Has free-roaming flight ever ....

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:45 pm

been incorporated into DBZ game, 2D, or 3D? I ask because I just had an idea for fun, and fast paced flying fights, but given it's simplicity I'm guessing it's probably been used before.

---
Maybe "freeroamed" wasn't the right word. What I want to know is if the player has ever been given the ability fly their character anywhere on the screen at any given time.

Detective X · Post by **Detective X** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:50 pm

You're joking, right?

Um... Super Sonic Warriors/Bukuu Tougeki and Legends.

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:54 pm

No joking here. I've never layed hands on a DBZ game, other than LOG2.

Um... Super Sonic Warriors/Bukuu Tougeki and Legends.

Could you tell me how the flight mechanics of those games are activated? That is to say, how do you control them?[/quote]

El_Diablo · Post by **El_Diablo** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:03 pm

I remember playing a SNES rom of a game with clear flying in it. You pressed up or held down jump or something

Post by **VegettoEX** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:28 pm

There's always Final Bout, as well. All you had to do was hold L1 or R1 as you pressed a direction.

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:03 pm

And TDIR has perfected 3D flight.

...I don't get paid I swear.

Izlude · Post by **Izlude** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:59 pm

IncredibleGuy wrote: Could you tell me how the flight mechanics of those games are activated? That is to say, how do you control them?

Its easy really, you press any directional button and you move in that direction. You double tap that direction and you dash in that direction. If you hold down the Ki button while moving you can rush into your enemies.

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:37 am

Ay, I should've expected as much... Still, if Dimps plans on creating another Budokai they REALLY need to implement something like that, along with a lock-on button to keep said fights from becoming too clumsy, or unenjoyable.

Dragon · Post by **Dragon** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:48 am

The Legacy of Goku 1 gave you the ability to fly anytime, but it was limited though. Does that help?

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:27 pm

IncredibleGuy wrote:Ay, I should've expected as much... Still, if Dimps plans on creating another Budokai they REALLY need to implement something like that, along with a lock-on button to keep said fights from becoming too clumsy, or unenjoyable.

You don't really need a lock-on button though in Supersonic Warriors, they're always looking at each other as one should in a fighting game. I imagine Budokai would be the same if it implemented that system, but I doubt it would just because it doesn't seem to fit in with the rest of the game's feel.

The Destruction is Real has Lock-On

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Sun Nov 14, 2004 1:52 am

You don't really need a lock-on button though in Supersonic Warriors, they're always looking at each other as one should in a fighting game.

I don't agree with that. Players shouldn't have to stay automatically locked-on to their opponents at all times just because it's a "fighting game". What if the player wanted to flee, or fly around and catch their opponent from behind? And what about matches that involved more than two players, can you imagine how awkard it would be to have an automated lock-on system kick in at a time like that? It's that kind of restriction that really turns me off when playing videogames.

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:06 am

IncredibleGuy wrote:
You don't really need a lock-on button though in Supersonic Warriors, they're always looking at each other as one should in a fighting game.
I don't agree with that. Players shouldn't have to stay automatically locked-on to their opponents at all times just because it's a "fighting game". What if the player wanted to flee, or fly around and catch their opponent from behind? And what about matches that involved more than two players, can you imagine how awkard it would be to have an automated lock-on system kick in at a time like that? It's that kind of restriction that really turns me off when playing videogames.

Go hug a tree.

But seriously, these restrictions honestly seem annoying and awkward, but think about a game without them. At best, removing the little "restrictive quirks" like locking-on produces a clumsy "where'd ya go?" type of situation.

I completely am in accordance that games should not adhere to the genre stereotypes, but I find the better games build upon the tried and true instead of immediate breakout. Immediate breakout has been seen as success in quite a good amount of examples, but in other cases it is either ignored or was never good to begin with.

So yes, on the surface, lock-on seems like a silly feature that destroys what credibility dodging and evasion can have in a fighting game, but take them away and you're gonna be hard pressed to make a game feeling that naked.

And this isn't even getting into the fact that video-games have limited input. Our human eyes and reflexes make something like "lock-on" a lot easier to pull off than it is with a digital pad and some buttons. The feature is sort of a compensation, it makes the characters feel like highly trained warriors without just making you watch a prefabricated sequence.

Of course one day we'll probably let go of these primitive inputs, but until we can develop technology that can tap into our neurons, I'd like to have something "automated" and "awkward" to keep me company.

Rocketman · Post by **Rocketman** » Sun Nov 14, 2004 6:14 pm

Mugenmidget wrote:Of course one day we'll probably let go of these primitive inputs, but until we can develop technology that can tap into our neurons, I'd like to have something "automated" and "awkward" to keep me company.

Yeah, something like The Matrix, where you plug your brain into the game and suddenly... you ARE Goku, or Gohan, or Cell, or even the mighty Roshi!

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:15 pm

Rocketman wrote:
Mugenmidget wrote:Of course one day we'll probably let go of these primitive inputs, but until we can develop technology that can tap into our neurons, I'd like to have something "automated" and "awkward" to keep me company.
Yeah, something like The Matrix, where you plug your brain into the game and suddenly... you ARE Goku, or Gohan, or Cell, or even the mighty Roshi!

Except hopefully a lot less philosophy.

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:19 am

But seriously, these restrictions honestly seem annoying and awkward, but think about a game without them. At best, removing the little "restrictive quirks" like locking-on produces a clumsy "where'd ya go?" type of situation.

Super Smash bros., and Powerstone don't use auto-aiming, and "at best" they perform much better than the average fighter, and way above what you claim such character freedom would entail.

So yes, on the surface, lock-on seems like a silly feature that destroys what credibility dodging and evasion can have in a fighting game, but take them away and you're gonna be hard pressed to make a game feeling that naked.

May I direct you to my two prior examples.

And this isn't even getting into the fact that video-games have limited input. Our human eyes and reflexes make something like "lock-on" a lot easier to pull off than it is with a digital pad and some buttons. The feature is sort of a compensation, it makes the characters feel like highly trained warriors without just making you watch a prefabricated sequence.

I'm not sure if you understand this, but I don't have anything against auto-aiming features. Just that they should be optional so that players can switch back and forth between different fighting styles. I don't enjoy restricting players to certain fighting style just because everyone else is doing it.

Of course one day we'll probably let go of these primitive inputs, but until we can develop technology that can tap into our neurons, I'd like to have something "automated" and "awkward" to keep me company.

Once again, I'd like to add I enjoy the lock-on feature, but if I want to travel around my arena without backstepping being my only form of travel I should be damn well able too. It's more fun.

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 7:19 pm

Super Smash bros., and Powerstone don't use auto-aiming, and "at best" they perform much better than the average fighter, and way above what you claim such character freedom would entail.

Except for the fact that Super Smash. Bros is 2D Gameplay with 3D Graphics and Power Stone DOES auto-aim most of the time (one that comes to mind: jump attacks), you almost had a point.

IncredibleGuy · Post by **IncredibleGuy** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 1:54 am

...you almost had a point.

Coincidentally, you almost had a rebuttal. -_-

Except for the fact that Super Smash. Bros is 2D Gameplay with 3D Graphics and Power Stone DOES auto-aim most of the time (one that comes to mind: jump attacks)...

What does it matter if Super Smash Bros. is 2D? Did we ever specify 3D games were only to be discussed? Really... was it too much for you to consider the possibility I purposely used a 2D fighter as an example, maybe because the idea I originally posted about maybe used a 2D engine, or did pompously over-looking that possibility really more appropriate? And please get over yourself with the Power Stone lock-on explanation. The game mixed both elements equally. Players roamed freely and auto-aimed for attacks. Backstepping, my biggest problem with auto-locks was never present.

Mugenmidget · Post by **Mugenmidget** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:13 pm

No, see...Smash Brothers is just like any other 2d fighter in that it isn't free-roaming...that's really all I meant...

And if Power Stone mixed both elements equally, then where's your argument? I'm talking about games that were heavily "free roaming."