Sakurai's Ideas About Fighting Games are More Interesting than This Screenshot
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 10. 2022
- streamed Oct. 21, 2022
This video ALSO does not cover the full context of Sakurai's own video about the origin of Smash Bros. It's pretty interesting and covers more in depth things about it's history so check it out:
• Super Smash Bros. [Ga...
/ sora_sakurai_en
Follow Sajam on Twitter & Twitch:
/ sajam
/ sajam
/ discord
If you're ever confused by some terminology try looking it up in the FG Glossary:
glossary.infil.net/
Clips Channel:
/ sajamclips
Editing/Thumbnail by Magic Moste:
/ magicmoste
#FGC #Sajam - Hry
I love people reacting to one thing from a video without the context of the full video it’s very great and not at all annoying 😅
To be clear I’m talking about the people on twitter not you ❤
Welcome to social media. Everyone would rather clip and screenshot things out of context just to get people to get angry at other people.
It's just the Twitter mentality. They can only think in 250 character chunks.
I mean the whole video is interesting, but there is no further context to the image. It means what it says on the screen.
Murica brain
As someone who understand just a bit of Japanese, l can say that at 1:51 Sakurai actually said "as more fighting game become combo focused, there are less room for *push and pull/interaction*"
The word he used there is "Kakehiki", the same word he used when he say that fighting game are a genre where push and pull really got a change to shine. I dont know why the translator decide to change it to strategy.
I mean... I guess I can understand where he's coming from, even though I might not agree. (Wall of text incoming cause my thoughts on this are a bit complicated)
If you've ever watched two people who really don't know what they're doing play fighting games, it's kind of interesting. Like, yeah, I'm not gonna sugarcoat it. There's so many punishable moves allowed to slide, so many fat combo starters uncapitalized, so much respect for fake pressure. All the same, it does feel kind of "scrappy". They're just full-force trying to throw hands at each other, and it seems like anything could happen until the last it. It's just a matter of course: when both sides' damage potential is so low due to only landing stray unconfirmed hits, a lot more interactions are gonna happen before the KO.
Now here's the thing. I don't think the emphasis on combos or anything else bears the "blame" (quotes to indicate lack of actual value judgment). Modern Smash is the point of comparison for a fighting game with few true combos, and mid-high level Smash doesn't have that "scrappy" look to it either. There are clear periods where despite no actual combos happening, one player is clearly running extended offense and keeping their opponent in disadvantage, sometimes leading to an edgeguard or kill setup. So it's not combos, it's optimization - something that's a lot more common now with Dustloop and Discord than in the past with arcades and grainy-ass replays.
I don't even know if this is a problem that needs to be solved. We have games that have interaction during combos: BB and GG have decision-making on when to burst, KI has breakers obviously. Regardless of those mechanics, much of the goal of the "strategy" of fighting games IS to cut off your opponent's options: do a combo, keep them in blockstun with small gaps as frametraps, run a mix where only one guess will let them escape, etc. That's what puts the meat on these games and keeps them interesting, and trying to change it would change foundations of the genre and might not even be for the best.
Anyway, excuse the wall of text dump, I just really like thinking too much about design problems like these.
@@Puffufuf very interesting read.
Sakurai loves sword characters. His perfect game would be endless Ult Marth duos
I guess Sakurai is referring to rps and neutral interactions.
@@Puffufuf 100%. While I was listening, I was just thinking that it sounded like he's concerned about the balance of mistakes and punishes. The logical extreme is to either make any mistake an instant death or to make both players immortal, neither of which would make a good fighting game. If there isn't some way to get a great lead from a bad mistake, it's not much of a fighting game.
Even chess has a similar dynamic - if you don't know what you're doing you're going to get swept off the board by anyone familiar with the game. There are board states where one side has a direct path to checkmate open long before the final move is made.
To be fair to Sakurai, at the time, no other "serious" fighting game subgenres existed when he was developing Smash. He was trying to find a solution to a problem and while it wasn't a perfect one it was definitely a valid one.
oh it was a perfect one.
The examples he have did seem pretty valid. Look at how many arrows are in one special!
It's probably fair-er to say Sakurai's philosophy when it comes to making Smash is a time capsule of the era when it first came out.
@@LoliconSamalik imo his examples are kind of extreme, like, most of the time it isnt hard to do a command input but then KOF decided that it would be funny to add the pretzel command
I think much of this video makes more sense in the context of the era. Fighting games back then usually had fewer resources to work with, so his statement that once you land the first hit there is no strategy on either side other than following up with the optimal combo from one confirm is true; many of the games from back then are now 'Kusoge' with degenerate playstyles centered around ridiculous infinites. Smash is a cool solution to the problem even if I prefer games like Guilty Gear personally.
Experimental stuff like samsho existed before smash, what are you talking about
Edit: Tekken 3 was out a year before smash, and even powerstone got released just a month after smash. The game is definitely less revolutionary than you guys give it credit for.
I love that Sakurai demolishing this poor couple in KoF 95 and making them sad is what set him down the path to make Smash. Its like a reverse-villain origin story
From his Famitsu column in 2004: "I was slightly aimlessly playing “King of Fighters ‘95” when someone joined me, playing on the other side. Despite feeling that I’d really want to just play alone..the fight was on! I landed my moves cleanly, and quickly took the first two games. One more team member to go and victory was mine!
…Weird. Something’s not right. My enemy is way too unresponsive, unresistant. Thinking something was strange, I stealthily used the reflection in the window glass to take a peek at my opponent, and to my surprise, they were…a normal couple! And the current player was the girlfriend.
Oh no…! I was filled with regret and remorse. I shouldn’t have been feeling good about myself, landing Zanretsuken [3] combos and whatnot. On the final round, once she had switched with her boyfriend, I did handicap myself, but by then my intent was obvious and it was far too late. I don’t know my opponents thought of me, but I personally left with a bitter aftertaste in my mouth.
At the time, when I was playing well I would win about 50 matches in a row, so I probably wasn’t too bad at fighting games. But because of this I felt especially regretful about what I had done. Most likely, that woman would never play a fighting game ever again. From the couple’s perspective, the two had probably walked into the arcade just to have some casual fun and have a nice time. And there, I had mercilessly destroyed them."
Interviewer: You annihilated a complete newcomer?
Sakurai: With Zanretsuken combos. Sigh…
lmfao
It's a feeling we all eventually know. I grew up getting dominated by my best friend in Street Fighter IV, and I thought it was the worst feeling on the planet. I played like crazy to try and get good enough to beat him, and eventually he was forced to do the same to stay ahead.
Around 4 years later, I went to university and joined the E-Sports society there. Fighting games were a new addition, and most of the people there were League of Legends or CS:GO players.
I was surprised to find myself winning non-stop: in our desire to match each other, me and my best friend had raced well past our humble beginnings without even realising the difference.
I tried to hold back, but this just made it worse: condescending even. I totally understand the bitter taste landing long complicated combos and setups has when used on newer players.
Eventually I set up fighting game tutorials and skill brackets to make the games fairer for everyone; despite being in my first year I had the most fighting game experience by far and it ended up working pretty well until... and here's the ironic twist:
The Smash community arrived.
You see, in my second year a bunch of Smash players joined the University and found out our E-Sports society played fighting games. They joined jovially enough, but as I had little to no experience with smash I ceded control of how the match brackets and such would be handled to the de facto leader of these Smash players.
I can say honestly, I have never seen people so satisfied with destroying hapless new players as those Smash players were. With no mercy or hesitation they proceeded to humiliate anyone who tried to learn the game, and despite my requests refused to set up any kind of skill bracket to match newer players with each other, or offer any kind of tutorial.
They were good, happy to play with each other and woe betide any who wanted to play smash at the E-Sport society. Then even started deliberately seeding Street Fighter IV matches with skilled players in the lower ranks to dumpster new players until I put a stop to it.
All the progress the players I'd been mentoring and improving with had been making was shattered and stepped on with glee, and I watched more and more leave the Society until I finally left myself in digust.
Moral of the story? It's not about the game, it's about the player. Smash is no more or less toxic than any other fighting game despite Sakurai's wishes, what matters is whether a person knows how pathetic it is to feel satisfied beating a beginner at a game they play constantly.
@@MH3Raiser When I was a weaker player, a better one kicked dirt in my eyes, and from that day every moment was spent becoming strong enough to kick dirt into someone else's eyes. It's a vicious cycle, but e necessary evil. No one would bother playing unless there was that villain willing to push someone over the edge.
@@DragoonCenten That's not the case for everyone. I'm the same as you, but I was lucky enough for that very person to also be the one helping me improve.
The people I described had no care for anyone but themselves, no interest in their own improvement or that of others. They SOUGHT OUT weaker players to crush, simple to parade their own strength.
Foe that matter, I don't think I agree with that definition of strong vs. weak. Those players were skilled, sure, but only a weakling takes pride in beating a weaker opponent.
To be strong is to risk failure to climb higher, which every one of those 'weaker' players at mu society did every day. I respect them far more than those other assholes.
"maybe if I go on twitter and get people to think Smash's director has bad opinions, the playerbase will finally realize they're playing a bad game and start preferring the games _I_ prefer."
I love Sakurai’s channel it’s really fascinating
It's very weird that some people think that sakurai hates fighting games, especially when he releases a full hour video talking about why he loves King of Fighters in the Terry introduction video for smash ultimate.
If anything, he wanted to make the genre he already loves more approachable to other people so they play it with him.
6:30 I think the difference isn't whether the player gets wrecked, but rather that the player feels like they can't do anything.
Combo length elongates the perception of "I'm not playing the game, I literally can't control my character". There's also a lot of fighting game specific things that can prevent players from doing a majority of the options they can pick (e.g chaining meaty sweeps), while not even knowing they are supposed to be making a decision in the first place.
Compared to smash, when you press attack, or jump, or whatever, your character will do those things. Maybe spamming up+B with kirby isn't a good idea, but you still get to do it. There's a perception of agency and control, and I think that's the key.
yeah, he wants the player to at least feel like they tried instead of feeling like you got beat up in the starting line
Meanwhile, people getting 0-deathed in EVERY iteration of the smash. Spamming up B with kirby is the same as spamming DP with ryu: you'll only get to do it once maybe twice before you don't get to play.
I think the bigger difference is that more players are casual at smash: you CAN get away with doing silly little things in neutral because chances are, they won't know how to punish it anyway. Try to pull that stuff against anyone who does how to punish it and I guarantee you that Kirby isn't going to have much fun.
@@SamuelTheodorePitzkin But it really do be like that anyway. A good player is going to make that person feel like they never got the chance TO try. I've seen it happen heaps of times.
As a Kirby player,
@@darbling311 getting TOD in smash is less serious in smash due to stocks and also the ability to gimp people early in retaliation or survive well beyond the norm by avoid kill hits or set ups.
It is true that there are more casual players but smash is also just more interactive even when getting whooped, DI and Smash DI gives you some interactions even while getting whooped and especially in games after Melee many longer "combos" are not actually combos making them theoretical escapable with a variety of methods though in many cases you opponent can punished.
Of course a high skill player going to beat a low skill one but that is normal for most games that have even a ounce of depth.
If I remember correctly Sakurai had like winner's guilt after absolutely dogging on some girl's boyfriend at an arcade in a fighting game so I guess he's never got over it.
I believe it was KOF or Fatal Fury
Yeah, those sound like one of them is right.
Sakurai is a better man than me, my motto is "do em dirty in front of they girl" I would have jubilated if I'd done that
"Never" is quite the stretch. Yes, this incident was a large part of what motivated him to come up with the base concepts that led to Smash. But to assume the man hasn't come to peace with it at any point in the last 25 years simply because the game which came from that idea continues to exist?
@@HS_Gomikubi I mean if I got Daigo parried, I'd never get over it so it must be bad
He showed freaking Dragon King footage and people still complaining.
02:12 I am pretty sure that Sakurai was talking about the games that existed by the time he was developing games for the N64, around the mid-1990's. At that time, most fighting games still didn't have mechanics or tools to counter-balance long chains of combos. I believe Killer Instinct (1994) was the first to have such tool.
SFA2 came out with "Alpha Counters" around then too, and CC activations with limited invincible windows; which was THEIR answer to this
It was probably at the time of throw looping, infinites, TODs from roundstart and Zangief basically winning the game the second he got a grab
I remember seeing this on Scrub Quotes. I raised an eyebrow and thought "there's more to this, isn't there?"
I knew the very moment I saw the image on Twitter that it was taken out of context, I eventually saw the video myself to 100% confirm my suspicions.
Sakurai was trying to explain that fighting games were neglecting defensive options at the time and downplayed skill level on that front. Execution skills don't matter when you lose control of your character for several seconds. He then tried to make a game where defensive skill does matter and all player are equally dangerous in any given situation.
Then the Brawl Nation attacked...
NO ONE CAN BE DANGEROUS WHEN EVERYONE HAS BANANA PEELS FOR FEET HAHAHA!!!
if you got hit thats a problem with your defensive skills, taking the reward from the opponent is scrubby .
@@exec_rigveda8299 You're misunderstanding the problem. The problem isn't avoiding a hit, it's being able to do something *after getting hit*. Many fighting games don't let you do anything while being combo'd. The ones that do are the exception.
"Just don't get hit" isn't a solution. Getting hit is inevitable. The argument is having meaningful interactions when you're at a disadvantage. Killer Instinct is a great example.
@@mmking9999 no im not misunderstanding, i am actively against what sakurai wants.
The most i tolerate is a gg style burst, combo breaaker and sdi are lame.
@@exec_rigveda8299 Oh, fair enough then.
I've always felt like the design of smash is pretty much what happens when you take the ideas of a fighting game, but then try to design it in such a way that things are much much more intuitive. Especially for new players.
The inputs are one thing sure, obviously the simpler directional and contextual inputs are pretty trivial to memorize, especially since most attacks go out in the direction that you pressed. Even if you're playing a character you've never touched before and you have no idea what they're capable of, you can at least be pretty sure that if you press left and an attack, then you'll do an attack to the left. This sounds like a no-brainer, but certain other platform fighters (like playstation all stars) didn't do this and as a result a core fundamental part of their gameplay was immediately a lot harder to understand for new players.
But the damage system is something that is really really nice and well thought out in smash as well. A thing with Fighting games that I think experienced players overestimate a newer player's ability with, is the ability to even read the health bar. Like so many times when watching newer players, or while playing myself, a round will end and they'll be like "oh shit I didn't even realize how low health I was. The brain economy to do something as little as look up to see the health meter, especially when they get moved to the other side of the screen, just isn't there when you're doing that initial panicky clueless style of play. And what I like about Smash is that you could theoretically turn your damage indicators off entirely, and still have a pretty good idea as to where your health is, because you can directly feel it in the gameplay. As you get knocked further back, you for one immediately feel how hurt you are, but you also know how at-risk of dying you are based on how big the stage is. If you fly half way across the stage then you're basically at half-health, but you can also understand that if you take another hit at the very edge of the stage you'll probably die.
It's also no wonder that new players enjoy playing on the bigger and wackier stages. Bigger stages effectively means more health. And it also means that since you can get knocked further away, then the other player can't catch up to you to keep up the combo as easily. Like What Sakurai was really getting at with the comment about combos imo was that when you get hit in a combo, even if the game has some kind of combo breaking system, a newbie isn't gonna know how to do that. And even if they mash buttons and do it by accident, what are you expecting to happen right after? They're gonna get punched and another combo is gonna start right up again, but now whatever resource the combo breaker uses is used up. They'll throw like 3 punches and then get punished for each one and die while feeling like they didn't even get to play anything. Meanwhile by having hits create greater knockback as you take damage, the worse off you are, the further away you are pushed from your opponent, which gives you a chance to at least move around and feel like you're doing something. Not to mention that a ton of characters have much longer ranged projectile abilities, so that you can try to get in some poke damage even if it's useless for starting a combo, cause just getting in that bit of damage at least feels like you're fighting.
And of course on top of that, another important thing is that damage carries over between rounds. Most people play on 3-5 stocks or more when playing casually. And because the match doesn't reset when one player dies, that means that that losing player has a much greater chance of getting one in on the other player. Even if you put a total scrub up against a more experienced player, sure there's the chance that the more experienced player will 0% the scrub, but more often than not the scrub can at least get a few hits in, and that damage will accumulate more and more over time until eventually a basic cheap hit will finally take out one of their stock, even if it cost them 5 lives to do it.
And that feeling of going 1-5 is a million times better than going 0-5. Like that's the thing, in a traditional fighter because the round resets entirely, if a scrub does equally as well, getting a few random hits in here or there and regularly taking out around 20% of the opponent's health each round, but then loses each time, then it just feels so demoralizing. Sure you technically did things, but it feels like you have nothing to show for it. The sense of progress is entirely erased and it feels like they might as well have killed you without taking a single hit. Even if we go back to a system where health carries over and the scrub didn't do enough damage to get a single KO across the whole match, being able to see that health bar get closer and closer to 0 as you throw bodies at your opponent would still feel so much better by comparison.
And that's what I think that Sakurai was focusing on, like the true brand new player experience and trying to erase or at least reduce how absurdly demoralizing fighting games are for most newbies. Like the first thing a noob sees is a huge combo list of moves they can't do, then they go into a match and barely deal any damage, while they get killed, and then they're expected to play another round against that person for the 2 out of 3 as if they're supposed to expect literally anything different to happen than the first one. Then the same thing happens again and we're back to square 1 where it feels like the newbie accomplished nothing and learned nothing and now they're gonna quit and play something else. Like that extra room you get when you get knocked away in smash, it at least gives you a chance to try out your moves a bit before your opponent can fully reach you again and destroy you, and getting those incremental points of damage that carries over between rounds provides that sense of progress that makes it feel like you're accomplishing something and progressing between matches.
something people get wrong is smash works as you say if its by "party rules" but the whole "the damage will add up" part is something that changes if people play by comp rules the newbie wont ever get to play if they are stuck in the air and forced to eat up airs or nairs over and over while sak did find a solution but when people get the comp mindset the perfect move for a moment will be obvious to the guy who actually knows combos,movement,killing options,edge guarding,item tech no amount of items will save the player
@@deathbringer9893 Homie really read a paragraph about catering to a casual player’s experience and said “uhm, acksually, it’s not the same if they play by the hardcore tournament rules against a player that knows what they’re doing!”
Of course; if you’re playing by the tournament rules against a player that knows feeding you up-airs and can execute decent combos, then of course you’re not gonna feel anything. That’s not what most players will experience.
@@ShesBearynice im not even using tournament rules at the end bruv do you know why they exist? its because smash favors the more skilled player with items and such with the only thing that helps new players being final smash meter im pretty sure i mentioned even with comp rules unless im thinking of another thread
@@deathbringer9893 Every game favors the more skilled players. What?
@@ShesBearynice you dont understand what im trying to say so nevermind im wrong here and your right hurgur
I think a lot of people got caught up on the word "strategy". He didn't say it eliminates strategy, he said it creates "less room". Which is still subjective, but I don't think he was implying something like traditional fighters are just whoever knows the highest damage combo wins.
And he was talking about while being comboed. And he was talking about a hypothetical that he wanted to base his game around. And he was talking about something that happened 25 years ago.
People are so goofy. They’re surprised the guy who made smash brothers had a different outlook on how to make a game that wasn’t a standard fighting game.
Anything he would’ve said about his approach to creating a non-fighting game would be accurate because he *did* create a game that wasn’t a regular fighting game lol. It doesn’t even matter that it was successful, he created the game. He had a thought about the way fighting games were and he made a game. There’s literally nothing to argue against, he thought it and he did it. It’s like looking at a painter who says “I used bright colors for this painting because I didn’t like the way gloomy dark colors looked,” and then arguing against them using dark colors because you believe dark can be non-gloomy. It doesn’t matter lol.
Have you SEEN retro fighters?
Whoever does the most damage the fastest, wins.
[laughs in MvC 1-2, CvS 2, SFA2, KoF anything, Tekken 3...]
@@maninblack3410 Exactly! It's an artistic intent thing, which naturally explains why so many people were vitriolic and upset about it.
@@megamillion5852 lol good point. Plus we’re talking about the cross section between Twitter users and the fgc, this “discussion” never stood a chance.
Yeah when I saw the 341236421 input I was like "yeah I guess he has a point there" idk what kinda drugs SNK were on but I don't want them.
Idk its low key an easy an input its just a half a circle with two crouches
An important part of Sakurai's Smash video that people aren't bringing up is the specific phrasing of "push and pull". In one of his previous videos about risk vs reward in video games, that same phrasing of "push and pull" is used to describe how going for something rewarding should have a proportionate amount of risk. I think what he's getting at here is that in terms of combos, there is no game of risk vs reward, and the player performing the combo simply gets the reward of damage for knowing how to do it, without much associated risk. Of course, this comes with other caveats that people are mentioning, such as the state of many fighting games that were around in 1996. Whatever your thoughts on this, I think people should interpret that screenshot as a statement of "combos are a reward without a risk, that only benefit experienced players" rather than "combos being a part of fighting games make them devoid of strategy".
On top of that smash is a Nintendo console game not a arcade game. So the targeted audience is different in the first place.
The player doing the combo gets the reward of damage because they've earned it. They learned the combo, they opened up their opponent, they executed the combo without screwing it up. They've earned the damage in every sense of the word. How many more hurdles should there be? The risk is playing the neutral, and the reward is winning neutral and getting damage. Messing up your combo gets you punished, playing neutral wrong gets you punished. Theres already plenty of risk and reward involved
@@brianbluhm1036 I agree, I'm just saying that what Sakurai said needs to be interpreted in a certain way to get any meaningful conversation out of it. In terms of what he wanted to accomplish (making inexperienced players feel more engaged) I think Smash did a great job. You can't change a core part of what makes a fighting game without taking away part of that experience though, which is why Smash and FGs are still very distinct genres with their own fanbases.
We should all just play dive kick
Lmao Sakurai was crystal clear. Thank you for the mild-mannered take as usual. Love how chill you are man 👍
People on Twitter are disingenuous and jump to conclusions and one of the greatest developers of all time knows more about video games than them....shocker.
Also Sajam x Sakurai collab when?
A wi-fi enjoyer collaborating with the ambassador of Rollbackia? Yeah I'd want to see that.
something that came across in that video is the subtext. he’s talking about the past! he’s talking about how he felt AT THE TIME when he was proposing smash brothers… his opinion is clearly different now !! this is why he talked about things of the time and how that informed his design… there’s nuance.
I feel like the ability to keep interacting after you get hit is one of the reasons I really like Dead or Alive. Until they actually get your feet off the ground or crumple you can still try to Counter/Parry their combo or if you read the delay try to grab them. It adds up to a lot more interaction and chances actually to press buttons and try things during the average match which is very nice.
That's really cool to hear. Smash has holding a directional-input midair to change your trajectory during combos or juggles, and button mashing to escape grabs and ground-buries. There's always something you can do literally every second of the match to help improve your survivability. It's a lot better than just sitting there checking your watch and hoping your opponent accidentally drops their combo lol.
@@RacingSnails64 i think it works well in Smash because it's like getting a bunch of stray hits but with the way smash work it doesnt lead into big stuff generally maybe into another hit at low % but that's pretty much. damage in Smash is kinda like dying by a thousand cuts which is not the worst idea as it makes the match more interactive as a result. But that's just how I feel about it feel free to disagree
Oh interesting, I know next to nothing about Dead or Alive except for the fan service and the movie.
the funny thing about the whole twitter argument was that some of them were even challenging Sakurai to a match (I saw one challenging for a set on Strive). It would be really funny if Sakurai accepted and dismantled the guy.
Send that man to a KOF95 match and see what happens lol
That reminds me of the famous story of the guy who asked Sakurai if he could help balance Smash Wii U since he was a pro player and Sakurai just asked "have you ever made a game." To be fair a lot of people think he probably didn't mean to come off that sassy, but the question is still valid.
Lmaooo Twitter needs to chill
Also to be fair, he was talking about a time frame. Most of the fighting games during that time were very combo focused, and a lot of games had not developed good combo counter play. (I'm looking at you Xmen vs Street Fighter.) This would drive a large amount to future decisions and was the driving force of the difference in Super Smash Bros game mechanics. The video is a good peek into game design and how fighting games developed.
I love the Boots updates. Most enthralling character arc since Zappa kid.
4:45 I think Sakurai is talking from the perspective of the person being combo'd. You don't really care about anything the opponent is doing when you are getting combo'd. It becomes a 1 player game. Yes from the perspective of doing the combo, it requires a lot of awareness, but the depends on if the game has a good combo system (instead of a 1 button infinite) and it doesn't necessarily mean it is more engaging even for the comboer
Sakurai's channel has been great. Lots of interesting design philosophies coming from experience, that I'm sure they will have a positive impact on game development as a whole.
dunno why but when sajam said "boots learned" i expected him to say he learned when to air tech in xrd
Combos are, in their own way, the only 'guaranteed reward' a fighting game gives you for time investment and practise.
Sometimes you'll end up in a bad matchup, sometimes your opponent will get you on download, sometimes your opponent will just find one thing you haven't learned to exploit and will do so until you want to yeet your stick through the screen.
As the man himself would say, that's simply the nature of the beast: fighting games are designed to allow success to capitalise on success: if you have the advantage in neutral, it gives you more opportunities to apply pressure, which makes you more likely to land mixups, which makes you less likely to have to defend yourself.
No matter your skill level, you WILL come across opponents who will completely dominate you, combos be damned. If I have the sickest Sol combos but don't know how to fight a really good Zato, the combos aren't going to make it so HE can't play.
That being said, learning better and more Advanced combos id simply effort x time investment = greater odds of victory in a way most other skills aren't. I can learn how to fight Eddie all the live long day, but if my next 20 games are against Ky and Sol, I'm not going to see value. I can work on my footsies spacing and then face a Happy Chaos who requires a completely different skillset.
Having good combos always provides some value, regardless of anything else. It gives you something to practise in the background whilst working on other skills in game, an immediate reward for your efforts when you land one in a clutch situation.
Are combos sometimes ridiculously long and effective? Of course, UMVC3 says hello. But combos themselves have inherent value that needs to be measured as part of this calculus.
So in the late 90s and early 2000s, there was a recurring meme in Japanese culture (especially in manga) about 10+ hit combos in tekken and how you wouldn't be able to play if you got hit by one. Modern games are a bit less cruel but there was a general stigma in Japan about long combo's
Of all the fighting games to make that meme about, it was early 2000s Tekken? What
@@Reydriel tekken was very popular. It was the one fighting game everyone knew (besides street fighter) do you think they’re really going to bring up that joke over and over and have it be about evil zone or some shit no one’s heard of?
If you look at early tekken games' damage, all the way up to 5 even, kind of, it kinda makes sense why 10 strings are such a meme.
Nowadays with the current combo scaling in place it's at least less of a problem. It's still there and can be abused, but at least not to the point of opponent dies in a single 10 string.
Well, that's dumb. 10 strings in Tekken aren't and have never been combos. They're strings that can be blocked and/or parried even after the initial hit.
That's why nobody uses them in competition.
@@nateolison7553 THIS. Guys those 10 hit combos are a joke.
I feel like people are breaking his statements down to a level that wasn't intended. He was just explaining his thought process at the time that led to the creation of the game. Whether it's technically wrong or right doesn't matter, because it's more about how that premise he posed was the spark to his creative solutions and how it led to new things being made.
I think Sakurai was right in saying that most people have no idea what's going on when picking up a traditional fighter. Having those special inputs be a command that most casuals won't discover unless they look up a resource for the move or just mess around until something happens, as well as wanting to make a game where even if you can get smoked if you're brand new, that it's mechanics are much more easily understood and easier to pick up and play. The only reason why people got so mad about it is because Smash eclipses all other fighters so much that amazing games in this genre go un-noticed while Multiversus and Nick All-Star Brawl get eyes prelaunch simply because of the fact they play like Smash (and big ip's but that's besides the point). That's probably why a lot of modern fighters wish to add simple inputs or make the mechanics simpler, because Smash Bros is able to reach so many people because it is so easy to pick up
I think that is quite fair. Smash is definitely more easy to pick up and play, especially if you are playing other new players, like your buddies. You can very quickly get a feel for how you are supposed to move and play, the moves are all very simple and easy to do, there is no need for a move list because there are only like a few moves and they are all just single buttons and directions.
I think that old FGs, like SF2, were simple like this, sure they had fireballs and DPs even then, but the interactions were all very simple. But as the genre evolved, it got more complicated. So did Smash though, look at the newest Smash. You have characters that can build walls and do all sorts of nutty shit that you would not figure out at first glance. Yeah, Smash 64 was dead simple, but so was Street Fighter 2. First iterations are going to be more basic, by nature things get more complicated as they are iterated upon.
Exactly. As a lifelong Smash player getting into DBFZ, there seems to be pros and cons between plat fighters and classic fighters.
Smash has simpler execution, with a more fluid neutral game and amazing feeling mobility in general. DBFZ feels clunky and stiff in comparison, however it has high-low blocking and blockstrings, along with 3v3 teams and assists. DBFZ has so much more intricacy and better up-close moments with those blockstrings. It's quite invigorating. Going back to Smash almost feels too simple now in comparison. But DBFZ is more clunky with frustrating command inputs that either don't come out or do a completely different move lol.
If the next Smash has high-low blocking and 3v3 with assists, that might be the perfect game for me lol.
Wow. Where do I start?
Where do you guys get the idea that gameplay mechanics are what draw eyeballs over to fighting games? I don't get it. It's that's true, then there's no point to have characters at all. Tekken, Street Fighter and Multiversus should be nothing but gray stick figures if that's the case. Why have writers to conceptualize all these personalities? Why spend money on guest characters? If the mechanics were all that mattered then the genre would have died a quick, painless death. The majority of casual gamers don't care how hard games are to play. They're sold on characters, story, action, etc.
"Smash eclipses all other fighters so much that amazing games in this genre go un-noticed"
Please, no it doesn't. Give me a break. Sakurai's not going to read this.
"That's probably why a lot of modern fighters wish to add simple inputs or make the mechanics simpler, because Smash Bros is able to reach so many people because it is so easy to pick up"
There were already simple mechanics. Street Fighter 1 only had 2 buttons to work with.
@@backup368 "There were already simple mechanics. Street Fighter 1 only had 2 buttons to work with." the sucked tho
@@RacingSnails64 smash already has mixups tho, you can cross up and at least in the older titles where you can move your shield around there is a high-low-grab mixup, and the neutral is mostly about positioning instead of just trying to be plus on frames
One of the biggest things about Smash is that the defender has more options/counterplay when they get hit. You can make it so that your opponent miss their combo by DI'ing in and/or out of your opponents attacks, making your opponent not just think about just the string of attacks they do as part of their bnb combo but also the string of attacks they need to do if their opponent DI's out and ends up further away than they normally would be or they DI in and end up closer than they normally would be. Making offense and defense in Smash and most platform fighters a lot more nuanced than you might think.
You can mix up on people's DI patterns, making it so that if they DI in and get hit by an unorthodox combo ender like if shiek does up-air instead of f-air then they die off the top at an earlier percent because they climb at a much steeper angle if they DI in. Another example is with Hungrybox's jigglypuff, he is so good at SDI'ing out of fox up-throw up-air which allows him to live extra long on a character that would otherwise die at 60%. You can see that in order to mix him up often times top foxes have to do stuff like up-throw b-air to condition him to DI for that instead before going for up-throw up airs on him.
These types of interactions cant happen in a normal fighting game because when you get hit you get hit. Sure you can optimize what you do with your resources when you get the hit, but that is all entirely one sided in favor of the attacker. The defender has to sit there and wait until theyve either gotten knocked down and have to guess for oki or possibly reset and guess on the mix. The defender has no influence other than the mentioned games with anti combo mechanics like Guilty Gear and Killer Instinct. There is no strategy between attacker and defender once the hit lands.
One interesting thing to counter this is how single hit hit confirming works in street fighter five. A Japanese player mentioned that because they block as close to the timing of the hit as possible, players that hit confirm watching the opposing character are much more likely to make mistakes compared to those who use the stun bar. Looking at the stun bar also has weaknesses, and adopting a style like that commands the attention of the opposing ayer and forces them to. Do what you're describing
It is pretty interesting how getting combo'd in Smash is more similar to getting mixed in a traditional fighter; block high low or DI in out, either way you're making a guess on defense to prevent getting hit. Coupled with the lack of a corner to get trapped in you can definitely see Sakurai's efforts to limit how long the feeling of not being able to do anything will last.
@@arachnofiend2859 Yep truth is that a lot of longer "combos" especially after Melee are possibly escapable or are not actually real combos but just a chain of disadvantage states and are getting mixed.
Yeah, but you can get knocked off a platform and edge guarded at any point in smash. You can also get throw looped and just be like, ok I can't do anything. I enjoy both genres, so I don't really understand when people try and take sides like this. They both have differences, all games do. We could go point for point all night. But to what end? It all comes down to what game you are more familiar with or enjoy more. Purely subjective. Pitting one against another is pointless squabbling.
@@charliericker274 As someone from the Melee side of smash, you *can* DI your way out of chain-grabs using some very tricky DI, but as you alluded to, if you don't know anything about the game's mechanics, you're effectively stuck until your opponent messes up or kills you. Like you said, not much difference between genres in this regard.
Every endcard of sajam's video should be about Boots update
I agree!!! I want to see more pictures of the cat too :D
This video and the channel by Sakurai are super cool. We see the backstage of some historic shit man, I love it
I love that whenever sakurai says anything that can get taken out of context like this, they forget the amount of nuance the man is capable of, and frankly, it's insulting
This is the same guy that frequently sabotages his own fanbase.
@@DragoonCenten the fanbase isn't his fault.
@@DaviddeBergerac "NO NO NO, YOU HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME THE WAY *I* WANT YOU TO! STOP HAVING TOURNAMENTS THAT ISN'T HOW THE GAME WAS MEANT TO BE PLAYED! AAAAAAAAA"
@@DragoonCenten You gotta prioritize more important issues
@@DaviddeBergerac nice deflection of the argument, Sakurai Drone.
When i first saw that vid before twitter got a hold of it, i honestly thought Sakurai just sounded like your average "Grounded Footsies" boomer.
Made me think of him even more as a member of this community who plays enough to have his own opinions.
This is a mindset if 1996 though, you need to consider it.
The points with strategy and getting beaten up without knowing what happen is also legitimate. It’s more likely to happen in traditional fighting games then is Smash.
You can lose to any game, fighting or not, if you don’t know what you’re doing. Smash’s goal was to mitigate that. It makes sense when a pro knows how to do these complex, sometimes inescapable combos, while in Smash someone who doesn’t know what they’re are doing can still get away just by simply holding away or even mashing buttons.
New wave of content coming from Sajam is amazing. Just reasonable and meaningful analysis, sprinkled with a little life advice, AND bonus updates on Boots at the end. Can't wait for the next one!
There's definitely also like, he was talking about games in 1996, and games definitely have, on average, more points of interaction (meaning, decision-making points where the attacker can lose their turn) now than they did in '96.
For like, a point of reference, in 1996, Guilty Gear won't be out for two years and it won't have burst for 4 more years after that. Killer Instinct came out two years before but Killer Instinct probably wasn't very popular in Japan (or the fighting game community that is largely not playing on the N64) in 1996. At this time, there just aren't as many decision making points for players looking to escape their opponent's pressure. I think pointing out options that didn't exist in the context he's speaking of and missing that he's not talking about combos as expressions of attacker skill being divorced from strategy but rather points where the defender could not do much to regain control of their character is missing a little bit of why Smash is the way it is (and also why tools to escape pressure are more common for modern fighting games.)
@@DiabloTraeluz Also, didn't most fighters at the time have much less damage scaling (if any)? The balance of combos in general was not so fine-tuned when it came to risk vs reward, and in very high damage games even simple combo were very deadly by comparison. And stun/dizzy was very common in old games like KOF 95, meaning a 3-hit combo could mean almost certain death, and a 4-hit combo would be practically guaranteed death.
What Sakurai said is 100% correct. Think about it, every thing we lab is optimized to the point where our opponent has as few options as possible. I’m some games the options are zero to the point you get instantly TOD’d or unblockable looped. We quite literally optimize so our opponent CAN’T play 😂
That's the goal but not always possible
and on top of that, things like Combo Breakers feel like a band-aid solution to a much bigger problem. A new player isn't going to know how to juggle and use that resource or when best to use it, so I think that it's a bit poor to just say "well X game has a combo breaker system" as if that's at all relevant to the problem at hand. All that'd happen is the newbie mashes buttons till they break the combo by accident (if they even try) and then they get hit again and now they used up the resource and die.
It's like that in card games too. People are naturally drawn towards limiting opponent gameplay, because giving him opportunities is scary.
I surprised myself that I was trying to invent some ridiculous '5% of the time it works everytime' uninteractive combo in Spellweaver at one point. I thought of myself as an enjoyer of a good back and forth game.
It's the job for a good game designer to release new strong cards, that people would want to play (strong offence) While not falling into solitaire levels of one participant dominance. (giving options to break combos and such)
What about the players that enjoy the slow buildup until they can initiate their master plan, making it so the enemy can't play the game? Before that point it is an uphill battle. A decent amount of these "fixes" people are brainstorming just alienate certain playstyles.
@@DragoonCenten you mean setup characters? That still exists. I main rob and a good setup from a good player would kill at 0%, plus characters like snake and steve exist that are good at setup while still giving that push and pull. Of course making your enemy completely unable to play the game through setup is probably something that only exists in card games and wont be healthy for a fighting game regardless of the uphill struggle
Sakurai says getting vortexed isn't fun and FGC twitter takes it personally lol.
I don’t know if it was like this in everywhere in South America, but where I grew up there was a pretty active community of Japanese fighting games mainly.
During the 90s and early 2000s there seemed to be an arms race of “longer combos” as a feature but it reached a point where it became a problem for multiple games depending on how they handled it. If there is no significant damage scaling as a combo continues then the number of interactions are greatly reduced per match and both players, good or bad, win or loose, would feel some dissatisfaction with the match. If there was significant damage scaling then each match would take way longer than a similar match with the same number of strategic interactions in a different game.
I think that people who are mad think that Sakurai is saying that the problem is combos when the problem was combo length. I was not directly a part of the community growing up, but I was often around them and I remember that it got to a point that whenever a combo started both players would disengage from the game somewhat. As in the player getting comboed would take a sip of their drink or stretch, and the player doing the combo would start to talk to their friends maybe asking them to get fetch a drink or something.
After a while a lot of people got fed up and would refuse to play the newer entries of some series of games. A lot of them got turned to smash precisely because, while there are combos, you can’t disengage mentally during one. If you’re doing the combo you have to think about the percentage that your opponent has and if you need to adjust your combo for that, and if you’re getting comboed, then you can at least think about directional influence and since combos change with damage your opponent might mess it up and you would get a chance to retaliate if you’re paying attention.
All of these were discussions my friends had with one another in front of me so I knew exactly what Sakurai was talking about even if the translation was a little loose and even if Sakurai did a lot of hand waving. Heck, I am significantly oversimplifying and hand waving and this comment is already pretty long. So I can see why he tried to keep it short, but I can also see how someone who has only played games where these issues have been largely addressed could misunderstand what he is talking about.
Smash is the kind of game where I feel like not everyone can get good at it (I certainly haven't) but at the same time, almost every fg fan can enjoy it and get hype for it. And it comes down to what Sajam said: its DNA is similar enough to other fgs, so anyone with a certain amount of understanding can get an enjoyable experience nonetheless
Thank fucking god Sajam made a video on this. Every twitter brain was sharing this, dunking on it without context. Whereas his actual point was pretty nuisanced and fair.
I'm bracing myself to see that screenshot for the next 10 years
People are just close minded he was talking in the past tense and liking or not in a casual view yes some games you get combo to death after the first hit that was how sakurai started the sentence with.
Honestly when it comes to a game that does “simple” combos while still leaving lots of room for strategy in these combos is Gundam Extreme Versus. As combos can be as simple as pressing a three times and be good but recognising situations where you can follow up with more damaging moves or maybe to to get some melee in is also very interesting and intuitive. Also with it being 2v2 you also have to take risks for the longer combos as you might let their partner get a free hit on you. It is very simple to get a good combo but there is a lot of interplay.
Yep often times it is better to go for shorter or safer combos that knock down quicker for less damage then doing longer ones, both so you don't get hit(known as cutting) by the other opponent and also so you can assist your ally.
I always love how twitter users don't use the minimum brain capacity to try to understand what Sakurai was talking about without taking everything at face value
tbf they the subs straight up changed what sak said so yea but besides the point aswell i geuss
Yyyep yep. They are so stupid.
I'm convinced 98% of Twitter users are bots
@@deathbringer9893 Yes that's besides the point. If you don't know Japanese but you've watched the full video (= read all the subtitles), you'd disagree with how some twitter users interpreted it, even though all you have are just those subs. So even with the subs being inaccurate they still don't convey that Sakurai hates FGs.
"He saw the pretzle motion and was like, "I'm good bro, I like having hands""
*Proceeds to make melee*
and Kid Icarus: "WristDestroyer" Uprising
That’s the player’s fault.
given the rest of Sakurai's video, I feel like "strategy" maybe wasn't the best word to use in that sentence. He doesn't seem overly concerned with the strategic depth being lost due to combos making the game braindead, rather he's worried about "the bad/new player not getting a turn".
if he had said "As more fighting games become combo-focused, the less room there was for player interaction" I think his point would have been better conveyed and people wouldn't have been mad. idk if the translator is at fault, or Sakurai's word choice itself.
That last sentence is what he actually says in japanese (according to another comment). This seems to be an issue with the translator.
To be fair he literally didn't say strategy. The person translating just translated it as strategy that time, when the other times they translated it as push and pull. He's really just saying that as combos became longer more important and more damaging, there was less push and pull between players. Which for the time was probably true since i dont think stuff like bursts and combo breakers were widespread if they existed at all back then
If you watch his other content, he talks about how push and pull is the essence of the game, the differences between risk and reward and constantly finding the correct balance between the two being where most of the fun lies. Bear in mind some of the games around 1996, especially as X-Men Vs. Street Fighter hit the scene, were a lot more lengthy in that regard, and being able to convert into high damage combos easily and consistently no doubt played a factor. We’ve all seen the conclusions of this in MvC3 where you get touched by a stray hit and get lightning looped.
One reason I think melee is so cool is because it IS a very combo-heavy game, yet the abundance of mid-combo defensive mechanics (DI, SDI, slideoff, tech options) makes the combo state highly interactive for both players.
It’s under appreciated how Sakurai’s solutions to the blowout feeling of traditional fighting games never included comeback mechanics of any kind.
Is rage not considered a comeback mechanic? It scales according to your % AND stock deficit, which sounds like a comeback mechanic to me.
@@m4r1o148 It may have been intended to be one, but in practice it doesn't play out like one. Rage increases the knockback you deal, but that's not always a good thing. Since combos in Smash are based on the percent system certain combos only work within certain percent "windows," and your heaviest-hitting combos are actually the ones you land at the very early percents because being at low percent means you don't get sent as far away with each hit you take even though you always take the same amount of hitstun.
In simplest terms, being sent shorter distances increases the amount of potential followups you have to use because you spend less time moving between each hit, while being sent flying farther restricts the amount of followups you can use because you have to spend more time repositioning yourself for the next hit.
What this means is that having Rage is good when the opponent is at high percents since it makes securing an actual kill move easier, but it limits your early game combo options by making the window in which you can pull off your longest combos smaller. You may hit harder with each individual hit, but as a result it makes it more difficult to reach the point where that extra power actually matters.
@@reperfan4 Nice explanation.
@an4 i personally think that smash ultimate is full of horrible character-specific comeback mechanics. for instance, lucario's aura not only makes him hit MUCH harder, but his special moves get way more range on their hitboxes and his recovery goes much farther and faster. terry gets his GO moves, kazuya gets his rage drive, and sephiroth gets his one winged form by taking damage, all of which gives the characters moves or movement options that they could not have used before.
I'm so glad we get a good FGC content creator that just doesn't miss when he shares his opinion
Little did we know but Boots is shaping up to become the main character of FGCU
i have played both platform fighters and fighting games.
honestly i like smash because it lets me focus more on the mind games then trying to remember button inputs and combo timings and worry about inputs being dropped because the input buffer decided that input was too early and all these other minor things to get to the part that i actually enjoy.
dbfz is fun and i appreciate that it has nothing more complex then quarter circles.
dnf duel though is probably the fighting game i enjoy the most control wise because it is a fighting game that gives me the simplified smash inputs so i can focus on the parts i enjoy the most.
I like how the end clips are now basically cat updates
1:22 Sakurai's version of "I think Coolsville sucks"
Fun fact, Twitter is a micro ecosystem. No matter how many people you see saying something they only account for the tiniest percentage of peoples opinions
God damn Sakurai is a handsome man, holy shit
For those wondering, he does actually say "Strategy" or "Tactics" in the video, so the translation is pretty accurate.
An interesting thing to think about is actually how Smash compares to fighting games with regards to combo length. There are a lot of fighting games that don’t have extensive combos unless you have the meter to do them; conversely, the concept of DI in of itself makes most Smash characters unable to effectively do lengthy combos. Ironically, characters that can generally become difficult to play against, as one mistake leads to you losing a lot of tempo (such as Smash 4 Shiek, Ultimate Kazuya, Smash 4 Bayo, Brawl / Melee Ice Climbers, Ultimate Pikachu, etc….). DI limits many characters, but it does not stop characters from doing the types of combos that Sakurai tried to prevent. The resulting reason is combo optimization, as well as Smash’s low rate of balance patches. Being able to do deadly combos has never been the sole reason for a character’s results in Smash, but there have historically been a lot of characters who could make the game feel uninteractive. So, it is kind of ironic that Sakurai tried to fix the issue of uniteractivity between players, but then accidentally created many characters who can be played so uninteractively.
It's like you said, optimization. It's really changed how fighting games work in general these days lol.
I notice the game footage is all from older fighting games. Not even like PS2 era stuff. Like SNES/Genesis. And back then there were a lot of games that have really long combo strings. Not even necessarily complex inputs individually just really long command strings. There have been a lot of changes to the baseline fighting game experience since then. If Sakurai hasn't done a lot of fighting game playing since the late 90s he might not be aware of how the genre has changed, or maybe he hasn't re-evaluated his view of the genre much since then. Because what he says was a LOT more true for the first couple Mortal Kombat games, or Killer Instinct, or other 16-bit era games. A lot of people my age avoid fighting games today because of the sins of the past. Get your 9-year-old behind whupped with long strings/infinites that leave you no way out a few times and it's easy to say "fighting games just aren't for me" at 30-40 when they aren't even like that anymore.
Pretty sure he's explaining his mentality when developing smash based on the games that were out during that time. Of course showing new game footage to prove this kind of point would be disingenuous as hell, and Sakurai is not stupid. Plus, he at least has had conversations with Harada and the like, so I highly doubt his view on fighting games now hasn't changed since then.
@@milkywayflea404 No, you are right it's probably a matter of the translation. Its obviously kind of a history thing but the language also feels like it's missing a lot of common things like "unlike more modern fighting games" or "games at that time". It makes it feel like he still feels fighting games are the way he describes. But he likely doesn't feel that way and is aware of what they are like today.
But also I have seen people very close to technology (working in I.T.) outright ignore the progress of technology, basically remaining ignorant of relevant advances in I.T. because at their job they haven't had to worry about them for years. Shoot, *today* the entire medical industry has a problem with keeping up with the update cycle of most software in the modern era. There are companies like Siemens and Fuji selling hospitals lab and imaging equipment with prices upwards of $100k...running on a small computer with Windows XP! And not USED equipment either! So if a multi-billion dollar industry can have problems being current, one very influential guy in fighting games could also. I'm not saying that's it for sure, I'm just saying that in my experience you might be surprised at how easily someone who is very good at their job can still ignore relevant changes.
Its funny to think SNK devs messing with inputs might've been responsible for inspiring Smash in the 1st place.
Classic Twitter. People reacting to a fraction of a complete thought or scenario.
CZcams and every other social media is just like this. Please, remember that it’s just people who are reactionary and the internet is just how people share those thoughts, because, for the love of god, being an asshole online means you’re an asshole in general.
when i watched this video for the first time, i always felt like the context of "if you didn't know any combos or what you were doing" was very important to that whole statement, so i was very confused to see people discussing combos not having strategy as if that were sakurai's stone cold statement about why fighting games suck or something
to be fair if you're on twitter you barely count as people
Ah the kitty finally learned chin scratch tech.
I still ultimately disagree that there is always "push and pull" once you get the hit in traditional fighting games, what sajam describes as that near the middle of the video is only push, and the pull he describes is only before the hit is landed.
Obviously this is mitigated a lot today by things like combo breakers and burst but at the time Sakurai developed smash, DI was, (and still is) the most interactive mechanic off the hit in any game where 2 people 1v1 try and hit each other.
Lol it's really just people overreacting to the wording of a single sentence. Replace the word strategy with interractivity and it's good.
His goal was to make a game that's more neutral focused than combo focused, and to some extent he succeeded.
he said there is LESS place for strategy, not NO space for strategy... people need their reading comprehension checked out
This is great and all but I am absolutely shocked to learn that the young man on the screen there is FIFTY TWO years old
black or white fallacy has been going crazy on twitter
I played melee for over 7 years now and once you get past the intermediate level; you will be doing combos. There are BnB. It just has way more to do with what your opponent does after each hit.
I just think it's a different kind of thinking to a fighting game as a whole. I love my self some Guilty Gear and other 2d fighters and the way you have to think about neutral is the biggest difference from platform fighters and 2d fighters. I think it's more about what is your cup of tea and what makes you wanna learn more.
On that note; play Melee you noobs. That's a real fighting game!!
As someone who came from smash into fighting games - yes, it does feel way more like you have control over your character practically all the time, and it does make for some great intereactions, but I also feel like it's a very taxing way to interact.
There are combos, but they are dependent on your damage, their damage, their character, stage position, stage, spacing, do they have cheater moves, _is their SDI godlike,_ and the most famous DI.
Same goes for receiving the combo, you continuously have to make choices.
Neither player gets to really have a break to collect their brain for two seconds, outside of just having lost a stock sitting on the platform.
Traditional fighters with less interaction while getting wailed on are easier to keep playing for me, because if i get sucked into a combo vortex, I can use that second to have a little brain reset and figure out a fresh plan.
Seeing him play himself with 2 controllers was just....wow
Dbfz went in the opposite direction. let's make the combos long AF AND not have you be able to do anything. How did they not put burst in that game
The last thing that game needs is another defensive mechanic.
i have 300 hours in smash and i still have no idea whats happening after try harding i love watching my fave players play but geez im so lost when it comes to mix ups, it feels like every single interaction has a layer to it
Damn geese is such an inspirational guy
When I was "graduating" from elementary school, I wrote "I want to work for Nintendo" in our graduation book/time capsule. I have worked as a professional game developer most of my adult life. I've studied game development for my entire existence. I've steeped myself in that world, and know a TON about the industry. I'm not saying this to brag or anything. I say all that, to posit this;
Sakurai has FORGOTTEN more about great game design than I'll EVER know. I could continue my studies till I'm 100 years old, and I wouldn't be able to come close to approaching that man's sage wisdom. He's an amazing talent, and I'm honestly surprised Nintendo doesn't throw millions upon millions of dollars at him to run their entire creative department.
Reacting to the while video, its context and NOT giving an inflammatory reaction?? What 🤯
There is a story about Sakurai playing a fighting game at an arcade where he beat his opponent, but saw the actual person he was fighting against. Knowing that, it makes me wonder if Sakurai created Smash Bros out of guilt from that experience.
His statement is technically true. Since he said "Less room for strategy" and not "No room for strategy"
If you can die in 2 combos, then there are less chances to outsmart your opponent. After 2 exchanges, you either win or lose.
That being said, I love combos and think reducing them too much means you are no longer playing a fighting game.
I think smash as an interesting approach to improvisation by having a wide range of character weight & size and the knockback on moves is always changing due to damage taken and attack decay. So when playing you need to take so many factors into account. I like the idea, but for my personal taste, it's a bit too much to get to a point where you have a consistent grasp of the game. Love the smash games though.
What I think he meant by combo focused. Is the length and difficulty of combos.
Having multiple bars that enable different combos. Different enders or extension depending on the situation or stage placement.
All of that is fine. But it's not really interactive fro the players that is getting combed. And it's still a really flowchart way of doing combos.
What I love about smash combos. Is that first, some character win witjout combos. But character with combos are rewards with more damage for more execution, and weaker hits in general.
You can pick a character like cloud and have a neutral and jungle based fighter that has at best 3 b&b combos of 3 hits each, that only work at specific percent, and then a handful of 2 hit kill confirms that work at specific percents.
Cloud is really not combo focused. And yet he work. And while he is easy, it's just the first one that came to mind. But there are many other character without combos that work and arnt brain dead.
Second, combos are naturally anti infinite. There are a few anti infinite mechanics, but overwhole the game does not limit you in that regard since higher percent already make you fly further. But to avoid pseudo infinite being too good, we have staling. Moves used are placed in a 9 move time-line.
Each repeating move in that time line decrease the damage of that move. So if you spam the same one in an infinite you will get less and less damage.
And the other anti infinite mechanic is on shield. If you get hit 20 times on you shield in a quick succession you can do a fully infinite roll. I think there is another one similar for regular hits with the sdi but I'll come to that part later.
Third, combos are dépendant on many more mechanics. The percent your opponent is at. Their weight. Their fall speed. The vastly more important stage position. Your rage. Your ressources. And the entities on stage. All of thoses make for character specific combos and free flowing extensions to no end. It really fun. But we still have general combos that work on 90% of the cast with no issues. And that's a nice balance.
Fourth. As the defender you are not getting a cutscene combos. You have a few mechanics to escape.
First the Di You can influence where you will be sent. Making it possible to be sent too far or too close. In addition to letting your survive longer if you know where to aim when em getting launched far. Many combos have guessing games in them. Whit 50 50 di. Or needing to react to their di. In addition to cutting some combo routes off as knowledge checks for some characters.
Then there is smash Di. A bit stupid in execution but really good mechanic over whole. Ih hitstun. For every frame, if your stick has moved more than 30 degrés you get slightly displaced in that direction. Meaning you can make multi hits drop. Or displace yourself far enouth that the combo can follow up. This is a bit more niche. But its the main way of escaping Bayonetta combos for example.
And last the combo enders. There are many more situations you might want to put your opponent in. Obviously there is the big damage, or kill. But you can also do thoses.
And last disadvantage state, whether on the ground or in the air. Is much more actionable. You don't do jungle combos in smash. When juggling an opponent you read them at their decent. And send them back in the air. Meaning the opponent is fully actionable and has agency in how to go back to the stage.
Gering sent on the ground or on wall is teachable. You can get up normaly, or roll in a direction. This lead to a'lot of cool guessing game to extend combos. If you miss the tech window you either bounce off walls. Or splat on the ground. At wich point as the attacker you can get a free extention. Or again guess their waking option. Weather roll, normal getup, or gettup attack.
And last the ledge. If you are sent off stage but don't die. It's basicly like juggling. But above the void. The defender has more offensive option to get back to the stage from bellow than from above. But he can die even at low percents. Once grabbed. The ledge offer a variety of get up option. From jumps, to roll, to atta k, 'normal, or even drop wich let you use any move after a double jump as you get on the stage. This is one of the most common where something similar to oki happen in smash.
All of that make for a much more dynamic combo game. From situation, position, and ressources being much more varied and extensive. To mind game inside the combo that isn't just a combo breaker. To enders and extension with more options and more resolutions.
I'm glad we had the updates on Boots. Thank you Sajam🙏
I lowkey want Sakurai to make an *actual* fighting game now. He has/had really cool ideas in Smash and I'd love to see what ideas he could implement for a game dedicated to a more serious audience.
I have always felt that a Smash style game could benefit from meter... maybe it could be something more like an accessible Marvel vs Capcom
@@rouge-ish324 Well, in some failness, Ultimate has a Final Smash meter. Dunno if that's legal (I think it should be), but it's there. And Some characters have unique meters too.
So long as an *actual* director works on Smash Bros. that's cool with me.
The idea of calling it an "actual" fighting game is why I'm glad Sakurai will never make a game like that.
Everybody gets upset about talks about innovation/accessibility to fighting games in any facet and then wonder why player counts die after 3 weeks. Smash is incredibly intuitive & easy to pick up at a basic level flaunting itself as a party game. But at a higher level the game is completely different, although the skill floor requirement is much higher to even do a combo in games without autocombos.
The thing about wi-fi indicators is that some people have no choice in how they connect. Back when I was living with my father I didn´t have a cable connection. I wanted one but my father didn´t want to make new cable canals that went through the entire length and height of the house. So instead he got wi-fi extenders. I had a great connection for wi-fi standards but it was still wi-fi and there was nothing I could do about it.
There are other situations I can think of in which people have no choice other than to use wi-fi. Is it ok to ostracize these people? I dunno... kinda doesn´t feel right
All those important strategic elements to combos were things that the general players back in the 90s didnt really know much about so if you were a pro or even just a hardcore player that knew the combos you didn't need a strategy UNLESS you were fighting against someone equally skilled who also knew the same stuff. THEN you needed strats like what combos to use, which were the most effective, how to open up your opponent for that damage etc.
But if you knew MK3 "dial-a-combos" it was simple:
⬇➡P Run HP, HP, LP, LK, HK⬅HK 'wash-rinse-repeat' 2 times FINISH HIM/HER!!
The only strategy involved was "don't get hit" by Sub's ice! 😂
They'll post this and proceed to defend not banning that ice climber infinite off of a grab.
Whenever I see people having senseless arguments online, I wish I have the ability to personally tell them that it’s not worth your time and energy all the time…
I feel like something people miss about this video is the fact that the majority of the video is in past tense. He's talking about a specific issue he was noticing at a specific time and Smash Bros was his answer to said issue. Other games came up with other ways of dealing with combos, but talking about those is not the goal of the video, seeing as it's specifically a video about Smash Bros.
What we need is characters who can counter while being hit, I guess. The evolved form of Baiken. Never-ending push/pull.
Ain’t that just Killer Instinct?
Ain't that just burst
@@KeshavKrishnan Baiken could get a combo while blocking. The equivalent would be if she could do that while getting hit. Burst just gets you out of the combo, doesn't get you one yourself.
Baiken in XX and Xrd could gaurd cancel parry and it's part of the reason why people hated her back then
@@KeshavKrishnan LOL true true. Sajam does mention both of these mechanics as ways to reintroduce player control while getting combo’d. If only I watched the rest of the video before commenting
I would also like to point out that figuring out how to even LAND that combo is a strategy. Gotta win neutral. There's lots of strategy in fighting games, you just don't see it if you don't understand how to play them.
There's some truth to the idea though. Low-mid players that only have only learned one or two combos don't get to make decisions when they get a hit, players don't get to make decisions once they choose their combo unless there's a tool that lets them potentially get out of that combo (such as DI, burst, combo breakers, etc.) or they have a couple variations on that combo (such as an easy version and a hard version), and the player getting hit by a combo doesn't get to make decisions until the combo is over unless they have a tool to potentially escape that combo.
That's not inherently bad though. Having a point where you don't need to make decisions helps conserve mental energy for other aspects of the match, like the neutral game or the mixup you're going to do after you end your combo. The amount of time you spend thinking in a fighting game with combo interaction stays a lot more constant over time than a fighting game without combo interaction, but there's no right answer as to which one you should prefer. I like having agency, so I prefer platform fighters, but that doesn't mean every fighting game should have combo interaction because there are some benefits to taking away a player's control.
Remember that this is the guy that gave fox a 4 frame move that is active on frame 1, invincible for a frame, and can instantly kill most characters in the game at the ledge.
You can add something like, body rotation of the defender. That way you'll be justifying trying to break out of combos when juggled.
It'd be like a 'prolonged' game of rps, where you'd be influencing where your character will drift in the air - to hopefully change paths of combo. That's how I see it. Even if burst and combo breakers from meter are allright too.
(Yeah, that's pretty much exactly how platform fighters do it. I just thought of it in more "how a cat lands on it's feet", kinematic sort of direction)
And well, Toribash already exists I guess.
combos are just an extension of a hit to make the inital hit more worth. In smash you can hit people with some moves harder depending on how you hit them (captain falcon knee) or in shooters you can hit more vulnerable spots (like head) for more payoff. Every game has some dynamic between actions with different risk and reward ratios to make it more interesting.
Combos become are very popular way of doing it its just important to balance the risk reward ratio and maybe dont make them too long.