Obsidian - "Project New Jersey"

[A user named cat]

I agree that the 3D is largely irrelevant other than making the games look better, and as a result the perspective has no real bearing on the game. There are good 2D fighters and good 3D fighters. A game is not good because its 2D or 3D - that's just blinkered crap.

This I disagree with. 3D fighting brings the important element of sidestepping, which I always whored quite a bit in Tekken 4 to either dodge certain combos or get behind opponents to use a grab. 2D is limited to left and right, which takes out half the strategy and variety.

 

[Dire Roach]

You would be inclined to think that 3D fighting games have an advantage over their 2D counterparts since they have the added potential of an extra dimension. However, no 3D fighting game I've played has really taken advantage of it to the point where you could say "holy shit no 2D fighting game could ever hope to match this level of strategy and possibilities!" Dodging and getting behind your opponent in 3D fighters by sidestepping is accomplished in pretty much the same fashion by jumping/ducking (and rolling in the case of Smash Bros) in 2D games.

It would be nice to have a 3D fighting game with big arenas where you could exploit terrain features like high ground, elevators/moving platforms, wall spikes, water, and crazy "physics" shit to your advantage. Alas, it doesn't exist yet AFAIK.

 

[deuxhero]

ToS would have been fun if it had fighting beyond "use combo, block, use same combo".

Actually the battle system in ToS was pretty damn great, better than the majority of Japanese and Western RPG systems actually. Your own fault for spamming the same combo and wuss tactic, as I sure as hell didn't. There were plenty of different attacks you could use, not to mention the other characters in your party that could contribute.

Do we have to go over the old argument of "you don't have to use something broken" again?


The fact that you can only map 4 special attacks at a time DOES make it an even worse argument here then normal. It is hard to have variety when you can only map the attacks for a single "combo" at once anyways, and that combo MUST consist of the attacks in the same order (expect for 3 characters, 2 of whom share a moveset)

 

[A user named cat]

The only thing broken here is your logic. You're sitting here arguing over a lack of what you believe to be combos, when you're talking of just special attacks. There are natural combos too, genius. Such as forward-A, A, A, B, etc. With those and special attacks combined, there's plenty of variety.

Your own fault for spamming shit and not mixing it up. They gave you plenty to work with.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I agree that the 3D is largely irrelevant other than making the games look better, and as a result the perspective has no real bearing on the game. There are good 2D fighters and good 3D fighters. A game is not good because its 2D or 3D - that's just blinkered crap.

This I disagree with. 3D fighting brings the important element of sidestepping, which I always whored quite a bit in Tekken 4 to either dodge certain combos or get behind opponents to use a grab. 2D is limited to left and right, which takes out half the strategy and variety.

Ever heard of defensive rolls? In KoF, those fill in the seat for dodges. And mind you, side-stepping bring a very limited amount of strategy and variety to gameplay compared to teleports, counter-throws, chain commands, projectiles and so on. Most 3D fighting games lack any meat on their system. Simply putting dial-up combos and calling it a day leads to a game with homogenous gameplay experience and extremely limited strategy and variety.

 

[deuxhero]

So slight differences in animation that only have any benfit when a. the one or 2 times in the entire game that you have a weapon with differing slash/thrust stats, b. with Presea who is hot
(due to vA haveing less lag) or c. when you have a flying enemy (that you MIGHT hit because of a bigger hitbox for your attack) count as variety?