"Freestyling" and doing things in the moment is the best thing about emergent gameplay. Sometimes I will have interactions where I'm like " holy shit I did that? That was so sick ". That's what makes me motivated to get good. The feeling of being able to improvise and come up with answers on the fly is amazing.
@@MarkoLomovic it's still good gameplay regardless if that's the right use of the word emergent it's unarguably just better that way mostly cuz of the reasons already stated everyone is happier
It's harder to have a pop-off in a tighter game I feel too. Given so many moves are so pre-baked in, and meant to pair against other moves... Usually the pop-offs are a result of really hard reads and counters. In emergent gameplay not only are there hard reads, but there's also usually a lot more high-level thinking or execution, and "I can't believe you handled that x way".
Freestyling is not how you get good, strategy is. Improvisation helps, but that's really just part of strategy. Know the game, know the opponent, know yourself. Victory does not happen randomly.
As I got older, I've been struggling with being instinctive and reactive. Now I overthink. When I was a kid, I'd just rush in and.....I got results. Now I know how adult Gohan felt struggling to remember how he fought as a kid.
@@moopersworthninjason42nd81 As an adult your experience would lead you to choose the most efficient, risk averse options that your younger self would simply not be aware of. At the same time your younger self carries that youthful confidence and daring do that creates "miracles" that defy convention. The ability to fuse those two elements together is the sought-after peak form that eludes many of us...
Woah this was an unexpected notification. Thanks for the shoutout and vid link. If the season 5 dlc for sfv is any indication, I'm excited for more flexibility with future street fighter projects
All-rounders, when done right, are the epitome of loose characters, in my opinion. They have relatively open movesets that allow for so much player expression. Not only that, but their simple nature allows for a lot of discovery and optimization. In 3S you can fight 2 Ryu players that play entirely different. TL;DR I'm a "white bread with water" apologist
3S's super select and EX system wa sso great. Before you even hit buttons and play, you decide what your gameplan's gonna be, and Ryu has the most freedom in what viable super he can pick. You want to make the opponent suffer? Denjin. You want to hit like a truck that's high on smack? Shin-Sho. You just wanna use EX combos? Shinku. Again, this is just super select, before a Ryu plays the neutral, or goes for any hail mary parries, or any of that. Long story short, I am totally with you that 3S shotos are very diverse in their play, and are extremely exciting
Ryu from Streets' favorite things. •Jumping into light fierce... •Stale bread... •Water without any ice... •The newest season of the Simpsons... •Aaaaaand dirt...
This is the reason I miss 3S Alex. He didn't have any combos, but had a lot of tricks and could switch between different modes of play. One moment he's turtling in the corner and poking you back to half screen, the next he's chasing you with a full screen ex overhead, and suddenly he's daisy chaining knockdown mixups in the opposite corner.
All of this is why I'm so hype for KoFXV. There are *so many ways* to utilize your meter and the new specials, combo mechanics and the fact that everyone can just use EX moves from neutral makes things sooo much more interesting. There are some characters that I play religiously in older KoF games that I have no idea how they'll play now. It's so exciting and daunting.
@@isaiahtorok7079 it’s hard to go back to SF after any faster paced game, but it doesn’t help SF’s case if you’re into KOF, they are both traditional 2D and compete in the same genre space.
@@chronology556 I didn't mean hard as in difficult, I meant hard as in to have fun, it feels really... claustrophobic? Cramped? I don't know uncomfortable for sure
@@isaiahtorok7079 i think is more like, you want to do this but the game makes you write an essay on why kinda thing, happens to me when i play 3S after playing MvC2
This is why a lot of people love KOF 02's (Both classic and UM) free cancel Max Mode. The ability to cancel specials into other specials, the abiliry to cancel Wiffed normals into specials... it's all SO COOL. Even if you can't perform these insane cancels yet, just having them there is what lets you take risks and have fun.
I like 02 but is that a good example? the cancels actually have quite restrictive charts, can only be done in very specific windows, and are almost always used for optimized combos with a singular path. it's very rare to see 02 max mode used in neutral because the reward is so poor.
The last part exactly! I play +R and even though I can't finish every combo or do all the FRC's doesn't mean I'm not having fun! I can do everything in Strive and even the "hard" stuff like Ramlethal dash cancels into rekka are not that hard. I want things that I won't be able to do after just a little bit of practice, that way I have something to work towards.
@@SFtheWolf You're thinking about how the game is already figured out and people have found the most optional combos. I'm just taking about an "options" perspective. Do cancels have specific windows? Yes Will it be optional? Most likely not Is it fun? Yes
@@joelvaldesjr.7404 I did play it in the 00s too, people totally ignored the max system at everything but top level because it was too jank and unintuitive and like 1% of the things you could try would actually work. again I enjoy 02 and the crazy combos, but roman cancels it aint.
@@SFtheWolf roman cancels are brain dead easy. Besides kof 02 has great movement and combos aren't the end all be all meta for Kof 02. Option select is what gives you the freedom do do combos, which aren't even that hard
I kind of feel like the esports scene might be partially to blame for a lack of emergent gameplay in fighting games. When everyone sees esports being a big deal you suddenly have tons of new players asking “how can I get better at this game?” The “tighter” a game is, the easier that question is to answer. You can essentially just give someone direct instructions on how to git gud. The “looser” a game is, the more vague the answer will end up being and the harder it will be for some people to get invested in the FGC and the esports scene.
esports has been a blight to casual gaming for years now, it affects not only fgc but other gaming communities as well. An esports community is only good when it is organically created by its players, not when a game is tailored for it or when devs forcefully create an esports scene.
To be honest I think that FG devs have had genuinely good intentions in their modern designs because change was needed on many levels, but it's just that no one game has really nailed it yet in this era. I think emergent gameplay is a great thing and these modern games need more of it, however, you can't simply go back to the version of what that was in designs 10yrs ago with overly complicated execution only superfans bother spending a lot of time (and money) on. There is a reason why they seeked those tighter changes in the first place and recently the genre has grown a lot and I would like to see it continue to evolve. Rank mode gaming is way more competitive as a whole across all video games than it used to be and new players want to get good because online games often aren't rewarding until you achieve a competent skill level as a bare minimum, and fighting games are no exception. They need freedom but not in a way that gatekeeps everyone not already in the FGC from wanting to join
Fighting games are inherently competetive regardless of the scene and they don't offer any emergent gameplay by design(rules are tight to a point you can't "emerge" different way to win/goal to achive or new type of gameplay to exist). Emergence in fighting games comes unitended by discovery of glitches and as such so it is very limited. Again fighting games are competitive, of course people want to get better, what do you expect them to ask ? Only way to gain more enjoyment from fighting game is to get better so you can interact with players on deeper level. It is always easy to understand how to get better what is hard is acctually doing it. Some people like tigher fighting games with clear answers some don't there is room for both.
It’s even more cool when you’re more aware of those happy accidents and transition to having more premeditated actions/decision making in those fighting games.
I disagree. It’s very easy to pick up FG now and do cool combos. Go back 10 years and many fighting games were so loose that combos seemed very unintuitive. Sure, there’s more to discover but that isn’t for casuals I don’t think.
I know it's a bit on the cheesy side, but I think everyone was amazed at the invention of the Daigo Parry. The fact that it could even happen at all, like, that it's even possible to do, much less, recreate.
And this is exactly why the last patch for DBFZ is great, the Special tagging system + the 3 assist they implemented back in season 3 made the game a crazy wild ride when you can do a lot of stuff on the fly
I agree with this, and also explains why some of my favorite fighters are the likes of Skullgirls and Under Night. But also, it has to be said that adding more room for creative expression in fighting game characters makes them excessively difficult to balance, so it's very much a tightrope act; too much "looseness" could completely destroy a game if certain characters are discovered as being OP or others as practically useless. Ultimately, I desire my fighting games to be as balanced as possible above all else, so that I feel as though every character is both fun *and* competitively viable. Them's Fightin' Herds, for example, gives me that feeling despite it being a more "tight" fighting game. Game development is hard. Fighting game development is absolute hell.
If anything I think both heat and heart unintentionally get to the same point "only in the innermost state of combat can we hope to find our "answer" ".
An interesting thing to ask now in regards to a casual player is are they scared more of the complexity of a game or the sheer freedom of options? What I've noticed in the years I've been playing fighting games is that people tend to mistake "having lots of options" for "having too much to learn", and I feel developers are also making that mistake as well hence we end up with FGs that are gutted compared to their older entries. I feel like educating newer players on making use of their options would do a lot to fix this misconception. Make our games fun, loose, and exciting, not structured in a way that railroads the players into having only one solution.
Misconception is one part, individual taste is the other. Some personality types find relaxation and security in the freedom of not being “tied down” or “pressured” into anything because they prefer to do things at their own pace. Like an artist who takes up the brush only when he is in the mood, and paints only that which inspires him at the current moment. Others receive the exact same positive feedback from restrictions and rules due to the simplicity that exists in doing something “the right way.” Like a Physics student learning a specific formula for a specific type of problem, thus becoming secure in the fact that they’ll always be able to solve said problem and others like it with consistent application of that knowledge. Freedom of gameplay brings out all of the individual characteristics of the player...including whether or not that player enjoys freedom over structure to begin with. Not much to be done about tbh
It comes down to execution imo. Games where the some of the usefulness of the utilities characters have is immediately recognizable are always going to be more beginner friendly. You can have that mentality towards designing characters' tools without limiting the scope of their options, and in my experience that's why Third Strike always comes up in this conversation; it's intuitive, but still has depth beyond the readability that it offers. SoulCalibur is another good example imo.
As a new player, I always prefer more "loose" games because however I want to play is less likely to be wrong. Tight games are so demanding where as loose games it feels like you can do whatever and figure it out as you go.
As someone that only plays fgs locally with my friends, and not even online, usually only 1 of us buys each game, I believe that things like auto combos and really flashy supers are more important than making the game more simple. But I also believe that its important to balance well the auto combos, as Max once said, its important to give players some motivation to graduate from ac into manual combos eg. doing more damage or giving you more super meter, but I have never seen any of my friends complain about the complexity of a game, is more common they complain about a character they like not been there or a super looking lame.
Brian F has some great points! I try to be strategic when I fight as my main fighters like Ryu, Dudley, or Ken against my opponents like Gill. It’s like fighting in real life in martial arts. “You have to read your opponent in the moment.” Best advice ever! More fighting games need to be like Street Fighter Third Strike and Killer Instinct!😊👊🏾🎮🏋🏾♂️
6:13 This is one of the things I enjoyed about older fighting games. Of course there are traditional strategies and combos to be used by a character, or set of character types; but when you could play against two separate players with the same character, more times than not both players had different ways of achieving certain things within the game.
That's why I love the Narutimates, you can Shuriken Cancel, Back-Jump Cancel and Jutsu Cancel 90% of the moves in the game at any time(startup, between hits, linking and after), so you can create your own mixups and strings in real time battle, while being aware that your opponent can escape with KnJ at any hit, so you have to adapt and buffer an option if your read is correct. Some people like to exploit the item meta, air block and run away with Aerial Back-Jumps, others will play more aggressive and button mash to force the opponent on losing more chakra as possible; that's why the game is so espressive and different among players.
For me, what made fighting games exciting was when it was low barrier for entry but high skill ceiling. When you see a pro doing something mechanically awesome or if you figure something out yourself, that feeling is what drew me in to invest more time in them. I don't get that feeling in many recent fighting games which is why I've been off them lately. It'll be nice for devs to make a fun game first instead of just trying to make it the next tournament viable game.
Think KoFXV's gonna be a big moment for SNK, partly for reasons touched on here. Either way I hope it ends up giving them some of the global recognition they deserve.
I'm sure it'll be a hit. They deserve it after all their hard work. I bought the game on Steam even if my potato PC can't run it, just to support the devs. 👍
I remember a pro gamer who was asked the question: "If every character on this roster was balanced, who would you main?". His response? "None man. I'd be bored of this game. You gotta have some doo doo."
Some fighting games I feel there is a sort of deja vu/ homogenized between the characters, while the have differences there is just that feeling of I am doing very similar stuff. I do agree with Max the prerelease beta of SFV was pretty good (lets not forget the trailer before that had even more cool looking stuff )
Honestly, this is why I love platform fighters so much. While melee is obviously the best example of crazy community developed tech, all of them have the freedom of movement, adaptable combos, and mindgame potential to give more freedom than most traditional fighters.
Thank for for separating the platform genre from traditional fg. I've had a hard time convincing people for YEARS that smash isn't a "true"fg for many reasons including the divergence of fgs and beatemups as beatemups weren't even coined and were once considered FGs
@@monstersinthecity In my opinion, neither are "true" fighting games, as the truest of fighting games are just boxing But Trad fighters and Plat fighters are two disendants of a core idea (and game where you fight)
I feel like emergent gameplayis almost becoming an umbrella term but I think that a key point of it all is that when building the systems the devs design for and see how they are used Emergent gameplay are aspects of those systems that at first doesn't seem designed for but gives the game a new axis of gameplay. You could say in fortnite the building was designed to make covers but had an emergent gameplay facet of players building towers near endgame. In fighting games there's importance to "animation locks" where your actions take time and having specials ignore that aspect gives emergent gameplay of figuring out when to cancel into a special to either punish or to open up a combo. Emergent gameplay is the designed potential which is basically the devs putting tools in players hands and saying - " surprise me ". Which if you're talking about q painting, handing an art student a brush and colors for the last 10% of your masterpiece? Not a good idea if you want to commercialise your art. But if you want to see potential and other artists take? It's the best thing to do.
It's funny how much less approachable I find newer fighting games that are explicitly made to be approachable. The "looseness" of games like 3rd Strike actually make them easier for me to learn, because I'm not being forced to conform to the developer's strict interpretation of the character. The "looseness" of the character makes it more adaptable to my (or anyone's) play style.
If opponent does X then you respond with Y or Z or if you do A then you have choice of B or C. I like choices in games because it makes me feel more in control of the characters
One of my favourite examples of emergent gameplay came from a split screen session of burnout 2 of all games. Me and my buddy were fiercely competitive at that game and i remember we were both burning down the final straight towards the finish and across one final intersection. I was slightly in the lead by a fraction and could see a bus coming from either direction across the intersection in the distance. I went full speed to attempt to squeeze in the narrow gap between the two buses before they formed a blockade across the whole intersection. I managed to narrowly squeeze through (i was clipped on both sides by the buses) while my buddy full on ploughed right into the side of them. It was such an exhilerating moment and one i still remember fondly some 20 years later. Say what you want about scripted sequences. Some of the most memprable moments in games are when the game mechanics all converge in the perfect way at exactly the right time and create something amazing. Kinda different from what max is talking about but that is what is possible at the peaks of emergent gameplay imo.
As soon as you mention emergent gameplay the first game that comes to my mind is King of Fighters. Since the game is based around hit-boxes that are unconventional and very few times directly related to instinct, with so many unique hitbox designs, upper and lower body invulnerabilities, not to mention strikers and special to special and normal or whiffed normal to special cancels, combos etc. almost everything on it has so many counters and at the same time only a few apply in every situation that you are left with so many options to choose properly from and can use many of them or they can be not viable in the same play, depending on your level of knowledge. Add to that the constant system changes and additions, a huge roster and you have one of the most interesting series of all time. All of the KOF games have emergent gameplay, except maybe some spin offs that are a little plain. The second game that comes to mind is Garou, then the third game is the one that has the third on it's title, 3S. I would put Marvel 2 and 3 on par with 3S as well. Many others have it too.
Unironically online multiplayer on call of duty and battlefield series are a great example of emergent game play as both you and other players are making decisions based on themselves and the decisions of the other players!
@@DANCERcow It's all fun and games till every match is just nade spam and run and gun with 2 shot smgs. I'd say designing maps in FPS games is equivalent to designing characters in fighting games. You can either have boring 3 lane maps where everyone rushes through a chokepoint, spam nades down the lane or camps the chokepoint entrance or you can have dynamic maps favouring a wide range of guns and alternate flank routes and sightlines.
@@flipkiller8521 Ironically, I think GG may be a bit more on the tighter side as far as airdashers are concerned. It feels as though you're more restricted in how much cool stuff you're allowed to do until you get the meter than in eg. BlazBlue or Melty. Dust is also a very tight button just in general, there's the whole meme of all GG combos ending in hard knockdown > oppressive oki, the physics make some strings harder to get to work etc. In a way, I think this video allowed me to put into words a bit better why I just don't vibe with it that much. I'll admit that old GG is definitely built on far more emergent mechanics than eg. SFV, Granblue Versus or, heck, Strive. I'm not trying to say GG is not emergent (free-form gatlings and RC sure allow a good deal of flexibility), but I think the emergence of gameplay is pretty interesting gradient from the game design perspective.
@@flipkiller8521 Legit this. You know you have an emergent game when characters are played as if they belonged to an entirely different archetype than what their toolkit would have you assume for the entire match, and still perform well. Justice and Axl aren't even considered zoners in +R.
I think a lot of people have this idea that "emergent gameplay" and "expression" means "more combo routes" even though it's arguable that the pinnacle of what actual emergent gameplay is, was a defensive mechanic.
I'd say its both. But when newer games only focus on simplifying offense, instead of adding more defensive options. People tend to only focus on increasing combo routes and variety.
This is something I've been missing from fighting games these days and I slowly found myself steering away from alot of these modern fighters. When I played DNF Duel within the first hour I knew I finally found a game that game me what I was searching for as it gave me freedom to do so much nutty tactics I never felt like was shackled to play a character in one specific way and it allowed me to experiment and express myself through my unique style of play. For the first time in years I was able to play other players in a fighting game in mirror matches and not feel like we're playing the same way and doing the same tactics. I'm definetly picking up DNF Duel on day 1 for sure.
Exactly why people don't want fighting games to be to simple because it limits what players can do and makes games boring doing the same thing as every other player with no way to stand out do cool advanced stuff.
Street Fighter Alpha / Zero 3 kinda touched on this... With the different ISM's. Aism Xism Vism and Shadaloo'Ism All had different move sets and different finishers. I remember if you picked certain ISMs with characters sometimes they would do a fireball or instead do a different special. Then Vism on its own was entirely different mechanism. I don't know why this never got followed on from.
SF V V-system is pretty much the continuation of Alpha 3 ISMs, but with it’s own twist and limitations. In SF V, Capcom combine X & A-ISM as the standard where everyone have 3 EX bar, 1 super (2 for some characters), and V-reversal + shift as the “alpha counter”. Then each character have their own V-ISM represents by 2 V-skills and V-trigger that can be used either for custom combos or offensive/defensive options. But back then people complaining about V-ISM, called it broken, not fun, or whatever. So honestly i don’t know what SF community wants. I bet people will hate SF VI even if the game have “emergent gameplay” 🙄
It all comes down to having the player make *_meaningful_* decisions. If you are given three options that look different but all of them lead to the exact same outcome, then it is not a _meaningful_ choice. Likewise, if you are given three options but one of them is clearly better than the rest, it is not a _meaningful_ choice.
Especially when you factor in that Smash has the directional influence (and Smash DI) systems so not only do you have to know your basic setups, you have to know the potential follow ups for if your opponent is holding in, out, up, down, any other direction, or isn’t holding anything at all since that character is going to move in different directions. It makes it so you can be getting combo’d and still have some input to try to either escape or make the follow ups less optimal. An easy example is Fox vs Peach. If Peach does her down smash (aka The Blender) and Fox holds down while getting hit, he’s probably going to eat like 40+ damage (at worst ~65% damage) and hits at an angle that’s extremely hard to recover from if the last hit lands. If you hold up and away or up and in on the stick, you can get out with taking maybe 15-30%.
So NOW the challenge really is balancing "balance" with "emergence." Because that's ultimately the problem with loose games, is that eventualy they reach a high degree of imbalance.
when you said marvel and the word "Many Options" i immediately thought of FChamp doing wakeup D Light with magneto off of a hard knock down and winning that game. i was like "wow.. i would have never thought of that. the opponent clearly didn't think that was an option but here you are. Doing D Light and winning the game"
Tighter games have been an absolute godsend as I've taken my first few steps into the FGC. I imagine those looser games will be better for me as time goes on, but for now, as I learn the very basics, tight is fine.
I absolutely agree. You don't want a game where you can do absolutely anything, because then characters have no identity. However, you do still want to give several spectruns of freedom simultaneously to allow players to make unique decisions to situations, thereby making the game their own, and making it so that there isn't a clear best answer to any situation. If there's a clear best answer for everything, there's less point to playing it because a scripted response would always be bettee. Melee is great because there are a lot of variables, and many of them are pretty analogue. Let's say you get hit. You can crouch cancel, wall tech, floor tech, and/or DI in a variety of directions, and for many of these situations can be followed up in other ways like using your reflector to cancel momentum, or pulling out a bomb to bomb-jump back, or approaching the platform low so you can air-dodge diagonally upward and use the grapple beam to hit the wall, at which point you can immediately hop off if you hit low or stick there by sweet-spotting, at which point you can... yeah, it goes on. All characters have certain options, and each character has options of their own that expand on those ones.
We need modes, ways to make us learn so they should revive the "Challenge Mode" from SFxT, not to be confused with "TRIALS". In Challenge Mode we had all sorts of challenges (duh) where we would need to beat the opponent in x amount of time, or only 4+ hit combos would deal damage, or only EX moves would do damage and so on, that helps us think in our feet and react and manage resources and such. Also another pseudo-challenge they should add to every game is KOF13's Arcade "challenges" where we do similar things during the round (although I am not sure if it gives us more points or extra meter or something, never played enough of that game to figure out), and that would be something else to help condition us to focus everywhere on the screen
i remember back in sfiv guys like tokido, infiltration and momochi were playing akuma and every single one of them had a very different playstyle. I think there's no need to add that they were getting results as well lol
honestly, the older I've gotten, the harder it's been with fighting games. the more choices I have to make the more I wind up limiting myself because I know what I can remember easily. I'm a lot more casual than I used to be too, so I also don't push myself to try to remember as much. I'm wired a bit differently thanks to my autism so as I've gotten older, my brain is all about routine. having to think on the fly is REALLY hard. I admit I was kinda glad when Guilty Gear simplified it's main mechanics, less I'd have to try to retain. less I'd have to remember on the fly. I'd forget blitz shield was a thing, along with most of the other mechanics. I WISH I was able to think more and retain things and making decisions. I'm soooo bad at it. basically, the more freedom I have, the more I don't know what to do with it. I'm curious honestly, how do people do it lol... I just feel like I can't keep up because I can't think out of the box.
@@kipkarl1580 Games are a form of art and it's nice to be able to express yourself in the game you play, a lot of games with 'looser' systems allow for personal expression and ways to figure out that take a long time that can still be optimised and changed years down the line. MvC2 has been out for a hell of a long time and people are still popping off with new, almost entirely unseen extensions and combo routes with Sentinel, and people are making team synergies and are holding their own against the traditional top meta that would have been laughed out of the room before. People are topping in MvC3 with team comps and synergies that are filled with what would be considered with lower tier and lower quality team comps to the meta, and they've managed to make it work due to finding unique synergies that the game's leniencies can allow. It was quite easy to tell what big player was playing a certain character in SF4. Didn't have to go a round before people could tell you if it was Ricky Ortiz or Justin Wong playing Rufus against Zangief [of which the former would have much better success against], or which person was playing the Guile. Watching Wolfkrone's C.Viper was an extremely different visual experience from watching Latif's C.Viper, as would be watching John Choi, Daigo and Alex Valle all playing Ryu. The same thing could be said about MvC3 and watching different Magneto players- RayRay's Magneto stands out like a sore thumb, as well as Milky when he's feeling himself. Having a 'looseness' to game engines and the ways in which one can play a character allows for this. In SFV at the moment, whilst it's an enjoyable game, apart from certain characters like Urien/Menat/Gill, most characters have very specific ways to play, and all punishes and mixups and pressure are essentially very similar. This is where a lot of the love for fighting games can truly come out, and a lot of more modern fighting games essentially gloss over this side of expression to make it 'beginner friendly'. News flash, it doesn't matter how much you cater the game to a casual, they're still not going to truly invest the time into it unless the game truly pops for them both visually and situationally. Cauterising what people can do so that button mashers and people that don't know what frame data is does not improve a game experience, and I entirely agree with Max's take in this vid.
As a 2-player game, objectively good game design dictates that lockdown pressure and combos should be prevented from taking up more seconds per round than interactive gameplay. This is a big reason why every other competitive genre are far more popular. They're all designed in ways that have players in control of their character for the vast majority of each round/match, no matter how bad the player is. The problem then becomes the majority of the fighting game genre's core audience prefering games that are designed in the opposite of that universal standard, flying in the face of what is proven to factually have better results than FGs ever enjoy. Guilty Gear Strive proves this further. An FG series known for being pressure-heavy, combo-heavy, having a mountain of mechanics, and a lot of 'looseness' releases an entry that streamlines the mechanics and reduces the length of both pressure and combos. Result: Many veteran fans of the dislike it, yet its the single highest-selling and most-played entry in the series' entire history. And Guilty Gear doesn't have the widespread IP regognition of Dragonball or even Street Fighter for the detractors to use as an excuse for its success.
I mean a lot of looser fighting games are still 2 player games. A lot of tight fighting games, just feels like poking each other with the safest move, until one of us makes a mistake. Then repeating that all over again. Eg. Mk11. You can still create a loose fighting game while being able to facilitate emergent input from both players. For example in Injustice you can air tech out of combos, or in Killer Instinct you can perform a combo breaker by reading the right input in a combo, giving the player agency even while being juggled. Problem is newer games don't bother increasing defensive options, but rather simplify offensive options. And when you take away such agency, the game becomes extremely dull.
Meh, you’re talking more classic Guilty Gear. Gatlings and Roman cancels, and thereby the variety of ways to bait bursts, are the most restrictive they’ve ever been.
I want a fighter where you can combo any move into any other move, _but_ it will have pros and cons to doing it at any given point, so that if you make a very bad combo attempt then it will leave you wide open, and if you get a really balanced one then it will be high damage and likely to hit, but if you are a little early or late then it doesn't "fail," it is just faster/slower and higher/lower damage, so "balanced" is not always be best move, you might give up damage to be more likely to land it, or risk whiffing it because it'll land harder if it hits.
This is how strings work in tekken. There are a lot of strings that can end in a low or a mid and you can only block one way, but then you can sidestep out of the way or use a character specific counter move, and of course, dependending on the string, there is offensive counterplay to that defence, such as moves that track sidestep.
I was wondering when this was coming out. It's interesting how games like third strike and samsho are released for people to enjoy. But it's an acquired taste. It's not for everyone. And people find fun with it when they do find joy playing it.
I feel like dbfighterz did this well. Thinking of like base Vegeta Gohan jenemba and baby etc have crazy different combos that happen from almost any starter and change with assist and spark.
That starting quote is true. Dominant Strategy is why a lot of fighting games at higher levels sometimes 'look' the same, heck games in general. As we're always looking for the best option and best character and this is the best way to play the game. In Melee it's the fabled 20xx. Where everyone plays at the highest level doing the best choices all the time and as such all matches end in a draw, because if we're all playing at that 'best' and expected way, there's no other outcome BUT a draw. Which.. can honestly kill a lot of FUN out of a game. Seeing people win with an unexpected pick is fun. Seeing a person react with an option that might not be the best but was unexpected or unconventional or just spur of the moment is hype. Seeing someones unique style bleed into character is important.
Yall remember on excellent adventures when max said he wanted a game with just Ken & ryu. Well he got it in sfv when it first came out. Also gootecks said he wanted sfv to be a mix of all sf games, and well sfv is kinda like that.
Strictly speaking there's no such thing as "emergent gameplay" because any one version of a game is a static instance of its code, the game's code and therefore the game's mechanics are set in stone and there's no room for "emergence" to take place. Max is actually talking about a game's *complexity,* which leads to *deeper mechanics,* incentivizing more *skillful play* from the players in order to beat the game, the CPU opponents, or each other.
Technically there isn’t. It’s more about using systems and free form solutions. Using the tools of the game in ways developers never full envisioned. The difference between Uncharted and Breath of the Wild. One is a carefully crafted experience. The other is an openworld systemic game. Or Final Fantasy vs Divinity Original Sin II
I like it when something I love is played with so much it eventually gets broken in and becomes loose so that when I get into playing it its not as tight and leave more room for stuff to do.
Oh wow the way Max explained his feelings for MK11 was how felt for SFV. I wanted to love the game but I came from Alpha and 3S so SFV was super wierd. I used terms like boring/clunky/slow but now i know I was a bit more into the looseness of older games.
I'm with Max 100% on this one, and funny he brought up Skullgirls because that's the reason I keep finding myself coming back to the game after all this time, There's so much creativity and variety allowed by design that no two matches will go the same way.
That's true about Undernight, even still it gives me this feeling that I'm only experienced enough to describe as "freestyle" really makes it one of my favorite fighters, aside from the world and characters and all that. Though I also love and have fun trying to git gud in sfv, so I guess i can rock with either type, long as I like the series overall vibe
Doesn't matter if a game has simple or complex gameplay, if the gameplay mechanics allows for freedom this gives the player more options. More options the player has, the more choices the player can choose to gameplay conclusions thus making for a more engaging gaming experience. There are "loose" games that don't care about being broke or crazy in favour for gameplay freedom and options and "strict" games are striving for balance and control but sacrifice the gameplay freedom and options. Interesting there is a trend today for "strict" games by the industry and honestly most gamers are not that bothered about out it, which is troubling.
BBTAG as well is very loose with cross combos and controlling 2 characters at the same time. Single handedly the only thing keeping me interested in the game.
I now have the words for what I like in a fighting game. Truth be told, I hate the idea of memorizing combos and just doing that. That doesn't feel like good gameplay or fun, it feels like school.
I find SFV hard because the combo is tight, and if I go even just slightly quicker or slower with the buttons, the moves won't register. Not to mention that combos can only work within certain path
Here's my personal take. Emergent 1. MvC 2. Dbfz 3. GG xrd 4. Sf3/Sf4 5. Kof 6. Tekken 7. MkX 8. Killer Instinct 9. Injustice Solved 1. Mk11 2. SFV 3. GG Strive 4. Granblue 5. Samsho Note: I think regarding Injustice (ignoring all the projectile spam), is the best example emergent gameplay of defense. You can tech out of juggles, push block, counter, and perform a clash when low on health.
In GG Strive I love playing Faust just because of his item toss. It forces some kind of randomness into the game and forces everybody to think about things.
This raises two questions with me. Are Fighting games with tag systems or assists more emergent, since they have more factors that weight into the fight? And do you need like a uniform battle mechanic (a la parrying) to have emergent gameplay?
I would say not necessarily but the potential is there. You can have a million tools but if you can only execute them in a particular order or under a particular set of circumstances then they are knowable and predictable. I think tags/assists give more options as a result of their history and the way people understand them, the way they "should" work, in fighting games. DBFZ was relatively predictable in terms of when you could expect a tag/assist until that last big patch. Likewise, uniform mechanics like the roman candle are fairly constrained in that they tend to reset things to neutral rather than increase the number of options you have.
Also a really good example of "Tight" vs. "Loose" in the same game was Dragonball Fighterz. In the launch version there was an optimal team with optimal combos and you didn't see people veering too far away from it, but after they changed how meter worked and gave characters multiple assists with their own pros and cons people got a lot more creative and played weird teams and played in more interesting ways.
Maybe not as emergent but i remember as a kid playing Flying Dragon Chibi version and played the hell outta Wiler learning that you can do all these command grabs and such in random spots in combos. Then you can put specials in those same combos to change it up. From then I've loved games that just let you throw in things to help add to the "how do they play" aspect of fighters. Excited to see more LOOSE crazy shit
To me, the danger of emergent gameplay seems like how there looks to be a fine line that divides loose/emergent games, and being an outright kusoge/broken game. But I get it, that kind of experimental gameplay intrigues me, making me ask, "how are they doing that?" and eventually leading me to learn and try, and eventually figure out and accomplish what I was simply watching a moment ago by figuring things out, as well as coming up with a defensive gameplay based on what I can do now.
I can feel you on SFV. I'm finding really cool stuff in it now with Akuma V- Trigger 2. With V-Trigger 2 and full bar u you get access to a max 7EX MOVES that cancel into each other! I can get some INSANE combos canceling into demon flip in the middle of the stage or in the corner canceling EX DP into EX Tatsu into EX Air Fireball. My favorite is jump in HP ⬅️HP, V-Trigger 2, V-Skill 2, immediate red fireball, Instant air EX Air Fireball, EX DP, cancel EX Tatsu, cancel EX Air Fireball! It's usually a guaranteed round ender if they've got less than half life. It's so easy to style on folks with V-Trigger 2. My only gripe is I CAN'T USE RAGING DEMON WITH VT2!!! WTF Capcom?!! Whhhhhhyyyyyy??!! And this is like the one game you can truly combo into the demon with crush counter! So I either gotta pick the V-TRIGGER I don't really like to hope for the 1 in a million chance to pop demon to style on someone or my more reliable combo method but no access to demon. Even if it was just the low level demon like in SF4 I'd be happy, but no demon at all!?! Is it even Akuma at that point?! But now with V-Trigger 2 New Characters, and the new mechanics for some characters, SF V is getting back a lil of that emergent magic.
Dead or Alive has great looseness. The Counter Hold system is fantastic. Reminds me a lot of Killer Instinct with its combo breaker system. Also, KI’s combo system allows for crazy creativity.
Dead or Alive 6 got pooped on by the community. But I think it was because it added more answers to “unblock-able” situations. 6 is a lot more emergent, as on top of the already amazing traditional throw/hit/grab triangle it added in metered counters that were counter-able.
@@retrofraction DOA6 is appropriately dunked on because of its stupid unlock system, no rollback netcode, lacking of features and roster that the previous entry had, in service of a barely noticeable visual system change. But yeah, its a super fun game, lol. I’m sad KT killed it.
This loose feeling, letting people feel like they can really do anything, is something Cross Tag was able to do. But almost no one ever talked about it or mentions it because “this is just dumbed down bb/persona/unist/etc” and it’s weird pricing and dlc model. The game was designed around doing weird stuff with your assists and it’s sad a lot of people just glossed over this, Max included
I was thinking about Cross Tag literally this whole video. By making the system simpler in execution and leaving in loose mechanics they allowed players the freedom to mix n match in crazy ways where I am still finding cool shit to do with characters who came out in the base roster three years later.
All the languages in the world and you chose to speak facts. If modern day ArcSys were to do BBTAG again, with all the right decisions. That franchise would have taken off.
I recently started learning BBTAG and was also thinking about that game throughout the video. I've been having fun with just throwing out assists in different situations to see what works and what doesn't. I think one thing in particular that makes the game feel so freeform is how there are so many jump cancelable moves which lets you have a lot variation when it comes to combos and pressure. The game's getting rollback soon so hopefully more people are willing to give it a chance despite it's bad rep 'cause it's a really fun game!
I would love if Smash Ultimate was more like this, but i think what makes developers not go for this approach, in all recent FGs, is sales, people with less experience or "casuals" would feel more save with a game that tells you what to do, if X happens just do Y to win, i think that's why games are becoming less, "Improvised" as someone in the comments said, since not giving the players a straight answer might make them feel like a game is too difficult, thus not buying said game, they're still fun but in a different way, i do hope games become more emergent since there's going to be a point where a game is so tight, it becomes predictable and boring(looking at you MK 11).
This has been on my mind as I’ve gone back and played MKXL and I just didn’t know how to phrase it. I always thought 11 felt more ‘stiff’ than X, despite me actually preferring the removal of the run button, and I couldn’t really place why. Thanks Max for being the voice of the FGC and just an overall awesome creator. Peace!
Man, I subscribed like many years ago and not only find your content fun, but I also agree to every word of yours AND I learn new things every single time. Thank you
This real talk was a good and important topic. Nitroplus Blasterz: Heroines infinite duel is one the games I recently last played at an arcade that had that “loose” feeling, you can cancel a lot moves with specials, tag assist, dashes, etc… and the moves are fast so it feels less clunky.
This might be a weird game to bring up, but I think Melty Blood Type Lumina is now the most recent new game with emergent gameplay. Despite the issues with some system mechanics, it does still allow for a lot of freedom, similar to UNIST/UNICLR (not as free as the old Melty Blood games though) but the mechanics on movement, reverse beats, skill bonus mechanic, moon drive, option selects, etc. The game has so much freedom that people are still finding options and optimizations to get around characters and systems as well as combo optimizations around the new combo system. There is still "limitations" but they are meant to only ensure infinites and broken stuff don't exist, but you are given a ton of freedom before hitting those limits (similar to MVC3). It's why I'm still having A LOT of fun with Melty Blood Type Lumina despite my frustrations with some defense system mechanics, and I think it can only get better from here. And it should, since French Bread has a history of releasing controversial vanilla versions, before fixing it all up to make them extremely good games (ie. OG Melty Blood, UNIB, vanilla DFC)
The reason I came to fighting games is because of this freedom. In 1985, I loved the Way of the Exploding Fist because despite only having one button, there was around 16 different moves you could do. Nothing else was like that
Thanks for presenting the idea of Emergent Gameplay because its specifically the issue I'm having in the more recent Arksys games like Granblue Versus and even Strive. It's just down guard all day and your options are either grab or dust (unless you're playing very specific characters), but the animations and delay are so long in said options that people can easily respond and punish you for it. The one Arksys game that actually gave me Emergent Gameplay was Blazblue Centralfiction because there were so many options and down guarding was JUST an option because all characters have tools to punish that playstyle, opening gameplay to more options and playstyles. Thanks for all you do and Shine On brother!
Fighting games being loose also means better environment for casuals and beginners since they cant be just insta stomped by someone doing a rhythmic sequence of answers to their attacks and moves and winning. The skill ceiling would go really high but at least games arent monotonous on how it goes.
I think that one of the things that make newer games want to be tight and keep the player under control is how now you can just drop the game and leave it as is. By players' demand you have to rebalance and polish the meta and being loose might make it require more work
This is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard, if this thing were really true then everyone would play Karin at the same level as Punk, but only he does amazing things with this character. In SF Alpha 3 there are pre-established moves from characters that cancel and others so this nonsense that modern games don't offer freedom is a big... nonsense. Nobody will stop doing a combo that does 300 damage to make a different one that does 200. It's a matter of logic. The difference is due to the neutral. Daigo's Guile is still different from another guy's Guile because only Daigo has the courage to do risky things that no one imagines like that move against Nephew recently at CPT.
This is also why rushdown revolt I think is one of the best platform fighters, canceling into ANYTHING combined with a bunch of airdashes let's do Basically anything if ur good enough.
That’s EXACTLY what I’ve been saying for the couple of years! You explained it the best!! That’s EXACTLY why Street Fighter Alpha 3 is the best! 🙌🏿🙌🏿 Every time you play you discover new shit!
I’m glad battle royales were brought up. I play those more, and they have differences in each of their games in subtle ways. Apex Legends is regarded as the best BR currently because the game is insanely fast and loose, and rather than focusing on terrain you have to survive across in a combat zone that keeps shrinking- a majority of the playable areas you fight in are cleverly disguised combat arenas. A big map will contain many unique, interesting places to fight, and you’re heavily rewarded for having good game sense and map knowledge. Amazingly it’s a game that learned from many faults of Overwatch without ever being a direct competitor to the game. Fortnite is a strange hybrid of survival and competitive shooter. Underneath the cartoony exterior of that game are gameplay design rules that are incredibly strict. The building mechanic is basically game design brutalism. But almost all items in the game do not aid building. The loot you find is either for your survival, or will give you the opportunity to do something insanely cool if you can pull it off. Put a hundred people in one map, and it amazingly works into an interesting gameplay experience. And if you become really really good, building becomes a new movement mechanic for you. PUBG is the old school BR now, but a lot of people still play it because most maps in that game are very good. Many areas are carefully put together to give you interesting moments and gameplay stories to tell regardless of where you are on the map. The combat arenas you fight in in PUBG are way more disguised than in Apex. Combined with all talk proximity voice chat and vehicles and it’s a surprisingly cool (and hilarious) game.
another thing is that in more tight games its harder to make your own combos, even if the best combos have been discovered in a loose game you can still come out with fun combos on your own that other people may not even know about
Yeah me and my friends dropped MK 11 pretty quickly as well as Strive. They're just kinda boring?? I'm not one of those crazy Strive haters who freak out and go 'XRD BETTER, THIS IS CASUAL TRASH' but I just felt so limited in it so I just quietly hung it up instead.
That was me, i enjoyed Strive for literally about a month and a half and then just dropped it. It was just too basic for me. It felt a lot more shallow than previous GG games.
@@orlanzo2621 I'm all for making the ground floor as accessible as possible but I'm very much into high skill ceiling games so I can have somewhere to grow. Strive and MK etc don't really have room to grow, you reach a point and that's kinda it.
This is the big reason why I main Ky or Ragna. Their relative openness when it comes to their playstyle and toolbox makes them rewarding because I can do pressure plays, zoning, turtling or mix-ups with those guys.
"Freestyling" and doing things in the moment is the best thing about emergent gameplay. Sometimes I will have interactions where I'm like " holy shit I did that? That was so sick ". That's what makes me motivated to get good. The feeling of being able to improvise and come up with answers on the fly is amazing.
That is not emergent gameplay.
@@MarkoLomovic doch
@@MarkoLomovic it's still good gameplay regardless if that's the right use of the word emergent it's unarguably just better that way mostly cuz of the reasons already stated everyone is happier
It's harder to have a pop-off in a tighter game I feel too. Given so many moves are so pre-baked in, and meant to pair against other moves... Usually the pop-offs are a result of really hard reads and counters. In emergent gameplay not only are there hard reads, but there's also usually a lot more high-level thinking or execution, and "I can't believe you handled that x way".
Freestyling is not how you get good, strategy is. Improvisation helps, but that's really just part of strategy.
Know the game, know the opponent, know yourself. Victory does not happen randomly.
As I got older, I've been struggling with being instinctive and reactive. Now I overthink. When I was a kid, I'd just rush in and.....I got results.
Now I know how adult Gohan felt struggling to remember how he fought as a kid.
Well stated. I’m in the same boat.
I totally understand you, but funny enough I feel that if I was to ever time travel and meet younger me, I would demolish him in any game he'd choose
I notice when I don’t focus gaming my skills is sharper. I can have a conversation while gaming and win but when I over think I lose. Weird.
@@moopersworthninjason42nd81 As an adult your experience would lead you to choose the most efficient, risk averse options that your younger self would simply not be aware of.
At the same time your younger self carries that youthful confidence and daring do that creates "miracles" that defy convention.
The ability to fuse those two elements together is the sought-after peak form that eludes many of us...
@@Galiaverse This is very accurate.
People can be philosophers in anything. What a beautiful quote by that SF dev.
Woah this was an unexpected notification. Thanks for the shoutout and vid link. If the season 5 dlc for sfv is any indication, I'm excited for more flexibility with future street fighter projects
Yo! Brian F.
All-rounders, when done right, are the epitome of loose characters, in my opinion. They have relatively open movesets that allow for so much player expression. Not only that, but their simple nature allows for a lot of discovery and optimization. In 3S you can fight 2 Ryu players that play entirely different.
TL;DR I'm a "white bread with water" apologist
3S's super select and EX system wa sso great. Before you even hit buttons and play, you decide what your gameplan's gonna be, and Ryu has the most freedom in what viable super he can pick.
You want to make the opponent suffer? Denjin. You want to hit like a truck that's high on smack? Shin-Sho. You just wanna use EX combos? Shinku.
Again, this is just super select, before a Ryu plays the neutral, or goes for any hail mary parries, or any of that. Long story short, I am totally with you that 3S shotos are very diverse in their play, and are extremely exciting
Ryu from Streets' favorite things.
•Jumping into light fierce...
•Stale bread...
•Water without any ice...
•The newest season of the Simpsons...
•Aaaaaand dirt...
@@dragons_hook see you in Street Fighter 6, everybody
This is the reason I miss 3S Alex. He didn't have any combos, but had a lot of tricks and could switch between different modes of play. One moment he's turtling in the corner and poking you back to half screen, the next he's chasing you with a full screen ex overhead, and suddenly he's daisy chaining knockdown mixups in the opposite corner.
@@ZdkDzk the legend of spiral ddt! It actually managed to stop a corkscrew blow from Dudley!!
All of this is why I'm so hype for KoFXV. There are *so many ways* to utilize your meter and the new specials, combo mechanics and the fact that everyone can just use EX moves from neutral makes things sooo much more interesting. There are some characters that I play religiously in older KoF games that I have no idea how they'll play now. It's so exciting and daunting.
It's my most anticipated fighting game in a long time, I was just playing 14 with my roommate! 2002um really makes it hard to go back to SF
@@isaiahtorok7079 it’s hard to go back to SF after any faster paced game, but it doesn’t help SF’s case if you’re into KOF, they are both traditional 2D and compete in the same genre space.
@@chronology556 I didn't mean hard as in difficult, I meant hard as in to have fun, it feels really... claustrophobic? Cramped? I don't know uncomfortable for sure
@@isaiahtorok7079 i think is more like, you want to do this but the game makes you write an essay on why kinda thing, happens to me when i play 3S after playing MvC2
This is why a lot of people love KOF 02's (Both classic and UM) free cancel Max Mode. The ability to cancel specials into other specials, the abiliry to cancel Wiffed normals into specials... it's all SO COOL. Even if you can't perform these insane cancels yet, just having them there is what lets you take risks and have fun.
I like 02 but is that a good example? the cancels actually have quite restrictive charts, can only be done in very specific windows, and are almost always used for optimized combos with a singular path. it's very rare to see 02 max mode used in neutral because the reward is so poor.
The last part exactly! I play +R and even though I can't finish every combo or do all the FRC's doesn't mean I'm not having fun! I can do everything in Strive and even the "hard" stuff like Ramlethal dash cancels into rekka are not that hard. I want things that I won't be able to do after just a little bit of practice, that way I have something to work towards.
@@SFtheWolf You're thinking about how the game is already figured out and people have found the most optional combos. I'm just taking about an "options" perspective.
Do cancels have specific windows? Yes
Will it be optional? Most likely not
Is it fun? Yes
@@joelvaldesjr.7404 I did play it in the 00s too, people totally ignored the max system at everything but top level because it was too jank and unintuitive and like 1% of the things you could try would actually work. again I enjoy 02 and the crazy combos, but roman cancels it aint.
@@SFtheWolf roman cancels are brain dead easy. Besides kof 02 has great movement and combos aren't the end all be all meta for Kof 02. Option select is what gives you the freedom do do combos, which aren't even that hard
I kind of feel like the esports scene might be partially to blame for a lack of emergent gameplay in fighting games. When everyone sees esports being a big deal you suddenly have tons of new players asking “how can I get better at this game?”
The “tighter” a game is, the easier that question is to answer. You can essentially just give someone direct instructions on how to git gud. The “looser” a game is, the more vague the answer will end up being and the harder it will be for some people to get invested in the FGC and the esports scene.
esports has been a blight to casual gaming for years now, it affects not only fgc but other gaming communities as well. An esports community is only good when it is organically created by its players, not when a game is tailored for it or when devs forcefully create an esports scene.
more than Esports, i think sales are the ones to "blame"
@@bassbusterx Yeah. Games like SFV and Overwatch really took out the fun from its casual gameplay due to e-sports pandering
To be honest I think that FG devs have had genuinely good intentions in their modern designs because change was needed on many levels, but it's just that no one game has really nailed it yet in this era. I think emergent gameplay is a great thing and these modern games need more of it, however, you can't simply go back to the version of what that was in designs 10yrs ago with overly complicated execution only superfans bother spending a lot of time (and money) on. There is a reason why they seeked those tighter changes in the first place and recently the genre has grown a lot and I would like to see it continue to evolve. Rank mode gaming is way more competitive as a whole across all video games than it used to be and new players want to get good because online games often aren't rewarding until you achieve a competent skill level as a bare minimum, and fighting games are no exception. They need freedom but not in a way that gatekeeps everyone not already in the FGC from wanting to join
Fighting games are inherently competetive regardless of the scene and they don't offer any emergent gameplay by design(rules are tight to a point you can't "emerge" different way to win/goal to achive or new type of gameplay to exist). Emergence in fighting games comes unitended by discovery of glitches and as such so it is very limited.
Again fighting games are competitive, of course people want to get better, what do you expect them to ask ? Only way to gain more enjoyment from fighting game is to get better so you can interact with players on deeper level. It is always easy to understand how to get better what is hard is acctually doing it. Some people like tigher fighting games with clear answers some don't there is room for both.
For casuals like me, games being more "loose" means you can do more cool stuff accidentally, which feels good
It’s even more cool when you’re more aware of those happy accidents and transition to having more premeditated actions/decision making in those fighting games.
I disagree. It’s very easy to pick up FG now and do cool combos. Go back 10 years and many fighting games were so loose that combos seemed very unintuitive. Sure, there’s more to discover but that isn’t for casuals I don’t think.
I know it's a bit on the cheesy side, but I think everyone was amazed at the invention of the Daigo Parry. The fact that it could even happen at all, like, that it's even possible to do, much less, recreate.
@@Manley410 but what makes a combo cool? if its a combo that was made to be in the game and everyone else is doing it then is it really cool?
@@gundamxzero3 I was arguing that casuals aren’t doing those combos. 1 frame links are not casual friendly. Shit, they aren’t even me friendly
And this is exactly why the last patch for DBFZ is great, the Special tagging system + the 3 assist they implemented back in season 3 made the game a crazy wild ride when you can do a lot of stuff on the fly
I agree with this, and also explains why some of my favorite fighters are the likes of Skullgirls and Under Night. But also, it has to be said that adding more room for creative expression in fighting game characters makes them excessively difficult to balance, so it's very much a tightrope act; too much "looseness" could completely destroy a game if certain characters are discovered as being OP or others as practically useless. Ultimately, I desire my fighting games to be as balanced as possible above all else, so that I feel as though every character is both fun *and* competitively viable. Them's Fightin' Herds, for example, gives me that feeling despite it being a more "tight" fighting game.
Game development is hard. Fighting game development is absolute hell.
Ryu's SF4 battle intro says it all
"The Answer Lies In The Heat Of Battle."
"Heart" not heat
If anything I think both heat and heart unintentionally get to the same point "only in the innermost state of combat can we hope to find our "answer" ".
FACTS
An interesting thing to ask now in regards to a casual player is are they scared more of the complexity of a game or the sheer freedom of options?
What I've noticed in the years I've been playing fighting games is that people tend to mistake "having lots of options" for "having too much to learn", and I feel developers are also making that mistake as well hence we end up with FGs that are gutted compared to their older entries.
I feel like educating newer players on making use of their options would do a lot to fix this misconception. Make our games fun, loose, and exciting, not structured in a way that railroads the players into having only one solution.
devil may cry = loose game nier automata = shit lol
Misconception is one part, individual taste is the other. Some personality types find relaxation and security in the freedom of not being “tied down” or “pressured” into anything because they prefer to do things at their own pace. Like an artist who takes up the brush only when he is in the mood, and paints only that which inspires him at the current moment. Others receive the exact same positive feedback from restrictions and rules due to the simplicity that exists in doing something “the right way.” Like a Physics student learning a specific formula for a specific type of problem, thus becoming secure in the fact that they’ll always be able to solve said problem and others like it with consistent application of that knowledge.
Freedom of gameplay brings out all of the individual characteristics of the player...including whether or not that player enjoys freedom over structure to begin with. Not much to be done about tbh
It comes down to execution imo.
Games where the some of the usefulness of the utilities characters have is immediately recognizable are always going to be more beginner friendly.
You can have that mentality towards designing characters' tools without limiting the scope of their options, and in my experience that's why Third Strike always comes up in this conversation; it's intuitive, but still has depth beyond the readability that it offers.
SoulCalibur is another good example imo.
As a new player, I always prefer more "loose" games because however I want to play is less likely to be wrong. Tight games are so demanding where as loose games it feels like you can do whatever and figure it out as you go.
As someone that only plays fgs locally with my friends, and not even online, usually only 1 of us buys each game, I believe that things like auto combos and really flashy supers are more important than making the game more simple.
But I also believe that its important to balance well the auto combos, as Max once said, its important to give players some motivation to graduate from ac into manual combos eg. doing more damage or giving you more super meter, but I have never seen any of my friends complain about the complexity of a game, is more common they complain about a character they like not been there or a super looking lame.
Brian F has some great points! I try to be strategic when I fight as my main fighters like Ryu, Dudley, or Ken against my opponents like Gill. It’s like fighting in real life in martial arts. “You have to read your opponent in the moment.” Best advice ever! More fighting games need to be like Street Fighter Third Strike and Killer Instinct!😊👊🏾🎮🏋🏾♂️
6:13
This is one of the things I enjoyed about older fighting games. Of course there are traditional strategies and combos to be used by a character, or set of character types; but when you could play against two separate players with the same character, more times than not both players had different ways of achieving certain things within the game.
That's why I love the Narutimates, you can Shuriken Cancel, Back-Jump Cancel and Jutsu Cancel 90% of the moves in the game at any time(startup, between hits, linking and after), so you can create your own mixups and strings in real time battle, while being aware that your opponent can escape with KnJ at any hit, so you have to adapt and buffer an option if your read is correct.
Some people like to exploit the item meta, air block and run away with Aerial Back-Jumps, others will play more aggressive and button mash to force the opponent on losing more chakra as possible; that's why the game is so espressive and different among players.
For me, what made fighting games exciting was when it was low barrier for entry but high skill ceiling. When you see a pro doing something mechanically awesome or if you figure something out yourself, that feeling is what drew me in to invest more time in them. I don't get that feeling in many recent fighting games which is why I've been off them lately. It'll be nice for devs to make a fun game first instead of just trying to make it the next tournament viable game.
Think KoFXV's gonna be a big moment for SNK, partly for reasons touched on here. Either way I hope it ends up giving them some of the global recognition they deserve.
I'm sure it'll be a hit. They deserve it after all their hard work.
I bought the game on Steam even if my potato PC can't run it, just to support the devs. 👍
I remember a pro gamer who was asked the question: "If every character on this roster was balanced, who would you main?". His response? "None man. I'd be bored of this game. You gotta have some doo doo."
depends on the reasons as to why characters are considered bottom tier or trash
Who said that lol?
Some fighting games I feel there is a sort of deja vu/ homogenized between the characters, while the have differences there is just that feeling of I am doing very similar stuff. I do agree with Max the prerelease beta of SFV was pretty good (lets not forget the trailer before that had even more cool looking stuff )
Honestly, this is why I love platform fighters so much. While melee is obviously the best example of crazy community developed tech, all of them have the freedom of movement, adaptable combos, and mindgame potential to give more freedom than most traditional fighters.
Thank for for separating the platform genre from traditional fg. I've had a hard time convincing people for YEARS that smash isn't a "true"fg for many reasons including the divergence of fgs and beatemups as beatemups weren't even coined and were once considered FGs
@@monstersinthecity In my opinion, neither are "true" fighting games, as the truest of fighting games are just boxing
But Trad fighters and Plat fighters are two disendants of a core idea (and game where you fight)
I feel like emergent gameplayis almost becoming an umbrella term but I think that a key point of it all is that when building the systems the devs design for and see how they are used
Emergent gameplay are aspects of those systems that at first doesn't seem designed for but gives the game a new axis of gameplay. You could say in fortnite the building was designed to make covers but had an emergent gameplay facet of players building towers near endgame.
In fighting games there's importance to "animation locks" where your actions take time and having specials ignore that aspect gives emergent gameplay of figuring out when to cancel into a special to either punish or to open up a combo.
Emergent gameplay is the designed potential which is basically the devs putting tools in players hands and saying - " surprise me ". Which if you're talking about q painting, handing an art student a brush and colors for the last 10% of your masterpiece? Not a good idea if you want to commercialise your art. But if you want to see potential and other artists take? It's the best thing to do.
It's funny how much less approachable I find newer fighting games that are explicitly made to be approachable. The "looseness" of games like 3rd Strike actually make them easier for me to learn, because I'm not being forced to conform to the developer's strict interpretation of the character. The "looseness" of the character makes it more adaptable to my (or anyone's) play style.
If opponent does X then you respond with Y or Z or if you do A then you have choice of B or C.
I like choices in games because it makes me feel more in control of the characters
One of my favourite examples of emergent gameplay came from a split screen session of burnout 2 of all games.
Me and my buddy were fiercely competitive at that game and i remember we were both burning down the final straight towards the finish and across one final intersection. I was slightly in the lead by a fraction and could see a bus coming from either direction across the intersection in the distance. I went full speed to attempt to squeeze in the narrow gap between the two buses before they formed a blockade across the whole intersection.
I managed to narrowly squeeze through (i was clipped on both sides by the buses) while my buddy full on ploughed right into the side of them. It was such an exhilerating moment and one i still remember fondly some 20 years later.
Say what you want about scripted sequences. Some of the most memprable moments in games are when the game mechanics all converge in the perfect way at exactly the right time and create something amazing. Kinda different from what max is talking about but that is what is possible at the peaks of emergent gameplay imo.
As soon as you mention emergent gameplay the first game that comes to my mind is King of Fighters. Since the game is based around hit-boxes that are unconventional and very few times directly related to instinct, with so many unique hitbox designs, upper and lower body invulnerabilities, not to mention strikers and special to special and normal or whiffed normal to special cancels, combos etc. almost everything on it has so many counters and at the same time only a few apply in every situation that you are left with so many options to choose properly from and can use many of them or they can be not viable in the same play, depending on your level of knowledge. Add to that the constant system changes and additions, a huge roster and you have one of the most interesting series of all time. All of the KOF games have emergent gameplay, except maybe some spin offs that are a little plain. The second game that comes to mind is Garou, then the third game is the one that has the third on it's title, 3S. I would put Marvel 2 and 3 on par with 3S as well. Many others have it too.
Unironically online multiplayer on call of duty and battlefield series are a great example of emergent game play as both you and other players are making decisions based on themselves and the decisions of the other players!
@@DANCERcow It's all fun and games till every match is just nade spam and run and gun with 2 shot smgs. I'd say designing maps in FPS games is equivalent to designing characters in fighting games.
You can either have boring 3 lane maps where everyone rushes through a chokepoint, spam nades down the lane or camps the chokepoint entrance or you can have dynamic maps favouring a wide range of guns and alternate flank routes and sightlines.
Xrd and Accent Core counts as Emergent based gameplay. I've run into turtle Potemkin and pressure based Axl mains.
@@flipkiller8521
Ironically, I think GG may be a bit more on the tighter side as far as airdashers are concerned. It feels as though you're more restricted in how much cool stuff you're allowed to do until you get the meter than in eg. BlazBlue or Melty. Dust is also a very tight button just in general, there's the whole meme of all GG combos ending in hard knockdown > oppressive oki, the physics make some strings harder to get to work etc.
In a way, I think this video allowed me to put into words a bit better why I just don't vibe with it that much. I'll admit that old GG is definitely built on far more emergent mechanics than eg. SFV, Granblue Versus or, heck, Strive. I'm not trying to say GG is not emergent (free-form gatlings and RC sure allow a good deal of flexibility), but I think the emergence of gameplay is pretty interesting gradient from the game design perspective.
@@flipkiller8521 Legit this. You know you have an emergent game when characters are played as if they belonged to an entirely different archetype than what their toolkit would have you assume for the entire match, and still perform well. Justice and Axl aren't even considered zoners in +R.
I think a lot of people have this idea that "emergent gameplay" and "expression" means "more combo routes" even though it's arguable that the pinnacle of what actual emergent gameplay is, was a defensive mechanic.
I'd say its both. But when newer games only focus on simplifying offense, instead of adding more defensive options.
People tend to only focus on increasing combo routes and variety.
This part of why I love the movement defense in kof
This is something I've been missing from fighting games these days and I slowly found myself steering away from alot of these modern fighters. When I played DNF Duel within the first hour I knew I finally found a game that game me what I was searching for as it gave me freedom to do so much nutty tactics I never felt like was shackled to play a character in one specific way and it allowed me to experiment and express myself through my unique style of play. For the first time in years I was able to play other players in a fighting game in mirror matches and not feel like we're playing the same way and doing the same tactics. I'm definetly picking up DNF Duel on day 1 for sure.
Exactly why people don't want fighting games to be to simple because it limits what players can do and makes games boring doing the same thing as every other player with no way to stand out do cool advanced stuff.
Street Fighter Alpha / Zero 3 kinda touched on this... With the different ISM's.
Aism Xism Vism and Shadaloo'Ism
All had different move sets and different finishers. I remember if you picked certain ISMs with characters sometimes they would do a fireball or instead do a different special. Then Vism on its own was entirely different mechanism.
I don't know why this never got followed on from.
Yeah i think that`s has to be emergent gameplay of that the ism system
CVS2 and III series did it as well. Also a nod at Vampire Saviour
Because it was a balance nightmare. It turns out just because it uses the same grid, doesn't mean you can both play checkers and chess together.
SF V V-system is pretty much the continuation of Alpha 3 ISMs, but with it’s own twist and limitations. In SF V, Capcom combine X & A-ISM as the standard where everyone have 3 EX bar, 1 super (2 for some characters), and V-reversal + shift as the “alpha counter”. Then each character have their own V-ISM represents by 2 V-skills and V-trigger that can be used either for custom combos or offensive/defensive options.
But back then people complaining about V-ISM, called it broken, not fun, or whatever. So honestly i don’t know what SF community wants. I bet people will hate SF VI even if the game have “emergent gameplay” 🙄
@@thepuppetmaster9284 old = good
new = bad.
Kof 15 looks really good for that, kof has really cool movement once you get used to it, cool meter choices, and interesting defenze
It all comes down to having the player make *_meaningful_* decisions.
If you are given three options that look different but all of them lead to the exact same outcome, then it is not a _meaningful_ choice.
Likewise, if you are given three options but one of them is clearly better than the rest, it is not a _meaningful_ choice.
Melee is probably the best example of emergent gameplay that I've personally experienced but the same can be said about most fighting games.
Especially when you factor in that Smash has the directional influence (and Smash DI) systems so not only do you have to know your basic setups, you have to know the potential follow ups for if your opponent is holding in, out, up, down, any other direction, or isn’t holding anything at all since that character is going to move in different directions.
It makes it so you can be getting combo’d and still have some input to try to either escape or make the follow ups less optimal. An easy example is Fox vs Peach. If Peach does her down smash (aka The Blender) and Fox holds down while getting hit, he’s probably going to eat like 40+ damage (at worst ~65% damage) and hits at an angle that’s extremely hard to recover from if the last hit lands. If you hold up and away or up and in on the stick, you can get out with taking maybe 15-30%.
@@XylessBrawl Not to mention character weight, size, and %
I also like my games loose
So NOW the challenge really is balancing "balance" with "emergence." Because that's ultimately the problem with loose games, is that eventualy they reach a high degree of imbalance.
Thanks for acknowledging melee in this discussion, I honestly didn't expect it
when you said marvel and the word "Many Options" i immediately thought of FChamp doing wakeup D Light with magneto off of a hard knock down and winning that game. i was like "wow.. i would have never thought of that. the opponent clearly didn't think that was an option but here you are. Doing D Light and winning the game"
Tighter games have been an absolute godsend as I've taken my first few steps into the FGC. I imagine those looser games will be better for me as time goes on, but for now, as I learn the very basics, tight is fine.
I absolutely agree. You don't want a game where you can do absolutely anything, because then characters have no identity. However, you do still want to give several spectruns of freedom simultaneously to allow players to make unique decisions to situations, thereby making the game their own, and making it so that there isn't a clear best answer to any situation. If there's a clear best answer for everything, there's less point to playing it because a scripted response would always be bettee. Melee is great because there are a lot of variables, and many of them are pretty analogue. Let's say you get hit. You can crouch cancel, wall tech, floor tech, and/or DI in a variety of directions, and for many of these situations can be followed up in other ways like using your reflector to cancel momentum, or pulling out a bomb to bomb-jump back, or approaching the platform low so you can air-dodge diagonally upward and use the grapple beam to hit the wall, at which point you can immediately hop off if you hit low or stick there by sweet-spotting, at which point you can... yeah, it goes on. All characters have certain options, and each character has options of their own that expand on those ones.
We need modes, ways to make us learn so they should revive the "Challenge Mode" from SFxT, not to be confused with "TRIALS".
In Challenge Mode we had all sorts of challenges (duh) where we would need to beat the opponent in x amount of time, or only 4+ hit combos would deal damage, or only EX moves would do damage and so on, that helps us think in our feet and react and manage resources and such.
Also another pseudo-challenge they should add to every game is KOF13's Arcade "challenges" where we do similar things during the round (although I am not sure if it gives us more points or extra meter or something, never played enough of that game to figure out), and that would be something else to help condition us to focus everywhere on the screen
i remember back in sfiv guys like tokido, infiltration and momochi were playing akuma and every single one of them had a very different playstyle. I think there's no need to add that they were getting results as well lol
honestly, the older I've gotten, the harder it's been with fighting games. the more choices I have to make the more I wind up limiting myself because I know what I can remember easily. I'm a lot more casual than I used to be too, so I also don't push myself to try to remember as much. I'm wired a bit differently thanks to my autism so as I've gotten older, my brain is all about routine. having to think on the fly is REALLY hard. I admit I was kinda glad when Guilty Gear simplified it's main mechanics, less I'd have to try to retain. less I'd have to remember on the fly. I'd forget blitz shield was a thing, along with most of the other mechanics. I WISH I was able to think more and retain things and making decisions. I'm soooo bad at it. basically, the more freedom I have, the more I don't know what to do with it.
I'm curious honestly, how do people do it lol... I just feel like I can't keep up because I can't think out of the box.
New games: Here is SPECIFICALLY HOW WE WANT YOU TO PLAY THIS.
Old games:
Here's the toy box. Go play.
Board games are great.
old games are like that too, don't get it twisted.
I feel like people sometimes forget fighting games are a two player game. Edit: btw I mean more fighting games should have "unanswerables"
Exactly.... I think loose is the current pc way of saying broke.
Only if you want it to be!
@@kipkarl1580 Games are a form of art and it's nice to be able to express yourself in the game you play, a lot of games with 'looser' systems allow for personal expression and ways to figure out that take a long time that can still be optimised and changed years down the line. MvC2 has been out for a hell of a long time and people are still popping off with new, almost entirely unseen extensions and combo routes with Sentinel, and people are making team synergies and are holding their own against the traditional top meta that would have been laughed out of the room before. People are topping in MvC3 with team comps and synergies that are filled with what would be considered with lower tier and lower quality team comps to the meta, and they've managed to make it work due to finding unique synergies that the game's leniencies can allow.
It was quite easy to tell what big player was playing a certain character in SF4. Didn't have to go a round before people could tell you if it was Ricky Ortiz or Justin Wong playing Rufus against Zangief [of which the former would have much better success against], or which person was playing the Guile. Watching Wolfkrone's C.Viper was an extremely different visual experience from watching Latif's C.Viper, as would be watching John Choi, Daigo and Alex Valle all playing Ryu. The same thing could be said about MvC3 and watching different Magneto players- RayRay's Magneto stands out like a sore thumb, as well as Milky when he's feeling himself. Having a 'looseness' to game engines and the ways in which one can play a character allows for this. In SFV at the moment, whilst it's an enjoyable game, apart from certain characters like Urien/Menat/Gill, most characters have very specific ways to play, and all punishes and mixups and pressure are essentially very similar.
This is where a lot of the love for fighting games can truly come out, and a lot of more modern fighting games essentially gloss over this side of expression to make it 'beginner friendly'. News flash, it doesn't matter how much you cater the game to a casual, they're still not going to truly invest the time into it unless the game truly pops for them both visually and situationally. Cauterising what people can do so that button mashers and people that don't know what frame data is does not improve a game experience, and I entirely agree with Max's take in this vid.
As a 2-player game, objectively good game design dictates that lockdown pressure and combos should be prevented from taking up more seconds per round than interactive gameplay.
This is a big reason why every other competitive genre are far more popular. They're all designed in ways that have players in control of their character for the vast majority of each round/match, no matter how bad the player is.
The problem then becomes the majority of the fighting game genre's core audience prefering games that are designed in the opposite of that universal standard, flying in the face of what is proven to factually have better results than FGs ever enjoy.
Guilty Gear Strive proves this further. An FG series known for being pressure-heavy, combo-heavy, having a mountain of mechanics, and a lot of 'looseness' releases an entry that streamlines the mechanics and reduces the length of both pressure and combos.
Result: Many veteran fans of the dislike it, yet its the single highest-selling and most-played entry in the series' entire history. And Guilty Gear doesn't have the widespread IP regognition of Dragonball or even Street Fighter for the detractors to use as an excuse for its success.
I mean a lot of looser fighting games are still 2 player games.
A lot of tight fighting games, just feels like poking each other with the safest move, until one of us makes a mistake. Then repeating that all over again. Eg. Mk11.
You can still create a loose fighting game while being able to facilitate emergent input from both players.
For example in Injustice you can air tech out of combos, or in Killer Instinct you can perform a combo breaker by reading the right input in a combo, giving the player agency even while being juggled.
Problem is newer games don't bother increasing defensive options, but rather simplify offensive options.
And when you take away such agency, the game becomes extremely dull.
GGst sort of has this as a tool, the lax combo system is even encouraged to try bait out a burst
Meh, you’re talking more classic Guilty Gear. Gatlings and Roman cancels, and thereby the variety of ways to bait bursts, are the most restrictive they’ve ever been.
I want a fighter where you can combo any move into any other move, _but_ it will have pros and cons to doing it at any given point, so that if you make a very bad combo attempt then it will leave you wide open, and if you get a really balanced one then it will be high damage and likely to hit, but if you are a little early or late then it doesn't "fail," it is just faster/slower and higher/lower damage, so "balanced" is not always be best move, you might give up damage to be more likely to land it, or risk whiffing it because it'll land harder if it hits.
Chain combos with smooth alternative ending combos would be dope. Have 2-4 different combo options.
This is how strings work in tekken. There are a lot of strings that can end in a low or a mid and you can only block one way, but then you can sidestep out of the way or use a character specific counter move, and of course, dependending on the string, there is offensive counterplay to that defence, such as moves that track sidestep.
Sounds like a nightmare to make
Loved this conversation. We need more real talks lol
I was wondering when this was coming out. It's interesting how games like third strike and samsho are released for people to enjoy. But it's an acquired taste. It's not for everyone. And people find fun with it when they do find joy playing it.
Would you happen to recall what stream this was from? I would appreciate it
Nvm I no lifed it and just scrubbed thru vods till I found it lol
I feel like dbfighterz did this well. Thinking of like base Vegeta Gohan jenemba and baby etc have crazy different combos that happen from almost any starter and change with assist and spark.
That starting quote is true. Dominant Strategy is why a lot of fighting games at higher levels sometimes 'look' the same, heck games in general. As we're always looking for the best option and best character and this is the best way to play the game.
In Melee it's the fabled 20xx. Where everyone plays at the highest level doing the best choices all the time and as such all matches end in a draw, because if we're all playing at that 'best' and expected way, there's no other outcome BUT a draw. Which.. can honestly kill a lot of FUN out of a game.
Seeing people win with an unexpected pick is fun. Seeing a person react with an option that might not be the best but was unexpected or unconventional or just spur of the moment is hype. Seeing someones unique style bleed into character is important.
Yall remember on excellent adventures when max said he wanted a game with just Ken & ryu. Well he got it in sfv when it first came out. Also gootecks said he wanted sfv to be a mix of all sf games, and well sfv is kinda like that.
Strictly speaking there's no such thing as "emergent gameplay" because any one version of a game is a static instance of its code, the game's code and therefore the game's mechanics are set in stone and there's no room for "emergence" to take place. Max is actually talking about a game's *complexity,* which leads to *deeper mechanics,* incentivizing more *skillful play* from the players in order to beat the game, the CPU opponents, or each other.
Technically there isn’t. It’s more about using systems and free form solutions. Using the tools of the game in ways developers never full envisioned. The difference between Uncharted and Breath of the Wild. One is a carefully crafted experience. The other is an openworld systemic game. Or Final Fantasy vs Divinity Original Sin II
I like it when something I love is played with so much it eventually gets broken in and becomes loose so that when I get into playing it its not as tight and leave more room for stuff to do.
Oh wow the way Max explained his feelings for MK11 was how felt for SFV.
I wanted to love the game but I came from Alpha and 3S so SFV was super wierd. I used terms like boring/clunky/slow but now i know I was a bit more into the looseness of older games.
I'm with Max 100% on this one, and funny he brought up Skullgirls because that's the reason I keep finding myself coming back to the game after all this time, There's so much creativity and variety allowed by design that no two matches will go the same way.
glad that max can pass this on to another generation who probably didn't grow up with such loose games with emergent gameplay
"feels like everyone is playing in the same way" Ah, Guilty Gear Strive in a nut shell.
That's true about Undernight, even still it gives me this feeling that I'm only experienced enough to describe as "freestyle" really makes it one of my favorite fighters, aside from the world and characters and all that. Though I also love and have fun trying to git gud in sfv, so I guess i can rock with either type, long as I like the series overall vibe
Love Under Night. SF5 is ok
Doesn't matter if a game has simple or complex gameplay, if the gameplay mechanics allows for freedom this gives the player more options. More options the player has, the more choices the player can choose to gameplay conclusions thus making for a more engaging gaming experience. There are "loose" games that don't care about being broke or crazy in favour for gameplay freedom and options and "strict" games are striving for balance and control but sacrifice the gameplay freedom and options. Interesting there is a trend today for "strict" games by the industry and honestly most gamers are not that bothered about out it, which is troubling.
This is why I started to love more DBFZ when the Season 3 came out and let us players build more teams.
Oddly enough, I like being limited, I think too much freedom isn’t necessary a good thing.
BBTAG as well is very loose with cross combos and controlling 2 characters at the same time. Single handedly the only thing keeping me interested in the game.
I now have the words for what I like in a fighting game.
Truth be told, I hate the idea of memorizing combos and just doing that. That doesn't feel like good gameplay or fun, it feels like school.
As Ryu Said: The Answer Lies in the Heart of the Battle
This deserves to be pinned. The solution is right here
I find SFV hard because the combo is tight, and if I go even just slightly quicker or slower with the buttons, the moves won't register. Not to mention that combos can only work within certain path
I like this concept. Could you do like a scale from emergent to solved and put some games where they fall on that scale?
Here's my personal take.
Emergent
1. MvC
2. Dbfz
3. GG xrd
4. Sf3/Sf4
5. Kof
6. Tekken
7. MkX
8. Killer Instinct
9. Injustice
Solved
1. Mk11
2. SFV
3. GG Strive
4. Granblue
5. Samsho
Note: I think regarding Injustice (ignoring all the projectile spam), is the best example emergent gameplay of defense.
You can tech out of juggles, push block, counter, and perform a clash when low on health.
In GG Strive I love playing Faust just because of his item toss. It forces some kind of randomness into the game and forces everybody to think about things.
This raises two questions with me. Are Fighting games with tag systems or assists more emergent, since they have more factors that weight into the fight? And do you need like a uniform battle mechanic (a la parrying) to have emergent gameplay?
yes
I would say not necessarily but the potential is there.
You can have a million tools but if you can only execute them in a particular order or under a particular set of circumstances then they are knowable and predictable.
I think tags/assists give more options as a result of their history and the way people understand them, the way they "should" work, in fighting games. DBFZ was relatively predictable in terms of when you could expect a tag/assist until that last big patch. Likewise, uniform mechanics like the roman candle are fairly constrained in that they tend to reset things to neutral rather than increase the number of options you have.
Also a really good example of "Tight" vs. "Loose" in the same game was Dragonball Fighterz. In the launch version there was an optimal team with optimal combos and you didn't see people veering too far away from it, but after they changed how meter worked and gave characters multiple assists with their own pros and cons people got a lot more creative and played weird teams and played in more interesting ways.
Maybe not as emergent but i remember as a kid playing Flying Dragon Chibi version and played the hell outta Wiler learning that you can do all these command grabs and such in random spots in combos. Then you can put specials in those same combos to change it up. From then I've loved games that just let you throw in things to help add to the "how do they play" aspect of fighters. Excited to see more LOOSE crazy shit
To me, the danger of emergent gameplay seems like how there looks to be a fine line that divides loose/emergent games, and being an outright kusoge/broken game. But I get it, that kind of experimental gameplay intrigues me, making me ask, "how are they doing that?" and eventually leading me to learn and try, and eventually figure out and accomplish what I was simply watching a moment ago by figuring things out, as well as coming up with a defensive gameplay based on what I can do now.
I can feel you on SFV. I'm finding really cool stuff in it now with Akuma V- Trigger 2. With V-Trigger 2 and full bar u you get access to a max 7EX MOVES that cancel into each other! I can get some INSANE combos canceling into demon flip in the middle of the stage or in the corner canceling EX DP into EX Tatsu into EX Air Fireball. My favorite is jump in HP ⬅️HP, V-Trigger 2, V-Skill 2, immediate red fireball, Instant air EX Air Fireball, EX DP, cancel EX Tatsu, cancel EX Air Fireball! It's usually a guaranteed round ender if they've got less than half life. It's so easy to style on folks with V-Trigger 2. My only gripe is I CAN'T USE RAGING DEMON WITH VT2!!! WTF Capcom?!! Whhhhhhyyyyyy??!! And this is like the one game you can truly combo into the demon with crush counter! So I either gotta pick the V-TRIGGER I don't really like to hope for the 1 in a million chance to pop demon to style on someone or my more reliable combo method but no access to demon. Even if it was just the low level demon like in SF4 I'd be happy, but no demon at all!?! Is it even Akuma at that point?! But now with V-Trigger 2 New Characters, and the new mechanics for some characters, SF V is getting back a lil of that emergent magic.
Love emergent gameplay cuz I get bored with repetition. Doing the same combo, same super, same kill move, same everything get bored super fast.
I loved MK X for this reason. There was so much creativity with combos. Duelist Liu kang was flashy as hell.
Dead or Alive has great looseness. The Counter Hold system is fantastic. Reminds me a lot of Killer Instinct with its combo breaker system. Also, KI’s combo system allows for crazy creativity.
Dead or Alive 6 got pooped on by the community.
But I think it was because it added more answers to “unblock-able” situations.
6 is a lot more emergent, as on top of the already amazing traditional throw/hit/grab triangle it added in metered counters that were counter-able.
@@retrofraction DOA6 is appropriately dunked on because of its stupid unlock system, no rollback netcode, lacking of features and roster that the previous entry had, in service of a barely noticeable visual system change.
But yeah, its a super fun game, lol. I’m sad KT killed it.
This loose feeling, letting people feel like they can really do anything, is something Cross Tag was able to do. But almost no one ever talked about it or mentions it because “this is just dumbed down bb/persona/unist/etc” and it’s weird pricing and dlc model. The game was designed around doing weird stuff with your assists and it’s sad a lot of people just glossed over this, Max included
I was thinking about Cross Tag literally this whole video. By making the system simpler in execution and leaving in loose mechanics they allowed players the freedom to mix n match in crazy ways where I am still finding cool shit to do with characters who came out in the base roster three years later.
Glad I'm not the only one who thought of BBTAG.
All the languages in the world and you chose to speak facts.
If modern day ArcSys were to do BBTAG again, with all the right decisions. That franchise would have taken off.
I recently started learning BBTAG and was also thinking about that game throughout the video. I've been having fun with just throwing out assists in different situations to see what works and what doesn't. I think one thing in particular that makes the game feel so freeform is how there are so many jump cancelable moves which lets you have a lot variation when it comes to combos and pressure.
The game's getting rollback soon so hopefully more people are willing to give it a chance despite it's bad rep 'cause it's a really fun game!
The key buzzword that coincides with Emergent Gameplay is...
"Replayability."
And comboability haha.
i just love these theory talks
I would love if Smash Ultimate was more like this, but i think what makes developers not go for this approach, in all recent FGs, is sales, people with less experience or "casuals" would feel more save with a game that tells you what to do, if X happens just do Y to win, i think that's why games are becoming less, "Improvised" as someone in the comments said, since not giving the players a straight answer might make them feel like a game is too difficult, thus not buying said game, they're still fun but in a different way, i do hope games become more emergent since there's going to be a point where a game is so tight, it becomes predictable and boring(looking at you MK 11).
This has been on my mind as I’ve gone back and played MKXL and I just didn’t know how to phrase it. I always thought 11 felt more ‘stiff’ than X, despite me actually preferring the removal of the run button, and I couldn’t really place why. Thanks Max for being the voice of the FGC and just an overall awesome creator. Peace!
Man, I subscribed like many years ago and not only find your content fun, but I also agree to every word of yours AND I learn new things every single time. Thank you
This real talk was a good and important topic.
Nitroplus Blasterz: Heroines infinite duel is one the games I recently last played at an arcade that had that “loose” feeling, you can cancel a lot moves with specials, tag assist, dashes, etc… and the moves are fast so it feels less clunky.
This might be a weird game to bring up, but I think Melty Blood Type Lumina is now the most recent new game with emergent gameplay. Despite the issues with some system mechanics, it does still allow for a lot of freedom, similar to UNIST/UNICLR (not as free as the old Melty Blood games though) but the mechanics on movement, reverse beats, skill bonus mechanic, moon drive, option selects, etc. The game has so much freedom that people are still finding options and optimizations to get around characters and systems as well as combo optimizations around the new combo system.
There is still "limitations" but they are meant to only ensure infinites and broken stuff don't exist, but you are given a ton of freedom before hitting those limits (similar to MVC3). It's why I'm still having A LOT of fun with Melty Blood Type Lumina despite my frustrations with some defense system mechanics, and I think it can only get better from here. And it should, since French Bread has a history of releasing controversial vanilla versions, before fixing it all up to make them extremely good games (ie. OG Melty Blood, UNIB, vanilla DFC)
That quote translates to “The answer lies in the heart of battle.”
The reason I came to fighting games is because of this freedom. In 1985, I loved the Way of the Exploding Fist because despite only having one button, there was around 16 different moves you could do.
Nothing else was like that
Thanks for presenting the idea of Emergent Gameplay because its specifically the issue I'm having in the more recent Arksys games like Granblue Versus and even Strive. It's just down guard all day and your options are either grab or dust (unless you're playing very specific characters), but the animations and delay are so long in said options that people can easily respond and punish you for it. The one Arksys game that actually gave me Emergent Gameplay was Blazblue Centralfiction because there were so many options and down guarding was JUST an option because all characters have tools to punish that playstyle, opening gameplay to more options and playstyles. Thanks for all you do and Shine On brother!
Fighting games being loose also means better environment for casuals and beginners since they cant be just insta stomped by someone doing a rhythmic sequence of answers to their attacks and moves and winning. The skill ceiling would go really high but at least games arent monotonous on how it goes.
I think that one of the things that make newer games want to be tight and keep the player under control is how now you can just drop the game and leave it as is. By players' demand you have to rebalance and polish the meta and being loose might make it require more work
This is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard, if this thing were really true then everyone would play Karin at the same level as Punk, but only he does amazing things with this character. In SF Alpha 3 there are pre-established moves from characters that cancel and others so this nonsense that modern games don't offer freedom is a big... nonsense. Nobody will stop doing a combo that does 300 damage to make a different one that does 200. It's a matter of logic. The difference is due to the neutral. Daigo's Guile is still different from another guy's Guile because only Daigo has the courage to do risky things that no one imagines like that move against Nephew recently at CPT.
Cope modern games lack depth and variety its factual
This is also why rushdown revolt I think is one of the best platform fighters, canceling into ANYTHING combined with a bunch of airdashes let's do Basically anything if ur good enough.
Nice max you hit every nail on the head with this one
Big ups to you and TKO for getting me back into fighting games after 10+ years stuck in the fifa wasteland!
I think the word you're looking for is depth Max. Deeper fighting games give you more ways to play characters.
Bullseye!!
I'm a bit confused that max totally ignores Tekken in that conversation.
@@Bluargh02 VF, Tekken, KOF, etc yea there’s a lot of games he missed.
That’s EXACTLY what I’ve been saying for the couple of years!
You explained it the best!!
That’s EXACTLY why Street Fighter Alpha 3 is the best! 🙌🏿🙌🏿
Every time you play you discover new shit!
I’m glad battle royales were brought up. I play those more, and they have differences in each of their games in subtle ways. Apex Legends is regarded as the best BR currently because the game is insanely fast and loose, and rather than focusing on terrain you have to survive across in a combat zone that keeps shrinking- a majority of the playable areas you fight in are cleverly disguised combat arenas. A big map will contain many unique, interesting places to fight, and you’re heavily rewarded for having good game sense and map knowledge. Amazingly it’s a game that learned from many faults of Overwatch without ever being a direct competitor to the game.
Fortnite is a strange hybrid of survival and competitive shooter. Underneath the cartoony exterior of that game are gameplay design rules that are incredibly strict. The building mechanic is basically game design brutalism. But almost all items in the game do not aid building. The loot you find is either for your survival, or will give you the opportunity to do something insanely cool if you can pull it off. Put a hundred people in one map, and it amazingly works into an interesting gameplay experience. And if you become really really good, building becomes a new movement mechanic for you.
PUBG is the old school BR now, but a lot of people still play it because most maps in that game are very good. Many areas are carefully put together to give you interesting moments and gameplay stories to tell regardless of where you are on the map. The combat arenas you fight in in PUBG are way more disguised than in Apex. Combined with all talk proximity voice chat and vehicles and it’s a surprisingly cool (and hilarious) game.
another thing is that in more tight games its harder to make your own combos, even if the best combos have been discovered in a loose game you can still come out with fun combos on your own that other people may not even know about
sf3ts with chain combos turned on in system direction is the greatest thing ever.
Saw title and thumbnail and already knew what you were talking about. YES
Yeah me and my friends dropped MK 11 pretty quickly as well as Strive.
They're just kinda boring?? I'm not one of those crazy Strive haters who freak out and go 'XRD BETTER, THIS IS CASUAL TRASH' but I just felt so limited in it so I just quietly hung it up instead.
That was me, i enjoyed Strive for literally about a month and a half and then just dropped it. It was just too basic for me. It felt a lot more shallow than previous GG games.
@@orlanzo2621 I'm all for making the ground floor as accessible as possible but I'm very much into high skill ceiling games so I can have somewhere to grow.
Strive and MK etc don't really have room to grow, you reach a point and that's kinda it.
This is the big reason why I main Ky or Ragna. Their relative openness when it comes to their playstyle and toolbox makes them rewarding because I can do pressure plays, zoning, turtling or mix-ups with those guys.