The Current State of 3D Fighters

[Jyakotu]

I'd say production hinders 3D fighters the most. Very seldomly does the 3D community get new games or event updates, with the exception of DOA5 of course.
Personally i think it would be good if Namco, Ninja, or somebody else to make a whole new 3D fighter series.

I never thought about it like that. But then again, a lot of 2D fighters now are using 3D models, but just restricting them on a 2D plane. But I get what you're saying. Fans of 3D fighters don't get new games as often anymore, unless you're a Tekken or DOA player. A lot more does go into a 3D fighter, because they try to replicate realistic fighting styles. Not to mention, environmental interaction is a HUGE aspect in 3D fighters as well. I supposed it's easier to make 3D models on a 2D plane as opposed to just a fully 3D game.

 

[d3v]

The problem with the games not appearing at EVO usually comes down to the communities. Tekken's been on a downward spiral in the US. Soul Calibur has always had the problem where it's had tons of casual support, but not alot of players playing the game competitively. Virtua Fighter has never really caught on in the west and the game itself is old. Dead Or Alive has had to rebuild after the catastrophe that was 4.

The other thing is that 2D communities have tended to be more resilient. Both in part due to the "dark ages" during the mid 2000's as well as the fact people have tended to stick to older games even as new ones came out as far back as the 90s. Look at how Super Turbo still got an official side tournament at EVO, and how #37Reloaded was one of the hypest tournaments this year. This resiliency translates into bigger tournament attendance.

 

[Jyakotu]

It's really sad, once you think about it. 3D fighters were once at the top of their game when 2D fighters were starting to fade out. Even popular franchises, like Street Fighter, KoF, and MK where trying to go 3D, but failed. It was only when Capcom released SF4 that the 2.5D revolution came, so people could enjoy 3D models, but still play the game on a 2D plane. While the scene for 3D fighters in the US have been diminishing over the years, the scenes outside of the US have been pretty consistent for most of the games. *sighs*

 

[d3v]

IMO, part of it is that 2D fighters on a certain level, are just easier to pick up. As someone once stated, 2D fighters are about controlling space, while 3D fighters are about controlling time. One of much easier to get a handle on visually while the other requires a more involved understanding of things like frame data.

 

[Jyakotu]

You're right. 2D fighters are easier to pick up, no matter how difficult it seems on the surface at first. There is less to worry about in a 2D fighter than in a 3D fighter.

 

[Rikuto]

2D = Physical Sport

3D = Math Bandits

Tekken comes pretty close to bridging the gap, and SCV pre-patch came pretty close as well. The only other one I can recall would be Bushido Blade, because of weapon ranges and one hit kills determining pretty much every fight.

VF and DOA go all-in on the math though.

 

[Jyakotu]

I think the reason I prefer 3D fighters are because they are more complex. Not to mention, they're more fun to watch.

 

[Matt Ponton]

What about them do you think makes them more fun to watch for you?

 

[Jyakotu]

What about them do you think makes them more fun to watch for you?

I think it's because I know what's going on and they're less flashy than their 2D counterparts. What makes 3D hype for me is the fact that it comes down to overall skill. I understand 2D games require skill as well, but I feel most people are only hype due to the flashiness of it all. In 3D, it's just the fighters and their environments that get to shine. Even with watching Tekken Tag 2, I still get hyped when I see the juggle combos, despite how much I hate the Bound system. Lol

 

[d3v]

I think the reason I prefer 3D fighters are because they are more complex.

lolwut?

 

[Rikuto]

I think it's because I know what's going on and they're less flashy than their 2D counterparts. What makes 3D hype for me is the fact that it comes down to overall skill. I understand 2D games require skill as well, but I feel most people are only hype due to the flashiness of it all. In 3D, it's just the fighters and their environments that get to shine. Even with watching Tekken Tag 2, I still get hyped when I see the juggle combos, despite how much I hate the Bound system. Lol

From my experience people don't get hyped during 2D because of flashiness. They get hyped because there is an extraordinarily larger difficulty barrier in execution, and long juggles can very very easy to drop. People hold onto their hats when something big happens mid-match because depending on that execution it might end the round or not.

Same could be said for 3D fighters, except the juggles are usually shorter and much more consistent. Not as much teeth grinding.

 

[quash]

I'm actually currently writing an article on how 2D fighters have successfully implemented 3D fighter conventions, whereas the opposite has yet to occur.

The issue with 3D fighters is that they tend to play to their strengths and pay little regard to their weaknesses. Case in point is the emphasis that's been placed on the wall game in recent 3D fighters: instead of figuring out how to have more interesting mixups at farther ranges, they've decided to give you every incentive not to play the long range game (on offense, at least). VF went as far as having those rectangular stages that place both players within spitting distance of a wall at round start, effectively encouraging more nitaku/triangle based play and discouraging defensive movement such as square stepping.

I'll easily admit though that it is much harder to give 3D games a good long range game than it is to give 2D games a good close range game, and those that have accomplished this (namely the mech fighters) tend to fail at the close range game, where every other 3D fighter excels.

 

[Rikuto]

When all the fighting is with your actual body, then all fighting becomes in-fighting. Soul Calibur made the greatest strides to change that about 3D fighters. Every character had their own range due to weaponry, their own techniques for controlling space, and some have even gotten to the point where they have projectiles or weird gimmicks like Viola or Zwei.

Sadly, some vocal individuals in that community got movement patched (and destroyed) in the process because they liked the numbers game more than the physical sport. Ie, they were more in favor of making rock paper scissors guesses instead of actually reacting and spacing via physical merit. Being unable to backstep into a guard completely destroys freedom of movement, so that series is no longer a viable candidate until 6 at the earliest.

The game already had an incredibly brutal guard break system, so it's not as if guarding was a problem to begin with. To this day, the leaders of the Soul Calibur community defend that patch and refuse to acknowledge it's what killed the game. Really disappointing.

 

[Jyakotu]

I don't know if 3D fighters should implement the ideas of 2D fighters. I play 3D fighters because of their differences from 2D.

 

[Jyakotu]

lolwut?

Are you saying that they're not?

 

[d3v]

Are you saying that they're not?

There are two reasons why I didn't bother to give that post of yours a serious response. The first is because it reeks of the kind of divisive comment made by someone who doesn't really have any idea but is simply trying to make themselves feel better.

The second is because it is obviously made by someone hasn't played enough and therefore has no idea what they're talking about. Games on either sub-genre all have different levels of complexity and certain examples on one sub-genre can be as simple or as complex as another game in the other one.

And this is before we get into the whole complexity vs depth argument where complexity does not necessarily equate to depth and vice versa.

 

[Jyakotu]

The only reason why I say 3D is more complex is because I literally have to study shit in order to get better. 2D fighters, I can usually jump right in with no problem, mainly because a lot of 2D fighters have the same control scheme, with quarter circles, half circles, etc. Even with anime, they usually have the same button layout, thus, it's pretty easy for me to jump right in. With 3D, it's not so simple. At least, to me. But also, you didn't have to come off as so rude in your response.

 

[Rikuto]

You'll have to study to get better at 2D as well. Study a lot. And practice more than you've ever practiced anything in your life.

2D is one of those things where the shallow end is incredibly welcoming, but the deep end is full of sea monsters.

3D is largely the opposite. You have to study a good amount to make that initial plunge, but the mountain tends to flatten out earlier than 2D fighters.

But it's all about that initial impression.

And guys, comn... let's try not to get into some awkward fight over nothing. I can already see the avalanche threatening to start and I'm too tired for that crap today.

 

[Jyakotu]

You're right. Both type of fighters have their strengths and their weaknesses. But with the bevy of 2D fighters out now, it's not hard for them to thrive and flourish, because they are simply easier to pick up. There are only 4 main 3D fighting game franchises right now, and only two have somewhat active communities (Soulcalibur is I guess active, but it's continuing to dwindle). What is worrying me is how 3D fighters are starting to become simplified, which is a double edged sword. Good for bringing in new people, but how many of those new people come in and stay? That's the real issue here. What are 2D fighters doing that have people take interest in the game, but also have them continue to be interested?

 

[d3v]

Simplifying doesn't mean dumbing down and some of the simplest games can have the most depth.