DB Fighting Games: Overall good or not quite what you want?

[Saiga]

I'm sorry but my response is a logical answer for all the comments of 'I don't care about uniqueness as long as I have all the characters'. If you don't care about uniqueness then what is the point of having different models in the first place?
Your comment follows no logical pattern from my posts though. I've defended on having unique characters with a decent solid roster which would be progressively expanded.

Furthermore, the Sparking engine basically uses the same model, only altering it's size when applicable. So yeah, my comment is moot because that already is a reality and you seem to enjoy it.

No, it's not a logical answer. You ignored that people have pointed out that their are differences between the Raging Blast and BT3 characters, so it's not nearly the same as your proposition. There have also been people (like me) saying they didn't care about gameplay depth but would like to see uniqueness in character movesets.

[DNA]

Yes. But my overarching point was that one shouldn't see it black and white. There are people who want both elements to be executed well.

Okay but you do have to compromise. In order to have quality, you have to have an initial smaller roster so they have time to work on it. Then, with time, we would have either more editions or DLC with more characters. I too want more characters but I want them to have some quality, some uniqueness to them. I would love to have a hundred characters, if they actually felt any good to play with.

Furthermore, if the game sets out to be just the simulation of the show, then why would one criticize it for not being a deep fighting game. It's like buying a bike and critizing it for not being able to drive it like a car.

Again, look at Super Smash Bros. series. Not a very deep fighting game, still manages to be an amazingly good game with each character feeling unique. Mario and Luigi are stated to be clones and even they play completely distinct from each other. This is not hard to do if some actual care and effort is put into it, of which Spike puts neither.

No, it's not a logical answer. You ignored that people have pointed out that their are differences between the Raging Blast and BT3 characters, so it's not nearly the same as your proposition.

I own and played and beat both Sparking Meteor and Raging Blast 2. I see no difference between the character models apart from graphics. Same moves, same flow, same shit. The characters behave exactly the same they did before, down to the very basic stance.

There have also been people (like me) saying they didn't care about gameplay depth but would like to see uniqueness in character movesets.

You can't have one without the other, game play depth IS uniqueness of characters. If the characters have unique move sets and just general basic moves, then you got yourself a deeper game play. If the characters are unique then you have to apply strategy in your fights instead of just spamming your strongest attack, especially since you have no drawback at all.

[Saiga]

Then you simply don't know much about the games, I'm playing BT3 right now and the difference are plain as day :V

[DNA]

Then you simply don't know much about the games, I'm playing BT3 right now and the difference are plain as day :V

That's rich coming from the guy who tells me he wants uniqueness with no depth. If you are so savant, please school me on how they are different. I am quite curious to know what exactly these differences are which you can so clearly see and I can't.

[Rostir]

Why hasn't there been a 3D version of Legends where I can fight for seemingly forever without invisible walls?

[Saiga]

Then you simply don't know much about the games, I'm playing BT3 right now and the difference are plain as day :V

That's rich coming from the guy who tells me he wants uniqueness with no depth. If you are so savant, please school me on how they are different. I am quite curious to know what exactly these differences are which you can so clearly see and I can't.

First of all to me, depth is more than just characters playing uniquely. Depth is also competitive balancing which I don't give a rat's ass about. Hence my comment.

For BT3, the characters have different "stats' as others have mentioned. BT3 also has different character types, like giants and androids and the like, which have their advantages and disadvantages. Blast 1/2/Ultimate Blast loadouts are different for the characters, and so are combo loadouts. Vegeta might use a rush ki wave on Square, Square, Square, Triangle however the same combo on Gohan would result in a different move. Blast combos also vary from character to character.

[DNA]

First of all to me, depth is more than just characters playing uniquely. Depth is also competitive balancing which I don't give a rat's ass about.

Okay dude, first off, balancing a game has nothing to do with depth nor competition. It has to do with the game been playable in the first place. What happens when you don't give a rat's ass about balancing is the early M.U.G.E.N. community, in which you had dozens of 'god' characters which could destroy each other with a single move, because they weren't balanced at all. If that's what you want you can always go look for early 'god' characters, there are plenty DBZ ones.

For BT3, the characters have different "stats' as others have mentioned. BT3 also has different character types, like giants and androids and the like, which have their advantages and disadvantages. Blast 1/2/Ultimate Blast loadouts are different for the characters, and so are combo loadouts. Vegeta might use a rush ki wave on Square, Square, Square, Triangle however the same combo on Gohan would result in a different move. Blast combos also vary from character to character.

And here, although you do raise valid points let's go at it one at the time. First off, the character types are nothing but sizes of the same model, so again, it barely makes a difference. Secondly, the 'androids''s main difference is that they are able to run away from the view and harder to locate, which would work in theory but is completely useless in the actual game play thanks to the engine used. And lastly you are telling me that Vegeta and Gohan differ the order they do things. Maybe Vegeta does a combo and a blast, maybe Gohan does a blast and a throw. All the moves are still shared though, the generic blast is common to nearly every character in the games, so is the energy blast volley and so on so forth. All that changes is the name and the colour. Load-outs, sizes and all that are not enough to actually make them feel different when they share everything else.
In any other fighting game, be it competitive or not, deep or not, you always have actual character types like grapplers, jugglers, tankers and more. In contrast, like you are telling me, in the Sparking engine you have child, adult, tall and giant. Those aren't types, those are sizes. A type is a complete change in character feel and strategy, Sparking does not have that because the strategy is always the same no matter what character you use. Independently of it being competitive friendly or not, that is what makes a good fighting game good.
And despite all that, like it or not, if a game is competitive it will sell much more, because as the name implies, it will attract those into gaming competitions. It will also extend it's shelf life and re-playability. More sales, more money, better games.

So we are now at the fifth page and I've got around five to six people arguing with me about this but the core is the same, it's not about the depth or the competitiveness of the game, it's about the game being good in the first place, which is not. You might enjoy it, heck I enjoyed it when it came out, but that doesn't make it good, and I can clearly see that it isn't, it simply isn't good enough. And it shows by the constant drop in sales and overall interest.

[Sinestro]

I'm not arguing, so make that four-to-five people.

Ba-da-dump

[Rocketman]

In any other fighting game, be it competitive or not, deep or not, you always have actual character types like grapplers, jugglers, tankers and more.

Maybe it's because those differences don't exist in Dragonball.

Except tankers, but BT3 also has those.

[DBZGTKOSDH]

What's important for a game is to be enjoyable. I enjoyed Sparking! METEOR, Raging Blast 2, and Ultimate Blast, so they are good games IMO, especially Sparking! METEOR. If the game is not enjoyable, then it's worth shit.

[DNA]

Maybe it's because those differences don't exist in Dragonball.

Except tankers, but BT3 also has those.

Those where three examples out of many. Whilst most might not apply to Dragon Ball, there are various disciplines which can be expanded upon with care and imagination. Super Dragon Ball Z manages to give each character an unique fighting style. Chi Chi uses something similar to T'ai chi ch'uan for example. Yamcha's 'wolf' style can be expanded upon to make him more unique, so can Tenshinhan's Crane style. Look at how resourceful Kuririn was on early arcs, he developed his own style from the Turtle style.
The differences do exist, if you actually care to look for them.

What's important for a game is to be enjoyable. I enjoyed Sparking! METEOR, Raging Blast 2, and Ultimate Blast, so they are good games IMO, especially Sparking! METEOR. If the game is not enjoyable, then it's worth shit.

Yes, you may find it enjoyable, but you are definitely not the majority, and it seems the majority begs to disagree. I found them enjoyable when I played them and now they are shelved forever. It's simply not a lasting enjoyment. The games fail to pass the test of time.

[Rocketman]

Please elaborate on the vast differences between the fighting styles of Vegeta and Freeza.

[DBZGTKOSDH]

What's important for a game is to be enjoyable. I enjoyed Sparking! METEOR, Raging Blast 2, and Ultimate Blast, so they are good games IMO, especially Sparking! METEOR. If the game is not enjoyable, then it's worth shit.

Yes, you may find it enjoyable, but you are definitely not the majority, and it seems the majority begs to disagree. I found them enjoyable when I played them and now they are shelved forever. It's simply not a lasting enjoyment. The games fail to pass the test of time.[/quote]
Exactly. If the game is good, it's up to the individual to decide.

[DNA]

Please elaborate on the vast differences between the fighting styles of Vegeta and Freeza.

I purposely left those two on the side because as you reach the Namek arc every character starts blending together, but there are subtle differences that have been explored in Super Dragon Ball Z. Vegeta is more of a fast paced mixed combo with large ki attacks. Freeza is much more ki friendly and will seldom attack physically, although he uses ki in more located points, small ki beams to do maximum damage. Vegeta uses large beams and ki balls to try to completely obliterate the adversary. Even down to the way they behave, Vegeta is more of a berserker whilst Freeza is graceful and precise, that can easily be translated in a game if any care is put into it.

Exactly. If the game is good, it's up to the individual to decide.

No, if the game is good, it's good. If the game is bad, then you might enjoy it but that doesn't change the fact that the game is bad, which is the case. I've said this three times already. It's the same with anything in life. I enjoy bad movies, doesn't change the fact they are bad. Enjoying one thing does not automatically make it good. One thing does not relate to the other. With the same logic, you might not enjoy a good game. I know there are some games which I can clearly see are good but I simply don't enjoy them at all.

[InfernalVegito]

Please elaborate on the vast differences between the fighting styles of Vegeta and Freeza.

I purposely left those two on the side because as you reach the Namek arc every character starts blending together, but there are subtle differences that have been explored in Super Dragon Ball Z. Vegeta is more of a fast paced mixed combo with large ki attacks. Freeza is much more ki friendly and will seldom attack physically, although he uses ki in more located points, small ki beams to do maximum damage. Vegeta uses large beams and ki balls to try to completely obliterate the adversary. Even down to the way they behave, Vegeta is more of a berserker whilst Freeza is graceful and precise, that can easily be translated in a game if any care is put into it.

I find this interesting and can imagine how this would create more variety in the game if this was done like that.
How would the controls be for every character? Because as it is with BT/RB everyone has his physical melee rush strings on square and ki blasts on triangle. Would Freezer then mostly have ki attacks and maybe even psychic grabs on both buttons? And then one would have to see how to combine buttons and time them to achieve a certain combo.

How would you see this?

Throughout the series although everyone just becomes too much the same, i.e. a fast melee fighter with lots of teleportation and excessive energy blast volleys.

[DBZAOTA482]

Please elaborate on the vast differences between the fighting styles of Vegeta and Freeza.

Vegeta is an expert tactical fighter and specializes in ki manipulation.

Freeza is combines elegance and precision with a large variety of techniques.

[DNA]

There you go. With a little bit of care, imagination and attention to detail we can actually manage to find different styles even in characters that seem to be so much like each other.

For example, going on a completely unrelated and outside character, I could easily grab Neko Majin Z and make him a slasher with some Turtle style moves throw in. Further more he could actually use farts as well. There are various slashers in SNK series and some... well... 'farters' have been seen. I know there was one in an SNK game and there's also Gon in Tekken 3.

It only gets complicated when you start scratching the bottom of the barrel for characters who barely had screen time, but that's when you have to be really creative if you want to put them in. There is no excuse to recycle moves and models, that's simply laziness.

[DBZGTKOSDH]

Exactly. If the game is good, it's up to the individual to decide.

No, if the game is good, it's good. If the game is bad, then you might enjoy it but that doesn't change the fact that the game is bad, which is the case. I've said this three times already. It's the same with anything in life. I enjoy bad movies, doesn't change the fact they are bad. Enjoying one thing does not automatically make it good. One thing does not relate to the other. With the same logic, you might not enjoy a good game. I know there are some games which I can clearly see are good but I simply don't enjoy them at all.[/quote]
I disagree. In my whole life, I never heard me, or my friends saying "this game is very good, but I can't enjoy it". It's either good, or it's bad. Exception are the different genres, for example, Pro Evolution Soccer 2013 is a very good game, but not my type, because I don't like football. But between, say, Sparking! METEOR & Infinite World, maybe the second will be more enjoyable, while the first would be shit. It's up to the individual to decide if a game is good or bad for his tastes, IMO.

[DNA]

I disagree. In my whole life, I never heard me, or my friends saying "this game is very good, but I can't enjoy it". It's either good, or it's bad. Exception are the different genres, for example, Pro Evolution Soccer 2013 is a very good game, but not my type, because I don't like football. But between, say, Sparking! METEOR & Infinite World, maybe the second will be more enjoyable, while the first would be shit. It's up to the individual to decide if a game is good or bad for his tastes, IMO.

Yes, and you have been mixing taste with quality for the whole topic so far. Your personal taste does not reflect on a game being good or not. But you are right in one thing, I didn't explain myself very well, I meant that I can appreciate if a game is good even if it's not my type. It's not that I don't enjoy the game, it's that I would not enjoy it if I tried it because it is not my type of game, even if it is good. So I won't enjoy it by default, which does not make it a bad game.

[Rocketman]

Vegeta is an expert tactical fighter and specializes in ki manipulation.

Freeza is combines elegance and precision with a large variety of techniques.

Vegeta (Second Form) has quick and brutal punching combos, more standard ki blast shots than any of the other heroes, all his attacks are ki blasts and his special abilites focus on boosting his ki power or his signature Explosive Wave.

Freeza (Final Form) has more flowery combos where he uses his feet and tail, his ki blasts are smaller and faster than the heroes' while also travelling in straight lines instead of curving, his major attacks are either extremely fast and precise or unblockable and his special abilites are paralysis and an instant jump to using his ultimate attack.