Plan for Andrius Adomavicius
by Minako · 06/08/2002 (2:10 am) · 6 comments
We are using the Tourque Engine for a 3-D fighting game. The emphasis will be on ranged energy (ki) based attacked, however melee combat with fists, feet and any weapons you may happen to have is also implemented. This is based very loselly on the anime Dragonball Z (though it it seeks to be far more than simply an implentation of the show). Target completion date is January 1, 2003. Players will fight simultaniously in large areas, 6-8 at once per map.
About the author
#2
But anyway, here is a short, early morning rant(IE: Not a very good rant)about the Fighting Game Genre.
Why is it, that within the last, let's say 10 years, of fighting games the only thing that has changed on them is the graphics?
Sure there are more moves, ultra smooth motion capture, more characters. But honestly, is this the only thing they can think about to add in a fighting games?
Maybe instead of getting insane polygons on characters they could actually take the time and make their environment interactive and something that isn't just a flat little square painted up differently with a static, can't go, background.
Take some examples like PowerStone, Destraga, I believe even a little bit of DoA, but I am not certain on that. These games have at least tried to break the mold of the whole "mortal kombat, tekken, virtua fighter, etc.." square ring and have been pretty good, but why not take it farther?
Why not add stuff some stuff that can't be done in the real world, after all it is a video game. Sure there are the odd moves in these games and they aren't completely realistic, but I am talking about something that is cool, can't be done in the real world, and completely common in the game.
Sure, a lot of the games that have tried these haven't been successful, but I respect them more then Tekken and Virtua Fighter because they at least tried something different.
Instead I see game reviewers main point for not liking a fighting games, "Well the characters polys were low and the motion capture wasn't all that"
Seriously, and I thought FPS were the genre based completely on graphics, for as much as I can rant about the FPS having little innovation, fighting games have defiantly taken the cake.
06/08/2002 (7:27 am)
I never did get the fascination with Dragon Ball Z....But anyway, here is a short, early morning rant(IE: Not a very good rant)about the Fighting Game Genre.
Why is it, that within the last, let's say 10 years, of fighting games the only thing that has changed on them is the graphics?
Sure there are more moves, ultra smooth motion capture, more characters. But honestly, is this the only thing they can think about to add in a fighting games?
Maybe instead of getting insane polygons on characters they could actually take the time and make their environment interactive and something that isn't just a flat little square painted up differently with a static, can't go, background.
Take some examples like PowerStone, Destraga, I believe even a little bit of DoA, but I am not certain on that. These games have at least tried to break the mold of the whole "mortal kombat, tekken, virtua fighter, etc.." square ring and have been pretty good, but why not take it farther?
Why not add stuff some stuff that can't be done in the real world, after all it is a video game. Sure there are the odd moves in these games and they aren't completely realistic, but I am talking about something that is cool, can't be done in the real world, and completely common in the game.
Sure, a lot of the games that have tried these haven't been successful, but I respect them more then Tekken and Virtua Fighter because they at least tried something different.
Instead I see game reviewers main point for not liking a fighting games, "Well the characters polys were low and the motion capture wasn't all that"
Seriously, and I thought FPS were the genre based completely on graphics, for as much as I can rant about the FPS having little innovation, fighting games have defiantly taken the cake.
#3
In real life, you can't go from an all-out sprint into a donkey kick (backwards kick, I don't know the technical term) or you'd probably fall flat on your face.
Of course, on the up hand, this would result in coming off a sprint to make some attacks much more powerful. Running towards someone and just doing a simple punch might knock them back and on their backs.
I don't think there's really much this genre can do to really innovate, but there are many small things it hasn't really tried. I think these developers see these "small things" as a waste of time since they might take a lot to integrate, but not be noticed by the more "hardcore" players who tend to like how many 45 button combinations and boob-jiggles are in the game.
06/08/2002 (2:34 pm)
I'd like to see a more momentum based move system.In real life, you can't go from an all-out sprint into a donkey kick (backwards kick, I don't know the technical term) or you'd probably fall flat on your face.
Of course, on the up hand, this would result in coming off a sprint to make some attacks much more powerful. Running towards someone and just doing a simple punch might knock them back and on their backs.
I don't think there's really much this genre can do to really innovate, but there are many small things it hasn't really tried. I think these developers see these "small things" as a waste of time since they might take a lot to integrate, but not be noticed by the more "hardcore" players who tend to like how many 45 button combinations and boob-jiggles are in the game.
#4
06/08/2002 (5:05 pm)
What we're doing here isn't just the usual two people on a playing feild and they fight thing. I agree, that's been done a lot. Sometimes well and it's fun, most times it's just boring rehashes. What we're seeking to do here is make large environments (test map is planned to be a series of tropical islands) and have all the players go at it at once in this environment. So like 4 or 8 people will all be fighting simultaniously, rather than the much more static 1 on 1 model. Now DBZ isn't necessarily the best series, but what we're taking is the style of combat. People super jump, fly, have energy projectile attacts, as well as resort to melee combat. Now sure, the character designs have varying degrees of anime influence to them too, but the style of battle is the main thing we're taking from DBZ.
#5
Like Quake meets Street Fighter 49201 X3 Alpha Ultra Powerpack Supreme.
Seriously, that's a cool idea. Powerstone sounds most similar, but even then that was just a tiny arena with standard moves and "grab anything and use it as a weapon".
06/08/2002 (5:25 pm)
Ah cool then.Like Quake meets Street Fighter 49201 X3 Alpha Ultra Powerpack Supreme.
Seriously, that's a cool idea. Powerstone sounds most similar, but even then that was just a tiny arena with standard moves and "grab anything and use it as a weapon".
#6
I would tell you that Tekken 2, 3 and 4 all play very differently, but those distinctions are very specific things like "in Tekken 4 a Paul blocked D+2 results in stagger and it only knocks over on a close clean hit, whereas in Tekken 2 it will knock over on any hit and if blocked does not stagger."
One issue is that most games are sequels. A new Tekken or VF or SF can only be so different. The new Tekken (Tekken 4) has some environmental interaction. There are walls, ceilings, pillars you can knock people into for more damage, differences in height of terrain - on a level with water you can even hold someone's head underwater. But of course, all the Tekken Tag fans hate all that.
VF3 had terrain differences, wall-throws and more level-dependent features, but they took them out with 4, in part because they add a bit of randomness and distract from the "purity" of the game. (Remember in old SF2 when you played as Vega on Vega's stage, when you did the wall grab instead of going off the wall he would climb the fence? Same thing) Most hardcore fans don't really want the environment (which changes from match to match) having much say in how the match turns out.
You could compare it to Indy racing vs. F1. F1 has actual tracks, Indy Racing is just ovals.
IMO a pretty general trend in games is to start with more random, unbalanced, "fun" elements and as a genre matures move more towards a sort of textbook perfection. Which in a way has the same effect as making a "quality" movie - it sort of seems like it should be good, but often it just isn't that engaging. This is especially true in competitive games.
For example I think Tekken 2 is the best Tekken, but for each individual change that occured from Tekken 2 to 3 (and then Tag and 4) you could probably say "yes this change made sense." Yes, attacking opponents on the ground was too good. Yes, the Deathfist was too powerful. Yes, having King be able to do 100% damage off a throw was a bit much - but you make all these changes that look good individually and the sum of those changes doesn't look so hot anymore.
"In real life, you can't go from an all-out sprint into a donkey kick (backwards kick, I don't know the technical term) or you'd probably fall flat on your face"
Actually this has been a feature of Tekken since at least 2. When you run you can only do certain moves like sliding kick, tackle, etc. There are also moves that leave you back-turned (back facing opponent), moves that leave you on the ground, etc.
06/09/2002 (2:12 am)
Fighting games and FPS games are a good comparison in that the changes that are being made appeal to hardcore fans but really don't make any difference to someone who isn't a fan of the genre as a whole.I would tell you that Tekken 2, 3 and 4 all play very differently, but those distinctions are very specific things like "in Tekken 4 a Paul blocked D+2 results in stagger and it only knocks over on a close clean hit, whereas in Tekken 2 it will knock over on any hit and if blocked does not stagger."
One issue is that most games are sequels. A new Tekken or VF or SF can only be so different. The new Tekken (Tekken 4) has some environmental interaction. There are walls, ceilings, pillars you can knock people into for more damage, differences in height of terrain - on a level with water you can even hold someone's head underwater. But of course, all the Tekken Tag fans hate all that.
VF3 had terrain differences, wall-throws and more level-dependent features, but they took them out with 4, in part because they add a bit of randomness and distract from the "purity" of the game. (Remember in old SF2 when you played as Vega on Vega's stage, when you did the wall grab instead of going off the wall he would climb the fence? Same thing) Most hardcore fans don't really want the environment (which changes from match to match) having much say in how the match turns out.
You could compare it to Indy racing vs. F1. F1 has actual tracks, Indy Racing is just ovals.
IMO a pretty general trend in games is to start with more random, unbalanced, "fun" elements and as a genre matures move more towards a sort of textbook perfection. Which in a way has the same effect as making a "quality" movie - it sort of seems like it should be good, but often it just isn't that engaging. This is especially true in competitive games.
For example I think Tekken 2 is the best Tekken, but for each individual change that occured from Tekken 2 to 3 (and then Tag and 4) you could probably say "yes this change made sense." Yes, attacking opponents on the ground was too good. Yes, the Deathfist was too powerful. Yes, having King be able to do 100% damage off a throw was a bit much - but you make all these changes that look good individually and the sum of those changes doesn't look so hot anymore.
"In real life, you can't go from an all-out sprint into a donkey kick (backwards kick, I don't know the technical term) or you'd probably fall flat on your face"
Actually this has been a feature of Tekken since at least 2. When you run you can only do certain moves like sliding kick, tackle, etc. There are also moves that leave you back-turned (back facing opponent), moves that leave you on the ground, etc.
Torque Owner Matt W
If you don't, I'm going to sick Poku or Mish-Mash or whatever the hell they call those midget guys with over-expressive faces. Pikachu? Bleh! I remember the good ol' days. Flinstones and Bugs Bunny! Why'd they replace it with all this drug-trip midget stuff?
Oh, uh sorry.
Good luck on your project.