"Dragon Ball FighterZ" Official Discussion Thread

[Kunzait_83]

Now I understand that wishing for an immense open world mode for a fighting game is a bit too much, but what about the Weapon Master modes from the first 3 Soul Calibur games, or the World Tour Mode from Street Fighter Alpha 3, or the Chronicles of the Sword and Soul Arena modes from Soul Calibur 3, or the Force modes from Tekken 3 to 6 (the one in 6 was wacky at times though), Are you saying that those game modes were a waste of time?

Those are VERY different examples that require very different answers.

As far as Street Fighter Alpha 3 and Tekken 3 go: those modes were added into what were home console ports of what were originally arcade games. In cases like those, the games were already pre-developed for the arcade originally (where they had their core fighting game all ironed and polished up to the hilt first and foremost) before THEN being ported over to home consoles, where the porting team could add in whatever extra bells and whistles they wanted.

World Tour Mode for Alpha 3 in particular was a delight: but it was by NO means the meat and potatoes of the game. That mode isn't what attracted most SF fans to the game at the time: people back then primarily played Street Fighter for Street Fighter itself. Modes like World Tour in the home Alpha 3 ports were definitely cool and a neat bonus, but they're just that: cool extras. Not the bread and butter for why most people were/are playing. And even aside from that, the main reason it was able to be added to such an already robust fighting game is because the core game was already finished for arcades, and modes like that could just be tacked on later when it came time to port it.

Arcades are no longer a thing now though (unfortunately), so we no longer have that "buffer" of extra time where a core fighting game can get ironed out for its original arcade release and then the console ports can add in whatever they like after. The games are now developed from the ground up for the console market: a console market that is now WAY more time consuming and expensive to produce games for than it ever was in the days when arcades were still around, I should add.

That means that dev time (and resources) are limited, and you have to prioritize: what's more important, making an actual solid, in-depth fighting game that holds up to years and years of repeat play, or focusing on adding in a ton of extra fluff that only appeals to casuals (who don't care that much about fighting games in the first place) while serving up a dull, mediocre, and substanceless fighting game (that ultimately pleases nobody) meant to anchor all that crap?

Then there's Soul Calibur 3: yeah, I know this is gonna piss people off, but the Soul Calibur series is the franchise that helped start that whole misbegotten PS2-era of "fluff extra modes and unlockables over core fighting" for the genre (in an attempt to appeal to gamers who never played in arcades before and were used to Legend of Zelda-esque single player "quest/goal"-oriented gaming rather than competition).

And Soul Calibur 3 was easily among the WORST offenders of it. Yeah it had a TON of extra modes: but the core fighting game itself, sorry, was a shallow button mash-fest that was MARKEDLY less deep of a fighting game than even fucking Soul EDGE was all the way back when. There was no real combo system to speak of (any attack could be chained into any attack with no regard for timing whatsoever) meaning that fights played out as sloppy "who can mash buttons the fastest" with little regard to any actual skill or strategy whatsoever.

Because of that lack of depth to the fighting, and the abundance of extra modes, Soul Calibur 3 (and the latter entries in the franchise in general) was a boon to non-fighting game players who don't particularly care much for the genre to begin with... but it hardly offered much to anyone who actually plays these games for any sense of challenge, strategy, or testing of skill.

You see, this is what pisses me off about today's fighting games, they do not care about catering to the medium anymore, all they freaking care about is the E-sports and online while the rest of the casuals (myself included) get the cold shoulder by giving us modes that are half-assed AND taking out some that were supposed to be in a fighting game in the first place like Team attack and time attack. We saw it with the vanilla Street FIghter 5, Tekken 7, Marvel vs Capcom Infinite, and now with this one too, and I was surprised because Arcsystem is usually great at providing single player content. People wanna talk about the gameplay being the only thing that matters, and that's fine, yall got what yall wanted, a good old versus and online, but I'm just saying that some players aren't interested in competitive play and it's a shame that these companies are taking away modes that are supposed to be in and not thinking of new modes that can be effective. No, a open world mode won't work much, but a beat-em-up can, and there are so many other ideas for them to explore. The only game studio that caters to the middle today is Neatherealms and people can say whatever the hell they want about them and their games.

Look I don't know what to tell you here: not everything is made to appeal to absolutely EVERYONE. That's flat out impossible, and there's an old adage about "when you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one" that feels appropriate to mention here.

If you want to get into a discussion about the ABSURD amount of money and resources it now takes to make a modern video game, that's actually an EXCELLENT discussion that I've long thought was well worth having and that I'm all in favor of all of us, as gamers collectively, taking a good long while to re-evaluate in what we prioritize. But in the meantime, this is the current reality of gaming: gamers (outside of the indie space at least) demand that ALL their games have these absurdly rendered, cutting edge graphics. And that shit's time-intensive, not to mention expensive as all hell. There's only so much time and resources to allocate to making these.

And like I said before, we no longer have arcades to act as an extra "step" in the process to buffer things: these are made from the ground up, wholecloth, for consoles. So sometimes you gotta make the choice of what to prioritize: making a satisfyingly deep game that fans of the genre will like, or trying to spread yourself ridiculously thin trying to add in "hooks" that will appeal to the tastes of EVERYONE, while snubbing aside the people who are actual fans of the genre and only want a good, quality fighting game?

And its funny, because of the examples you cited just now, MvC Infinite actually runs COUNTER to what you're arguing there: most of the missteps in the design choices that game made that pissed people off... those were attempts to appeal to CASUALS and non-fighting game fans! Everything from the non-cell shaded graphical style (which according to Capcom, was an attempt to hook in Western AAA gamers that are used to "realistic looking" games like Halo and God of War and such and to keep the game from being too "off-puttingly Japanese anime-esque"), to the roster (which Disney/Marvel wanted to be super MCU-friendly in part - apart from not wanting to draw attention to Fox's X-Men movies from a marketing standpoint - to also appeal to casual gamers who know the characters mainly from the movies now; the lack of X-Men mainly pissed off die hard core fighting gamer MvC fans who'd been playing X-Men characters for decades, and wanted them in primarily due to gameplay purposes), to the emphasis on the big, dumb story mode (which Capcom thought is what casuals wanted) in all of the demos released.

ALL of those things ended up contributing SINKING the game's successes... and MvC fans like myself were/are SUPER pissed about that, because this game's failure could very well now spell the total and utter demise of one of the single most beloved fighting game franchises of all time.

Vanilla Street Fighter V even put this HUGE amount of emphasis on its gigantic, cutscene-riddled story mode, and that STILL wasn't enough to appease single player-focused casuals who apparently wanted a SF RPG (don't get me wrong: I had my own issues with the SFV vanilla release, but those have thankfully since been swiftly remedied soundly with all the various updates).

What's also important to consider in all of this is the ways in which Street Fighter IV had TOTALLY changed the paradigm of the fighting game landscape back from where it was during the early/mid 2000s: the whole reason we even HAD that era of "minigame modes over core fighting" in the first place was as a direct response to the total demise of arcades (the venue through which the fighting genre was born and thrived in originally).

With arcades gone, there was now a whole new generation of gamers who never played these kinds of games before and were more used to single-player intensive games like RPGs and adventure games and such: and it ended up becoming seen as conventional wisdom that if fighting games as a genre were to survive in this new gaming landscape, they now had to tailor themselves to the experiences, expectations, and tastes of THOSE kinds of gamers instead of their older, more socially-inclined and skill/competition-focused player base.

The people who glommed onto games like Smash Bros, Soul Calibur, the Budokai games, and the like... most of them tended to be gamers of the "Ocarina of Time/Pokemon" generation: kids too young to have gone to arcades and never cut their teeth on Street Fighter against other players, and didn't play games in general as a social thing among their friends, but as something to do to kill time in their rooms alone after school.

Those early 2000s fighting games were designed from the ground up to appeal to gamers who don't respond to games that demand practice, experimentation with different approaches and strategies, and constant honing of raw skill... but rather who respond to games that demand grinding, completion of "quests" and check lists of goals, travel and exploration of in-game worlds, and finding and collecting in-game items.

I can't count the number of (younger) players I knew in the early/mid 2000s (both IRL and even on just this forum alone) who'd play games like Mortal Kombat Deception, Soul Calibur 3, and DBZ Budokai whatever, would finish the various single player modes and "unlock" everything... only to then soon after sell the game off at Gamestop because they "completed/beat" the game... without of course EVER actually playing the core fighting game against other players for any real length of time (the most oft reason being: "I don't have any friends at all to play with").

The idea of playing a fighting game's single player through once, then considering the game "finished" only to sell it off... to a fan of the genre, that's BUGFUCK nuts and runs directly counter to the ENTIRE point of the genre, which is supposed to be years and years and years of lasting experience because its supposed to provide constant competition against other players.

Then Street Fighter IV came along and changed ALL of that: for whatever reasons (be it its intuitive tutorial, and the idea of online play for console games finally truly taking off that console gen), THAT game managed to become the "Rosetta stone" fighting game that properly introduced the classic fundamentals of the genre to that "lost generation" of younger non-arcade gamers. For the first time since the collapse of the arcade industry, there was now an "in" for gamers of that console-centric "single player quest experience" generation to learn the ropes of how the genre is supposed to work, and have a healthy competitive outlet against other players (including skirting around the fact that most of these people evidently have unbearably depressing and sad IRL social lives).

Ever since then, the fighting genre has COMPLETELY turned itself around from the early/mid 2000s era of "quest modes" and "unlockables": the focus is now FIRMLY back on the core gameplay and competitive play, which is where it always belonged and where it SHOULD be. There's now a whole new generation of "hardcore fighting gamers" who've hopped on board the genre proper due to SFIV, and THAT'S ultimately what's lead to a competitive-focused game like FighterZ now being seen as a viable type of game for an anime license like DBZ to have its name on.

No, things are not 100% perfect... we still have issues with gratuitous and shifty DLC deals in some corners... but overall, as a hardcore fighting gamer since the early 90s (and the original arcade release of vanilla SFII) who was beyond alienated and frustrated with the state of the genre during the PS2 days (the odd Guilty Gear X update, Virtua Fighter 4, or Capcom/SNK crossover title aside), I will GLADLY and EAGERLY take where we are right now over where we were back then.

The point being: when it comes to a choice between which is more important: the core meat of the fighting game versus extra bells & whistles game modes... sorry/not sorry, but, as a fighting game player, the only answer I'll accept to that one is the core fighting game all day, any day. If you're someone who is THAT intrinsically detached from and disinterested in the fighting genre that the actual game itself isn't nearly enough for you, and you need it to pile on gobs and gobs of RPG-like "quest modes" and such in order to entice you... then as harsh as this is gonna sound, just go play RPGs and adventure games instead of fighting games already because maybe this just isn't the genre for you at all to begin with.

I can't stand most sports/racing games myself: you don't see me complaining to EA that they need to fundamentally alter and water down all of their annual sports releases from here on out solely to cater to the whims of people like me, who don't like the genre at all in the first place, while effectively saying "piss off" to their core player base and what they want out of it. I just... don't bother with playing most sports games, and stick to genres that I actually like. Really, its that simple. Not EVERYTHING is made for me.

And like I said earlier: we've already HAD more than a solid DECADE'S worth of faux-fighting games that put their emphasis on a bazillion single-player quest minigames and stupid shit to unlock and the actual core fighting game acting as a total afterthought of an excuse for all that other crap. If you want a "fighting game" where the whole point is to complete some lite open world mode to unlock a bunch of alternate costumes and 90% of the game's roster (for a core fighting game that you probably could hardly care less about anyway), there's a TON of games of that very nature on the PS2, Gamecube, and even the early period of PS3/360. Or again, even better yet, just cut out the unnecessary middleman completely and just... go play an actual RPG or open world adventure game, where that type of "quest-driven" gameplay is the whole entire POINT of the genre you're playing.

Because its been obvious to me right along, for the better part of the last 15 years that I've been hearing these sorts of arguments from people who pine for and fetishize the days of Budokai and its like, that many of you don't even like or care that much about fighting games in any way, and what many of you have REALLY wanted all along is a Dragon Ball RPG or open world adventure game or a beat em up/action platformer/collect-a-thon, or something along those lines, and have simply been "putting up with" the fighting games we've had up till now as a means of vicariously satisfying that craving 2nd hand through their various single player modes. In which case I'd simply say... go bug Bandai/Namco to license THOSE OTHER genres of games for the series instead.

I can't fucking stand collect-a-thons myself, but if Bandai/Namco ever put out a Pilaf arc-themed collect-a-thon game where you just aimlessly run around exploring a 3D open world as little Goku collecting Dragon Balls in a similar vein as something like Banjo Kazooie... I'd roll my eyes and snark at it to myself, but you know what? Have at it gang. That shit's all yours. God bless.

In the meantime though, let the people who actually like fighting games for being fighting games and mainly care about having a solid, deep, and competitive fighting game to just... have a solid, deep, and competitive fighting game for the DBZ series for once. There's already umpteen gazillion Budokai-style DBZ games out there: let us have just THIS one at least for now.

[EXBadguy]

If you want to get into a discussion about the ABSURD amount of money and resources it now takes to make a modern video game, that's actually an EXCELLENT discussion that I've long thought was well worth having and that I'm all in favor of all of us, as gamers collectively, taking a good long while to re-evaluate in what we prioritize. But in the meantime, this is the current reality of gaming: gamers (outside of the indie space at least) demand that ALL their games have these absurdly rendered, cutting edge graphics. And that shit's time-intensive, not to mention expensive as all hell. There's only so much time and resources to allocate to making these.

Arcades are no longer a thing now though (unfortunately), so we no longer have that "buffer" of extra time where a core fighting game can get ironed out for its original arcade release and then the console ports can add in whatever they like after. The games are now developed from the ground up for the console market: a console market that is now WAY more time consuming and expensive to produce games for than it ever was in the days when arcades were still around, I should add.

That means that dev time (and resources) are limited, and you have to prioritize: what's more important, making an actual solid, in-depth fighting game that holds up to years and years of repeat play, or focusing on adding in a ton of extra fluff that only appeals to casuals (who don't care that much about fighting games in the first place) while serving up a dull, mediocre, and substanceless fighting game (that ultimately pleases nobody) meant to anchor all that crap?

I have an answer for you. Neatherealm Games, the company that does both and succeeds. Again, some people can say whatever they want about their games. More fighting game developers need to follow Neatherrealms approach. I ain't asking for a lot of modes, all I am asking for is the right amount which is what Neatherealm does with their games. I ain't asking to lock up 90% of the roster either, no way. I agree that those days are done. Maybe 96-97% of the characters can be available while the last 3 or 4 can be secret characters.

Because of that lack of depth to the fighting, and the abundance of extra modes, Soul Calibur 3 (and the latter entries in the franchise in general) was a boon to non-fighting game players who don't particularly care much for the genre to begin with... but it hardly offered much to anyone who actually plays these games for any sense of challenge, strategy, or testing of skill.

I'd argue that the modes in Soul Calibur 3, mainly Soul Arena and Chronicles of the Sword, has all three of those things that you mentioned. I still have the game. If Soul Calibur 3 had the arcade version first before consoles, it would've been the true successor to the competitive crowd.

Look I don't know what to tell you here: not everything is made to appeal to absolutely EVERYONE. That's flat out impossible, and there's an old adage about "when you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one" that feels appropriate to mention here.

I can't stand most sports/racing games myself: you don't see me complaining to EA that they need to fundamentally alter and water down all of their annual sports releases from here on out solely to cater to the whims of people like me, who don't like the genre at all in the first place, while effectively saying "piss off" to their core player base and what they want out of it. I just... don't bother with playing most sports games, and stick to genres that I actually like. Really, its that simple. Not EVERYTHING is made for me.

When did I say they should please everyone? I'm only talking about the the two types of fighting gamers, which are the hardcore ones (like you) and the casual ones (like me). Just like racing games, there are two types of racing game fans, the ones who just wanna race and the ones who want creative single player modes, which some of them have thankfully (the Burnout games, the early NFS games, Midnight Club 2 & 3).

And its funny, because of the examples you cited just now, MvC Infinite actually runs COUNTER to what you're arguing there: most of the missteps in the design choices that game made that pissed people off... those were attempts to appeal to CASUALS and non-fighting game fans! Everything from the non-cell shaded graphical style (which according to Capcom, was an attempt to hook in Western AAA gamers that are used to "realistic looking" games like Halo and God of War and such and to keep the game from being too "off-puttingly Japanese anime-esque"), to the roster (which Disney/Marvel wanted to be super MCU-friendly in part - apart from not wanting to draw attention to Fox's X-Men movies from a marketing standpoint - to also appeal to casual gamers who know the characters mainly from the movies now; the lack of X-Men mainly pissed off die hard core fighting gamer MvC fans who'd been playing X-Men characters for decades, and wanted them in primarily due to gameplay purposes), to the emphasis on the big, dumb story mode (which Capcom thought is what casuals wanted) in all of the demos released.

ALL of those things ended up contributing SINKING the game's successes... and MvC fans like myself were/are SUPER pissed about that, because this game's failure could very well now spell the total and utter demise of one of the single most beloved fighting game franchises of all time.

Capcom made a lot of questionable decisions that's for sure, but since we're talking about the content, the reason I bring up that game is because the content there half-assed.

Vanilla Street Fighter V even put this HUGE amount of emphasis on its gigantic, cutscene-riddled story mode, and that STILL wasn't enough to appease single player-focused casuals who apparently wanted a SF RPG (don't get me wrong: I had my own issues with the SFV vanilla release, but those have thankfully since been swiftly remedied soundly with all the various updates).

I didn't have much expectations for SFV's story mode, since it was too short and dumb. They should take notes from Neatherrealms and ArcSystem (regarding the early Guilty Gear games and Blazblue). And there were a lot of reasons why many people were pissed about the content, starting by the omission of the arcade mode which should've been there from Day 1.

What's also important to consider in all of this is the ways in which Street Fighter IV had TOTALLY changed the paradigm of the fighting game landscape back from where it was during the early/mid 2000s: the whole reason we even HAD that era of "minigame modes over core fighting" in the first place was as a direct response to the total demise of arcades (the venue through which the fighting genre was born and thrived in originally).

But still the vanilla Street Fighter IV had more content than the vanilla Street FIghter V, completed content I should say.

With arcades gone, there was now a whole new generation of gamers who never played these kinds of games before and were more used to single-player intensive games like RPGs and adventure games and such: and it ended up becoming seen as conventional wisdom that if fighting games as a genre were to survive in this new gaming landscape, they now had to tailor themselves to the experiences, expectations, and tastes of THOSE kinds of gamers instead of their older, more socially-inclined and skill/competition-focused player base.

The people who glommed onto games like Smash Bros, Soul Calibur, the Budokai games, and the like... most of them tended to be gamers of the "Ocarina of Time/Pokemon" generation: kids too young to have gone to arcades and never cut their teeth on Street Fighter against other players, and didn't play games in general as a social thing among their friends, but as something to do to kill time in their rooms alone after school.

And there are people who are still like that. Even the adult casual gamers spend time on single player campaigns after a long day at work. I'm like that too, I remember playing Tekken 6's Scenario Campaign mode a lot (even though it can be dumb at times).

Those early 2000s fighting games were designed from the ground up to appeal to gamers who don't respond to games that demand practice, experimentation with different approaches and strategies, and constant honing of raw skill... but rather who respond to games that demand grinding, completion of "quests" and check lists of goals, travel and exploration of in-game worlds, and finding and collecting in-game items.

The ones I've bold are the ones that I want on the single player side of fighting games. The exploration open-world stuff, I don't really care for as those modes can fuck up the focus for a core fighting gameplay. Mortal Kombat Deception and Armageddon being huge examples of that, and it's a shame cuz I enjoy playing those two back in the day, and now I only enjoy one every now and then, which is Deception. Budokai 3's exploration mode was a linear (but fun) one.

I can't count the number of (younger) players I knew in the early/mid 2000s (both IRL and even on just this forum alone) who'd play games like Mortal Kombat Deception, Soul Calibur 3, and DBZ Budokai whatever, would finish the various single player modes and "unlock" everything... only to then soon after sell the game off at Gamestop because they "completed/beat" the game... without of course EVER actually playing the core fighting game against other players for any real length of time (the most oft reason being: "I don't have any friends at all to play with").

The idea of playing a fighting game's single player through once, then considering the game "finished" only to sell it off... to a fan of the genre, that's BUGFUCK nuts and runs directly counter to the ENTIRE point of the genre, which is supposed to be years and years and years of lasting experience because its supposed to provide constant competition against other players.

And...so what? There are people like that in EVERY DAMN GENRE. People have different reasons to play the game. You have yours, I have mine.

Ever since then, the fighting genre has COMPLETELY turned itself around from the early/mid 2000s era of "quest modes" and "unlockables": the focus is now FIRMLY back on the core gameplay and competitive play, which is where it always belonged and where it SHOULD be. There's now a whole new generation of "hardcore fighting gamers" who've hopped on board the genre proper due to SFIV, and THAT'S ultimately what's lead to a competitive-focused game like FighterZ now being seen as a viable type of game for an anime license like DBZ to have its name on.

I am glad there is a new generation of hardcore fighters out there keeping the competition alive, but the reception most of the current Japanese fighting games (except Blazblue and Guilty Gear Xrd) aren't the best. There are many people who are pissed that Tekken 7 doesn't have the content that 6 had and half assed the ones that were there.

In the meantime though, let the people who actually like fighting games for being fighting games and mainly care about having a solid, deep, and competitive fighting game to just... have a solid, deep, and competitive fighting game for the DBZ series for once. There's already umpteen gazillion Budokai-style DBZ games out there: let us have just THIS one at least for now.

And nobody is stopping you from enjoying the game. All I'm saying is that the single player experience could've been better. Let the casuals voice their concern about that!

[Ranmaru Rei]

I like DBFZ, but it is barebones. I Like BlazBlue and Guilty Gear not only for gameplay, but for a singleplayer content too. I spent a lot of hours in Guilty Gear XX playing Story Mode ( I've finshed all story lines), M.O.M., Survival and Missions. I played various modes in BlazBlue, such Abyss, Highlander Assault, Unlimited Mars, etc. I like Guilty Gear Xrd for the best Tutorial in fighting games, IMHO. DBFZ has almost nothing for singleplayer. It even has no proper Tutorial Mode, that teachs everything in the game, like other ArcSys games do. BlazBlue Cross Tag Battle, IMHO, in a lot of aspects will be better game, btw.
I hope, they fix it, at least for DBFZ 2.

[Kunzait_83]

I have an answer for you. Neatherealm Games, the company that does both and succeeds. Again, some people can say whatever they want about their games. More fighting game developers need to follow Neatherrealms approach. I ain't asking for a lot of modes, all I am asking for is the right amount which is what Neatherealm does with their games.

I'm quite a great deal fond of Netherrealm's games myself. But I'm a bit confused by your distinction here: because apart from their various story modes (which are incredibly threadbare and basic, apart from the absurd amount of cutscenes featured: FighterZ's story mode, much as I'm not in any way fond of it, was certainly a MUCH more elaborate and ambitious effort at providing some sort of lite-RPG-esque experience), most Netherrealm games... don't really offer THAT much in the way of variable single-player content. Certainly no more than FighterZ does.

Both Mortal Kombat 2011 and X offer challenge towers, which I guess is something: beyond that though, its all just basic arcade ladder and versus matches. MKX has a whole lot of variety in terms of online multiplayer match-types, but that's obviously not related to single player (or to the non-competitive interests of casuals). Injustice 1 is incredibly threadbare apart from the story mode. Injustice 2 has the whole "collectible armor pieces" gimmick: and while I really love the core Injustice 2 game, I'd argue that the whole "collect all the various costume components" gimmick doesn't really add much of anything to the game and simply bogs it down needlessly.

Contrast that with the PS2-era MK games: where you had Konquest Modes that were anywhere from fully open world, quest-based RPGs (complete with day/night cycles) and full-bore beat 'em up/action adventure games, Tetris/Puzzle Fighter-esque puzzle games, Chess-based strategy games, a fucking full on Mario Kart-style racing game... ANY of the various modes in those games could've EASILY been their own full separate game (provided they had actually been polished and tuned up enough, instead of just carelessly thrown together to try and cram as much content into the games as possible, quality and substance be damned), and are testaments to how impossibly bloated, over-stuffed, and unfocused those games were.

By comparison, the current stable of Netherream games are INCREDIBLY stripped back and centered primarily on the core fighting games above all else. Yes there's a basic story mode (that's really just a glorified arcade ladder with gigantic cutscenes stuffed in between each match), yes there are a few challenge towers and the like... but that's largely IT.

That's... hardly what I'd call any sort of an emphasis on casual-friendly single player modes.

Unless you're just spending THAT much time in the challenge towers, I don't really understand what it is that you're getting out of games like the new current crop of MK games that isn't oriented mainly around the core competitive play. Injustice 2 I'd imagine you're probably spending oodles of time collecting all the various costume pieces... which is all well and good (and ultimately not much skin off my nose in the end, since the core fighting game is still a blast and plenty in-depth anyway) but again, I just wonder why it is that someone like yourself would feel the need to get these sorts of gameplay fixes out of a genre as largely ill-fitting for them as fighting games (more on that in a sec).

So really even there with Netherrealm... I don't really see what it is you're asking for a game like FighterZ to do differently than those games. If anything, FighterZ makes MUCH more of a token effort at providing a few grab-bag single player modes than does most Netherrealm games, regardless of how you feel about its execution thereof.

I ain't asking to lock up 90% of the roster either, no way. I agree that those days are done. Maybe 96-97% of the characters can be available while the last 3 or 4 can be secret characters.

Agreed: I'd go one further and just add that those days are done, and never should've even been a thing in the first place.

I'd argue that the modes in Soul Calibur 3, mainly Soul Arena and Chronicles of the Sword, has all three of those things that you mentioned. I still have the game. If Soul Calibur 3 had the arcade version first before consoles, it would've been the true successor to the competitive crowd.

Agree to disagree on the various SoulCal 3 modes.

But the second part of that statement is a contradiction: if SoulCal 3's core fighting game, as-is in the finished game we have today, had come out in arcades first, then I hardly see how it could've become the "true successor to the competitive crowd" since the game's core fighting game mechanics were so dumbed down and scaled back.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you and you're argument is that if it came out in arcades first, then perhaps Namco could've put their focus on making the core fighting game into something deeper and worthwhile to competitive players first, and THEN the console port could've later on added in all the bells and whistles (similar to games like Street Fighter Alpha 3 and Darkstalkers 3 and such): in which case, yeah I would definitely agree with you there... but that's more just a case of "would've, could've, should've".

When did I say they should please everyone? I'm only talking about the the two types of fighting gamers, which are the hardcore ones (like you) and the casual ones (like me). Just like racing games, there are two types of racing game fans, the ones who just wanna race and the ones who want creative single player modes, which some of them have thankfully (the Burnout games, the early NFS games, Midnight Club 2 & 3).

The bigger problem I have is with so much of the outrage and entitlement I've seen coming out of fans of the more Budokai-ish approach, who seem incensed that FighterZ is the first Dragon Ball game in over a decade to not cater itself to them. You'd almost think that we didn't have a whole gigantic SERIES of such games that stretched on for years and years and two whole console cycles, and that hardcore competitive fighting gamers (ones that are also Dragon Ball fans for purposes of this discussion) had what, all of ONE game during all those years before this one: one game that went roundly ignored, in large part because this was still pre-SFIV and the general console gaming public of 2006 just wasn't in the headspace yet for a "real" fighting game.

Is it sucky that FighterZ attempts to placate casual/single player gamers ended up turning out half-assed? Yes, but then I'd rather it just not even bothered with the token effort and instead just stuck to what its obviously best at, and maybe save all that other stuff for the sequel or something. Again, Dragon Ball simply hasn't had ANYTHING even vaguely like this since Super DBZ: and not since what, the last genuine stab at a "real" Butouden game before that back in the mid-90s? Long before the dub had even become a thing yet?

I'm hardly gonna shed any tears that the single-player casual market was deprived of a DBZ game that caters itself to their priorities THIS ONE TIME when its had a constant, never-ending torrent of DBZ games crafted specifically for their wants since Budokai 1 in 2002. I'm not saying that to be a jerk: I'm just being up front about what the reality for Dragon Ball video games has been for all these many years now, especially from the vantage point of someone who's in the market for "serious" fighting games and hasn't had that itch scratched for Dragon Ball since 2005/6 (and not since 1995/6 or so prior to that).

Meanwhile, the voices who are complaining about FighterZ the loudest are the same people who've been getting their "casual single player, item collecting, quest-driven" Dragon Ball "fighting game" fix consistently across countless dozens of games across numerous consoles since the early 2000s up till now.

I didn't have much expectations for SFV's story mode, since it was too short and dumb. They should take notes from Neatherrealms and ArcSystem (regarding the early Guilty Gear games and Blazblue). And there were a lot of reasons why many people were pissed about the content, starting by the omission of the arcade mode which should've been there from Day 1.

I agree that SFV now having a basic arcade ladder mode on its release was shitty. Again, I had more than my share of issues with the original release version of that game: those issues have thankfully though been more than soundly addressed since then, and SFV as it stands now is a perfectly fine game and worthy addition to that series.

What's also important to consider in all of this is the ways in which Street Fighter IV had TOTALLY changed the paradigm of the fighting game landscape back from where it was during the early/mid 2000s: the whole reason we even HAD that era of "minigame modes over core fighting" in the first place was as a direct response to the total demise of arcades (the venue through which the fighting genre was born and thrived in originally).

But still the vanilla Street Fighter IV had more content than the vanilla Street FIghter V, completed content I should say.

As noted, Street Fighter V had a TON of problems with its original release. That being said though: Street Fighter IV, much like the current crop of Netherrealm fighting games, was hardly some bastion of single player-rich modes. Arcade, versus, online, training: that's EVERYTHING the game gives you right there. As basic as and no-frills it gets.

The main thing that SFV was lacking up front was an arcade ladder: and I agree that that was shitty and a bad, innexcusable slight on Capcom's part. That said though, its there now, and as it currently stands, SFV actually has even MORE gameplay modes to offer than did SFIV in even its most advanced incarnation.

With arcades gone, there was now a whole new generation of gamers who never played these kinds of games before and were more used to single-player intensive games like RPGs and adventure games and such: and it ended up becoming seen as conventional wisdom that if fighting games as a genre were to survive in this new gaming landscape, they now had to tailor themselves to the experiences, expectations, and tastes of THOSE kinds of gamers instead of their older, more socially-inclined and skill/competition-focused player base.

The people who glommed onto games like Smash Bros, Soul Calibur, the Budokai games, and the like... most of them tended to be gamers of the "Ocarina of Time/Pokemon" generation: kids too young to have gone to arcades and never cut their teeth on Street Fighter against other players, and didn't play games in general as a social thing among their friends, but as something to do to kill time in their rooms alone after school.

And there are people who are still like that. Even the adult casual gamers spend time on single player campaigns after a long day at work. I'm like that too, I remember playing Tekken 6's Scenario Campaign mode a lot (even though it can be dumb at times).

That old argument (about "adults who come home tired from work, don't have a lot of time, and just want something to play in their now rare and precious free time") has NEVER made any sense to me in the way that its always generally been presented.

Most of the time, the people who often tend to make that argument do so in the defense of games that offer gigantic, dense, single-player intensive and quest-driven experiences over more difficult and skill-based "arcadey" styles of gaming.

The problem I have with that is, if you're a full-grown adult with a ton of daily responsibilities and shrinkingly little free time (and I myself am indeed such an adult these days), then which kind of games makes VASTLY more sense as a way of sneaking in some quick game-time in between work, errands, relationships, social life, and various other daily commitments:

10/15 minutes in a few quick matches, playing in short but intense bite-sized bursts, dropping in and dropping out however and whenever you like without any long-lasting commitment for each session... or sitting there on the couch for hours and hours at a time in front of a series of ginormous 20 minute long cinematic cutscenes interspersing ridiculously dense, exploration-heavy, multi-pronged quest-filled RPG-like games that aim to be "immersive experiences" and which result in these epic-length time sinks that require the utmost focus and commitment from the player?

This old chestnut of a point ("gamers now are adults and have NO TIME for quick and dirty-yet difficult, arcade-style games; that's why we now want all our games to be epic and movie-like RPGs with a bazillion different items and quests and assorted busywork to trudge through!") has NEVER made even the SLIGHTEST lick of sense: back in the day or now.

Those early 2000s fighting games were designed from the ground up to appeal to gamers who don't respond to games that demand practice, experimentation with different approaches and strategies, and constant honing of raw skill... but rather who respond to games that demand grinding, completion of "quests" and check lists of goals, travel and exploration of in-game worlds, and finding and collecting in-game items.

The ones I've bold are the ones that I want on the single player side of fighting games. The exploration open-world stuff, I don't really care for as those modes can fuck up the focus for a core fighting gameplay. Mortal Kombat Deception and Armageddon being huge examples of that, and it's a shame cuz I enjoy playing those two back in the day, and now I only enjoy one every now and then, which is Deception. Budokai 3's exploration mode was a linear (but fun) one.

Glad we at least agree on the open-world end of things. But as far as completing quests and checklists of goals and collecting items and whatnot goes... I'm not trying to knock you here, but I have to reiterate my earliest question: why even go to something as detached from that type of gameplay focus as fighting games (of all genres) for that kind of fix, and not just cut out the unecessary middleman entirely and just play RPGs and action/adventure games for that sort of experience? Genres in which those types of gameplay focuses are VASTLY more at home and organically intrinsic to?

This is what I meant earlier when I said that not everything or every genre is meant for or agreeable to everyone's tastes. Its obvious that you don't care as much about a game that's focused mostly on competition and where the meat of the gameplay is on diligent practice and honing your skill through constant matches, and that's perfectly fine, different strokes and all that... so why even go to a genre where that's the whole goddamn point of it in the first place?

Its also obvious that a gamer like yourself loves RPGs and loves adventure-like games, games that are single player dense quests where you have to explore a world, collect a ton of items, and complete numerous goals and tasks: you already have a whole TON of various genres that already make it their central point of doing that stuff as their central fixture! Why not just play the latest Zelda or Final Fantasy instead of yearning for the newest Marvel vs Capcom or King of Fighters or Mortal Kombat to provide that type of content, when that's OBVIOUSLY not the sort of foundation that their genres were even built on to begin with?

I don't go on Dragon Quest or Fire Emblem forums, for example, and say things like "Yeah these games are cool and all, but you know what they REALLY need to spruce them up? A combo system. A combo system, maybe some air juggles with it, and online versus play... and do we really need to have hit points and magic spells? Can't those magic spells just be special moves instead that you do with quarter circle movements instead of navigating a menu? And how about we do away with the towns and overworld map and have tournament brackets instead..."

I get what it is that you've been saying in this thread... it just fundamentally makes no goddamn sense to me, and never has in aaaaaaall the years and all the other discussions in which other gamers like yourself always raise these sorts of points about fighting games.

I can't count the number of (younger) players I knew in the early/mid 2000s (both IRL and even on just this forum alone) who'd play games like Mortal Kombat Deception, Soul Calibur 3, and DBZ Budokai whatever, would finish the various single player modes and "unlock" everything... only to then soon after sell the game off at Gamestop because they "completed/beat" the game... without of course EVER actually playing the core fighting game against other players for any real length of time (the most oft reason being: "I don't have any friends at all to play with").

The idea of playing a fighting game's single player through once, then considering the game "finished" only to sell it off... to a fan of the genre, that's BUGFUCK nuts and runs directly counter to the ENTIRE point of the genre, which is supposed to be years and years and years of lasting experience because its supposed to provide constant competition against other players.

And...so what? There are people like that in EVERY DAMN GENRE. People have different reasons to play the game. You have yours, I have mine.

You're missing my point: my point is that when you restructure an entire gaming genre (like fighting games in this case, but this applies to any other genre out there) to go so far out of their way to cater to the desires of gamers whose tastes run DIRECTLY COUNTER against the initial appeal of that genre to begin with, to the point of alienating and shutting out the playerbase that likes that genre for what its supposed to be, what it originally was, and doesn't have any interest in it remaking itself to be like other, unrelated genres (RPGs, adventure games, action platformers, beat em ups, etc)...

...then at a certain point, why even bother to have the pretense of the fighting game in the first place? Just make a game that's up front and from the ground up a beat em up, or an action adventure game, or an open world RPG or whatever else. This, I've always thought, was the whole entire reason we even had genre categorizations in the first place.

If Budokai fans love the open world of Budokai 3's story mode so much for example (and I know we already agreed on open worlds being too much to impose on a fighting game, but just bear with my example here for a moment)... why not just ask Bamco to make a DBZ open world RPG-like adventure game instead of a half-assed fighting game (a genre most of you clearly don't even care for or about in the first place) that sloppily and haphazardly squeezes a vague facsimile of an open-world adventure game into it? Just cut out the fucking unnecessary middle man of a fighting game entirely and get straight to what it is you clearly and obviously really want.

This can apply for fans of these kinds of "grab bag minigame" fighters who are more in the market for a beat em up, or a straight RPG, or a puzzle game, or a collect-a-thon type of thing and aren't that big on core fighting games in general: just make noise for Bamco to make a DB/Z game that's already in THOSE genres up front instead of pointlessly squirreling them away inside a hollow, dumpy, half-assed attempt at a "fighting game" acting as the thinly veiled excuse to have these things.

That way casual/single player folks can get the kinds of gaming experiences they like, and fans who just want a competitive fighting game can have real, competitive fighting games in the DB license. See? Everyone wins. Everyone goes home happy.

[Logania]

It's surprising the quality for the tutorial in FighterZ compared to Guilty Gear Xrd. I know the tutorial would be shorter as the combat system for FighterZ isn't nearly as complex so they don't have to explain as much, but they went about it very lazy. Just repeating a command or requirement 3 times to advance made it to where I just breezed through it for the Zeni and that's it and learned all the tech by just sitting in Training mode.

It was also nice how Xrd had a big Q&A and guide for all various things to do in a fighting game, like applying pressure, footsies, frames etc. It was really a perfect tutorial for people new to fighting games to get a nice headstart (although the tutorial is for one of the most complex fighting games ever lol) but FighterZ attempting to have a big casual audience and potentially it being their first fighting game to a lot of people, just did the bare minimum. Even the combo challenges are utter garbage.

[EXBadguy]

Okay, this isn't aimed at anyone here, but all I'm trying to say is that what some casuals are asking for is not going to take away anything from the hardcore players. AT ALL! Asking for an open world RPG exploration mode is going too far, but since when did became a bad thing to ask for an effectivesingle player campaign in today's fighting games? The earlier Tekken games had it, most Soul Calibur games had it (except 5), the Blazblue series had it, and the Guilty Gear series has it. Like I said again, I ain't asking much, I ain't asking for useless minigames like go-karts or Tekken Bowl or anything, I'm just asking for the right amount and/or make it like the earlier games. They're just a tiny mix of genres while they keep the core fighting game mechanics in tact. They could even make some of the modes DLC if they wish to, I don't mind. (just make price reasonable, that's all).

If this is the state of today's fighting games, with 100% of the focus being on online multiplayer e-sports, then I'll give up and move on, besides the genre is very niche anyway. But I'll be damned if somebody tells me that I'm entitled and not a real fighting game fan because I don't enjoy it the same way they do!

[jeffbr92]

It's funny how people thought that game would be the best-selling one of the franchise, yet five months have passed and still can't surpass Ultimate Tenkaichi sells lol

[Kanassa]

It's funny how people thought that game would be the best-selling one of the franchise, yet five months have passed and still can't surpass Ultimate Tenkaichi sells lol

Didn't FIghterZ set a new sales record?

[MCDaveG]

It's funny how people thought that game would be the best-selling one of the franchise, yet five months have passed and still can't surpass Ultimate Tenkaichi sells lol

Really? I was huge fan since the reveal, but that price was kinda too much for me, so I have bought Injustice 2 Legendary Edition, in steelbook, with lots of extras for half the price and I am waiting for the price to drop... will probably have to buy the DLC tough, waitinf for all the eight characters to be revealed

[dario03]

It's funny how people thought that game would be the best-selling one of the franchise, yet five months have passed and still can't surpass Ultimate Tenkaichi sells lol

Wait. Fighterz vs Ultimate Tenkaichi?
How many copies did UT sale? Only thing I could find was 700,000 after ~5 months.

[ShadowBardock89]

It's funny how people thought that game would be the best-selling one of the franchise, yet five months have passed and still can't surpass Ultimate Tenkaichi sells lol

Ultimate Tenkaichi's sales have been eclipsed nearly four times over by FighterZ's. I do not know what source you are using but the first Xenoverse game still is the best-selling Dragon Ball game.

[Bullza]

I'd made this thread where I put as much time as I could into finding the sales.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29226

Ultimate Tenkaichi is at 700,000. Xenoverse is at 5 million. Xenoverse 2 I at 3.3 million. FighterZ is at 2.5 million.

[goku the krump dancer]

So going by the last few pages there seems to be a split between people who think that FighterZ isn't worth sixty bucks because the story mode isn't that good and those who almost couldnt careless if the story mode consisted of fully rendered 3D cut scenes ala NetherRealm or barebones in-game models standing around "roasting" each other until its time to fight (What we got) or character cut-outs talking to each other for extended periods ala BLazBlue just so long as the core fighting game is good and has longevity.

Personally i'm more so with the second group.. I understand wanting a decent story mode even for fighting games but thats always gonna be second or third fiddle to the core of the game , which is the gameplay and the depth to it. I love NetherRealm's story modes but they dont make or break the games for me. In fact even if the story mode is good, I never play through it more than once unless I absolutely have to. FighterZ might not have the same quality of cutscenes but I think it still did a pretty good job conveying the story it was supposed to tell. Tekken 7 has full 3D cut-scenes but the story mode in that game is 100% GARBAGE I'd argue that some of the cut-scenes are even bad, I couldnt get through the first quarter of it. However Tekken 7 is still my favorite game out right now! with FighterZ and MKX tusssling back and forth for second place.

People were saying the same thing about Street Fighter 5 when it first dropped mostly because it lacked core gameplay modes ( including story mode) but even still nowadays you dont hear anyone praising the story asking for more but its the gameplay that gets the bulk of the attention.

[New_Guy]

Just wondering does #17 still have a chance as a full character?

[LightBing]

Just wondering does #17 still have a chance as a full character?

He's 99% confirmed to be a DLC character. From the leaks we had all have been correct. We should expect Vegetto Blue and Merged Zamasu, then Base Goku and Vegeta and finally the last pair are Cooler(unknown which form) and #17(from Super).

[ShadowBardock89]

I'd made this thread where I put as much time as I could into finding the sales.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29226

Ultimate Tenkaichi is at 700,000. Xenoverse is at 5 million. Xenoverse 2 is at 3.3 million. FighterZ is at 2.5 million.

Well, there you go.

Is FighterZ the fastest selling Dragon Ball game, though?

[Bullza]

Well, there you go.

Is FighterZ the fastest selling Dragon Ball game, though?

Yes I believe it is. FighterZ has shipped 2.5 million copies in 3 to 3 and half months or so.

The best comparison I could find is that Xenoverse shipped 3.1 million copies in 12 months.

http://www.siliconera.com/2016/02/05/dr ... shipments/

[Bullza]

So to the above, I definitely think the way the story is presented is much better than Xenoverse with its fairly stiff and repetitive animations. This not only looks better but it's done in a more Cinematic way too.

The story itself though....isn't very good, it's actually not as good as Xenoverse or even close to it maybe.

The gameplay is far better but none of it seems to matter because it is quite literally one of the easiest games that I've played in years. I just beat the final boss in like 30 seconds without hardly taking any damage.

According to my stats now I've played 94 games and I've won 94 games. I have not had a single character even get beaten. I have hardly even been in a position where I've needed to change character.

There's a hard mode but why should I have to go through the whole thing just to have to do it all again except this time it be a challenge?

It's very shoddy how it was put together. What is a fun combat system is all for nothing when you an mash triangle and win every time with no effort.

[Super Saiyan Turlast x4]

I'm in a very weird place with this game. I love it, but don't feel too enthused to play it much. I only planned to get to 530k BP for the Freeza trophy...before deciding to get to Super Saiyan 3. Eventually I just settled on Super Saiyan God and haven't had much of a desire to go any higher. The game has the mechanics (3v3, assists, flashy supers) that I adored from the MVC series, and it's still what I would consider a "dream game" for me. I wanted a Dragon Ball fighter in the form of the MVC games since I was a kid, so I'm glad it actually came into fruition.

Next to Street Fighter, the MVC games have always been my favorite. Nothing else really came close to those two. With the many issues plaguing MVCI, I just assumed DBFZ would fill the hole for me. It kinda has, but not as much as I'd like. I have way more hrs in DBFZ than I do MVCI, but honestly speaking, I don't think a game will ever have me as much as UMVC3/MVC2 did. Those games were just beyond fun and addictive. The type of games I could play for several hrs and be ready to play for another several. What I need to do is understand that DBFZ is its own thing and that it doesn't need to be on the level of those MVC games to be super fun.

Anyway, I love this game. It has a lot of things I am not a fan of, but that can be said about most fighting games. Hopefully Zamasu and Vegito end up being a ton of fun.

[Logania]

I hope they have a future patch where you can't skip Dramatic Finishes online.

I play Teen Gohan on Cell Games arena and, to no one's surprise, I run into Cell like crazy. I have to work around switching out his teammates to keep Cell alive, destroy the stage AND finish with a heavy attack. As soon as the cutscene happens, they skip it or ragequit. This happened to me 3 times yesterday.

WHY?? I EARNED that shit! Don't go Weenie Hut Jr's on me because you lost, then they have the nerve to want to rematch me. They getting booted from the Ring Match, I don't care.

If I'm getting bodied and it ends up the enemy can get a dramatic finish, if I'm at near death I'll even stand there and let them do it, they deserved it. I'm not saying everyone should bend over and gimme that finish, but take your loss like a man.