, because, unless you have godly instinct, even basic but prominent mechanics like these don't become apparent until you're *constantly losing to them*. Games can teach by failure surely, but you HAVE to teach by measured success as well (and that's largely ineffective in this genre as well). The range of 'little victories' (learning and performing those wiff punishes, exploiting gaps, proper spacing, pressure into mixup, etc.) is so muddled, so obscured by having a round system that declares victory to the one with yellow bar left at the end. Someone into the genre could tell you that high level play is more about strategy and the terms you listed all they want, but the surface of the game IS still two people beating each other up; that's one of the largest gaps in translating intent I've ever seen in a game. There's work to be done in bridging that gap, and I can't pin that on the community (their job is to keep the competition fresh with new tech and discoveries); it's time for developers to step in on this.
Skullgirls' tutorial is a wall of text basically. They show you a concept and then you can go figure it out yourself. A good tutorial shows you a concept and lets you practice until you understand it. A lot of single player campaigns are basically one really long tutorial with loads and loads of you practicing the mechanics, Resident Evil 4 for instance. I tried to do Skullgirls' tutorial, I shouldn't have to leave the tutorial to go practice the concepts. I should just be able to play it and when I'm ready, choose to go to the next part.
The things is though, it teaches all the lingo, all the terms, and a bunch else as well along with showing what they are, all things needed to get better.
Hunter Benjamin You don't learn something by looking at it once and then moving on. You have to be introduced to the concept, practice with it, and then have it reinforced repeatedly at regular intervals of time as you go along. The Skullgirls tutorial is step 1 out of 10 steps.
That RPG you mentioned is not very different at how we learn at krav maga, you start at p1 (practitioner 1) and you learn basic moves like punching, basic defenses, basic kicks then you get a exam on that and then you go to p2 where you learn some more moves which are pretty basic but more complex then those of p1 and you keep learning more advanced moves the further you go, its a really effective way of learning so its a great idea for video games
Fighting games already have too many comeback mechanics and much easier inputs than they used to. Practice modes already now have frame data and complex tutorials to teach you everything + the internet is flooded with tutorial videos, wikis and forums where you can ask specific questions at whatever level you want and get an answer. Big corporations already sacrifice fighting game balance in the name of making the game "more fun to watch," like removing chip damage or giving the losing opponent a magic pixel or special comeback super so they can pull out a win that LOOKS more impressive to bystanders.
The only fighting game I've ever gotten into is Super Smash Bros. Because in that game, the button combos for any one attack amount to little more than "tilt stick, press button." Please note that's *button* as in singular, as in just one button.
Guacamelee was sort of like this, as well. It's a Metroid-vania-ish game but your hero plays like a fighting game character, and you learn new moves as the game progresses. Not only opening up new areas of the map, they let you chain them into increasingly complex and versatile combos. The bosses are like a mix of your typical 2D platformer patterns, and the complex mind-games of a fighting game boss.
People who don't try at fighting games aren't having issues because the games don't convey information well, though that is a part of it. The bigger issue is that most people don't have any interest in trying to get good at something.
and yet they are still about reflexex if you can't keep pace with mechanics - it doesn't matter what your strategy is i can't execute half of the moves, i'm too old for that
Right its muscle memory not reflexes. At first it is about reflexes. But once you know the strategy and know how to combat what your opponent can do, it is more about staying one step ahead. You anticipate, you don't react. You manipulate and thus as a result the game slows down. Though if I put my parents in front of the screen I know they wouldn't be able to keep up. Its no different from Chess. An 80 year with experience in chess can see a situation and notice openings immediately. An inexperienced 18 year old can see the same situation and take 20 minutes to dissect it down to notice that opening.
Nigel Blackman you know there is blind people even in their 5 or deaf there is also colorblind people not everyone born as american white male christian superhuman with lighning reflexes given them by mother of christ
Smash does fighting games very well. It's controls are very simplistic, but to get good it is very complicated. You have 4 specials, can block, roll, and grab, and have a basic attack along with directional attacks Combos are very simple, and specials take no complicated button combonations. Yet high level smash play is ridicuosly complex and fascinating.
My problem with fighting games as a whole is this: I want to get into the strategic depth, a game of positioning and on your feet thinking centered around controlling space and double-blind reactions. I want to learn the applications of various techniques and the way different characters interact. You don't get that when you're getting into most fighting games for the first time. You get a minigame about wiggling a stick in a certain way and guessing what kind of effect this type of wiggle or that type of wiggle will have. Getting better at that minigame is a requirement to be allowed to play the game that's interesting, but it has nothing really to do with it, and it's not really a helpful skill or particularly interesting minigame to master. Learning this minigame contributes nothing to learning the actual fighting game hidden behind it, and rarely adds to the depth of the game behind it. When I work on anything, be it a game or studying, I want my work to have meaning. The time spent overcoming that initial barrier doesn't feel like it has meaning, other than granting permission to try a game I don't even know if I'll like, and may or may not be any better or worse than other games that reward my work with each facet mastered and explored. I can understand that people might feel accomplished overcoming that hurdle for the first time, but every time I've managed it, regardless of how much I enjoyed what came after (or not), I've never felt accomplished. I learned how to wiggle a stick. It taught me nothing about the underlying systems of the game and how to utilize them. My work meant nothing in the grand scheme of things, as I am as capable a player of the game as I was before I even put the disc in.
blazblue and guilty hear have amazing tutorial modes to teach you the game. more fighters are implementing tutorials now. hell, I've been playing fighters for 25 years. It's getting easier for more people to dive into the genre compared to the days of old.
As someone with friends into fighting games but who is bad at video games and cannot memorize the moves and pull off the inputs without more practice than I have the time or interest for, and who stresses playing multiplayer in general, I love the idea of making a singleplayer mode designed to teach you. That's a great idea and I hope it gets picked up. Also I wanna play Dungeon Fighter Online now.
The Naruto series had a really good story and u learned step by step :D because u learned something and as u progress u figure out new moves and new attacks
Hoenestly the only fighting game i am invested in is Super smash brothers, because of the lack of preset combos. I am not a genious when it coems to memorize those :)
TheMakuboy Yeah, there is a lot of strats in the game because f it's movement freedom, but it's easier to enjoy even at a noob level, because you don't have to button mash or have to learn any hard combos.
Shoutouts to you, Extra Credits, for being extensively knowledgeable about a topic, before speaking to a fan-base of thousands. You actually are a big-name youtuber that understands fighting games. Pretty rare stuff there. Thanks for the advertising for the community. Grrrr8 work, breh.
Ty extracredis for the support you have been showing on dungeon fighter online since ever. Ps. You guys have been plating some nasty C4 on people minds since ever too sooo is a huge plus when you do it to the fighting game Community too.
Some of the problems raised at the beginning are valid, but the video completely lost me when it proposed that they could be solved with solo campaigns and RPG systems. MK Mythologies: Sub-Zero did something like that a while ago and I'm almost positive that no one became a competetent MK player by playing that game, because of the simple fact that fighting against a computer and fighting a person are radically different experiences. A computer opponent doesn't react based on what is happening on the screen, it just reads your inputs, and as such is not burdened by reaction times, the only reason you're able to beat an AI is because it is programmed to throw you a bone from time to time and let you score a hit. It doesn't have patterns based on emotions, it doesn't get cocky and launch an ill-advised offence, it doesn't get nervous and drop combos, it doesn't stay in place obviously waiting for you to try a jump-in, it can't see that you're trying to bait him. Tekken and Soul Calibur tried something interesting where they let you play against AI who where programmed to mimick actual players' patterns, but it doesn't work convincingly. The truth is that playing against an AI for any extended period of time will make you WORSE. I'm mostly used to playing traditional capcom-style fighting games, so when I picked up Smash 4 I spent a lot of time against the computer before jumping online because I wanted to have a good grasp of the mechanics in order to not look like an idiot in a real match. When I finally tried playing against real people, I got absolutely wrecked by players who very obviously knew less about the game than me: they didn't tech, spot-dodge or tilt, but they still won because while I was busy learning bad habits and patterns that worked against the computer, they were out there learning how humans actually play. I learned more by getting my ass beat on For Glory for an hour than by playing against the AI for five evenings.
+BensonBPH it means you don't see how the single player gave you the understanding of the commands you used to get your ass beaten.You're saying,"it taught me nothing!" and it actually taught basic controls,even if it's not enough to beat people.
that's exactly what people mean when they say have been in the genre for too long,no videogame concept is as intuitive as you think it is,you're so "in" you don't know what it feels like to be out,you can put your grandmother to play if you feel like testing your ideas.
I heard it's best to get people to listen to a critique by starting with a complement, or saying what you liked, ect... I disagree with a couple of things in this vid. 1: Reactions are most certainly an important part of high level play. It is not a chess game. It's about risk vs reward, and reading the opponent, and capitalizing on opportunities. Doing these requires knowledge, practice, good reactions, and solid execution. 2: Memorizing the move sets, combos, and how the game specific system mechanics work is the same thing as learning them in a single player mode, or training mode. You do both by playing the game, and both take time, effort, and dedication by the player. The bottom line is that learning to play a fighting game takes a lot of time and effort. Learning to be competitive takes more time and effort. You cant make players want to put in the effort. No amount of spoon feeding new players in a tutorial will teach them how to think and be creative. Indeed, it would more than likely teach them to be predictable, always reacting a certain way in a certain situation. There are basic concepts of fighting games that are simple concepts, but very hard for the average gamer to understand. Concepts like Frame Data, Movement, Reversal, Block, Combo, and many others. For Example, how frames work in a fighting game, and the implications of how they work is particularly difficult for new players to understand. I don't think it matters if the player is spoon fed this info in a single player, or is taught by playing the game vs other players. Most simply wont get it the 1st time, and wont put in the effort to understand and apply such a concept. Every fighting game has some complex mechanics these days, but they still all share a fundamental group of concepts. This is where players struggle the most. Learning them, understanding them, and applying them in real matches takes time and effort that most people aren't willing, or are unable to put in. The player is the driving force in a fighting game. In every critical situation in (good) fighting games, players have options to choose from. Do I hit a button, or do I reversal? Do I continue to apply pressure, or do I bait a reversal? Knowing what options are available and choosing intelligently between them in a split second, developing good habits but not becoming predictable, and having consistent execution, all these things take time and effort, by the player, to learn. I do agree that most games could do more to teach players how to play. Indeed, games like Blazblue, Persona 4, and Skullgirls have improved in this way from older games. Melty Blood has one of the best training modes that I've seen in a fighting game. These tools are limited by the player. The best way to learn a fighting game is to play it as it is intended; against other players, face to face. Preferably, someone better than you. Eventually, the player develops their own understanding, and creates new ideas. I guess to sum up my main point(s), you can't teach players to want to play your game, or to want to learn, or to want to think, or to want to create. You can, however, train them to be monkeys. Most gamers, not just fighting game players, are trained monkeys that hit all the buttons and expect to get the rewards.
Hehe. "Free." I know what you mean. I like that the guys at Nekki are aware of culture as well as simple game design and make things like katanas, which are culturally and visually significant but not really that much better than other weapons, cost the currency that you buy. Which is terrible for mall ninjas.
Soul Calibur may be a wall of infomation but practicing with it is pretty helpful since the directional inputs are easy enough it doesn't overwhelm you for you to perform complex movesets with only a handful of complicated techs (i.e. Ivy). A horizontal slash is weaker than a vertical but can sweep an enemy that likes to strafe, a vertical is stronger than a horizontal but its range is limited to a straight line and kicks are helpful for surprise attacks. The essential skills that need to be learned through sheer grit and training however, are the reflexes to perform parries and counters.
skullgirls gives you all the tools to climb the learning curve with the best tutorial i've ever found for this genre, the flexibility to choose up to 3 characters at the same time removes the problem of counterpicking since you can imput any assist move for each character... and this is just the first things that came up in mind. i suggest try it, especially for who feels fighting games are overwhelming... not to mention the roster of characters is composed mostly by females that they have a great personality and characterization. go and play it!
Being a fighting game person, I realise there are two types of people: 1). Someone who goes straight to training mode, get to know a character, learn combos, etc. 2). Someone who goes straight to VS mode and button bash, saying "How did I pull that off?" I know some people who thinks that the randomness of button bashing and figuring out the moves is part of the "fun"; and then they complain that the game is not fun when I beat them.
Well...that's an interesting way to put it. I've fallen into category 1 and a half then I suppose. I take time to research and work with characters to see what feels better, but then move on to vs to gain some experience using the limited tools I have. I do however at least know all the specials, supers, and normals though. Sitting in training mode for an hour and a half at a time can be daunting, so to have some fun I keep it only to maybe 10-30 min a day.(Links, FADC Combos etc.)
I think the mobile Shadow Fight 2 is a perfect example of this too, it gives new information in a very slow pace, and it just feels good to constantly change your weapons and adapt to them, each has its own strategy, and it makes us feel smart when we crack it
Soul Calibur 2 did this very well. I had it for the Gamecube. The first few levels of the single player campaign were really good about teaching you the mechanics of SC. The system mostly boils down to vertical attacks beat horizontal attacks which beat side stepping which beats vertical attacks. There are also kicks but they basically follow the same trend.
I think you guys are missing the point. Fighting games is supposed to be like that like Dark Souls is supposed to be hard and free, you get your ass kicked on online or vs a friend, start for searching material like youtube videos or tutorials (there's a TON of content from basic moves to full complex way of thinking on a competitive match) and then start to see how things work, kinda like seeing in the dark, you will get used to it with time, if a player is bummed down from the first loss he's not apt to experience the game at it's fullest (again, like Dark Souls). I'm not even close to a good fighting game player, but I do try to improve and the progress is indeed slow. Like mastering a new skill. Now, when you talk about the rpg system is very probable that even with the bonus for getting a move right the player could simply grind till the end of the game, as exists button masher there will be grinding in it. Fighting games are free, if you start thinking about tutorials we will have ANOTHER wall on another genre.
First of all: I don't think the darksoul comparison works in any way. You are missing the point. Maybe I could even make a point about how Fighting game players don't get the point why they have so few new players. And what does "free" meen? Free = no tutorial?
If fighting games are "supposed" to be like that, then fighting games will dwindle until they're more niche than text adventure. It's become a genre that, if you haven't followed along for pretty much its entire life, it's almost impossible to get into it. In what way would teaching people to play be a bad thing?
Dark Souls isn't hard for the purpose of being hard, that's why Dark Souls 2 isn't as good as the first, that was their mindset "guys the first game was hard and people liked that, make it hard" it was hard and fair and smart about its difficulty and the difficulty fit in with the world. barrier for entry is a completely different thing than difficulty. all it does is limit the people who can enjoy the game. and these are people who don't abandon the game because "it's hard" but because it's frustrating not knowing how to do shit, you can brute force your way through the frustration by memorizing every single move, but you still won't be very good.
a achmed Free mans, "pickup and play", see what happened to Zelda, is a clusterfuck of unnecessary tutorials. Fighting games have a lot of teaching content on internet. ***** would not be bad to teach people, but people need to be willing to learn, there's a lot of content explaining the basics on internet, and even the most complex systems. MuffinatorXII you missed entirely my point, let me explain again maybe I was wrong in the wording of it. I said Dark Souls because the difficulty EXPOSES the game feel, the game is supposed to be that way, the difficulty helps in every single aspect of the game, feeling, story, music, universe, narrative and etc. Fighting games IS to have your ass kicked online (like I previously said, the same goes for Dark/Demon Souls invasions, hell Demon Souls even have a boss that can be a player) and then YOU DISCOVER you way to victory, you don't need to hand EVERY SINGLE ASPECT of the game or even the basics. You have four to six buttons, you have special maneuvers, pickup a character and try to beat your oponent, you failed? Ok now think WHERE you failed. If you spoonfed everything the game loses it's soul.
Marcos Wicket agreed. I feel as though fighting games are meant to played competitively to a sense. But if you dumb it down, it loses its appeal. Games like Soul Calibur can be extremely easy to pick up, but the overall casual player will still only play for a small amount of time before quitting. So fighting games are practically niche by nature.
The one major obstacle to fighting games (or any PvP game for that matter) is dedication. If you are not dedicated to learning the game, whether due to lack of time or whatever, you will never understand the mechanics everyone else already learned. It's sadly one of those things that boil down to "git gud or git out".
How do you know if you will like a game if they put that big brick wall in your face? I should not have to play 30 hours just to learn the basics and decide if I am willing to reach for mastery.
TheMakuboy too bad it doesn't even take that to learn that character :P in all honesty you can practice for a good 30 minutes to an hour learning the basic tools to have a good time. You're gonna be spending more time developing hand eye coordination, reflexes, and overall thinking skills than learning your character. its called dedication. :P
***** Not a chance. For the average player, it will take hours upon hours of practice to get to the point where your strategic play outperforms your button mashing ability.
TheMakuboy 30 Hours is not the basics. The basics are easy, it's how you evolve those basics, which is the same with ANY game really. You play Mario, you know how to run and Jump. Simple. But once you practice and get really familiar with these movements, you can time precise jumps on Mulitiple enemies, platform at full speed without stopping, etc. No one is saying everyone should try to master fighting games on a Professional level, some of those guys, winning tournaments is their JOB. Doesn't mean you can't get good enough to beat OTHER people
Andrew Morris For many that is the case. For me, it was just seeing how the competitive players performed and acknowledging my reactive playstyle. I then tried to be a more technical player and usually thought of what i was doing before pressing a button. I wasn't a button masher for say but i did have a habit of trying to react to everything in a lame manner. (waiting for an opponent to press a button to a ultra).
I think Skullgirls does quite a good job with the basic tutorial EXCEPT for one thing: Instead of telling you the actual button you have to press, they go with the LP, LK, MP, etc.-system, which is rather infuriating for new players. Also, what this game lacks are character-specific tutorials.
The last batch of Skullgirl tutorials are actually the character-specific ones... But truth be told, they are the weakest, since they simply list off the moves that each character can do and what they actually do.
I think it's better that way because it's universal. Not everyone uses the same controller, so this makes it easier for others--not just the game--to explain an input/combo without having to know how your buttons are labeled. Plus, part of learning the game is knowing which button is which.
The most important thing that needs to change in fighting game tutorials is how they teach the player to think. See, in the approach taken, players think about the moves themselves, which on they want, and then loose because they think in the wrong way. The best approach is to go about it in situations. Rather than teach any moves specifically, introduce various real in-game situations they may come across and get the player to figure them out, much like in the methods you suggested. By approaching the tutorial in a situation rather than move based focus, you get the player to learn to think in terms of situations, which is what high level play is all about. Even doing this through the basics, moving and hitting the basic attacks and combos, creates a solid thought foundation that changes the perspective on how you go about it. Think on this: When learning a fighting game, which is more effective? Knowing how to do special moves or knowing WHEN to do them? If you know how to move and when, even with normal attacks you can become incredibly powerful.
Thank you Dan, cause my friends and girlfriend have a hard time understanding how to do some stuff and I had to either go one on one fight online or offline with them slowly teaching them how to do each techniques of every fighting game
***** - Trouble is, when you want to test a move after it showed a single on, it jumps into the menu. I would consider that more of an instruction manual than a tutorial.
This is why I like Smash Bros. The general idea of the game is more simplistic than other fighting games and you don't need to memorize button combinations. You only have 2 buttons for attack and depending on which direction you tilt or whether you're on the ground or jumping it affects what move you use. This also makes it harder to button mash to win.
I think the main problem with this entire idea is that many competitive fighting game players wouldn't WANT the complicated mechanics to be taught in an easier way, since that would make them feel less "elite" for learning everything the hard way. If, for example, Street Fighter put these ideas into practice for their next game, its own niche fanbase would probably abandon it to find something more complicated (and thus more rewarding to that type of people).
The tutorial is exactly what made Skullgirls a great fighting game to get into for me. The tutorial in that game was rather vast and comprehensive. From doing mix-up combos to air chaining and even learning the ins an d outs of each individual character's special moves and blockbusters. I can't really explain the process that thoroughly, but it's the best I've seen.
Three words: Super Smash Brothers. Incredibly simplistic, but also very very deep. Appeals to the masses, and is also a blast to watch. Look no further than the recent Smash Invitational. I don't know how many were watching on other streams, but the Twitch stream of that had over 200k at one point when I was watching.
I love Smash Bros, but it also has some of its own problems as well. You could say that its in the other extreme end of the skill level. Sakurai has been very wary of making the game competetive in any way, removing things that could give a determined learner any form of upper edge, which is kinda sad and doesn't include strategy at all. You kinda need to put tools in (like perhaps L-cancelling or movement options in general) for players to be able to use strategically, otherwise it only becomes a game where everyone trades hits. That isn't what fighting games are about, it's in it's core about split second strategic play. Here's a video explaining what I'm trying to say: HANDS ON! Smash Bros: Wii U (Game Speed, Mechanics, Impressions)
I don't see how SSB is any different from any other fighting games as far as learning curve goes. Anyone can learn to use the buttons in Street Fighter or Guilty Gear or whatever, but just knowing the attacks means nothing to high level play, it's literally just step one, and that goes for ALL fighting games. People that aren't into the SSB scene just like watching it because it's a game that has a lot of movement and it always looks like something is happening where as SF is just much slower visually. Both games have a lot of strategy happening, it's just that in SF movement is much more restricted because you can be punished for careless movement differently than you would in SSB.
It's a bit hard for me to explain exactly, but if you're interested this video pretty much sows some of the aspects that worry me about Smash: HANDS ON! Smash Bros: Wii U (Game Speed, Mechanics, Impressions) It's not about the attacks themseles, but the fact that many of your actions requires a lot of recovery time (even jumping and landing) meaning that it's generally advantagious for a player to play defensively no matter if you're a zoner or not. That's not as fun, since it becomes a game about dodging and poking, trading hits until one dies, rather than actually opening up the opponent and hitting them for damage by out-predicting them strategically. Here's a more in-depth analysis on Smash in general, and some of the problems it might have: www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/27wshi/praxis_reply_to_what_makes_a_game_competitive_and/
There are too many moves? Each character in Streetfighter has about three and character types have interchangeable moves like Hadoken, Yoga Fire, Rekka Kens or Cannon Drill. They have transferable qualities to them that make it easy to learn the basics of each character, these moves are also quite similar to the moves you'd need to play King of Fighter games, Samurai Showdown and the majority of fighting games with a hand full of exceptions like Tekken or some Mortal Kombat games. The problem is that the gameplay of fighting games is not like any other kind of game. You can't use the same skills you'd have learned from a platforming game or an FPS you have to learn a new way of playing and people have little patience for it.
Apotheosis275 yes, which is why FPS games had such a hard time getting on to consoles, it took Halo and Call of Duty to introduce the public to FPS gameplay before that it was a niche market.
i play racing gams platformers fps and dota style games for years and have gotten good at some of them. the reason why, is that getting good at those games can be fun as well and is not a choire because you are not forced to start with meatboy or counterstrike or dota2 to learn them you can start with easier games (of which there are a lot which teach you basic and advanced skills for those genres) but all fighting games i've played so much only had features to train but not have fun while doing so
"Each character in Streetfighter has about three" Nope. You're just thinking about special moves. For starters, each character has 6 standing normals and 6 crouching normals. Someone new to the game has to find out which ones are useful, and when. It creates a fair amount to learn if you want to play competitively and not simply mash.
Fighting games are something that I have only just started getting into... but it's particularly hard for me as I don't have any friends who play fighting games and are at all good at them, the competitive scene here is literally non-existent, and at the moment I don't really have an online console to play on as I am too broke to afford anything!
BloodySteel64 3rd Strike is very hard to get a grip on an I applaud you for trying to. There are still a number of people left that still play it and can help you. SRK is a good place to start.
Speaking as someone who is rarely drawn to fighting games, I think Soulcalibur II did a fantastic job of this with Weapon Master Mode. I remember it individually teaching mechanics like Guard Impact, Ring Out, etc. It also had a great difficulty curve that allowed a beginner to become truly great at the game by the end. All while telling a good story and remaining engaging.
If you want a good example of a recent fighting game with the tutorial issues mentioned here, take a look at Injustice 2, especially the character tutorials. The Joker tutorial in particular asks the player to pull off a fairly difficult combo of moves (especially for console players) involving and anti-air move followed by a special move cancel (requiring very fast and precise inputs immediately after a very different type of attack) and then another delayed special move. All of this while the enemy is in the air. If at any point you miss, get hit, or the enemy touches the ground without every single move in the combo connecting, it restarts you.
I guess "The Fighting Game Problem" did not exist during the boom of fighting games back in the 90's. Players back then didn't have anything proposed in this video. I wonder how the fighting game genre ever took off and be in its present popularity. Let's face it. Fighting games are not for casual players. It sounds harsh but it is true. Think about it. Back in the 90's, we didn't have any of this shit. Everyone is challenging anyone in the arcades, everyone. You learn from your fellow humans. If you don't have the guts and determination to learn and eventually fight toe to toe with your fellow arcade goers, then it is not the genre for you. Really. Now, CPU trained players, no matter how good the developers have made the training mode and missions, will still get their ass kicked the moment they set foot online to fight a fellow human. Your human opponents will be your greatest motivation or your greatest obstacle in this genre. No artificial way will ever replace that. And also, this is not an RPG where you talk to an NPC, or obtain an item, or do a quest for you to learn something new and become stronger. In this genre, you become good by your own determination, discipline, training and continuous learning. No imaginary "level ups".
There is another thing that we, the dedicated fighting game players, can do to help with the growing of the genre: don't be a dick to new players. Teach them the stuff you know, correct their mistakes, encourage them to get better. Don't use your best character and tear them apart from the first second, don't call them scrubs after you defeat them. Be supportive of new players, or at least be kind to them.
Oh man being a dick to someone's tastes in video games is an even bigger problem than just within the fighting community, it's unreal. People literally still shit on Facebook games and phone games for no reason other than they hate/don't have the platform when quite a few of them have done their job being entertaining, and you're fucked if you reveal you actually LIKED those games.
Joseph Kolberg I don't think Jonathan's point was to go easy on new players; just to not be a jerk when you body them. Trash talk is one thing when it's between people of similar skill levels who trade sets often. But if the guy who gets to top 3 at all of his locals talks shit to the guy who has never been to a tournament before, the first guy just looks like a douche. It's the competitive gaming equivalent of a school bully who only fucks with kids who are half his size.
In part, it is on any player to know how to hold a loss and manage their expectations if they want to have a good time in a fighting game community. Losing is inevitable, especially when you're new. But if a new player gets trash talk because they're new, that will put an end to their desire to be a part of that community far faster than simply losing would.
Joseph Kolberg brawlhalla.ranked community is a hellscape really though i have met good people there most of the people just say "ez" or "trash"
being a jerk is a problem that will absolutely drive people away from a game no matter how interested they are in it. during the For Honor open beta the steam community was pretty dang unhelpful with anything.
"this character keeps using this combo, how do I deal with it?"
"well why dont you try playing the game more!?"
"my bad, I didnt realize it only worked against people with less than 40 hours in the game"
and about not needing to know all the combos, I barely even knew my own characters combos and was doing rather well. I only needed to know how to parry and counter-guard break and victory was easy.
I'm gonna give major props to the Skullheart forums for having a wealth of information about their game and a few users who will reliably answer gameplay questions.
"Strategy? Spacing? I just punch shit until it stops moving."
_-Sol Badguy, Guilty Gear Xrd_
And nothing has changed
"Ah yes, king monke"
Peak beast blaming lol
Not a damn thing has changed
Stuff like this is why I feel that Skullgirls is totally underated. The tutorial takes things one step at a time, introducing movement and teaching all of the things you have to know, each one in an individual tutorial that tells you what to do and when to do it, or helps you recognize things as they are. I am NOT a fighting game player- I'm just not- but Skullgirls has shown me how a fighting game can truly teach the player, before they have to get through things by themselves. In addition, each character has their own tutorial, outlining their specials, Blockbusters (Supers) and unique character traits. And, since each skill you have to learn is teached in its own tutorial, you can replay it again and again to get the hang of it, and if it's too much for you, you can go practice something else and then work your way up to it.
+Jagar Alagoria Agreed, SG's tutorial is great. And it's a fuckin awesome game created for fighting game fans by fighting game fans. I really wish more people played it.
skullgirls is exactly what this episode should have referenced.
Killer Instinct has a great tutorial mode as well.
The just-released (outside Japan) Guilty Gear Xrd Revelator has an awesome tutorial. Go check it out!
Additonally, something that has to be understood is that the tutorial will never teach you everything. To be competitive, you have to think for yourself. But yeah Skullgirls took a huge stride even though the tutorial combos are a bit tough for just showing concepts, and then Xrd Revelator got players moving around while teaching them even if it was a bit messy (I think the advanced lessons, Missions, were fantastic though. Whiff punishes, fuzzy guard, etc.).
Meanwhile Arcana Heart 3 had no tutorial, not even for the core mechanic unique to the franchise (Homing Attack), and I can only hope that apparent developer question for suggestions of additional features for AH3 Six Stars result in at least an in-game manual (there are a couple half-decent ones on the internet) when it finally comes to PC.
Sad to say this, but Virtua Fighter 4 Evolution on PS2 had exactly this approach. From a basic "tutorial" to more complex "challenge" modes, it also pitted the player in a Single Player campaign called "Quest Mode". Quest Mode was essentially simulated as visiting arcades around a map of Japan, challenging AI opponents of varying difficulties.
Playing to win in order to improve your rank was obviously one incentive, but another incentive were the "quest challenges". These would have you perform certain tasks during a course of a match, or several matches, and often reward you with a rare item. The difficulty of the quest challenges started off simply, introducing players to basic concepts. But by the time you reached the final challenges, you were performing techniques expected of high-level players. So in playing through Quest Mode, one therefore couldn't rely on a FOO strategy because not only would your progression (rank) plateau, but you'd never be able to complete beyond the most basic of quest challenges.
Now, I started my reply by saying "sadly" because, to my knowledge, no other Fighting Game title has replicated this level of learning aid built in and around the basic game. In watching this video, I kept thinking how VF4 Evolution ticked every box. This game was pioneering for its time, and has yet to be exceeded, let alone matched.
God damn do I miss Virtua Fighter.
You must be happy with VF5!
While I do think these are all genuinely great suggestions, the practice mode in a fighting game is possibly the greatest tutorial mode new players can get. When used for the sake of learning the mechanics of the game and not just dicking around, practice mode is effectively a freeform tutorial that lets the player learn at their own pace and get comfortable with the game.
"the practice mode in a fighting game is possibly the greatest tutorial mode new players can get."
Good luck getting new players to use it any time soon in it's current incarnation, though - _after all, they came to _*_play the game,_*_ not beat the shit out of a training dummy._
I think there's a lot we can learn from games like Divekick and Bushido Blade as well. They serve as a starting point to show us how engaging we can make just learning timing before we even layer on any of the complexity of a full fighting game experience. -JP
any thought on Smash Bros ? I think it deals with the issue in a quite unique way by pleasing both the casual and competitive audience instead of forcing an experience onto the player.
Another game that the game industry could learn a LOT from here is Kya: Dark Lineage. If you haven't heard of it, thats fine, it never really took off, but it managed to pull together a lot of mechanics that would have seemed impossible if you pitched them to a design team altogether, but worked incredibly well. Even more so, they managed to teach the 6-year-old me all of the complex ins and outs of their fighting mechanics in a way that would enable me to see the strategy behind it all. I think some of their design decisions are very important with a lot to be learned from them.
Check out Skullgirls' Tutorial, it's really good (compared to the usual FG tutorials, that is). It explains basic things like low-blocking, overheads, etc...
How do you feel about "simple mode" style controls that make button inputs correspond to special amd super moves? It completely removes the excecution barrier but often what comes out of it is a player who is utterly predictable due to his entire play being thoughtless. I would be cautious in saying that once you remove the execution barrier all the work is done. As daunting as the frontload of data is, memorizing "everything" is only about 5% of what you need to do well. This ki.d of control scheme I think gives players a false sense of confidence since they may beat their friends who use normal controls but once they play anyone good they're gonna get destroyed and despiritted.
you should have a look at the tutorial in blaz blue contiueum shift extend. excellent at teaching at the lower levels of play to much deeper mechanics
Oi! What the hell you guys? You missed the perfect opportunity to mention Divekick, the game that removes the information overload and presents the players with that top-level-chess immediately. Sure, it's simplified, or rather, concentrated and purified. Divekick gets to the core of why fighting games are fun and presents it in a very intuitive and easy to understand way.
probably cuz divekick went under the radar for the most part, it was like a joke that the fighting game community understood only
Divekick is too simplistic to be top level chess.
Probably because Divekick is zoning and nothing _but_ zoning. Sure, zoning is an important part of high-level fighting game play, but it's not sufficient.
They didn't mention smash bros either.
Nixitur I think you are mixing up the terms *zoning* and *spacing*
Zoning is a type of play where you keep your opponent out at all times using the tools given to your character, like Dhalsim's streachy arms or Guile's fast Sonic Boom. It's also referred to "Keepaway" or (Playing) "Lame"
Spacing is more akin to the footsie game where you use the attacks you have to both get in on the opponent, but keep him to a distance desirable to you. For example, you space people with Ryu by trying to keep them at his crouching medium kick, where he can use all of his tools, but also keeping them away from himself.
Yup, this is the ONLY thing keeping me away from fighting games. The ONLY reason I play Street Fighter 3rd Strike is because I know how ONE character works and that's only because someone sat down for two hours and taught me.
But you can apply the basic know-how to other fighters and grow from there =j
When I played Tekken as a kid I just mashed the face buttons, later on I spammed moves which seemed effective. From there, knowing all of a character's moves (and most importantly executing them) can be so annoying though, due to the precision necessary, that I only got as far as knowing the 3-4 or 5 hit combos
Nigel Blackman Yes, but most fighting games rely on that principle - that you've played other fighting games and can bring your existing knowledge over because you should know this already. Very few games try to teach you how to play the game from the ground up, least of all Capcom's fighters. Skullgirls and Killer Instinct made pretty decent attempts with their tutorial modes though.
TheMikenyan I do have agree with this.
The way i learned how to do the hadoyken in Street Fighter was by playing, get this Kirby: Triple Deluxe
You can't teach mind games and how to defeat the opponent online or at tournaments, but you can teach basic mechanics and tools the player can use. When to use the tools is really something you have to learn on your own. How to perform the tools is something you may get assistance on.
Game: Okay this is how you do a counter breaker. Be careful, its unsafe and your opponent has a ton of frame advantage which gurantees a combo on you.
Player: But when do I use it, how will I know my opponent will break a combo? I don't want to be stuck in 140 frames of end lag and open for a combo.
Game: Mind games my friend... mind games. Your opponent will behave differently from himself or from others.
It's not some sort of arcane thing. It's just risk vs reward. Explain what the risk is and what the reward is, and explain how much risk you're taking on vs how good the payoff is. This is totally explanable.
Framing it as a kind of "rock, paper, scissors" situation can help new players get their mind around the "mindgames, predict your opponent's move" aspect.
You CAN teach mind games
Psychological warfare is a somewhat different area from game mechanics but it's also universally applicable to other games or even real life
Yeah I disagree with this. Fighting games simply don’t even try to teach these things but it can be done. If someone can look over your shoulder and keep giving you advice to improve, that is proof it can be taught, and there’s no reason a game can’t be designed to help teach that.
The problem is that fighting games usually out almost no effort into single player gameplay content. Having enemies that focus on a handful of basic strategies would help players both identify those strategies but also learn how to react to them. Then having enemies slowly combine two things together and slowly work up the complexity over time would probably do wonders for learning the game. But the most that most fighting games do is just tell you the controls and then throw you in a basic arcade mode against brain dead Ai
I think that the Super Smash Bros. series has the most intuitive control scheme. Its attack control scheme is based on action buttons, special attacks independent of regular attacks, a control stick in a certain direction, how fast you press a combination (smash attack vs. strong attack vs. standard attack), and circumstances when you press a combination (mid-air, ground, etc.). No memorization of complex button combinations, although you do need to know how each character plays but the base control scheme is universal.
Short hopping is a little difficult
@@christopherdane4263 I think you missed the point.
To be honest, I have plans to make a fighting game that's gameplay is a mashup between platformer fighting games like Super Smash Bros and Rivals of Aether and traditional fighting games like Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. Replacing Smash Attacks with Light and Heavy attack buttons with Specials inspired by Terry having a forward and back special as well two super meters, one for a Final Smash-like technique, called a Desperation Technique, the other temporarily transforms the character for 30 seconds into a stronger form, though some characters "transformations" aren't really different forms but are an action with different effects such as stopping time for only 10 seconds. The game would be designed to be accessable to casual players with movesets that are simplistic and easy to understand, with a character or two designed for new players but even new players would take a little while to understand their full potential. The game also rewards players for learning combos and understanding each characters strengths and weaknesses.
fighting games would be extremely boring if all of them played under this control scheme and ditched motion inputs, what makes these games satisfying and rewarding to learn is how difficult they are, on top of that motion inputs also serve the purpose of balancing certain moves abd allow for more varied movesets since you can fit more tools onto one character by having multiple command inputs.
Smash delivers that but simplifys a fighting game but gives the strategy right away as you don’t have to remember inputs like a+b+Rt+lb+x ->
That is exactly what new players need to get into fighting games. Something to help them learn the move set and encourage them to keep playing to the point where they can achieve a much higher level of play. I would love to see something like this in the next gen fighting games.
I agree to a certain extent, but another thing people need is others who understand the game and helping them. I end up doing it. I'm a decent fighting game player and try to help others even if they're beating me. I agree on the video to a certain extent, but I'm completely against unlocking moves or only having a certain moves from the beginning...
That sounds grate for the RPG fighter he was mentioning in the video, but it would break the fighting game genre mainly the competitive kind like Street Fighter and King of Fighters and so forth. If you're restricted to certain moves then the strategy of the game that he well explains would be gone since most moves would have to unlocked, or earned.
Example: Ryu's and all the other Shodo characters didn't have their shoryuken they wouldn't have a effective anti-air, or if one character had the shoryuken, the hadoken, and the Tatsumaki Senpukyaku, while the other player only had the shoryuken and was being spammed with hadokens, they wouldn't be able to use the Tatsumaki Senpukyaku to go through the hadoken. To makes things a little worse that's only comparing like characters. If it was others like Vega, or Ibuki there might be problems bigger than I explained.
master2873 I used to do that and then stopped caring. Most of the casual players still will most likely quit... that is unless they have "gamer blood" as my uncle would say. I have an online that wanted to learn sf and quit in less than 3 days. Everyone in the stream kept trying to teach him but the salt catch'd up to him eventually. I've argued others on this video before like a month ago concerning the training mode and such. Teaching others is just a waste if time if they don't seek it out themselves. If people really wanna learn Street fighter they have the internet. You don't need a programmed tutorial to teach you.
master2873
What I got from the video was that the moves would be restricted in the single-player mode only, and the in-game opponents would be scaled accordingly to make winning feasible with the limited moves.
***** Even then it would break the game. The single player is no different then the online, other than you're playing against a AI controlled character. So in this case it would be even worse since the AI knows the inputs you're doing and almost always knows a strategy for your character. Other than that if the game was designed around it kinda like Soulcalibur's adventure mode and Street Fighter: Alpha 3's world tour I think it was called, then it would be grate.
master2873
That's assuming the AI will not go easy on you and has the full moveset. In such a system, I would bet the AI would have equally-restricted moves and likely be put on an easier difficulty on top of that.
Imagine if a fighting game's single-player mode began like Divekick and ended like Guilty Gear. That's what I mean.
Oh man, you guys have completely hit it on the head as to why I've never delved much into fighting games. You're absolutely right, that there's absolutely a brick wall when it comes from the beginning moves to the more advanced ones, and a lot of us just aren't motivated to invest that much time into learning tons new button combos that will have limited crossover at best to other games even within the same genre.
Hmm. You might be right. What do you think would be some good rewards in this context? I don't know if you've ever seen One Must Fall 2097, but I really liked that whole system; upgrades for speed, endurance, etc. that you earned by winning matches, how much health you ended the match with, combos you did, etc. I've never seen another fighting game with that mechanic, which seems a real shame.
That is partly true. Infact playing Litchi(top 3 highest learning curve in Blazblue for roughly 5 games/updates) has actually greatly improves how easily I picked up other characters in other games. As well as playing Xiaoyu in Tekken, these characters taught me how to be versatile with my button commands and my execution. It is true if you want to play competitively it can be hard work compared to most games, but if you don't want to you can still practice some of the stuff. You'll improve alot and the games will feel much easier in general.
stormthrush37 they aren't in other fighting games because they are bad mechanics. Fighting Games are fundementally about learning a character and their moveset and taking full advantage of those moves against an opponent doing the exact same thing. Introducing pseudo-RPG "rewards" would ruin the competition by making the characters moves and stats change over time.
Imagine a highly skilled player using a "level 1" character against a novice's "level 100" character because the novice has more health and power and doesn't actually know how to play his character well.
These "rewards" don't incentivive skillful play, they just incentivive grinding and taking on less equipped opponents.
Oh god, mechanical rewards for playing a fighting game?! I don't even like unlockable characters! Unlockable cosmetics are also a pet peeve of mine, I want my cool color palette from the start, but I'll live.
In the last six months I have always had the same things available to me in fighting games (barring getting new games). Yet I have seen significant progress, because when I went back and played someone in 3rd Strike after a while, it really hammered in that I had improved at general fighting game skills.
yea, but at the same time, to get good you must get bodied by real people, just playing safely with computers on an arcade mode does nothing for improvement
Hey guys, great show, glad you guys decided to tackle this topic as it's one I've often thought about. However, I'm going to disagree with your proposed solution.
You can teach concepts in a single-player campaign, but you can not replicate a live opponent sufficiently. The video references reversals/countering so let's take that as an example. We agree that high-level fighting game play is not about reflexes and surely enough, counters are predictive. How would you craft an AI to teach human player tendencies? If you've boxed before, this is the difference between boxing drills on countering, hitting pads and trying to counter someone while sparring. The gap is a massive. Maybe I notice my opponent likes to throw two jabs before loading up with a right cross, perhaps I intentionally leave an opening after I throw my left hook to bait a response? Teaching these concepts without real experience is a tall order. Soul Calibur 2 attempted this with guard impacts. The result was a mess, degenerating down to the player guessing when the CPU would attack. This system may teach the timing for counters, but completely misses the fundamental skill at the heart of counters: reading the opponent.
Secondly, slowly introducing moves and allowing time for the player to acclimatize sounds like a great idea for individual moves, except in fighting games, moves do not exist independently of each other. The result is the player will waste a great deal of time learning sub-optimal strategies because a yet to be unlocked move was not available. Fighting game characters are so finely crafted, there are many components that if removed, fundamentally changes the way it plays.
Take for example, a seemingly basic concept like spacing. I've got a level 1 Guile against a level 1 Ryu. Level 1 Ryu does not have his bread and butter low medium kick. At this point, I've learned a very specific range that I can be successful. Enter level 2 Ryu (with low medium kick). Everything I've learned about spacing against Ryu is out the window. Multiply that across all characters in the game.
The real problem isn't how to better teach potential players complicated mechanics, but how to motivate people to want to learn the game. There is no getting around the amount of work involved in becoming a skillful player of fighting games, holding their hands in a padding room will only go so far. Most people are turned off by getting beaten into a bloody pulp by a expert player and THAT is the main problem. Unless you have a PvE focused fighting game, your long term player base is going to be made up of people who get obliterated, get back up, learn more, train and improve. Not everyone has these qualities, that's why (in your own metaphor) we don't all flock to the local chess club and throw down every Saturday night.
This is why I love Mortal Kombat. For the past several iterations, even since the PS2 era, it had a robust single player experience, and while it did start out with walls of text followed by making you do the move, it had moved onto story modes of various types, that slowly acclimate the player to the fighting system, meanwhile deliver on a solid narrative. And the most recent Mortal Kombat also had the challenge tower, which didn't feel like practice mode, but essentially its own gameplay type.
Guilty Gear Xrd's tutorials are fantastic in this regard, starting from "this is how you run" to every move and mechanic, broken up into many pieces. Then each character also has tutorials as well as a separate "mission" mode that goes into strategies from high-low mixups to oki to effective blocking.
The problem I find often with learning fighting games is that learning the fundamentals is usually not intuitive like a standard action game AND that they don't introduce new concepts over time to the player.
Most shooters for instance these days, even without a tutorial, are intuitive to play at the basic level. Sure, in specific games, a player that has played 100 or 200 hours will crush a player that's only put in 10, but that player that played for 10 usually can figure out WHY they lost more easily. In a fighting game, if you get destroyed by someone that has 10x the experience, you usually have little idea how they did it and learn nothing from the experience. It ends up feeling like a waste of time to play higher skill players to learn, which, is a thousand times more fun in games than sitting there and practicing alone. Becoming better via experience is always more fun that study and setting yourself up with a freaking lesson plan.
The RPG suggestion here is a good idea but just getting intuitive core mechanics is important. Complicated and non-sensical combos are not at all intuitive to learn and to me they come off as the laziest design methodology and almost every fighting game uses them. The Fight Night boxing series, which outright had no combos, worked wonderfully well. Just a solid core sensible fighting game design. And there was a ton of depth.
Telling people that if you don't want to sit and grind out a boring practice session to become competent that you just wont get good at fighting games are totally missing the point. If you WANT your game to be this way? Fine. Obviously there are plenty of games to choose from. In the future though, for the rest of us, we really need like, a new sub-genre within fighting games or something that ignores the old and lazy mechanic of learning combos to begin with.
Until that happens, I'm perfectly happy to ignore the fighting games that come out and play games in genres with consistent, intuitive, and interesting-from-the-get-go mechanics.
Mortal Kombat became a success again because it was easy to learn
Or because the kids love their gore and edgy fatalities.
Killer Instinct is easy for casuals but also fun and unique for people that understand fighting games, no one gave as much of a shit.
perhaps, for slow gamers
Yeah, not really bud.
What about street fighter lol. Even Mortal Kombats not that easy.
Divekick is a pretty good example
I apologize in advance for the long comment. I want to preface it simply by saying that this is definitely the most mature treatment of the problem fighting games have reaching out to super-novice players that I have seen to date (props to Extra Credits), and I thought it merited a thoughtful response. So here I go.
I would say that the only (but critical) problems with implementing the solutions suggested by this video are twofold:
(1) The mechanical and logistical difficulty of programming these features into a fighting game. Time, money, programming know-how, things that might be a luxury depending on developer resources. But this is a minor problem compared to #2:
(2) It can sometimes be difficult for designers to "teach" players their games because in many cases, it can be difficult (or almost impossible) to envision how the competitive metagame will shape up, even for the best designers and developers in the industry.
It's very hard to anticipate what game mechanics will be unexpectedly weak or powerful, important or unimportant in a finished fighting game. No matter how genius a designer and/or developer you are, there is almost always some game-changing emergent property that won't be found in pre-release playtesting even by world-class competitive players. The best hope a designer can have when these properties emerge is that they don't radically upset the balance they EXPECTED from the game they so carefully planned.
Not only that, but even in an age where re-balancing games already released is cheaper and faster than ever, community discovery of these game-changing quirks is STILL not guaranteed to be fast enough for developer support to address. People didn't find certain quirks about T. Hawk in Super Turbo and Makoto in SF3: Third Strike for over a DECADE after those games' releases (almost TWO, in Super Turbo's case!), when developer support had long since ceased, and those quirks they found DRAMATICALLY altered the competitive landscape. (Makoto went from high-mid tier in estimation to top tier with the big three of Yun, Chun-Li, and Ken. T. Hawk went from bottom-tier estimation to just shy of top tier because his safe-jump tick throw OS was literally inescapable if executed properly. He still had a hard time at neutral, but one good read by a player using his OS could literally win the round for him.)
Thankfully, discoveries this radical are not TERRIBLY frequent -- but they DO happen, and the warning signs for those with access to source code and the ears of developers are often too subtle to notice.
The difficulty of anticipating these emergent properties increases exponentially with the mechanical complexity of the fighting game in question.
People frequently cite the Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution (PS2) tutorial mode as one of the best fighting game tutorials ever done. "Why doesn't every game do this?", people often wonder. The reason is because VF is, quite frankly, a much easier fighting game to "teach" from the designer's perspective than other games, because its system is so closed compared to other fighting games. No fireballs, no crazy animation-cancel mechanics, combos on the ground and in the air are strictly limited. You have almost no way to cancel various character states that the designers haven't already anticipated and accounted for. There's pretty much nothing in the way of game-breaking chaos to futureproof for -- the designers' imagination can easily encompass the actual possiblities of the gameplay. So if your game's really that simple, yeah, it IS appropriate for the designer to anticipate the competitive metagame and try to teach it to novices through an engaging tutorial mode.
But when you try to apply that "designer teaches their game" tactic to a sandbox game like Marvel vs Capcom 3, the variables are so immense that it's completely unreasonable to expect the developers and designers to have enough knowledge to tell the novice player what their game will look like when played by crafty, merciless competitors of varying skill and technical knowledge. There's so much stuff to play with that there's NO way to know what mechanics will be critical or insignificant in competitive play until the game is turned loose to the player base for exploration and exploitation.
So if your fighting game (or any competitive-focused video game, really) is truly closed and fundamental enough (like Virtua Fighter) that the designers could reasonably imagine what competitive players will come up with, then yes, the solutions in this video SHOULD be implemented.
But if you're trying to teach a sandbox game like MvC3...I don't know if the developer CAN teach the player all that needs to be taught. Air combos, DHC, assists and TAC only scratch the surface. How deep do you need to go into aspects of psychology, competitive theory (team synergy! how do you know who's gonna float to the top, and why?) to make the application of those mechanics apparent to the player? At what point does the question come up of SHOULD the player have this much confusing mechanical freedom in a fighting game? Does the developer overstep their ethical bounds trying to anticipate and possibly regulate the competitive landscape?
This is a lot to chew on for a UA-cam comment, I know, I'm sorry. I just don't have anywhere else to put it right now. If you have any questions or criticisms about what I've said, or just want to berate me for incorrectly describing T. Hawk's OS (which I probably did), then by all means, do so. This is definitely the most adult framing of this game-design problem I've seen yet.
-- Ben Reed
@internetbenreed on Twitter
I guess the shorter version of what I want to say is this: Is it really enough for designers to just have more creative ways to teach MECHANICS to the players? Or do they need to take the initiative and try to teach the METAGAME as well?
I ask because even the best-designed fighting game mechanics (or competitive game mechanics, really) are sometimes used in ways their well-read designers never anticipated or intended. Hell, half the conventions in fighting games exist as institutionalized versions of cool glitches from other games that jerks in arcades found while banging around. (Special-cancels were a glitch in World Warrior. But players liked them so much that Capcom made them a feature. The rest is history.)
So if you only teach players mechanics based on your necessarily limited predictions as a developer, depending on your game's complexity, you risk leaving them in the lurch when/if the competitive player base turns your game into something different entirely. (You can change the game post-release with patches and sequels to better suit your vision, if this bothers you, but this opens up a whole other discussion on if and to what extent you should.)
Well, you're right to say that developers can't really predict what gamers will do with their games... But it's so easy to get around that. You said it yourself. Things that happened in older games are reflected in newer ones' mechanics. But why not teach it to the player in an environment that's controlled by the game and not just in "practice mode" with a bunch of FAQs and tutorial videos? Why do I need to use outside material to learn a game that's been released in the 21st century? We live in an age where games teach themselves.
Now, as I've mentioned above, the solution is in making new content. For example, how in later versions of SF3:3s there's a challenge to repeat the famous Daigo perry counter combo with Ken against Chun-Li. Problem is - this won't really teach you anything you could use in a real match.
The real solution is to have player-made content. There's an endless list of games with player-made levels and mods and all that. Why not have a fighting game that allows players to construct tutorials? You just need the game's engine to allow frame-by-frame editing and, as I've mentioned in another comment, slow-motion or frame-by-frame playback of real-time gameplay (not just videos).
Just imagine it. Someone would discover an amazing combo or trick or whatever and then they could construct a tutorial, and someone else could download that tutorial and learn that move step-by-step and then practice it in slow motion and slowly speed up to be able to perform it at any situation. The players' level in that type of fighting game would be insane! And since this is all built into the game - it's reachable to anyone!
I've taught a few people how to play from near zero, a whole lot of what I've used follows this step-at-a-time pattern of complexity ramp up.
Took a lot of patience, but it's worth it to build someone you can expand yourself by fighting against.
Without someone to teach you, it's just pitting your character against a mannequin, trying to understand these arbitrary buttons and identical move sets. More like memorizing your times tables before you learn to multiply. But when you understand that 2×3 is two groups of three objects, you don't *need* to memorize everything at once because you understand a concept you can build on.
Another big issue with fighting games is the steep learning curve on execution. If fighting games are a chess match, imagine not being able to move your rook unless you could hold a handstand for 30 seconds. Even if you know what you want to do you cannot do it. And I'm not talking about quarter circles or even Z-Motion or charge moves (which are big learning gaps for people just getting into fighting games). I'm talking linked combos, frametraps, Guilty Gear XXAC false roman cancels or Sol Badguy's dust loop. Players, even high level players, are required to spend HOURS if not days sitting in a tutorial room doing the same combo over and over and over in order to execute them well enough that using it in a match becomes second nature. And I get that high level execution is fun to watch and REALLY hype when a player at a major tournament when someone like Sako does a ridiculously flashy combo full of 1-frame links and unnecessary dashing. The issue is, execution is part of the challenge of the game, it's the part of the match where the player simultaneously fights themselves and dropping combos or bad execution becomes a part of the match. But players have gotten such great and consistent execution after playing fighting games for thousands of hours that, in order to maintain that execution aspect of the game, they have to keep raising the bar to the point that even the most disciplined fighter still messes up sometimes. But that bar is raised so high (I-No in GGXXAC), it becomes impossible for someone who has only sunk a couple hundred hours into fighting games overall to even consistently pull off some stuff. On top of that, move properties are so hidden, you often times have to hack the game into debug mode to see frame data or hit/hurtboxes. A lot of these properties are incredibly hidden even to people who are looking for them, let alone a player who isn't even aware that a move could have invincibility frames.
So you want unexciting combos?
+stormsasuke I think you can have exciting combos without such strict execution requirements. Just look at things like Blazblue, Arcana Heart or other animu fighters - they give you a few frames of buffer before the window even starts, and if you hit your next link in the combo during that it will come out frame1. You're still going to have to practice your BnBs to not drop them in real matches and such, but I personally don't feel super tight 1 frame links really add anything to the games, they're just kind of something I deal with because I like the genre.
I think the great things about fighting games are the mindgames from spacing and resets, which is part of the reason I fucking hate option selects. Being able to do input multiple things and have the game OS into the best option is stupid IMO.
Also I just now realized after typing this that you posted this after 3 months, but whatever.
James Dewey They are just a result of frame data. You can't remove them. They aren't intended but you can't change them.
Looks like Street Fighter 6 World Tour mode is similar to what you proposed here. A solo, leveling system, where you start with few moves and learn more from your masters as u move on.
For teaching mecanics, I don't know if the solo World Tour campaign RPG mode catches some of ur propositions, but the guides menu is dope ! But could be a kind of bricks wall too. You'll need to come back from times to times there
Skullgirls has a pretty amazing and indepth tutorial system that divides up the different techniques and teaches them piece-meal before gradually asking you to put it all together.
Any fighting game looking to craft a good learning experience would do well to start with that.
It isn't presented in the context of a story mode, but the way it is set up it would be trivial to put story over top of it.
The thing with Fighting Games is the same thing as MOBAs, don't expect to go in and know everything, you are guaranteeing rage and saltyness from doing that.
Take it slow, look at the character's movelist, and try out the moves again and again and again, get a feel for how to move your fingers, it's the same as typing without looking at your keyboard, it sounds complicated but the moment you get a feel for where every letter is, you will know what to do.
That is the whole thing with Fighting Games, if you want to learn this new thing you found out about, go to the training mode, and do it until it feels right, it's not difficult at all, and I main Fukua, Robo-Fortune and Beowulf, like, it's not that hard, patience makes skill.
Learning fighting games is like learning an instrument or practicing your drawing skills. Growing and learning is as much a part of the fighting game experience as are the actual matches.
Except playing an instrument or drawing doesn't involve me doing complex dance moves or Naruto hand signs to do something like drawing a straight line.
@@boshwa20 learning an instrument or drawing both require hand dexterity, especially when you're trying to learn something hard. at a base level for most modern fighting games, you can just hold directions and press buttons, and you can get by perfectly okay. If you want to get better, thats when you can start using special moves, combos, supers, etc. the naruto hand signs aren't required, they just look cool so of course you're gonna want to do them
It's been a passive effort for years for me;
I WANT to get into the genre, so badly, I love the fan base and I love watching matches of high level skills, but I just... there's some disconnect somewhere, I can't combo right, or I can't set off the moves, it's a shame, honestly, I WANT to be into it.
+Amiibo Cell If you want to get into fighting games, it's honestly gonna take a lot of dedicated practice. You even have to "learn how to practice". You can probably find videos and articles about this. Hell, fighting game community member Ryan (I forget his last name) more commonly known as Gootecks has an E-Book available called Simplifying Street Fighter.
+Amiibo Cell +El Blackimar Yeh, I think part of the problem is that to get to the kind of level the video mentions, and that you yourself have struggled with, is that so much of it is down to muscle memory, its all well and good learning the moves - but you have to be able to pull them off on reaction without thinking "oh I should anti air here" or what not. And it just gets worse with combos in Street Fighter - its not just learning the order of moves, and variants in said combo against different characters or in different situations, but the infinitely trickier bit of getting the input timings down, these often being narrowed down to windows of 1-5ms leaniency....
All of which can currently only be mastered by grinding it out for hours and HOURS on end.
That being said Street Fighter V is making efforts to simplify this, and other games such as Skull Girls have much improved tutorial systems for teaching the mechanics of the game which other games can learn from.
Ian Dingle Yeah, learning inputs and combos is a barrier for a lot of people. It's hard for me to related because I can easily do most inputs and/or find simple yet effective (bread and butter) combos. But SFV does have a tutorial at least. Hopefully it has a single player mode, cause it really sucks when people ask me to help em get into fighting games, but quit cause they say it's too hard.
If you are interested maybe you need a mentor... What console do you play on and what game do you want to learn?
i cant speak for mkX but mortal kombat has the best training programs. since the first ps2 game theyve always had a challenge tower or a tlstory based tutorial seprat frome the main game to teach moves & combos & such. street fighter has the worst. mvc 3 has a great combo training program. tekken/soul caliber games are hit and miss generally pretty shitty tho.... at the end of the day tho you iust hav to remember that most games follow the same rules and button combos so just pic one learn it and you can rest assured that youll be at least decent at all the others
To be honest, I have plans to make a fighting game that's gameplay is a mashup between platformer fighting games like Super Smash Bros and Rivals of Aether and traditional fighting games like Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. Replacing Smash Attacks with Light and Heavy attack buttons with Specials inspired by Terry having a forward and back special as well two super meters, one for a Final Smash-like technique, called a Desperation Technique, the other temporarily transforms the character for 30 seconds into a stronger form, though some characters "transformations" aren't really different forms but are an action with different effects such as stopping time for only 10 seconds. The game would be designed to be accessable to casual players with movesets that are simplistic and easy to understand, with a character or two designed for new players but even new players would take a little while to understand their full potential. The game also rewards players for learning combos and understanding each characters strengths and weaknesses.
this is why i like smash bros. there's only a few basic attacks, a wealth of characters with different strengths and weaknesses, and i think it pulls off an effective depth:complexity ratio. There are tons of different ways to fight, but it's fairly easy to get used to the game.
+pewol That stuff is why fighting games are engaging. They are talking about how for a novice like me, the in accessibility of fighting games lies in the complicated move set.
+Misty Wind Simplifying fighting games doesn't address the problem though, it just works around it. As someone who is now very familiar with fighting games, I find that Smash Bros. is still just as hard to understand at a high level, as it has it's own nuances and techniques that aren't explained by the game. The "how to play" video in the Smash Bros. games gives about as little information as some of the tutorial modes in fighting games that don't teach new players well, such as Street Fighter 4. In this regard Smash Bros. is just as bad as the more traditional fighting games. It just so happens that the tools you are given in Smash are basic enough to be effective even at low skill levels, making players feel empowered, perhaps to the point of feeling more competent than they actually are. That's why more people play Smash and stick with the game than other fighting games.
What this video is saying is that if we want people to "git gud" then the game should be designed in a way that encourages players to do so as well as serve as a learning platform. In depth tutorials give players access to the information necessary but can be overwhelming, so creating a proper single player experience around this can be what we need. The closest I've seen to this is the main mode in Tekken Tag Tournament 2, as it gives you challenges to complete based around a particular game mechanic or group of mechanics. For what it's worth, Smash has never done anything like this. It doesn't even give you an explanation as to why you should choose an A attack in one direction over another.
I think something like what Tekken Tag 2 has would work well in other games but might be hard to pull off. It would take a lot more work and resources to deliver an effective tutorial and engaging single player experience compared to what we have in fighting games now. Also, an important aspect of high level play in fighting games is recognising that some moves are useful because of the presence or threat of other moves, so drip feeding players new attacks might be a bad idea. But, coming up with a good single player experience that teaches fighting games could be the key to making them grow and I'd really like to see a fighting game developer take a good stab at it.
I don't see how making it easier for people to learn or making the opportunity more readily available hurts anyone.
+KillerSasuke44 it doesn't, however there's a theory i want your opinion on when it comes to fighting games (melee specifically). Melee at first was an accessible party game that did not rely on chess-match-fighting-game-mechanics to win. however, as the meta-game grew, players began to supersede this and play at high levels that novices could not achieve simply by playing. Fighting games are a niche genre because not only is there noticeable difference between starting a game and playing it, there's also a difference in the level of play from each opponent.
+Misty Wind The reason I think Smash is difference is because it tries to be two different things, and mostly succeeds. If you play Smash with all the items and the chaotic stages, you get a match with a lot of randomness, leading to some equalization between the highly skilled and the less so. The simple control schemes make this style of play immediately approachable. However, if you take away the items and go to Final Destination, you have the same sort of tactical thought that other fighting games utilize.
Each of Melee and Brawl failed in an aspect of this. Melee wasn't polished enough and the competitive scene found a large number of work-arounds to maximize efficiency. But with sophisticated techniques like wave dashing and l-canceling, they turned the game into something that only barely resembles what the casual gamer experienced. Brawl was an over-correction for this. It slowed the game down and took away a lot of exploits. I think a lot of the mechanical improvements in Brawl, like changes to the air dodge, where fantastic. But they contributed to a slowed pace that encouraged defensive play, impairing the competitive scene.
Smash 4 really is a work of art that balanced the two game styles.
Good reference point: The NES 1980s classic Pro Wrestling. All moves (and there were quite a lot) were never more complicated than double-dash + button or hold-direction + button. It was basic, but it worked.
I'd recommend Skullgirls as a good first fighting game. It has tutorials that teach basic fighting game mentality, like cross ups and hit confirms. It also might a good example of the very first point that you said would work for a whole episode, since the designer was originally a competitive MvC2 player.
I recommend marvel Vs capcom infinite
The auto combo system makes combos barley a thought until you learn the game in an intermediate level
Input are also very easy in this game and the open ended tag system and infinity stones system present a strategy clearly instead of focusing on your damage
I'm a doa fan big time, so I have to point out that, the story mode is a tutorial of basic controls, then you step up to a fundamental game type tutorial. Once you get that you can go to the move set tutorial that teaches every move for any character you want, then you can move to the combo tutorial that can't possibly teach every combo, yet it gives a basic idea on different set ups. Once you've graduated from all this you can go to the dojo and learn all the frame data, and other such top level mechanics. I don't think tutorials can hand feed you any more than this, yet doa is one of the least popular fighting games out.
You know what's up DOA 4 Life.
my strategy is let people win until they get interested, then I start using advanced stuff in small amounts until they figure them out
That's great. Most people's strategy just seems to be to curb stomp you while you're still trying to figure out how "soul punch" is different than "spirit fist", what the hell "hundred cherry blossoms" is, and trying to remember if the ranged attack you want (out of your 22 combos) is ^ ^ < v ^ block+ kick, or ^ v ^ ^ < kick + block
If you can't take the time to invest in playing a fighting game, guess what, fighting games are not for you. There is no easy way to learn a fighting game. You will get bodied constantly by players who have invested more time than you. There is no easy way to teach people fighting games.
I love when new people want to get into fighting games; really, I do. But if you really want to get into the meat of it, you better sit your ass down, look up a guide, and practice.
***** Yeah, pretty much. If fighting games were easy to learn, they wouldn't be nearly as entertaining to play, watch, or compete with.
Sit down and learn the game through practice, or take your arcade stick/quarters you got from mommy and go play whack-a-mole. I got bodied for months at arcades and online before I got to be decent at fighting games. There are a billion different ways to learn the basics of fighting games; guides, friends who play, ingame tutorials, or, heaven forbid, actually practicing with your character.
*****
Guess what, you don't need tandem combos to have fun playing JoJo, you're making it sound like the games becomes unplayable just because you can't beat the pros. If you're the kind of guy who "has a life" and has no time to waste playing silly video games all day you can easily find likeminded individuals who will play with you.
Basically you have to make a choice, slam with the best or don't put in the effort.
***** Yeah, there's also the concept "Difficult to learn, satisfying to measter". Not every game will cater to the "I want to know everything without putting much effort into it" crowd. There are MOBAs a few doors down if that's more your speed.
...why can't you learn on your own time PRECISELY by looking up guides?
If fighting games require the player's dedication and time, the fighting game franchises will die because they would be too much of a daunting task for the everyman. There is no detriment by making it a more hospitable place for people to get better.
A fighting game that does its teaching well is Skullgirls. It teaches you the basics at your own pace, and it doesn't have ridiculous 17 quadrillion button input supers. The most complex super movement is the dragon punch input or a full circle input, and yet it is amazingly deep and its mechanics are extremely well refined. (We're talking Super Metroid refined here.) So, for any of you who read this, and want to get into a fighting game, perhaps give Skullgirls a chance. .w.
+Dylan Hinkson when I was first starting to get back into fighting games I was asking around about which ones to get. Everyone told me Skullgirls because of the tutorials! and they were right :)
Something I would like to point out is that there is a certain point you get to in your skill that allows you play almost any fighter. Most fighters have fundamentals that apply to ALL fighters (spacing or 'footsies' is a good example) and you can apply them to any fighter, and you don't have to learn it all over again, at least to an extreme degree
But that has no bearing when we're talking about accessibility to people with lives and jobs, who didn't grow up with every weekend and snow day spent on memorizing button combinations and can't take a week off work to start now.
The best thing about fighting game is it's has a never ending learning curve physically and mentally. Even top players learn things everytime because of the depth and complexity of fighting games.
There's already a prefect example of this: Oni for the ps2 and PC. (Desperately needs a sequel btw). You began the game with a small list of moves, and through the games 14 or so long missions, at set points along the story, were given one or two new moves and the situation in which to use them. After that the game continued as normal with your (ever so slightly) bigger list of moves. By the end you had a massive arsenal to choose from and you were pulling off insane combos and fight sequences only seen in the best done kung-fu flicks.
except oni is a trash game
After recently getting more into fighting games I sympathize with the experience of fighting games that throw you into the deep end but I don't feel many of the suggestions made in this video would be able to resolve that.
As an example the idea of asking players what to do in a specific situation or teaching them with a few moves at a time both work off of what I believe is a faulty assumption. The challenge in learning fighting games isn't learning the basic moves it's graduating to fighting other players. In many situations the optimal response is character specific or subjective and I doubt a story mode teaching the player one or two moves at a time will help them much in online matches.
Fighting games should have more substantial single player mode. Single player mode should take place outside of a typical ring format.
I can imagine a good tutorial would present you tutorials where you gradually learn the moves one by one doing with a variety of experiences.
Sucks I'm so late to this video, but what I'd really appreciate is if they just told us the timing. I get so hung up on trying to figure out when it is they want me to press certain buttons, but if they'd just tell me, I could move on to mastering the combo. Like you mentioned, slow motion would help a lot too, cause I could get an idea of which frame to aim for pressing the button on, rather than through trial and error.
This is why Smash Bros. had such a nice competitive scene. Each character has a simple number of moves but there are many hidden mechanics, high level combos and such.
Yeah. For example, it took me two battles to memorize Kirby's main moves (A UP, B DOWN, etc), and about half a battle to memorize Toon Link's. It's fairly simple, and easy to memorize.
I despise fighting games with shit tutorials such as Street Fighter 4 and UMvC because you spend hours trying to figure out if you're even doing correct button prompts because the "tutorial" just says "do this combo". Good tutorials like Mortal Kombat 9, SkullGirls and Smash bros ease you into combat where you can grow into it rather than "unless you played and memorized the last fighting game we made don't bother playing this one"
Learning everything yourself is a good thing. Hand-holding is bad.
I don't think Smash has a tutorial, outside of the "How to Play" video that plays if you stick around on the title screen.
@@AlphaZeroX96 that sounds like a lazy excuse for bad tutorials though.
@@AlphaZeroX96 That's why we don't send children to school or provide training for new employees.
Smash is *terrible* at teaching new players, what?
“Kick punch it’s all in the mind” that was one smooth parapa reference
breaking down special moves through leveling goes against the whole idea and concept of a fighting game.
for example, how would you break up a character like Guile who literally only has 2 specials and someone like Yun who has about 4 specials but tons of target combos, and special command normals?
The best thing a fighting game can actually offer is a Robust Tutorial mode. One that does more just teach the players the character's special moves and combos (trials). If you need an example, look to games like the Virtua Fighter series especially Virtua Fighter 4.
I get the feeling that if this were shown to a place with a lot of competitive fighting game people, this video would get laughed out. I've seen proposals for a greater focus on the single-player mode at Shoryuken, and it was dismissed largely with the argument that it's time and money sacrificed against game balance. Ideas about beginning with few moves and easing newcomers into a game gets a similar argument, and on top of that some players are insulted that their game would need something like that.
Regrettably, it all boils down to the mentality of the exclusive club: After mingling among some communities, a lot of fighting game people, I found out, do not want beginners joining them unless they can compete at their level. They loathe the idea that they could go online, for instance, and have problems finding people they know. The "fighting game community" is exactly that: A community. It's their neighborhood, their turf, and they don't take kindly to influxes of people moving in.
Personally, a community like that is toxic to the franchise, and it's best to discard them and find a new one. However, it seems that companies like Capcom and Arc System Works are absolutely terrified of abandoning them because to throw away one group for another is an extremely risky business move in any industry.
+Overhazard It's people like you that discourage new players from entering fighting games. You hype and build up this nonexistent monster that is this community that acts that they don't want any newcomers. You're not only barking up the wrong tree you're not even in the right forest. There are so many tutorials made by high level players for each FG series that a simple google or youtube search can show you: Aris for Tekken and Soul CalTom Brady and Ketchup for MKInfiltration and Geoff the Hero for Street FighterMaximilian for simple but all around points for all fightersEven Gootecks made a whole book about teaching fundamentals in street fighter (and by extension most other fighting games). Why do you think they made these, for their ego? no. This is also not including people in forums and communities that are good to decent that still wish to help players when asked. The fighting game community is anything but exclusive because they always want other people of equal or above skill level to play against. What no fighting game player wants is to be good at a game then find out that there is nobody to play. As for how a greater single player focus cutting into the budget of balancing, that is undoubtedly true. Fighting games' strength lies in it's player vs player combat BECAUSE they are players with patterns, reasoning, as well as being able to develop mind games and strategies. An AI simply can not do that, and no amount of beating an AI will prepare you for a game against a human player (except for maybe combo consistency). Fighting games because of their niche market also have tight budgets. How about instead of pretending you know the community, how about you go to a forum or tournament scene and actually ask for help? Because right now you're talking so far out of your ass that its hard to tell whether you're farting or yawning.Also inb4 LOL THIS COMMENT IS A YEAR OLD!
YOURFACEOUCH
What I found were based on comments at places like Shoryuken.com and Event Hubs. There were multiple articles on both of the sites asking what should be done with fighting games in general to make them more accessible to a mainstream audience. For the most part, the responses were to add in tutorials, but there were a few who said that they wanted the genre to remain a niche.
External tutorials and guides made by players is also not part of the issue. This video is about how the games THEMSELVES can promote wider audiences. When someone plays a game and they find themselves unable to compete at multiplayer, whether online or off, they're not necessarily going to look at what other people have done or have written. Many will just stop playing the game altogether. External help will not solve anything until the game itself tells the player something like, "If you're having trouble, look up this guide online!"
This help, at least the ones I've looked up myself, is also not that helpful. Explaining something to a beginner like myself is not that easy from the perspective of someone experienced. They might wind up skipping a lot of steps or explaining things without content assuming the reader is already familiar with them. Have you ever tried to use any "how to draw X" kind of books? If so, you've likely seen how they seem to go from rough contruction lines to the full drawing in one or two steps. Some don't even explain what construction lines, action lines, or types of shading are. This is what nearly all fighting game guides are like. And I have asked directly, and while I'm not stonewalled, they predominantly say, "It's easy, just A" and then I have to ask like six or seven times about more detail on A until I either get it, I give up, or they give up. I tried to get better at BlazBlue and Marvel vs. Capcom 3, but whatever help I tried to find or get wasn't helpful, and I wasn't really getting better. Most likely, neither side was able to explain what was going on properly; I probably needed someone behind my back watching me play directly.
As for single-player modes, that's a way to get used to the mechanics of a game. You mention getting used to combos; that's not beginner level. Beginner level is understanding what buttons do what, how to move properly, how to jump properly, where to aim what each character's moves do, and how to do particular directional inputs. You move up to playing human opponents later. Splatoon is a game with a complex competitive scene and was designed from the ground up to be competitive. It has an extensive single-player mode (about 5 or 6 hours, I'd say), and people repeatedly say that they jumped into multiplayer, got crushed, then went to the single-player mode and became noticeably better. No doubt the single-player modes for other shooters like the Call of Duty series and the Halo series function in similar ways. Shooters can have these training wheels to get people ready. Fighting games, logically, can do that too.
Overhazard I know that this is an old post but it strikes the right cords for me. This is the same philosophy I have teaching my brother. I have play dates with him using the Skull Girls tutorial as an aid.
Ethan so is the advice to new players literally “google it”?
Yes, thats how it is. User made content is the only real way to learn how to play fighting games and even MOBAS or RTS. It really isnt a new concept, if you want to get good you have to look for the things you need yourself.
I believe that all characters in fighting games should have the same button combinations, just with different moves.
Darth Vader 1128 then wheres the fun or variety? half the fun of a fighting game is learning your character
Eh... while I don't like half-circles for anything other than super moves, there's a reason that charge specials are charge specials, and z-inputs are z-inputs.
Otherwise that's pretty much how it is in Skullgirls and Guilty Gear Xrd.
The thing with fighting games is that it's completely up to the player to get to that higher level of understanding that makes fighting games so immersive. As a player, you have to be willing to put yourself through the hundred-hour grind in the training area to build that muscle memory. You have to be willing to do your research, learn match-ups, and frame-data. You have to be willing to get your ass handed to you, look over your losses, and learn from your mistakes. Sure, tutorials can help with some tech-skill, but no amount of hand-holding is going to truly prepare you to go head-to-head with another human being.
And that's why they're so niche and relatively less popular. Which is fine, but if they want a bigger cultural impact then having alterations to mitigate the early tedium.
Smash is just perfect to learn. It has no complex button combos but still you have to use your mind to win. Its easy to learn but hard to master.
Very true.
L4nk with practice many things are easier. Like reading and writing. Simply pressing a button is cool too tho
Oh it's still pretty hard to make your character move how you want...
are Smash players really that afraid of other fighting games?
I couldn't agree more. VF 4 Evo also had a display for a (supposed) max damage combo for each launcher. How could one possible top that in a tutorial?
I also love how VF Final Showdown has program mode and shows the essential frame data in free training. That alone got me hooked to learn more. VF does it well, VF Evo just did it best.
Skullgirls is a truly underrated game in this respect, because it has an extremely comprehensive tutorial, that you can always go back and replay. i'm a reeeally casual video game player, and I think skullgirls is a very good entry point if you want to get into fighting games
Absolver handles this so well that I'm wondering if they didn't actually watch this video while designing the game. There's a brief tutorial proper, in which you're taught which buttons do what; but after that, the whole single-player campaign effectively functions as an extended tutorial for the true endgame, the PvP. At first you only have 10 slots in which to assign moves; you simply don't have that much scope to fill out your deck, and must level up quite a bit before the full 16 slots are given to you (and given how your movelist's complexity grows exponentially with every aded slot, this is a major deal). And rewards for defense are built into the game: you gain "mana" only by executing defensive techniques like dodge or absorb, and you learn moves only by successfully defending against them & defeating the opponent afterwards.
This is how i feel with Super Smash bros, there aren't many "moves" you need to memorize so i can play the game strategically rather quickly.
More complex fighting games are confusing and i don't stand a chance *unless* i button mash and get lucky, and while it's fun(ny) beating someone experienced by button mashing it's never an experience i would initiate, a friend always has to goad me into playing.
I personally think that using a MMO fighting game is a bad idea. Because it brings the in balance of the actual game. Take Mortal Kombat X for Mobile. You just need to rack up Lvling up and you never lose. It's too easy
Oh man, I have wanted to rag on fighting games for so long. Thanks to EC for keeping it positive and showing areas they could keep their spirit, but still improve. I definitely agree that steadily unlocking moves would work great - I think when I look at the final array of moves I have in Devil May Cry, or even certain action MMOs I play, I realize this would be super-complicated to anyone who didn't know what I was doing. But, they taught me the important bits first, presented problematic enemies, and then allowed new moves to overcome them. Some tend to be unlocked during the story, and should be core to your play, while others tend to be more to a player's style, and are often unlocked in a "Skill shop".
If a seasoned fighting game player wants to feel what it's like being thrown into the genre, try out The Witcher 2. Specifically, try out its tutorial, which was thrown in after release, and even admitted by the developers to be not so good. About an hour into a tutorial, they're teaching you how to set traps, use potions, use the hotkeys for about 5 different magic spells, and the sword-fighting strategies for about 3 different types of opponent. Then, they send those enemies at you all at once, give you one chance to beat them all, and then evaluate your performance. It's not even humorously fun.
And, I'd like to request all fighting games give up these ridiculous sequences of actions. If my A, B attack stuns someone just long enough that I can always follow up with X, Y, up-Y for the most damage...who is playing the game at that point? The opponent can't react, so I'm not playing against them - just proving my memorization and timing of a particular button input. Why not just automatically deal that damage? Fighting games are games of strategy, spacing, and decision-making; NOT combo-inputting, so why not just turn the controller into the "decision-maker", rather than some kind of bizarre instrument of proof of personal dexterity?
(In the same way, in Mirror's Edge your obstacle is the environment and circumnavigating it, so the controls are not perfectly simple and navigation challenging. Conversely, in Titanfall, the environment is just a tool to maneuver around your REAL enemies - so in that game, parkour is correctly made ridiculously easy)
Mainly cause doing combos is lots of fun really. They are the reward for managing to lamd that solid hit and now you get to show off how awesome your imagination and execution are. You've never been one to invent optimal combos, I can tel that much. There's a certain degree of emotional attachment to specific combos believe it or not. Be it they are col or awesome or use some unusual property in am imaginative way. Putting combos together in impressive ways could be called an art form and it is an expression of ones self to pull them off. This is what makes them compelling.
Besides the freedom and fun that dreikoo mentioned, sometimes different players want different stuff out of moves. Combo A might get you better damage, but combo B will get you better corner carry, and combo C will get you more meter. I might prefer combo B, while you might prefer combo A but in a game that auto pilots combos you've removed that choice. There's also a matter of some things just not being reactable. Maybe A>B is better on hit, but A>C is better on block, you can't tell if your move is going to hit or not, so you might go for A>C since it's safer, but if you're sure that I'm not going to block A, then you'd go for the riskier A>B combo.
Just to add what the others have said.
Big combos are good for the game flow, player and audience. It's high tension with the two players spacing and positioning, then when there's an opening a flashy combo is the reward and tension release. The characters are usually reset back to the beginning, unless the player decides to do a combo that puts them at an advantage afterwards which you usually have to sacrificed damage to do. These are resets or hard knock down enders or what not.
friendofphi
That's cool, but I've seen quite a few fighting game combos where that choice doesn't matter. You hit them and they lose somewhere between 60 and 80% or their HP every time and it's annoying/infuriating.
When you have the combo choice you've spoken of it's awesome and something I found in Super Smash until I ran into glitchers and chain-grabbers that made 95% of the roster useless. However, those are unintended exploits. I just like it when a match doesn't come down to what's essentially 2 hits for one side, but rather a constant exchange of blows with a focus on repositioning.
And I really want an alternative to quarter-circle movements because they're not very reliable for most ppl and complicate things. This is also aggrivating when you consider that most fighting games barely use the L1/L2 and R1/R2 buttons, they could just make them correspond to that thumbstick movement so you could combo them like you would for a grab(Square & Triangle, Triangle & Circle, etc...).
Like L1 = left quarter-circle up, L2 = left quarter-circle down, etc - so you can people can immediately use their desired move on command and don't a barrier to their specials(which are a requirement for some characters).
CtisGaming If you can't do a quarter circle reliably there are 2 possibilities, either you lack the physical dexterity or you aren't doing it correctly. If you're not doing it correctly there is a simple solution, practice. That's what most people do when they run into a pit they can't jump in a game like mario or an enemy they can't beat in devil may cry. If you actually just lack the dexterity you should probably spend less time playing video games and more time in physical therapy, because it's a very simple command.
As someone who wants to become a game developer In the future I just want to let you know that I really love your channel.
My personal trick to learning a new character in BlazBlue is to practice the inputs until I'm comfortable with them and then do some basic combo and move practice until I have a good feel. Then I switch the practice dummy, which has the same charater as the one I'm using, to AI controlled and ramp up the diificulty to the highest level. This way, while fighting I can practice the combos I've already figured out and at the same time observe what the CPU does with the same tools. Once I've learned a few new tricks, it's back to the training dummy to solidify them with repetition. I have yet to gather any real competitive experience though.
Button mashers almost always beat someone like me when I try to think strategically. Button mashing is very unpredictable, which makes the opponent's strategy a waste of time if they are trying to predict their moves based on their play style, or waiting for an opportune moment to attack.
I also find some games just allow you to spam your favourite move over and over again, some of them I can never figure out how to avoid, and frequently lose by being continuously kicked/punched into the ground. The game doesn't really teach you anything about those situations, but if I looked them up I would actually understand what was going on.
I know the feeling. But I would argue that there are ways to beat button-mashers. Otherwise there wouldn't be a competitive fighting scene. I believe its more about staying back and then doing the 'safe' option. You know they're going to charge and throw attacks at you, thus you need to get control of the map, stop them from making you retreat and then do the safest attack option. Because once you have them on the defensive you know they're going to attack probably with that character's easiest and quickest option. Like with a rising shoryuken. So step back, let him and then confirm into another combo. But I'm the same lol. Nothing more frustrating than losing to someone you know you're better than.
If your losing to mashing, then you dont know spacing, how to create safe pressure or condition an opponent. Mashing = counterhits and whiff punishes. If your losing to mashing, you dont know how the game works.
The button masher's worst enemy: blocking. That's honestly all you really have to do. Block and wait for them to use an ability that has a high recovery time then punish.
Kurt Horsting
But what's teaching you wiff punishes? Spacing? Counterhits? Safe pressure?
Fighting game design is a lovely shitpile of messy information, because, unless you have godly instinct, even basic but prominent mechanics like these don't become apparent until you're *constantly losing to them*. Games can teach by failure surely, but you HAVE to teach by measured success as well (and that's largely ineffective in this genre as well). The range of 'little victories' (learning and performing those wiff punishes, exploiting gaps, proper spacing, pressure into mixup, etc.) is so muddled, so obscured by having a round system that declares victory to the one with yellow bar left at the end.
Someone into the genre could tell you that high level play is more about strategy and the terms you listed all they want, but the surface of the game IS still two people beating each other up; that's one of the largest gaps in translating intent I've ever seen in a game. There's work to be done in bridging that gap, and I can't pin that on the community (their job is to keep the competition fresh with new tech and discoveries); it's time for developers to step in on this.
Ipsen13 Those concepts are not unique to the genre. Tbh, if your only source to learn a game is just the game itself, your going to suck.
Skullgirls has really great tutorial to teach about 100% what you want to use :)
Skullgirls' tutorial is a wall of text basically. They show you a concept and then you can go figure it out yourself. A good tutorial shows you a concept and lets you practice until you understand it. A lot of single player campaigns are basically one really long tutorial with loads and loads of you practicing the mechanics, Resident Evil 4 for instance.
I tried to do Skullgirls' tutorial, I shouldn't have to leave the tutorial to go practice the concepts. I should just be able to play it and when I'm ready, choose to go to the next part.
The things is though, it teaches all the lingo, all the terms, and a bunch else as well along with showing what they are, all things needed to get better.
Hunter Benjamin
You don't learn something by looking at it once and then moving on. You have to be introduced to the concept, practice with it, and then have it reinforced repeatedly at regular intervals of time as you go along. The Skullgirls tutorial is step 1 out of 10 steps.
TheHoratiosvetlana And those steps being what?
Skullgirls have nightmarish control scheme, so this doesn't help a lot.
3:41 don’t think you can get that reference past me
That RPG you mentioned is not very different at how we learn at krav maga, you start at p1 (practitioner 1) and you learn basic moves like punching, basic defenses, basic kicks then you get a exam on that and then you go to p2 where you learn some more moves which are pretty basic but more complex then those of p1 and you keep learning more advanced moves the further you go, its a really effective way of learning so its a great idea for video games
You mean pretty much any real world fighting style?
Pickle Avenger Well wouldn't say all of them but pretty much most of em yeah
I'm trying to get into the genre, and the tutorials in Skullgirls have really been helping me understand fighting game mechanics.
Fighting games already have too many comeback mechanics and much easier inputs than they used to. Practice modes already now have frame data and complex tutorials to teach you everything + the internet is flooded with tutorial videos, wikis and forums where you can ask specific questions at whatever level you want and get an answer.
Big corporations already sacrifice fighting game balance in the name of making the game "more fun to watch," like removing chip damage or giving the losing opponent a magic pixel or special comeback super so they can pull out a win that LOOKS more impressive to bystanders.
The only fighting game I've ever gotten into is Super Smash Bros. Because in that game, the button combos for any one attack amount to little more than "tilt stick, press button." Please note that's *button* as in singular, as in just one button.
the Dbz Budokai games did something similar to DFO and it worked really well.
Guacamelee was sort of like this, as well. It's a Metroid-vania-ish game but your hero plays like a fighting game character, and you learn new moves as the game progresses. Not only opening up new areas of the map, they let you chain them into increasingly complex and versatile combos. The bosses are like a mix of your typical 2D platformer patterns, and the complex mind-games of a fighting game boss.
People who don't try at fighting games aren't having issues because the games don't convey information well, though that is a part of it.
The bigger issue is that most people don't have any interest in trying to get good at something.
and yet they are still about reflexex if you can't keep pace with mechanics - it doesn't matter what your strategy is
i can't execute half of the moves, i'm too old for that
lol unless you're 80+ I don't think thats the case =p
Right its muscle memory not reflexes. At first it is about reflexes. But once you know the strategy and know how to combat what your opponent can do, it is more about staying one step ahead. You anticipate, you don't react. You manipulate and thus as a result the game slows down. Though if I put my parents in front of the screen I know they wouldn't be able to keep up. Its no different from Chess. An 80 year with experience in chess can see a situation and notice openings immediately. An inexperienced 18 year old can see the same situation and take 20 minutes to dissect it down to notice that opening.
Nigel Blackman
you know there is blind people even in their 5 or deaf
there is also colorblind people
not everyone born as american white male christian superhuman with lighning reflexes given them by mother of christ
Alexandrosll
try to play with ping 500 to understand what i'm talking about
humans are not equal and never was
*****
so? i'm not dango. i'm 26 and i can't beat same bots which was easy when i was 12
Smash does fighting games very well. It's controls are very simplistic, but to get good it is very complicated. You have 4 specials, can block, roll, and grab, and have a basic attack along with directional attacks
Combos are very simple, and specials take no complicated button combonations. Yet high level smash play is ridicuosly complex and fascinating.
lol
My problem with fighting games as a whole is this: I want to get into the strategic depth, a game of positioning and on your feet thinking centered around controlling space and double-blind reactions. I want to learn the applications of various techniques and the way different characters interact.
You don't get that when you're getting into most fighting games for the first time. You get a minigame about wiggling a stick in a certain way and guessing what kind of effect this type of wiggle or that type of wiggle will have.
Getting better at that minigame is a requirement to be allowed to play the game that's interesting, but it has nothing really to do with it, and it's not really a helpful skill or particularly interesting minigame to master. Learning this minigame contributes nothing to learning the actual fighting game hidden behind it, and rarely adds to the depth of the game behind it.
When I work on anything, be it a game or studying, I want my work to have meaning. The time spent overcoming that initial barrier doesn't feel like it has meaning, other than granting permission to try a game I don't even know if I'll like, and may or may not be any better or worse than other games that reward my work with each facet mastered and explored.
I can understand that people might feel accomplished overcoming that hurdle for the first time, but every time I've managed it, regardless of how much I enjoyed what came after (or not), I've never felt accomplished. I learned how to wiggle a stick. It taught me nothing about the underlying systems of the game and how to utilize them. My work meant nothing in the grand scheme of things, as I am as capable a player of the game as I was before I even put the disc in.
blazblue and guilty hear have amazing tutorial modes to teach you the game. more fighters are implementing tutorials now. hell, I've been playing fighters for 25 years. It's getting easier for more people to dive into the genre compared to the days of old.
As someone with friends into fighting games but who is bad at video games and cannot memorize the moves and pull off the inputs without more practice than I have the time or interest for, and who stresses playing multiplayer in general, I love the idea of making a singleplayer mode designed to teach you. That's a great idea and I hope it gets picked up.
Also I wanna play Dungeon Fighter Online now.
The Naruto series had a really good story and u learned step by step :D
because u learned something and as u progress u figure out new moves and new attacks
I don't think this counts...the story is from the anime which is adapted from the manga. It's not really an original series like most fighting games.
yeah thats true but its about the system
hehe, good story :D
yeah but its not about the story xD its about the system its really easy to begin with and when you play longer you learn god like moves :D
I would consider the Naruto series more of a brawler series. It's a very simple series.
Hoenestly the only fighting game i am invested in is Super smash brothers, because of the lack of preset combos.
I am not a genious when it coems to memorize those :)
Combos exist but there are an usual amount of conditions that go into pulling them off.
TheMakuboy Yeah, there is a lot of strats in the game because f it's movement freedom, but it's easier to enjoy even at a noob level, because you don't have to button mash or have to learn any hard combos.
TheMakuboy but the combos are not pre-canned. SSB combos are completely dependent on damage levels and scene geometry.
its more of just glorified sumo wrestling
André Cécile What?
Shoutouts to you, Extra Credits, for being extensively knowledgeable about a topic, before speaking to a fan-base of thousands.
You actually are a big-name youtuber that understands fighting games. Pretty rare stuff there.
Thanks for the advertising for the community.
Grrrr8 work, breh.
Ty extracredis for the support you have been showing on dungeon fighter online since ever.
Ps. You guys have been plating some nasty C4 on people minds since ever too sooo is a huge plus when you do it to the fighting game Community too.
Some of the problems raised at the beginning are valid, but the video completely lost me when it proposed that they could be solved with solo campaigns and RPG systems. MK Mythologies: Sub-Zero did something like that a while ago and I'm almost positive that no one became a competetent MK player by playing that game, because of the simple fact that fighting against a computer and fighting a person are radically different experiences.
A computer opponent doesn't react based on what is happening on the screen, it just reads your inputs, and as such is not burdened by reaction times, the only reason you're able to beat an AI is because it is programmed to throw you a bone from time to time and let you score a hit. It doesn't have patterns based on emotions, it doesn't get cocky and launch an ill-advised offence, it doesn't get nervous and drop combos, it doesn't stay in place obviously waiting for you to try a jump-in, it can't see that you're trying to bait him. Tekken and Soul Calibur tried something interesting where they let you play against AI who where programmed to mimick actual players' patterns, but it doesn't work convincingly.
The truth is that playing against an AI for any extended period of time will make you WORSE. I'm mostly used to playing traditional capcom-style fighting games, so when I picked up Smash 4 I spent a lot of time against the computer before jumping online because I wanted to have a good grasp of the mechanics in order to not look like an idiot in a real match. When I finally tried playing against real people, I got absolutely wrecked by players who very obviously knew less about the game than me: they didn't tech, spot-dodge or tilt, but they still won because while I was busy learning bad habits and patterns that worked against the computer, they were out there learning how humans actually play. I learned more by getting my ass beat on For Glory for an hour than by playing against the AI for five evenings.
+BensonBPH This is the problem with people who have been in a genre for too long. They forget what it's like to be new at something
+XBlueM0ndayX I'm not exactly sure about what you mean, did you miss the part at the end where I describe my experience as a new Smash player?
+BensonBPH it means you don't see how the single player gave you the understanding of the commands you used to get your ass beaten.You're saying,"it taught me nothing!" and it actually taught basic controls,even if it's not enough to beat people.
grassinigrassini you can learn the basic controls for smash in a match against a real person in 2 minutes
that's exactly what people mean when they say have been in the genre for too long,no videogame concept is as intuitive as you think it is,you're so "in" you don't know what it feels like to be out,you can put your grandmother to play if you feel like testing your ideas.
I heard it's best to get people to listen to a critique by starting with a complement, or saying what you liked, ect...
I disagree with a couple of things in this vid.
1: Reactions are most certainly an important part of high level play. It is not a chess game. It's about risk vs reward, and reading the opponent, and capitalizing on opportunities. Doing these requires knowledge, practice, good reactions, and solid execution.
2: Memorizing the move sets, combos, and how the game specific system mechanics work is the same thing as learning them in a single player mode, or training mode. You do both by playing the game, and both take time, effort, and dedication by the player.
The bottom line is that learning to play a fighting game takes a lot of time and effort. Learning to be competitive takes more time and effort. You cant make players want to put in the effort. No amount of spoon feeding new players in a tutorial will teach them how to think and be creative. Indeed, it would more than likely teach them to be predictable, always reacting a certain way in a certain situation.
There are basic concepts of fighting games that are simple concepts, but very hard for the average gamer to understand. Concepts like Frame Data, Movement, Reversal, Block, Combo, and many others. For Example, how frames work in a fighting game, and the implications of how they work is particularly difficult for new players to understand. I don't think it matters if the player is spoon fed this info in a single player, or is taught by playing the game vs other players. Most simply wont get it the 1st time, and wont put in the effort to understand and apply such a concept. Every fighting game has some complex mechanics these days, but they still all share a fundamental group of concepts. This is where players struggle the most. Learning them, understanding them, and applying them in real matches takes time and effort that most people aren't willing, or are unable to put in.
The player is the driving force in a fighting game. In every critical situation in (good) fighting games, players have options to choose from. Do I hit a button, or do I reversal? Do I continue to apply pressure, or do I bait a reversal? Knowing what options are available and choosing intelligently between them in a split second, developing good habits but not becoming predictable, and having consistent execution, all these things take time and effort, by the player, to learn.
I do agree that most games could do more to teach players how to play. Indeed, games like Blazblue, Persona 4, and Skullgirls have improved in this way from older games. Melty Blood has one of the best training modes that I've seen in a fighting game. These tools are limited by the player.
The best way to learn a fighting game is to play it as it is intended; against other players, face to face. Preferably, someone better than you. Eventually, the player develops their own understanding, and creates new ideas.
I guess to sum up my main point(s), you can't teach players to want to play your game, or to want to learn, or to want to think, or to want to create. You can, however, train them to be monkeys. Most gamers, not just fighting game players, are trained monkeys that hit all the buttons and expect to get the rewards.
For all it's failures, Shadow fight 2 ("free" mobile game) does this fairly well, with players only unlocking certain moves as the level up.
I agree. With a simple move pool, it's easy to learn the different moves. It is where I learned to be patient in a fighting game
Lance Lindle Lee only fighting game I've ever played, and I'd like to play some more, can you recommend any entry level ones?
Jespah Cropley Sadly, I'm also the same.
Try Smash though :)
okay. I know it, but thank you!
Hehe. "Free." I know what you mean. I like that the guys at Nekki are aware of culture as well as simple game design and make things like katanas, which are culturally and visually significant but not really that much better than other weapons, cost the currency that you buy. Which is terrible for mall ninjas.
Soul Calibur may be a wall of infomation but practicing with it is pretty helpful since the directional inputs are easy enough it doesn't overwhelm you for you to perform complex movesets with only a handful of complicated techs (i.e. Ivy). A horizontal slash is weaker than a vertical but can sweep an enemy that likes to strafe, a vertical is stronger than a horizontal but its range is limited to a straight line and kicks are helpful for surprise attacks. The essential skills that need to be learned through sheer grit and training however, are the reflexes to perform parries and counters.
Gladly, fighting games nowadays are really accesible and more newbie-friendly. Dragon Ball FighterZ helped a lot with that.
skullgirls gives you all the tools to climb the learning curve with the best tutorial i've ever found for this genre, the flexibility to choose up to 3 characters at the same time removes the problem of counterpicking since you can imput any assist move for each character... and this is just the first things that came up in mind. i suggest try it, especially for who feels fighting games are overwhelming... not to mention the roster of characters is composed mostly by females that they have a great personality and characterization. go and play it!
There's a problem with this video,The Problem is that Single Player is the safest place
Core-A-Gaming explains this
Being a fighting game person, I realise there are two types of people:
1). Someone who goes straight to training mode, get to know a character, learn combos, etc.
2). Someone who goes straight to VS mode and button bash, saying "How did I pull that off?"
I know some people who thinks that the randomness of button bashing and figuring out the moves is part of the "fun"; and then they complain that the game is not fun when I beat them.
Well...that's an interesting way to put it. I've fallen into category 1 and a half then I suppose. I take time to research and work with characters to see what feels better, but then move on to vs to gain some experience using the limited tools I have. I do however at least know all the specials, supers, and normals though. Sitting in training mode for an hour and a half at a time can be daunting, so to have some fun I keep it only to maybe 10-30 min a day.(Links, FADC Combos etc.)
I think the mobile Shadow Fight 2 is a perfect example of this too, it gives new information in a very slow pace, and it just feels good to constantly change your weapons and adapt to them, each has its own strategy, and it makes us feel smart when we crack it
Soul Calibur 2 did this very well. I had it for the Gamecube. The first few levels of the single player campaign were really good about teaching you the mechanics of SC. The system mostly boils down to vertical attacks beat horizontal attacks which beat side stepping which beats vertical attacks. There are also kicks but they basically follow the same trend.
I think you guys are missing the point. Fighting games is supposed to be like that like Dark Souls is supposed to be hard and free, you get your ass kicked on online or vs a friend, start for searching material like youtube videos or tutorials (there's a TON of content from basic moves to full complex way of thinking on a competitive match) and then start to see how things work, kinda like seeing in the dark, you will get used to it with time, if a player is bummed down from the first loss he's not apt to experience the game at it's fullest (again, like Dark Souls). I'm not even close to a good fighting game player, but I do try to improve and the progress is indeed slow. Like mastering a new skill. Now, when you talk about the rpg system is very probable that even with the bonus for getting a move right the player could simply grind till the end of the game, as exists button masher there will be grinding in it. Fighting games are free, if you start thinking about tutorials we will have ANOTHER wall on another genre.
First of all: I don't think the darksoul comparison works in any way. You are missing the point. Maybe I could even make a point about how Fighting game players don't get the point why they have so few new players.
And what does "free" meen? Free = no tutorial?
If fighting games are "supposed" to be like that, then fighting games will dwindle until they're more niche than text adventure. It's become a genre that, if you haven't followed along for pretty much its entire life, it's almost impossible to get into it. In what way would teaching people to play be a bad thing?
Dark Souls isn't hard for the purpose of being hard, that's why Dark Souls 2 isn't as good as the first, that was their mindset "guys the first game was hard and people liked that, make it hard" it was hard and fair and smart about its difficulty and the difficulty fit in with the world.
barrier for entry is a completely different thing than difficulty. all it does is limit the people who can enjoy the game. and these are people who don't abandon the game because "it's hard" but because it's frustrating not knowing how to do shit, you can brute force your way through the frustration by memorizing every single move, but you still won't be very good.
a achmed Free mans, "pickup and play", see what happened to Zelda, is a clusterfuck of unnecessary tutorials. Fighting games have a lot of teaching content on internet.
***** would not be bad to teach people, but people need to be willing to learn, there's a lot of content explaining the basics on internet, and even the most complex systems.
MuffinatorXII you missed entirely my point, let me explain again maybe I was wrong in the wording of it. I said Dark Souls because the difficulty EXPOSES the game feel, the game is supposed to be that way, the difficulty helps in every single aspect of the game, feeling, story, music, universe, narrative and etc. Fighting games IS to have your ass kicked online (like I previously said, the same goes for Dark/Demon Souls invasions, hell Demon Souls even have a boss that can be a player) and then YOU DISCOVER you way to victory, you don't need to hand EVERY SINGLE ASPECT of the game or even the basics. You have four to six buttons, you have special maneuvers, pickup a character and try to beat your oponent, you failed? Ok now think WHERE you failed. If you spoonfed everything the game loses it's soul.
Marcos Wicket agreed. I feel as though fighting games are meant to played competitively to a sense. But if you dumb it down, it loses its appeal. Games like Soul Calibur can be extremely easy to pick up, but the overall casual player will still only play for a small amount of time before quitting. So fighting games are practically niche by nature.
The one major obstacle to fighting games (or any PvP game for that matter) is dedication. If you are not dedicated to learning the game, whether due to lack of time or whatever, you will never understand the mechanics everyone else already learned. It's sadly one of those things that boil down to "git gud or git out".
How do you know if you will like a game if they put that big brick wall in your face?
I should not have to play 30 hours just to learn the basics and decide if I am willing to reach for mastery.
TheMakuboy too bad it doesn't even take that to learn that character :P in all honesty you can practice for a good 30 minutes to an hour learning the basic tools to have a good time. You're gonna be spending more time developing hand eye coordination, reflexes, and overall thinking skills than learning your character. its called dedication. :P
***** Not a chance. For the average player, it will take hours upon hours of practice to get to the point where your strategic play outperforms your button mashing ability.
TheMakuboy 30 Hours is not the basics. The basics are easy, it's how you evolve those basics, which is the same with ANY game really. You play Mario, you know how to run and Jump. Simple. But once you practice and get really familiar with these movements, you can time precise jumps on Mulitiple enemies, platform at full speed without stopping, etc. No one is saying everyone should try to master fighting games on a Professional level, some of those guys, winning tournaments is their JOB. Doesn't mean you can't get good enough to beat OTHER people
Andrew Morris For many that is the case. For me, it was just seeing how the competitive players performed and acknowledging my reactive playstyle. I then tried to be a more technical player and usually thought of what i was doing before pressing a button. I wasn't a button masher for say but i did have a habit of trying to react to everything in a lame manner. (waiting for an opponent to press a button to a ultra).
I think Skullgirls does quite a good job with the basic tutorial EXCEPT for one thing:
Instead of telling you the actual button you have to press, they go with the LP, LK, MP, etc.-system, which is rather infuriating for new players. Also, what this game lacks are character-specific tutorials.
That's because you can reconfig the buttons.
Then they just could show the button currently mapped to, say LK, along the message "Buttons can be rebound in the options menu".
The last batch of Skullgirl tutorials are actually the character-specific ones... But truth be told, they are the weakest, since they simply list off the moves that each character can do and what they actually do.
I think it's better that way because it's universal. Not everyone uses the same controller, so this makes it easier for others--not just the game--to explain an input/combo without having to know how your buttons are labeled. Plus, part of learning the game is knowing which button is which.
The most important thing that needs to change in fighting game tutorials is how they teach the player to think.
See, in the approach taken, players think about the moves themselves, which on they want, and then loose because they think in the wrong way.
The best approach is to go about it in situations. Rather than teach any moves specifically, introduce various real in-game situations they may come across and get the player to figure them out, much like in the methods you suggested.
By approaching the tutorial in a situation rather than move based focus, you get the player to learn to think in terms of situations, which is what high level play is all about. Even doing this through the basics, moving and hitting the basic attacks and combos, creates a solid thought foundation that changes the perspective on how you go about it.
Think on this: When learning a fighting game, which is more effective? Knowing how to do special moves or knowing WHEN to do them? If you know how to move and when, even with normal attacks you can become incredibly powerful.
Thank you Dan, cause my friends and girlfriend have a hard time understanding how to do some stuff and I had to either go one on one fight online or offline with them slowly teaching them how to do each techniques of every fighting game
Kick, chop, it's all in the mind...
And that's why i play smash.
Good for you, but that's off-topic.
Do you mean Fox VS Fox simulator, Meta Knight VS Meta Knight simulator, or Cloud VS Cloud simulator?
It's so hard to teach people to play! They always press A and fall off the stage!
Smash doesn't have a tutorial.
***** - Trouble is, when you want to test a move after it showed a single on, it jumps into the menu. I would consider that more of an instruction manual than a tutorial.
This is why I like Smash Bros. The general idea of the game is more simplistic than other fighting games and you don't need to memorize button combinations. You only have 2 buttons for attack and depending on which direction you tilt or whether you're on the ground or jumping it affects what move you use. This also makes it harder to button mash to win.
I think the main problem with this entire idea is that many competitive fighting game players wouldn't WANT the complicated mechanics to be taught in an easier way, since that would make them feel less "elite" for learning everything the hard way.
If, for example, Street Fighter put these ideas into practice for their next game, its own niche fanbase would probably abandon it to find something more complicated (and thus more rewarding to that type of people).
The tutorial is exactly what made Skullgirls a great fighting game to get into for me. The tutorial in that game was rather vast and comprehensive. From doing mix-up combos to air chaining and even learning the ins an d outs of each individual character's special moves and blockbusters. I can't really explain the process that thoroughly, but it's the best I've seen.
Three words: Super Smash Brothers. Incredibly simplistic, but also very very deep. Appeals to the masses, and is also a blast to watch. Look no further than the recent Smash Invitational. I don't know how many were watching on other streams, but the Twitch stream of that had over 200k at one point when I was watching.
I love Smash Bros, but it also has some of its own problems as well. You could say that its in the other extreme end of the skill level. Sakurai has been very wary of making the game competetive in any way, removing things that could give a determined learner any form of upper edge, which is kinda sad and doesn't include strategy at all. You kinda need to put tools in (like perhaps L-cancelling or movement options in general) for players to be able to use strategically, otherwise it only becomes a game where everyone trades hits. That isn't what fighting games are about, it's in it's core about split second strategic play. Here's a video explaining what I'm trying to say: HANDS ON! Smash Bros: Wii U (Game Speed, Mechanics, Impressions)
I don't see how SSB is any different from any other fighting games as far as learning curve goes. Anyone can learn to use the buttons in Street Fighter or Guilty Gear or whatever, but just knowing the attacks means nothing to high level play, it's literally just step one, and that goes for ALL fighting games. People that aren't into the SSB scene just like watching it because it's a game that has a lot of movement and it always looks like something is happening where as SF is just much slower visually. Both games have a lot of strategy happening, it's just that in SF movement is much more restricted because you can be punished for careless movement differently than you would in SSB.
It's a bit hard for me to explain exactly, but if you're interested this video pretty much sows some of the aspects that worry me about Smash: HANDS ON! Smash Bros: Wii U (Game Speed, Mechanics, Impressions)
It's not about the attacks themseles, but the fact that many of your actions requires a lot of recovery time (even jumping and landing) meaning that it's generally advantagious for a player to play defensively no matter if you're a zoner or not. That's not as fun, since it becomes a game about dodging and poking, trading hits until one dies, rather than actually opening up the opponent and hitting them for damage by out-predicting them strategically. Here's a more in-depth analysis on Smash in general, and some of the problems it might have: www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/27wshi/praxis_reply_to_what_makes_a_game_competitive_and/
There are too many moves? Each character in Streetfighter has about three and character types have interchangeable moves like Hadoken, Yoga Fire, Rekka Kens or Cannon Drill. They have transferable qualities to them that make it easy to learn the basics of each character, these moves are also quite similar to the moves you'd need to play King of Fighter games, Samurai Showdown and the majority of fighting games with a hand full of exceptions like Tekken or some Mortal Kombat games.
The problem is that the gameplay of fighting games is not like any other kind of game. You can't use the same skills you'd have learned from a platforming game or an FPS you have to learn a new way of playing and people have little patience for it.
The skills don't transfer from playing a platformer to an FPS either.
Apotheosis275 yes, which is why FPS games had such a hard time getting on to consoles, it took Halo and Call of Duty to introduce the public to FPS gameplay before that it was a niche market.
i play racing gams platformers fps and dota style games for years and have gotten good at some of them. the reason why, is that getting good at those games can be fun as well and is not a choire because you are not forced to start with meatboy or counterstrike or dota2 to learn them you can start with easier games (of which there are a lot which teach you basic and advanced skills for those genres)
but all fighting games i've played so much only had features to train but not have fun while doing so
"Each character in Streetfighter has about three" Nope. You're just thinking about special moves. For starters, each character has 6 standing normals and 6 crouching normals. Someone new to the game has to find out which ones are useful, and when. It creates a fair amount to learn if you want to play competitively and not simply mash.
Fighting games are something that I have only just started getting into... but it's particularly hard for me as I don't have any friends who play fighting games and are at all good at them, the competitive scene here is literally non-existent, and at the moment I don't really have an online console to play on as I am too broke to afford anything!
What games are you trying to play? You might be able to see if there's anyone in your area on SRKs regional matchmaking forums.
AirLancer At the moment... 3rd Strike... I just got a ps3 and the game...
BloodySteel64 3rd Strike is very hard to get a grip on an I applaud you for trying to. There are still a number of people left that still play it and can help you.
SRK is a good place to start.
NightPonyGaming SRK?
BloodySteel64 shoryuken.com
Speaking as someone who is rarely drawn to fighting games, I think Soulcalibur II did a fantastic job of this with Weapon Master Mode. I remember it individually teaching mechanics like Guard Impact, Ring Out, etc. It also had a great difficulty curve that allowed a beginner to become truly great at the game by the end. All while telling a good story and remaining engaging.
If you want a good example of a recent fighting game with the tutorial issues mentioned here, take a look at Injustice 2, especially the character tutorials. The Joker tutorial in particular asks the player to pull off a fairly difficult combo of moves (especially for console players) involving and anti-air move followed by a special move cancel (requiring very fast and precise inputs immediately after a very different type of attack) and then another delayed special move. All of this while the enemy is in the air. If at any point you miss, get hit, or the enemy touches the ground without every single move in the combo connecting, it restarts you.
I guess "The Fighting Game Problem" did not exist during the boom of fighting games back in the 90's. Players back then didn't have anything proposed in this video. I wonder how the fighting game genre ever took off and be in its present popularity.
Let's face it. Fighting games are not for casual players. It sounds harsh but it is true. Think about it. Back in the 90's, we didn't have any of this shit. Everyone is challenging anyone in the arcades, everyone. You learn from your fellow humans. If you don't have the guts and determination to learn and eventually fight toe to toe with your fellow arcade goers, then it is not the genre for you. Really.
Now, CPU trained players, no matter how good the developers have made the training mode and missions, will still get their ass kicked the moment they set foot online to fight a fellow human. Your human opponents will be your greatest motivation or your greatest obstacle in this genre. No artificial way will ever replace that.
And also, this is not an RPG where you talk to an NPC, or obtain an item, or do a quest for you to learn something new and become stronger. In this genre, you become good by your own determination, discipline, training and continuous learning. No imaginary "level ups".