cartmansp Wrote: *sigh* I don't care anymore. No matter what the MK Team does, somebody will complain. I don't consider MK to be an actual fighting game. To me, wanting MK to be a DEEP fighting game is like wanting Super Smash Bros. Melee to be a DEEP fighting game. MK never has and never will be deep, gameplay wise. But it is VERY DEEP, story wise. I love MK because of its story, characters, and originality. NOT GAMEPLAY. To me MK is very fun, and that's the ONLY thing I look for in a video game. People who want a DEEP fighting game shouldn't be playing MK. That's like playing Mario Kart for a deep racing game.

Well put.

Hey, Mario Kart and Mortal Kombat have the same initials...coincidence?

Still, the people will complain until the cows come home and have Fatalities performed on them. And we'll all have our own opinions while we enjoy some fresh burgers.

cartmansp Wrote: *sigh* I don't care anymore. No matter what the MK Team does, somebody will complain. I don't consider MK to be an actual fighting game. To me, wanting MK to be a DEEP fighting game is like wanting Super Smash Bros. Melee to be a DEEP fighting game. MK never has and never will be deep, gameplay wise. But it is VERY DEEP, story wise. I love MK because of its story, characters, and originality. NOT GAMEPLAY. To me MK is very fun, and that's the ONLY thing I look for in a video game. People who want a DEEP fighting game shouldn't be playing MK. That's like playing Mario Kart for a deep racing game.

Bravo! *claps hands*

People take game to seriously anyway. I would consider MK to be the "laid back" fighting game. I'm not saying DOA or any other fighting game is not fun, I'm just saying that MK is the type of fighting game you pick up and play then enjoy how the story unfolds.

fighting game players don't care if a game has simplicity. street fighter is the epitome of simplicity. in the fact you can learn all the moves in a month's time. now after that simplicity comes depth. years and years of depth to be discovered. mk on the other hand has no depth. it's just....simple. that's not a problem if mk has simplicity in the fighting engine. but what is the problem is it has no depth after that. seriously people, play other fighting games before commenting on mk's engine. because if you did, you'd realize what we're saying.

*will be playing sf's anniversary collection 60x more this fall*

MENTHOL Wrote: fighting game players don't care if a game has simplicity. street fighter is the epitome of simplicity. in the fact you can learn all the moves in a month's time. now after that simplicity comes depth. years and years of depth to be discovered. mk on the other hand has no depth. it's just....simple. that's not a problem if mk has simplicity in the fighting engine. but what is the problem is it has no depth after that. seriously people, play other fighting games before commenting on mk's engine. because if you did, you'd realize what we're saying. *will be playing sf's anniversary collection 60x more this fall*

Are you saying Street Fighter has years and years of depth or maybe I'm just reading it wrong, but if so please explain.

And as far as you saying Mk is simple, I agree 100%. Some games really challenge you to play the game a lot and practice. Others are for, like I said above, people to pick up and play.

"Are you saying Street Fighter has years and years of depth"

yes. meaning while you can have everything memorized in a month's time, it takes years to actually master it. there's still new strats for third strike coming from japan to this day.

Oh ok, I was just wondering.

cartmansp Wrote: *sigh* I don't care anymore. No matter what the MK Team does, somebody will complain. I don't consider MK to be an actual fighting game. To me, wanting MK to be a DEEP fighting game is like wanting Super Smash Bros. Melee to be a DEEP fighting game. MK never has and never will be deep, gameplay wise. But it is VERY DEEP, story wise. I love MK because of its story, characters, and originality. NOT GAMEPLAY. To me MK is very fun, and that's the ONLY thing I look for in a video game. People who want a DEEP fighting game shouldn't be playing MK. That's like playing Mario Kart for a deep racing game.

Then you should of said that months ago and save of all our fingers. You didnt have to come up with with shit like "It has a unique 3 style system and shit like that". SSBM is deep, so don't even compare MK to that, and Mario Kart is also deep. Both games are simple, but..well, just read what Monthol said. He explained it best.

I love MK for all the reasons you do, but I have grown sick of the shallowness. A little depth would be appreciated.

cartmansp Wrote: *sigh* I don't care anymore. No matter what the MK Team does, somebody will complain. I don't consider MK to be an actual fighting game. To me, wanting MK to be a DEEP fighting game is like wanting Super Smash Bros. Melee to be a DEEP fighting game. MK never has and never will be deep, gameplay wise. But it is VERY DEEP, story wise. I love MK because of its story, characters, and originality. NOT GAMEPLAY. To me MK is very fun, and that's the ONLY thing I look for in a video game. People who want a DEEP fighting game shouldn't be playing MK. That's like playing Mario Kart for a deep racing game.

Then you should of said that months ago and save of all our fingers. You didnt have to come up with with shit like "It has a unique 3 style system and shit like that". SSBM is deep, so don't even compare MK to that, and Mario Kart is also deep. Both games are simple, but..well, just read what Monthol said. He explained it best.

I love MK for all the reasons you do, but I have grown sick of the shallowness. A little depth would be appreciated.

MK is no different than Street Fight, Mario Kart, or Smash Bros in that respect. It too can be memorized quickly, but it takes a long time to master, especially with everybody's styles being different from each other. Now that there is no longer HP,LP, HK, LK, it's a completely different ball game.

I think there is plenty of depth in MK, just not necisarily in the move sets. The levels have plenty of depth, same with the characters, the artwork, the fatalities, and everything else in the game.

The moves are more basic than say DOA, and SC2, but, it's not that different really. It's a huge step from MK4 where everyone had the same combo's, etc.

There are enough moves in MKD to satisfy most gamers, and lets not forget that reversals and breakers weren't implemented yet, so we have to take that into consideration. Perhaps they could bring the Run button back (maybe they have, don't know).

I think it's fair to say that they are all GREAT games for different reasons, and Versatile brings up some excellent points, and has very reasonable requests.

MK will evolve, it will have to. But I think for right now, it's good enough, it's deep enough, and doggarn, people like it. SO why don't we just end this right now, and play all these games? They all deserve our love and affection.

Midway wants to maximize profits, and by jumping to the next big thing when somethig still ahs life in it, is not profitable. I don't necisarily think this is bad. It's a product we'll all have fun with, and out of a lot of gaming companies around, Midway is one I want to have my money. They are a fans company in my opinion, and we can't say that about all of them.

Versatile Wrote: Then you should of said that months ago and save of all our fingers. You didnt have to come up with with shit like "It has a unique 3 style system and shit like that". SSBM is deep, so don't even compare MK to that, and Mario Kart is also deep. Both games are simple, but..well, just read what Monthol said. He explained it best. I love MK for all the reasons you do, but I have grown sick of the shallowness. A little depth would be appreciated.

Is Mario Kart as deep as Project Gotham Racing?

*No, but it's more entertaining IMO.

Is Super Smash Bros. Melee as deep as Dead or Alive?

*Again. No, but it's more fun IMO.

Is Mortal Kombat as deep as DOA, SC2, Tekken, ect.?

*Once more. No, but it has a much better story, more diverse characters and is more fun IMO.

-

None of those games are as "deep" as the ones I compared them to but they offer more options than there video game rivals.

In Mario Kart you can throw shells and bombs at your opponent or eat mushrooms and become super fast.Those are some examples of things you can do in Mario Kart but not in Project Gothem Racing.

In Super Smash Bros. Melee you can pick up a baseball bat and smack your opponent across the screen or hurl a shell at your enemy or throw a Poke Ball at your enemy.Those are some examples of things you can do in SSBM but not in Dead or Alive.

In Mortal Kombat you can spit acid at your opponent or freeze them with an ice ball or kill them in the end of a match.Those are some examples of things you can do in MK but not in DOA, Tekken, SC2, ect.

It's the little things that you can only do in certain games that make them fun and unique.

veinz Wrote: SO why don't we just end this right now, and play all these games? They all deserve our love and affection.

I agree. I'm gonna stop replying to these kinds of threads

Once again I give a big BRAVO!!!! *stands up and claps*

"MK is no different than Street Fight, Mario Kart, or Smash Bros in that respect. It too can be memorized quickly, but it takes a long time to master, especially with everybody's styles being different from each other. Now that there is no longer HP,LP, HK, LK, it's a completely different ball game."

no, it doesn't take a long time to master. it's insanely broken and only takes a few broken strats to play.

"I think there is plenty of depth in MK, just not necisarily in the move sets. The levels have plenty of depth, same with the characters, the artwork, the fatalities, and everything else in the game."

those don't equal depth. those are just eye candy that only enhance the experience. not the fighting engine.



"There are enough moves in MKD to satisfy most gamers, and lets not forget that reversals and breakers weren't implemented yet, so we have to take that into consideration. Perhaps they could bring the Run button back (maybe they have, don't know)."

like it was already brought up, if it's the same as mkda, the move lists will be worthless. so while there will be enough moves to memorize, what's the point if they're worthless?


"MK will evolve, it will have to. But I think for right now, it's good enough, it's deep enough, and doggarn, people like it. SO why don't we just end this right now, and play all these games? They all deserve our love and affection."

but that's the thing. it DOESN'T evolve. ever since mortal kombat was created, it's never evolved to a deep fighter. it's always had the same problems plague each game. from the looks of it, mkd will continue that tradition.

"Midway wants to maximize profits, and by jumping to the next big thing when somethig still ahs life in it, is not profitable. I don't necisarily think this is bad. It's a product we'll all have fun with, and out of a lot of gaming companies around, Midway is one I want to have my money. They are a fans company in my opinion, and we can't say that about all of them."

even though you didn't mean it as a diss, it's EXACTLY what's wrong. midway doesn't care if a game is complete before it ships. they only want money. which any normal person does. but shipping out crap will get a negative response.

Versatile Wrote: Drfatality Wrote: TonyTheTiger Wrote: Satyagraha Wrote: Drfatality Wrote: I agree but I like VF and Tekken.I know alot of people would agree with you about DOA though.That guy that made it acts like he has the best fighter out. LOL!! That dude is funny as hell. I've read a couple of interviews with him. He backs his team and having confidence is all good, but damn, lol. He acts like DoA is a cure for cancer . I still thinks it's not as bad as some think, though. People talk about wanting a "different" kind of fighter, DoA is just that. But, meh... Itagaki is his name I believe. Don't remember his first name. I remember one interview that had a question that was likely hinting at Soul Calibur and his reaction was classic. Something like "A lot of popularity is concentrated on a weapons game. Are weapons in the future for DOA?" He could have been cordial and said that weapons wouldn't fit into DOA. But this guy said that he "doesn't need weapons to shut that game up". I don't consider DOA to be garbage though I do see it as a bit uninspired. But this guy is like the Jerry Springer guest of game designers. I can't wait untill I see the next interview with him.In the last issue of OXM he said this in the intervyou section: Q:How did you get into the game industry? Itakagi Answer:I felt like I wanted to make games. LOL.Sometimes I wonder is he stoned while he does these interviews.He bashed MK hard in a XBN issue.He said MK is all looks and no gameplay.On top of that earlier in the interview he said he didnt play MKDA. hahahahaha..that one made me laugh at loud.

The Stash.Only me and Vers knows what that means.

I thought it was said somewhere that the move list wouldn't be the same. Even if it is just elborated though, it's no different than Street Fighter that way. Depsite that, there are enough new fighters to add enough new moves and styles etc. anyway. I was upset to see Subby with the same combo, but hopefully that does change and I assume it will. I am sure tehre will be more combos though, and so a few old ones might be fun as well.

Also, I fail to understand how you can say it doesn't take long to master Mortal Kombat, perhaps any of em if you take into consideration how long it would typically take to master a fighting game with respect to the year it was made.

I wouldn't say I mastered MKDA or Soul Calibur 2, as I just don't have the time these days, but I am good at both of them and own both. I know that SC2 is deeper as far as the fighting engine goes, but that's not to say MK is shallow. It has lots of moves too, and those breakers and reversals add an extra element (whether it was brought up before or not). This game is deeper than you guys give it credit for, and just because you can't adjust the size of your headband before the match does not make it shallow.

Also, the levels being interactive and such do add depth to the game, it's not just eye candy, the reviews have said that it really does add more of a strategy element than originally thought to the game, which I incorporate into the fighting engine. When your position in an area can change the outcome of the game, that is part of the fight.

veinz Wrote: I thought it was said somewhere that the move list wouldn't be the same. Even if it is just elborated though, it's no different than Street Fighter that way. Depsite that, there are enough new fighters to add enough new moves and styles etc. anyway. I was upset to see Subby with the same combo, but hopefully that does change and I assume it will. I am sure tehre will be more combos though, and so a few old ones might be fun as well. Also, I fail to understand how you can say it doesn't take long to master Mortal Kombat, perhaps any of em if you take into consideration how long it would typically take to master a fighting game with respect to the year it was made. I wouldn't say I mastered MKDA or Soul Calibur 2, as I just don't have the time these days, but I am good at both of them and own both. I know that SC2 is deeper as far as the fighting engine goes, but that's not to say MK is shallow. It has lots of moves too, and those breakers and reversals add an extra element (whether it was brought up before or not). This game is deeper than you guys give it credit for, and just because you can't adjust the size of your headband before the match does not make it shallow. Also, the levels being interactive and such do add depth to the game, it's not just eye candy, the reviews have said that it really does add more of a strategy element than originally thought to the game, which I incorporate into the fighting engine. When your position in an area can change the outcome of the game, that is part of the fight.

The levels do add more strategies with the Death Traps and multi-tiered levels.I know Im going to get 0wned alot on teh beach level.My mind cant adjust to changing through the match like that.I hvae to stay focused.Good point you brought up.MKDA is one of my favorite fighting games of all time.I just want MKD to be even better.

"Also, I fail to understand how you can say it doesn't take long to master Mortal Kombat, perhaps any of em if you take into consideration how long it would typically take to master a fighting game with respect to the year it was made."

because there's only a few strats you need to play mk games. where as other fighters, more than 2 moves come into play.



"Also, the levels being interactive and such do add depth to the game, it's not just eye candy, the reviews have said that it really does add more of a strategy element than originally thought to the game, which I incorporate into the fighting engine. When your position in an area can change the outcome of the game, that is part of the fight."

oh i agree with that. but you mentioned fatalities and what not being part of the depth. i don't think you understand. if you're looking at move lists to a game's depth, you have a point. mkda does have quite a few moves. but when virtually 90% of the moves in mkda are worthless and only a few moves matter, it's NOT deep. that's also why it doesn't take long to master. just master the few moves that actually matter, and you're high level in just a few weeks. where as street fighter takes more than just a couple moves to win. it takes 99% of the arsenol. mk games do not.

We all agree tha MK it's not an example of a deep game. But that doesn't mean it ain't fun.

I play more often MK than VF and SC2. Why. Because when you master one character, if you have time an patience for that, then i have no reason to try another one. Just BORING.

When all of you say most of MK moves are eye candy, i think ALL of the games are eye candy. All the movments are done to be eye candy also. If it wasn't that way i don't think people buy the game. And there are movments that are kind of improbable for a "more serious game". Example, Kilik one of my fav of SC2 when he puts his staff on ground and then in the air he will take the staff of the ground and smashes his opponent and fall after that, only after that, where is the realness of that? sure, as it's SC2 it's a deeper movment. Those game have also useless movments. I don't think the parafernalia of movments in SC2 or VF will all be used. Some of them are pretty difficult to do, and that's isn't fun.

OK, MK needs a revamp of it's core engine for fighting, but not in a way people starts to think MK is boring as it's hard to master and play.

I think they should give a few more throws (back, side, front) and unique, back attacks(when you are facing backwards you're opponent), wall attacks (like grabbing and switch positins), better combo system.

But, know we have environment interactivity, more special moves, combo brakers, speed up a liitle bit. I think this give a more DEEP fighting, and more strategic fighting.

Seti1.

well, whatever, in my experience, you certainly don't need to use 90% of the arsenal in any of those fighting games. I would say there are twice as many useless moves in the other games simply because there are more moves.

But anyway, I don't care anymore.

Items:
*New/better/longer combo strings, not yet implemented as of E3.
*Breakout moves to stop players from cheesing one obnoxiously long combo the entire time, not yet implemented as of E3.
*Fully interactive environments that, for once in fighting game history, actually affect the outcome of the fight in major ways.
*And three new modes: puzzle, chess, and a story-based konquest because they knew the above wasn't enough by itself, but risked ruining the gameplay with too many major adjustments. If it ain't broke, don't break it.
That's more enhancement than you'll find between SF2 Turbo and practically every other Capcom fighter to date.
Expect for a real overhaul, both graphically and gameplay-wise, for MK7 on next gen platforms, but the 3-style based gameplay will likely remain in place since that's what brought Mortal Kombat from its history as a simplistic 2d game to being the premiere 3d fighter.

MrSphfmut:

I know you're not trying to pick a fight, and I'm not either. I'm glad that we all can talk about these things, exchange ideas, and not get all that angry with one another.

I did read your post. I wouldn't have commented on it if I hadn't. I know that you don't want MK to be like SC2, VF etc. I was just suggesting that those games are the model for what's good in fighting games right now. All I was saying, and I didn't say it well I admit, is that MK doesn't need to be the best game in that model. It doesn't need custom combos or any of the other things you suggested. In fact, it probably doesn't need a lot of the ideas that I suggested either.

What I'm saying here is that instead of MK being the best model under what's considered good in 3D fighting games, it should break from that model completely. I think that the style of MK, with projectiles, new teleporting, fatalities, increased jumping etc is a start at breaking that model. So when you say that it should be like SC2 IN THE SENSE that it should be easy to pick up and difficult to master, I agree and I disagree.

On one hand, all good fighting games seem to have that quality. On the other hand, I've always considered MK to be a great fighting series, and I don't think that MK has had that quality since MK2. Does that mean that everything that's come out since MK2 has been less than stellar, some would say yes, other would say no.

I personally don't think that a fighting game needs this quality to be great. If I know the moves and combos, and I'm playing online against thousands of people that also know the moves and combos, what would I need simplicity for?

I like your ideas, and I like where you're going with them. I just think that some people need to accept the fact that this is what MK is. A 3D fighting game that's just a little bit different from all other 3D fighting games. Does that make it better or worse? Well, that's what we're arguing here. Some here seem to think that all of the extra stuff is fluff, but I personally think that it provides a more complete gaming experience. My girlfriend has hated every MK since the second one. She probably won't like MK:D. But she will like the puzzle game. So if it appeals to a wider audience, what's so bad about that?

I'm not judging the substance until I see the move lists. If all of the characters have only one combo worth doing, and it's very apparent that all of the MK team's focus went into peripheral stuff, then i'll be the first person on this board to start this topic again. But perhaps we should wait and see how all of the fighters play in the final product before we start making MK better, or unique, or what have you.

Again, no disrespect intended.

veinz Wrote: well, whatever, in my experience, you certainly don't need to use 90% of the arsenal in any of those fighting games. I would say there are twice as many useless moves in the other games simply because there are more moves. But anyway, I don't care anymore.

Absolutely wrong. Even the worst of moves in fighters have some sort of use for some sort of sitation. Why don't YOU give me a lose for f+2 in Shaolin Fist with Kung Lao.

"New/better/longer combo strings, not yet implemented as of E3."

How will they be better?


"*Breakout moves to stop players from cheesing one obnoxiously long combo the entire time, not yet implemented as of E3."

Combo Breakers will either be another broken piece of shit or the saving grace of MKD's core gameplay.

"*Fully interactive environments that, for once in fighting game history, actually affect the outcome of the fight in major ways."

Tekken 4's enviorments affect the outcome in major ways, so Midway is totally wrong for saying that.

"*And three new modes: puzzle, chess, and a story-based konquest because they knew the above wasn't enough by itself, but risked ruining the gameplay with too many major adjustments. If it ain't broke, don't break it."

If it aint broke don't break it? HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA! Bro, that LITERALLY made me laugh out loud for atleast 5 seconds. Do I even have to say it? I think I have to..MKDA is broken. Now you figure out what's funny about what you just said.

"That's more enhancement than you'll find between SF2 Turbo and practically every other Capcom fighter to date."

Sure it is. Compare MVC2 to MVC and then come back and tell me how wrong you are.

"Expect for a real overhaul, both graphically and gameplay-wise, for MK7 on next gen platforms, but the 3-style based gameplay will likely remain in place since that's what brought Mortal Kombat from its history as a simplistic 2d game to being the premiere 3d fighter."


Premiere 3D fighter? *COUGH* hahahahahahhahahahahaha! I'd put my head on the chopping board and say that 2D MK is a lot deeper than 3D MK as of now.

Don't know if I'd say 2d MK was deeper, but it was a hell of a lot more fun. I don't care about depth, but I do want have a good time.

all the early MK's werent very deep, thats why they took alot of flak from SF fans. Thats also the reason they were loved so much, is that you had to learn a few special moves then make do with the same core moves most everyon else had. So while it wasnt very deep, it allowed people to excel quickly and made the matches very fun. I found MK:DA to be awesome, some of the moves were useless which i cant argue, but I find most fighters have moves that are useless. I can honestly say soul calibur is probalby the only game that has a plethora of useable moves in a match, but they have weapons only so thats understable, if not required. I personally cannot wait for MK:D, ill be playing it for months on end im sure. It will probably be the only game that will get me to stop play World of Warcraft.