Wasn’t thinking of the shoulder buttons for attack and guard but yeah I recall Cory saying something about that. My reply on stun gauge was mostly referring to this part -
Why Derivative Game Design Doesn't Matter
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
A game like Shadows of the Damned has the best walking sections, because you're not forced to slow walk. The Sushi Lamp sections. You can do a slow walk, medium walk, or run around like a crazy jackass and no immersion is broken. What helps even more is that you're not always exactly safe during these sections, aside from its first introduction.
Now Yahtzee is complaining about time dodges and parries being in "everything". No they are not, Yahtzee. He mentions this in his 2024 games he didn't review.
You can't stop someone from drawing a fake Picasso. and that's probably a lot of people. Whether it's a good or bad copy doesn''t matter to most people. People are just going to think it's the same thing in some random gallery, with probably some minor details only true afficionados of Picasso can recognize.
In any case, the copy of Picasso is acceptable to most people.
But what I think fascinates people a lot is when you start to get those deviations of that original formula. And those derivatives/deviations away from the "way Picasso drew it" is something a lot of people seem to enjoy. Like this painting of Super Mario as a Picasso.
displate.com
Kind of the same thing with game genres, especially in FPS/3PS/2D beat em ups/fighting games.
Take for instance KOF and Street Fighter. KOF's base is definitely one of Street Fighters at first, with the only difference being the 3v3 Team format.
But as the series progressed, starting with '96, we get some land mark mechanics that defined the series and distinguished itself from its foundation; hops, rolls, blowback attacks, guard cancels, comboable grabs, OTGs, techs rolls, etc. It basically stopped being 3v3 Street Fighter and became something of its own, which a lot of people internationally have grown to appreciate.
I don't think derivative game design doesn't matter, especially with what games laid the foundation for certain genres. In fact derivatives, I will argue, are also important for the appreciation of what came before it/the genre itself. And a great derivative can open a gateway of new ideas for a genre as well.
I don't think I would have appreciated or enjoyed something like Spikeout if I didn't play Yakuza 0 first, especially when you start doing 1 cc/deathless runs and start learning how to deal with multiple enemies/do combos in both those games. Everything Yakuza 0 does builds off a very similar foundation combat wise to Spikeout when you look at how it plays fundamentally, with Yakuza adding more mechanics like heat actions and different enemy types to spice things up. The heat system is something unique to Yakuza that I don't see a lot of other 3d action games have and is core the series. But even then, Spikeout still has some of its own identity with how the Charge hold system works, the way you can "Super Attacks" interactions with certain enemies and the more "disciplined" approach the game is going for compared to Yakuza.
I think a derivative piece fails is when it doesn't have any identity of its own, and is simply copy-pasting what has worked previously instead of something that makes it worth playing. Which is why I believe something like Concord was going to fall along the way side eventually(apart from its atrocious character designs and god awful marketing), even if it was a financial success.
But also a bad derivative does this hidden "meta damage" being for the genre itself, to where people bring up the "it's just another shitty game of this type, this genre is dying" argument. Which is something people would definitely always seem to say when there's a major flop in a particular genre, but then REWIND on that statement as soon as something in that genre does well again. Marvel Rivals comes out and suddenly, wouldn't you know!? "Hero Shooters are saved!" As if a decent chunk of people weren't still playing Overwatch 2 by the time Rivals came out. Sure, not as big as a cultural phenomenon as the 1st, but still to this day has more active players playing it on Steam than the entire communities of Street Fighter 6 and Tekken 8 on Steam combined.
And I also feel that it really does matter a LOT now when talking about derivative game design in a genre, especially these days where people on the internet want to just dumpster fire anything and all relations to that thing for clout and money, with total disregard on how their actions/words affect an impressionable young audience/the general masses (looking at you, "gaming is dead" youtube/tiktok grifters).
In any case, the copy of Picasso is acceptable to most people.
But what I think fascinates people a lot is when you start to get those deviations of that original formula. And those derivatives/deviations away from the "way Picasso drew it" is something a lot of people seem to enjoy. Like this painting of Super Mario as a Picasso.
'Super Picasso' Poster, picture, metal print, paint by Eye Catching Art | Displate
Beautiful 'Super Picasso' Poster Print by Eye Catching Art ✓ Printed on Metal ✓ Easy Magnet Mounting ✓ Worldwide Shipping. Buy online at DISPLATE.
displate.com
Kind of the same thing with game genres, especially in FPS/3PS/2D beat em ups/fighting games.
Take for instance KOF and Street Fighter. KOF's base is definitely one of Street Fighters at first, with the only difference being the 3v3 Team format.
But as the series progressed, starting with '96, we get some land mark mechanics that defined the series and distinguished itself from its foundation; hops, rolls, blowback attacks, guard cancels, comboable grabs, OTGs, techs rolls, etc. It basically stopped being 3v3 Street Fighter and became something of its own, which a lot of people internationally have grown to appreciate.
I don't think derivative game design doesn't matter, especially with what games laid the foundation for certain genres. In fact derivatives, I will argue, are also important for the appreciation of what came before it/the genre itself. And a great derivative can open a gateway of new ideas for a genre as well.
I don't think I would have appreciated or enjoyed something like Spikeout if I didn't play Yakuza 0 first, especially when you start doing 1 cc/deathless runs and start learning how to deal with multiple enemies/do combos in both those games. Everything Yakuza 0 does builds off a very similar foundation combat wise to Spikeout when you look at how it plays fundamentally, with Yakuza adding more mechanics like heat actions and different enemy types to spice things up. The heat system is something unique to Yakuza that I don't see a lot of other 3d action games have and is core the series. But even then, Spikeout still has some of its own identity with how the Charge hold system works, the way you can "Super Attacks" interactions with certain enemies and the more "disciplined" approach the game is going for compared to Yakuza.
I think a derivative piece fails is when it doesn't have any identity of its own, and is simply copy-pasting what has worked previously instead of something that makes it worth playing. Which is why I believe something like Concord was going to fall along the way side eventually(apart from its atrocious character designs and god awful marketing), even if it was a financial success.
But also a bad derivative does this hidden "meta damage" being for the genre itself, to where people bring up the "it's just another shitty game of this type, this genre is dying" argument. Which is something people would definitely always seem to say when there's a major flop in a particular genre, but then REWIND on that statement as soon as something in that genre does well again. Marvel Rivals comes out and suddenly, wouldn't you know!? "Hero Shooters are saved!" As if a decent chunk of people weren't still playing Overwatch 2 by the time Rivals came out. Sure, not as big as a cultural phenomenon as the 1st, but still to this day has more active players playing it on Steam than the entire communities of Street Fighter 6 and Tekken 8 on Steam combined.
And I also feel that it really does matter a LOT now when talking about derivative game design in a genre, especially these days where people on the internet want to just dumpster fire anything and all relations to that thing for clout and money, with total disregard on how their actions/words affect an impressionable young audience/the general masses (looking at you, "gaming is dead" youtube/tiktok grifters).
Suck it bitches!
Which makes sense. Fatal Fury and Art of Fighting were made by former people from Capcom's Street Fighter II. Both games started out as clones spiritual successors. Ironic, because both SNK and Capcom officially confirmed AoF, Fatal Fury, and Street Fighter all take place in the same universe back in 2024. KoF is non-canon and still in its separate continuity though. Capcom vs. SNK 2 is literally KoF, but with Capcom characters and every fighting game mechanics from either respective games out at the time. Also, @ExtraWildGames, check this video on fighting game Shotos.
I tried getting into Yakuza/LAD several times, but I don't like the RPG mechanics and pacing structure. I appreciate you talking about Spikeout (the game itself is a 3D spiritual successor to Streets of Rage), because Yakuza does take inspiration from the latter, and most importantly: Shenmue. Yakuza literally did what Shenmue tried to do, but the former succeeded much further and still active to this day. Shenmue ain't doing shit. I give credit where it's due, but unfortuntately, most of the later competition ended up doing Shenmues concept's and gampley ideas/mechanic beter than the franchise ever could.
Second part is about this thread and directed at other people, not you.
Part about Batman takes a few walls of text to explain. Fighting, stealth, environmental traversal, side quests, story, art direction, it's all pretty poor and makes me mad. It's not Batman.
Asylum is good, pretty bad ending though; City is amazing; and Knight is meh at best.
City is one of the most overrated games ever made. Mediocre, at best. Kevin Conroy even phoned it in.
He did. He carries the character with little of the charisma from his animated work. More serious. Colder. Perhaps he was told to, as the story lacks charm too.
Different take of the character, does not mean lack of effort. He cared, you're just wrapped into your own foolishness and pathetic pride to see that. FTR, I find City ok. Even if I did hate is as much you do, I give credit where credit is due, and Conroy performed well. He's not the problem, nor the symptom. Deal with it.
Story is pretty good as far as I'm concerned. You're just a spoiled brat that can never happy. Sucks to be you.
Smarter would have been to tell shorter stories. Episodes that loosely connect an overarching story. It's a mess.
Wall of text about the story (including shitty quests) in an hour or two.