Frikandel Wrote:
What you don't believe that Tekken doesn't change to many things and relies on it's name to sell? It does, it really does. How many new caracters in T5 have been added since the last one?
Who cares about how many characters have been added? Do you realise why Tekken has gotten it's fanbase in the first place? It certainly wasn't because of how many characters it added each game.
Save your opinions for things you have a clue about, thanks.
Garlador Wrote:
Tekken is a lot like MK, I think. They always have "diversion" games, like Tekken Beachball or Devil Within. I believe Tekken does change, but not so much as MK. That doesn't mean Tekken, or any other fighter, is a bad game, just that they have a system that works and they stick with what works. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. MK is still broke and needs fixin', but they also take risks. Concerning sales figures, I don't have a huge list or anything from every region in the world or even the US; it's not like I follow the exact number of sales figures, but MK is a huge seller, and I do remember reading that, despite its shortcomings, it did outsell Virtua Fighter 4, Dead or Alive 3, Bloody Roar 4, Capcom vs. SNK 2, Tao Feng, and, so far, Soul Calibur 3. The Namco giants that are Tekken and Soul Calibur 2 trounce it, but they are good games that evolve yet maintain a sense of continuity as well. Don't misread my statements; I'm not saying fighting games don't evolve or take risks or that Boon was lying, either. I'm saying that, for the most part, that's what fighting games do. Sure, Tekken will always have new diversion modes and little changes, Soul Calibur will have Soul modes, Virtua Fighter new ranking tournaments, etc. MK, however, like Nintendo against its competitors, has changed its game-style significantly from game to game, apart from just the diversion elements (the combo-system of MK3, the weapons and 3D jump in MK4, the 3-style gameplay of MK:DA, the interactive environments of MK:D, and now the air combo additions). These changes rarely are superficial and typically determine and define the game-play for that specific game, unlike most other games which stick with one certain style. I'm not saying that's the best move, either, but, damn, it's ballsy. Edit: Most of my assumptions come from the articles I read throughout the internet that say that MK:DA was the largest selling fighting game at the time of its release and this link, developer information , which backs up those finds, though I will admit the uncertainty of this information.
That link does look a bit suspect, whatever, I don't mind.
I appreciate what MK does, but I always get the feeling that for every new thing they do, there's always new ways in which it's flawed.
If they could make solid, less flawed gameplay over these diversions I'd go for it. MK can't afford to spend so much time on them when I see these infinates, 50/50 mix-ups, inescapeable throws, missing options to do whatever when you're on the ground and a decent risk vs reward system in which a jab doesn't take longer to recover than swinging a huge hammer/sword etc.
Gillbob316 Wrote:
I did read what he said. And I was put off by the overall ignorant manner in which it was presented, so I didn't choose to interpret it as anything important enough to give a second thought. Is that true? Maybe not. But after reading it, it sounded ignorant, so I chose to interpret it that way. It had nothing to do with me being too lazy to read it properly, and everything to do with him being too lazy to write it properly. If they're his opinions, and he's the one who wants others to hear them, then why should I be expected to waste my time reading it properly, if he can't take the time to write it properly? I read it word for word and it came off like an idiotic rant.
How a statement is said, be it opinion or not, is just as important, if not more important then the content of the message. That may not be a good thing, but it's the truth.
Just as a for instance, ask any career services expert: a job interview has very little to do with your actual skills, and everything to do with how you present yourself. Is this a good thing? Maybe not. Means that that people best qualified for the job may not be getting it, but it's still true.
Some bum on Cops could be a friggin genius, but if he's yelling his opinions in the middle of the street with no shirt on, he still gets his butt thrown in jail and ignored.
People want to present themselves as ignorant, then its their own fault if others give their arguments the short end of the stick.
Well if you refuse to take part fully in a debate because of comparisons with bums on tv programmes and job interviews then that's your loss.
Labelling things as ignorant rants without responding to the points he has made is a bit pointless really.
Whatever, if you want to judge grammar you do that, I'm posting my thoughts on MK games.
