there's nothing wrong with being jaded, its only natural after a series of disappointments, hell I still have my doubts, but I try to stay optimistic.

I have no doubts that the game will NOT be boring. When I look at Tekken 6 and Street Fighter IV THAT'S where I see bored. They're both the same shit. Mortal Kombat tries to be new and revolutionary and with the addition of several combat element they will probably succeed. I'll admit when I heard about the game at first I thought "Oh God they can't be serious" but didn't we all? Then when I saw the gameplay my opinion changed by 180 degrees. I don't doubt this game is going to be good in some ways. Perhaps the game will be underrated but I am sure it is going to be good. That's it from me.

Exactly. I mean, if you think THIS game is boring, you might as well quit fighting games altogether, because Tekken is pretty much the same game every time with better graphics. And this is coming from a guy who supports keeping traditional gameplay mechanics within a series.
I'm probably still gonna get Tekken 6, but I probably won't even put HALF the gameplay hours into it that I will in MK vs. DC.

I don't get why people call Tekken or Street Fighter boring, just because they basically have the same mechanics as back then. They don't have to revamp their mechanics after every few titles like the MK franchise, because their mechanics were actually solid since day one. And since then they've kept refining their mechanics.

I feel like the MK games are for people with ADD. With all the mechanic changes and increasing amount of blood and gore to keep the fan's interests.

Refined them? You think so? Because Tekken 4 and 5 felt the same, to me.
Yes, they're nice, solid mechanics. Good, safe mechanics.
They could do SOMETHING different. Bring the camera in closer, maybe, add some dramatic angles. You're gonna put all this time into the graphics, don't keep the characters at the same angles we've been seeing in the past 5 Tekken games. Do SOMETHING that says, "This is a new generation of fighting games."

I have actully stopped buying any game from Namco .Iam not ready to pay 59.99 $ for the same shit I am seeing for 10 years .

Well, it seems that's what SFIV is doing. Bringing in the camera in close during special moves and following movements during special attacks with the camera. Which makes everything pretty cinematic looking.

Then again, I wouldn't really need stuff like that. I'd still take a game with solid mechanics, over a game that makes the action look good, but might play medicore.

And the stuff added by Midway doesn't even look good in the first place. They managed to make the normal combat faster, so the stiff animations aren't too obvious. But then they had to include klose kombat which just reminds you how little Midway knowns of animation.

dude, klose kombat is looking really good and there's nothing wrong with the animations!

Well, I never said anything about Street Fighter. I never even looked into it, because I don't really care about SF. But from what you say, their closeup conventions are actually a good idea. If all you care about are gameplay mechanics, then what's the point of Tekken 6, when you have the same mechanics in Tekken 5 anyway? It's not like in an adventure game where you might have different puzzles, different level design which adds new mazes, with new deep storylines. Tekken's storyline is pretty simplistic, and not as interesting as the presentation of their gorgeous FMV cinematics, which are half the reason I'd buy a new Tekken.
But if all you care about are solid fight mechanics, then Tekken 5 is all you need. And as fun as that game may be, sometimes, I want something with a little more impact. Something where background scenery gets destroyed and the fights themselves are presented with some cinematic value. It's what made the Dragonball Z games so awesome.

IF THIS GAME BORES YOU
THAN PLEASE DON'T BUY THE GAME
MK FAN NEVER SAYS BORES

Pretty much the same reason why sequels of other fighting games are getting bought. New characters. That's the number one reason why people buy sequels in the first place. Those and updated mechanics.

You've got to be kidding me... New characters? How are you still an MK fan? Since MKDA came out, less than 25% of new characters have been good, and when they were good, they still didn't phase the classic characters. So I can't imagine you picked up MKD and said, "Boy, these new characters are a good reason to own this game!"

Tekken is no different, when I pick up a Tekken game, it's to play as Nina, Kazuya, Bryan Fury, etc. Not as Murdoch, Christie or Steve. Sure, I'd say Tekken might have a bigger ration of good new characters than MK, Dragunov and Raven were pretty cool. But Tekken also has a lot of crappy old characters. Lee, Ganryu, Bruce... I'm not too impressed by them and don't see why they keep bringing them back, but that's neither here nor there. I'm not too impressed with the new characters of Tekken 6. A fat guy who can fight. Real original.
Rarely do I play a fighting game and say, "Wow, these new characters are awesome!" Don't even get me started on Street Fighter. Their newer characters have godawful designs.
And frankly, that's one of the best things about MK vs. DC, it's got all the classic characters, that have even been deemed iconic, on both sides. I mean, if you're looking strictly at MK, then yes, half the characters in this game are new. But I don't see it that way. They might be from different universes, but they're all classic characters, and that's the best thing about this game.

Can I borrow your time machine?

Of course I'm serious. I doubt many would buy a new fighting game if the roster remained the same since the first game.

So you're saying that you LIKED the new characters introduced in MKDA, MKD and MKA?

whats up man?

Obviously not all. But that doesn't matter. People don't buy the sequel of a fighting game just because it offers a new engine. If that were the case MK would probably the only good selling game.

Of course people also buy them simply so they can play as their favorite character that they learned to love since the first part. But Fighters sell because of the addition of new combatants, updated and more refined fighting mechanics and enhanced graphics.


Anyway, instead of just counter questioning my questions, just tell me if you'd continue to buy a fighting game if they wouldn't change the characters from the initional game. Meaning only having the MK core 7 throughout the entire series up to Armageddon. Would be kinda lame, wouldn't it?

Yeah, I'm not saying there shouldn't be any new characters, but it's still not the reason I buy the game.
Frankly, the one thing that gripped me with MKD was the death traps and the level transitions.
Yes, I was interested in the new storyline (disappointing as Shujinko might have been). But to be completely honest with you, I took no interest in the new characters. I didn't read up on anyone, not Dairou, Darrius, Hotaru, etc. Didn't even know what some of them look like until I played the game, I was actually more interested in which classic characters are coming back. But the one thing that hooked me was the presentation. When one character smashes the other through that wall, it had a very cinematic look to it, and that's what I liked about it.
And just like that, the freefall combat and the klose kombat, have a cinematic feel to them, and if it wasn't for the upgraded graphics and the story mode, then it would be precisely the close kombat and freefall kombat that would hook me.

But I guess we're just looking for different things in a fighting game.

I'm looking for a solid fighting mechanic first. After they nailed that part, they can add whatever they want.

I feel like Midway is spreading their resources too thin, trying to add as many new gameplay modes as possible, instead of concentrating on the most important part.

I feel like Midway is spreading their resources too thin, trying to add as many new gameplay modes as possible, instead of concentrating on the most important part. -Nathan

i agree totally.

Solid Gameplay mechanics aren't everything. There are plenty of games out there, where the gameplay mechanics are a bit broken, or don't work so well, but they're still highly acclaimed.
My #1 example is Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem. I found the gameplay mechanics in that game to be pretty tedious. Combine it with the sub-par graphics and (what I found to be) an unimpressive storyline, I wouldn't call it such a great game.
But god forbid I should say ANYTHING to insult that game, and I'm telling you, MANY people I spoke with were tearing at my throat. Not my favorite game, but there are some games like SIlent Hill, Indigo Prophecy, Sid Meyer's Pirates, to name a few, where I felt that the gameplay mechanics could've used some polish. Nevertheless, I thought they were all extremely fun, and fall with some of my absolute favorite games of all time.
If all you focus on are gameplay mechanics, then graphics or other features might suffer. I think they should focus on all aspects evenly to the best of their abilities.
Would you rather play this game with completely balanced gameplay mechanics and PS2 quality graphics or 10 characters in total?

I just want to play the damn game. I can't say that I'm bored of a game I am yet to played but what I do know is that I am bored of us even talking about it. I'm bored of the renders, I'm bored of the old videos and I'm sure as hell bored of fanboy attitude which most of us here are guilty of. Rant OVER!

PCE

Trax

Well, unfortunately it's not gonna get here any sooner than November. But hey, at least the MK team has a good reputation with deadlines.

By the way, what's that word in your sig, before 'samurai' mean?

I would gladly take good mechanics over character count and graphics. Sure, I wouldn't want to play something from the Amiga years, but I'm also not a total graphics whore. And a large amount of characters means nothing if most of them play like ass. Look at Armageddon.

Every aspect of the game should evolve, but they should also reconsider where their priorities lie. First you make the game play good, then you bother thinking about how far you can push the polygon count of a single character. Or how many modes you can add that haven't been in a fighting game before.

Well, I didn't find Armageddon to be uncomfortable to play. It might not be perfect, but I don't find myself saying, "This is a tedious experience. What a pain in the ass to play," like I do with certain games.
Armageddon might not be all balanced, but I still think it's fun to play.