That is surprising. Don’t expect this game to run well on Switch 1, lol.

Yeah, can’t argue with that. But I wouldn’t really mind which direction the solution came from.

At the same time though, I wish we could retain old versions, like how Ultra Street Fighter IV did. I know doing so is harder, but you can lose a thing you enjoy to a new version of the game that you don’t. I didn’t like Strive season 2, but fortunately, I liked every other season. I feel like Strive is in a really good place right now, and I’m nervous about this 2.0 update they’re talking about. If it’s a major update to the software and not the gameplay, then hell yeah, I’m on board, but I’m nervous that it could be another season 2.

That’s why SF6 has freak fights, MK has challenge towers and king of the hill, DBFZ has weird random modes on rotation, etc.

Even that is tricky though, because now you have to program the computer player to take bait. A computer Guile that can tell when you’re blocking and when you’re not could be just about unbeatable, and a human player can’t tell that, so they have to guess. In any case, I think the genre’s single player modes are lacking because we’ve only been taking them seriously for about 15 years. NetherRealm does what they do well, but they could still stand to do a better job of diagetically teaching you through the story mode like you’re saying. SF6 has its RPG mode, which I think is a better idea on paper than it is in how they executed it. RGG is talking a big game about the single player offering in the new Virtua Fighter, and I believe they’ll probably do a great job at it, because if you fork the code for Yakuza, you’re most of the way to a single player Virtua Fighter already; just make the plot something like Blood Sport.

You phrased it as “the newer generation of AI”, so it was unclear what you meant, but it seemingly referred to the AI we hear about all too often these days in the news. I do think there’s more room to get closer to approximating a human opponent in fighting games, and I know how I’d attempt to tackle it at a high level, but it must be harder than I think it is, or it would have been done by now; one potential pitfall would be having to update it every time you put out a balance patch, because that would affect how the computer player would have to behave.

Every era of video games was affected by its business model. Games used to be far more obtuse to sell guides and hint hotlines, and they used to be hard to the point that they were less fun so that it took longer to finish them. In the early 2000s, when the industry was largely between alternate revenue streams, you tended to get a lot of padding so that they could put a larger number of levels as a bullet point on the back of the box, so the first few levels would be great, but somewhere in the middle, they’d be pretty phoned in.

Yeah, it’s an article that makes you think it cites its sources and did its homework, but it doesn’t even examine why SF2’s success is so high, like that arcade revenue in the 90s is basically a cheat code compared to selling copies of console games, or that SF2 had a number of versions across that entire decade that all factor into that several billion dollars it earned. What the article refers to as “the dark ages” is actually a different era than what most would assign to the moniker to, misnomer though it might be. And it also states things as facts that aren’t; not just your Guilty Gear example but that somehow SF6 is the most homogenized SF game somehow. This feels like the author is just salty that they don’t care for the last few years’ offerings personally.

Guilty Gear is now a multi-million seller when every previous game didn’t even crack a tenth of that. Yes, what they did to Guilty Gear demonstrably worked. Tekken and Dragon Ball FighterZ are both huge. If I were a betting man, I’d say Marvel Tokon will do about as well as any of the other most successful fighting games out there.

I don’t want to be mean, but your best summary didn’t capture the counter system or the multi tiered stages. DOA rules as a fighting game.

I just played Escape from Ever After. Every bit as good and polished as the old Paper Mario games. $25. They cost $50-$65 back then.

I have, and the last Mortal Kombat that had a problem with infinite combos was 15 years ago. There’s also a structure to MK combos that reduces your need to memorize anything.

That’s neither here nor there, and it’s not much of a problem in the genre either.

It’s got to serve both masters. It should be fun when you don’t know what you’re doing, that person should always lose to someone who does know what they’re doing, and becoming the person who knows what they’re doing should be fun, too. When you don’t know what you’re doing in DOA, you’re still kicking people off rooftops and down the steps of the Great Wall of China.

It was a Sony show. They barely mentioned PC. There’s no listing for Volume 2 on the eShop, and to set your expectations accordingly, I would only expect this game to run on the Switch 2, not the Switch 1.

Not impossible but a colossal pain in the ass such that no one ever thought they’d dip into their pocketbook to fund the work.

It’s a handful of podcasts, and spoilers abound during GOTY in December.

I want to play it, but they made me wait past spoiler season, so I won’t be paying full price for it anymore.

The juice may not be worth the squeeze there, but there might be money in buying the IPs for pennies on the dollar and releasing dead games as self hostable with bots to fill out a match.

Not in multiplayer, at least. LAN was deliberately patched out, and we know from Alanah Pearce’s channel that this game in particular could have LAN back extremely easily if they wanted it.