Street Fighter IV!!!!

[MadDogMike]

LOL. Know what you're talking about before you try to correct me.

You know we're talking about MvC2, not MvC1.

[Starnum]

Well, I don't know jack shit about game designing, but even I can tell that 2D fighting games vs 3D fighter's gameplay is vastly different in feel. That "feel" is exactly why I prefer 2d fighters, like Femto said. However, maybe that's not what's being argued here, I'm not sure. *shrugs*

[Femto]

Marvel vs. Capcom 2 is a 2D fighting game.

Soul Calibur is a 3D fighting game.

Undeniable facts.

[MadDogMike]

Marvel vs Capcom 2 is a 2D fighting game, but the Marvel vs Capcom 2 graphical engine is a 3D engine, also an undeniable fact. Don't be a troll for the sake of it, do some research. Don't go twisting my words around either. Sometimes you just have to realise that you can't be right all the time.

[Femto]

Marvel vs Capcom 2 graphical engine is a 3D engine

That's completely irrelevant because the game is 2D and follows the basic rules of a 2D fighting game.

Street Fighter IV is not 2D.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE FACT?

Marvel vs. Capcom 2 was a horrible example.

Period.

[MadDogMike]

It's obvious you know nothing about programming, so it's understandable that you refuse to acknowledge what I'm saying.

I find it funny that you called my explanation earlier "rhetoric".

[Femto]

I find it funny that you called my explanation earlier "rhetoric".

I bet you had to look that up.

Anyway, you did the smart thing.

Getting the hell out of this conversation before you ended up looking like even more of an idiot.

Marvel vs. Capcom 2 is 3D.

Hahaha.

Won't get over that one anytime soon.

[MadDogMike]

Actually, I was waiting to see how you would respond to that. I was hoping to avoid this, but I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you like a child.

Every single 3D game in existence uses sprites. Your hud is made of sprites. Your mouse cursor is a sprite. Particle systems use sprites. Spell effects and hit effects are sprites.

Now, what if we decided we wanted to make a fighting game that has 3D backgrounds but 2D sprites? Easy, we make a 3D engine and add sprites to it (which are actually just flat 3D objects). That's what they did in Marvel vs Capcom 2 and recent King of Fighters games. These games still use hitboxes and still retain the exact same 2D fighting game gameplay. The only thing that has been changed is the part of the code which draws the graphics to the screen.

I really don't understand why Capcom is having trouble with their collision detection, but that's beside the point of our arguement. I was just defending my post from your witty but ignorant reply. Try to learn to accept criticism from others.

Honestly, try and make a proper rebuttal to this explanation without resorting to flaming or to making fun of me.


EDIT: Just noticed one more thing in a previous post that I should address. Street Fighter 4 doesn't use sprites for characters, but the gameplay is just as 2D as all the other entries in the Street Fighter series. To a programmer working on the gameplay code of a game of this nature, whether the character models themselves are 2D or 3D is almost completely transparent to them. I'm looking at this from a programmer's point of view, not the player's point of view. To the player the only thing that matters is what they see (3D graphics). The programmer sees something completely different (2D gameplay).

EDIT: Well, Femto, after looking up some articles about Street Fighter IV gameplay it seems the issue people were reporting wasn't to do with hits not being detected correctly but something entirely different. Basically, players arms/legs look like they go through the opponents when you hit them. Here's a good example: http://www.videogame-forums.com/imgcache/83.png

Capcom probably are using hitboxes just like I said, this problem stems from an entirely different area.

[War Machine]

Maybe a good example would be Smash Bros 64, were many items like Captain Falcon's Falcon Punch were still (low-quality) sprites even though the game was in full 3D.

By the way, Femto. Weren't you bitching about reserving our judgment until we see the game? At the moment we were talking about pictures and now we have video, but you still haven't seen anything definitive in regards to how the finished product will be.

[The Prince]

Was Primal Fury 2D or 3D? What about Super Paper Mario?

BTW....MadMike has staked his claim on this board. I will now use him as my source for everything Streetfighter, and fighting games in general.

I bet you could beat Femto at Streetfighter as well.

[War Machine]

I don't remember primal fury, but Paper Mario is the perfect example of a 3D game with 2D sprites (which look like flat objects).

[Femto]

Let's take this back to the beginning, shall we?

This whole argument started when I mentioned the inherent differences between a 2D fighting game engine and a 3D fighting game engine.

Now I'll be the first to admit that I was flat out wrong when I stated that physics dictate collisions in a 3D engine but that is beside the point I was and have been trying to make this entire time, which is that a 2D fighting game feels differently than a 3D fighting game (because of hit detections or whatever it may be).

Now let's fast forward to MadDogMike's latest post where he rambles on about a 3D graphics engine in a 2D game when that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

He talks about the HUD in a 3D game when that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And then people mention Super Paper Mario when that has abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Not at any point in this discussion has MadDogMike mentioned a true 3D fighting game like Virtua Fighter or Soul Calibur for comparison purposes or to support his arguments regarding Street Fighter IV, which would make sense since SFIV's fighting game engine probably has more in common with those games than with, say, 3rd Strike or yes, MvC2. Instead, he chooses to constantly use 2D fighting game engines to support his argument that a 3D fighting game engine can feel like a 2D one. It's like having apples and oranges and saying that an apple can taste like an orange if you eat an orange. Does no one else see the failed logic here?

In the midst of all this, MadDogMike has been condescending, pretentious, made huge assumptions about a variety of topics (according to him, there is only a single Street Fighter development team and they've made every single Street Fighter game ever made including the EX games) and has shown just flat out ignorance when it comes to fighting games in general.

EDIT: Well, Femto, after looking up some articles about Street Fighter IV gameplay it seems the issue people were reporting wasn't to do with hits not being detected correctly but something entirely different. Basically, players arms/legs look like they go through the opponents when you hit them. Here's a good example: http://www.videogame-forums.com/imgcache/83.png

That is absolutely not it at all and it just proves how you know absolutely nothing about fighting games and what I've been trying to explain this entire time as you desperately try to apply your general knowledge of something to an area where it just doesn't seem to apply, i.e. a fighting game engine.

And I quote:

But what's really curious is the hit detection -- an unfortunate casualty of the jump to 3D.

This isn't to say that hit detection in previous 2D fighters was altogether perfect; it's a refined art, and one that needs to be carefully developed. But through my time with SFIV I wasn't able to get a sense of what constituted a hit -- chalk it up to the game's ongoing development or what have you, but it's something I'd like to see tightened. 3D or not, fighting on a two-dimensional plane requires precise, reliable hit detection.

http://www.destructoid.com/gdc-08-stree ... 1603.phtml

Tell me, have you ever coded a fighting game?

PS: The Prince thinks I'm dumb enough to fall for his childish bait.

Nice try, but ultimately unsuccessful.

Also, to whoever smartass said it, I still haven't passed judgment on this game.

I was merely expressing my disappointment based on the above comments at something that had me worried about this game from the very beginning, i.e. that the jump to 3D will change some nuances in Street Fighter.

[The Prince]

I'm confused people are referring to SF4 as 3-D when the videos show fights playing out like they had during SF2 days. Though once in a while, a slight change in angle and interaction with elements in front or in the backward would come into play to create a 3-D illusion, the fighters always appeared to engage on a 2-D plain.

Perhaps this refers to the extra-dimension of collision physics (being discussed), though I still have trouble visualizing depth being applied as a factor when engaging on a 2-D plain. But if it were the case that there was a depth component (z-axis), than surely from the primarily 2-D camera view then I could easily see how a punch or a kick would have the illusion of punching through an opponent, despite missing to the outside or inside of the screen.

Or maybe I'm just a noob.....and are out of my element discussing these intricacies.

BTW.....I thought my Paper Mario illustration was spot on. IMO may have helped pioneer the future of fighting games like we see with SF4? What other examples of 2.5D games are there to compare?

That said I still think Tobal.1 is still the best fighter of all time regarding its collision physics and depth of gameplay......either that or DragonSlayer.

[Femto]

Street Fighter IV is a 3D game that's limited to two planes.

The way I see it, is that it's like Soul Calibur without 8-way run or Virtua Fighter without sidestepping whereas something like 3rd Strike or Guilty Gear (ugh) is 2D through and through.

Try to compare KOF: Maximum Impact to the Neo-Geo King of Fighters games, they tried to keep the gameplay intact when they moved to 3D but it just doesn't feel like a 2D game. Street Fighter IV seems to be taking a similar approach but I don't know if it'll really feel like a 2D game when all is said and done and that's the big question mark hovering over the game for me right now.

Truth to be told, I'll most likely get it either way.

Paper Mario has nothing to do with this.

There are tons of 2D fighting games with 3D backgrounds but they are all ultimately 2D games.

To this day, I have not played a fighting that is as tight as 3rd Strike is.

When 3D fighting games reach that zenith then all will be fine with the world.

[MadDogMike]

Let's take this back to the beginning, shall we?

This whole argument started when I mentioned the inherent differences between a 2D fighting game engine and a 3D fighting game engine.

Now I'll be the first to admit that I was flat out wrong when I stated that physics dictate collisions in a 3D engine but that is beside the point I was and have been trying to make this entire time, which is that a 2D fighting game feels differently than a 3D fighting game (because of hit detections or whatever it may be).

What you also need to understand is that there are no inherent GAMEPLAY differences between 2D and 3D engines, the game's graphical engine is simply a method of drawing the graphics onto the screen. Graphics code, gameplay code and physics code are almost entirely independent of each other. This can be seen in that most games these days use proprietary 3D engines and proprietary physics engines from different companies, with their own in-house developers create the gameplay code. Any differences you feel when playing 2D or 3D fighting games boils down to something as simple as this: THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES. Nice try, comparing the gameplay between Virtua Fighter/Soul Calibur to Street Fighter and saying it's because of the 3D engine.

Now let's fast forward to MadDogMike's latest post where he rambles on about a 3D graphics engine in a 2D game when that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

He talks about the HUD in a 3D game when that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And then people mention Super Paper Mario when that has abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

It has everything to do with the topic of you ridiculing me for saying Marvel vs Capcom 2 was built upon a 3D engine, as well as the topic of 3D games still being able to retain the same 2D gameplay and use hitboxes. You said that 2D gameplay couldn't be replicated in a 3D engine, I proved you wrong by mentioning games like Marvel vs Capcom 2, which is undeniably built from a 3D engine. To support this information, it's the only Street Fighter game which uses Sega's NAOMI arcade boards, which were made for 3D games.

Mentioning that other 3D games use sprites was for the purpose of showing you that just because a game has sprites that doesn't mean it isn't using a 3D engine.

Not at any point in this discussion has MadDogMike mentioned a true 3D fighting game like Virtua Fighter or Soul Calibur for comparison purposes or to support his arguments regarding Street Fighter IV, which would make sense since SFIV's fighting game engine probably has more in common with those games than with, say, 3rd Strike or yes, MvC2. Instead, he chooses to constantly use 2D fighting game engines to support his argument that a 3D fighting game engine can feel like a 2D one. It's like having apples and oranges and saying that an apple can taste like an orange if you eat an orange. Does no one else see the failed logic here?

The gameplay of Virtua Fighter and Soul Calibur was built from the ground up to be a completely different breed of fighting game, which is why it feels completely different. Street Fighter IV is a 2D fighting game transplanted into a 3D engine.

In the midst of all this, MadDogMike has been condescending, pretentious, made huge assumptions about a variety of topics (according to him, there is only a single Street Fighter development team and they've made every single Street Fighter game ever made including the EX games) and has shown just flat out ignorance when it comes to fighting games in general.

Condescending and pretentious? You were trying to tell ME how programming a game works without having any knowledge on the issue, so I told you that I had a degree so you'd realise I knew what I was talking about. You, on the other hand, were the one that first resorted to ridicule.

EDIT: Well, Femto, after looking up some articles about Street Fighter IV gameplay it seems the issue people were reporting wasn't to do with hits not being detected correctly but something entirely different. Basically, players arms/legs look like they go through the opponents when you hit them. Here's a good example: http://www.videogame-forums.com/imgcache/83.png

That is absolutely not it at all and it just proves how you know absolutely nothing about fighting games and what I've been trying to explain this entire time as you desperately try to apply your general knowledge of something to an area where it just doesn't seem to apply, i.e. a fighting game engine.

And you have more in-depth knowledge on how fighting games are made? I'm not trying to say that I'm a master game coder, that's far from the truth, but you have even less knowledge on the subject than I.

And I quote:

But what's really curious is the hit detection -- an unfortunate casualty of the jump to 3D.

This isn't to say that hit detection in previous 2D fighters was altogether perfect; it's a refined art, and one that needs to be carefully developed. But through my time with SFIV I wasn't able to get a sense of what constituted a hit -- chalk it up to the game's ongoing development or what have you, but it's something I'd like to see tightened. 3D or not, fighting on a two-dimensional plane requires precise, reliable hit detection.

http://www.destructoid.com/gdc-08-stree ... 1603.phtml

That's the only article I've seen so far where they talk about not being "able to get a sense of what constituted a hit". So, maybe there is a problem with their hit detection code. It could even be something as simple as the hitboxes being too small, or a character's animation extending part of their body outside the pre-defined hitbox area. I don't know what it is because I haven't had a chance to play the game yet, but it's not the fault of using a 3D engine, it's just a symptom of moving to a 3D engine. Capcom will have it fixed in due time.

Tell me, have you ever coded a fighting game?

Since you're going to resort to such a stupid argument, let me ask you: have you ever coded anything at all?

A person doesn't have to have coded a fighting game to understand the concepts behind one. I have coded other 2D "games" as university assignments including a pinball game where I had to code collision detection between balls and other objects, making those objects react to each other accordingly. The same concepts that we learnt from that pinball game project apply to pretty much every 2D or 3D game, that's the reason why it was taught to us. I've also taken some computer graphics classes where we learnt how to code our own simplistic 3D engines using OpenGL. More experience than you have, I'm sure, so stop trying to tell me how wrong I am without actually KNOWING that I'm wrong.



Now, to sum up the points of my last few posts so that you can see exactly what I was getting at:
- I said 3D and 2D engines have no inherent gameplay difference
- To prove this I explained that 2D fighting games can still be built on 3D engines, such as MvC2, while still retaining the exact same 2D gameplay
- Since you refused to acknowlege this just because the characters are sprites, I explained how it's very common for 3D engines to use sprites

Now can you see how everything I said was relevant? Sheesh, how did this get so out of hand. Just call psi29a into here and ask for his opinion or something so we can get this over and done with.

[Femto]

You said that 2D gameplay couldn't be replicated in a 3D engine, I proved you wrong by mentioning games like Marvel vs Capcom 2, which is undeniably built from a 3D engine.

This is as far as I read.

I'm sorry, but you simply can't grasp the point I'm trying to make here.

[MadDogMike]

Afraid to read it because it might actually make some sense? By not even bothering to respond to my arguments, let alone read them, you show yourself as the troll you really are. GG, troll, I guess I win this one by default.

[Femto]

Once again.

Do you understand that there is an inherent difference between a 2D fighting game and a 3D fighting game in gameplay?

Can you grasp and process this simple piece of information?

OK?

Good.

Now you agreed with me when I said that Marvel vs. Capcom 2 was a 2D game, correct?

Now tell me exactly how it is that the engine, be it graphics or gameplay, of Marvel vs. Capcom 2 has any relevance to how Street Fighter IV will ultimately play when the latter is a 3D game in its entirety?

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY HERE?

And please be brief in your reply because I'm running out of patience here.

[War Machine]

Femto, I don't think you should worry about the hit boxes. That's probably the easiest thing to manage, if I understood the problem they experienced. Basically, they're just a bunch of values: certain attacks moves to XY, and if other character is in XY, he gets hit. The problem that comes with that is that there are a lot of values to manage (strength of the punch for example, but there should be more than that) that require a lot of tweeking to balance it out. So you sometimes get those hickups were the animation shows a hit, but the hit boxes didn't register the hit.

Soul Calibur 3 and Tekken 5 have a good example of this if you own a Codebreaker or Gamshark and use the code for "Hit Anywhere". What the code does is change the values of your hits to exaggerated ammounts (instead of an attack having a range of 2, it has a range of 100), so you can pretty much hit anyone from any distance. Although those games make more use of the Z-axis than SFIV, so I don't know why you wanted them as an example.

[Eldo]

From what I read from the points presented on both sides is:

MadDogMike is talking about 2D/3D in terms of graphics engine.

Femto is talking 2D/3D in terms of gameplay. 2D gameplay being the sidescroller, while 3D gameplay is where the player can turn 360 degrees around the environment he is in.

From what we know of Street Fighter 4, there are some parts of the game where it isn't just completely 2D gameplay (sidescrolling). What Femto is saying that in these events, when the game switches to its 3D gameplay (not graphics) the controls becomes harder to manage since the controls was designed to be on the 2D plane. In terms of difference of controls for example, in 2D-gameplay fighters, up is typically the jump button, while in 3D-gameplay fighters, up moves the character around the environment, and another jump button is assigned.

[The Prince]

Street Fighter IV is a 3D game that's limited to two planes.

The way I see it, is that it's like Soul Calibur without 8-way run or Virtua Fighter without sidestepping whereas something like 3rd Strike or Guilty Gear (ugh) is 2D through and through.

Try to compare KOF: Maximum Impact to the Neo-Geo King of Fighters games, they tried to keep the gameplay intact when they moved to 3D but it just doesn't feel like a 2D game. Street Fighter IV seems to be taking a similar approach but I don't know if it'll really feel like a 2D game when all is said and done and that's the big question mark hovering over the game for me right now.

Truth to be told, I'll most likely get it either way.

Paper Mario has nothing to do with this.

There are tons of 2D fighting games with 3D backgrounds but they are all ultimately 2D games.

To this day, I have not played a fighting that is as tight as 3rd Strike is.

When 3D fighting games reach that zenith then all will be fine with the world.

They have to start from somewhere. OVer time there is only so much you can do with a 2-D fighting engine, before you can't evolve anymore without making shit a bunch of crazy animations.

Seriously Femto, in your opinion, if 3rd-Strike was in fact the pinnacle of fighters, what about it could be improved upon to make it a better game? In particular what aspects from today's generation of technology could be incorporated into further evolving the 3rd-Strike engine for the better, if any?

IMO whether you like 3-D fighters or hate them, by adding literally a whole new dimension of gameplay it creates an infinite number of oppurtunities to expand or build upon from previous efforts.

Do you not see the potential of how a 3-D engine is a work in progress, like how 3rd-Strike supposedly perfected the 2-D engine (after how many generations of Streetfighter and similar games)?

You provide good example of issues that arise in 3-D fighters, that by their nature 2-D fighters don't have to deal with. But you make it seem as such issues are a natural limitation, as opposed to a stumbling block which can be addressed through innovation and more precise physics due to improved hardware capabilities with the next generation of gaming sytems, and even more important.....the next generation of developer who literally grew up playing these games who would be able to take things in a whole new direction to address what works and what doesn't.

[spoiler]That said.....I have a feeling MadDogMike will own SF4 when it comes up out. And a movie will be made about his exploits, which will be fashioned into a highly anticipated sequel to the Fred Savage Classic....The Wizard. Only this one would be called The Wizard II...........as opposed to just The Wizard, being that The Wizard II is a sequel and all......[/spoiler]

[Femto]

MadDogMike, I read your post because I felt a little sorry for you but I'm not in the mood to discuss it word by word so I'll just throw some bullet points and let you sit on them for a while:

- You still think you can code better than Capcom.
- You stubbornly talk about graphical engines when I've been talking about gameplay and feel differences the entire time.
- I never, ever even mentioned sprites so I don't know why you keep bringing them up.
- You're assuming that SFIV is being based off a previous iteration of the game when it's most likely being built from the ground up.
- My knowledge of how fighting games work come from dicking around with debug bios with Neo-Geo roms where you can actually see the hitboxes of characters, moves and animations and how exactly it is they work.
- Coding a freaking pinball game doesn't make you an expert in the differences between a 2D and 3D fighting game engine.
- Playing tons of fighting games, both 2D and 3D, and learning all the nuances and differences between various fighting game engines makes you more of an expert in the differences between a 2D and 3D fighting game engine than coding a freaking pinball game does.
- Yes, I've coded (nothing graphical though).
- You still do not understand that there is an inherent difference between a 2D fighting game and a 3D fighting game (and it isn't just in controls like Eldo mentioned).

[The Prince]

From what I read from the points presented on both sides is:

MadDogMike is talking about 2D/3D in terms of graphics engine.

Femto is talking 2D/3D in terms of gameplay. 2D gameplay being the sidescroller, while 3D gameplay is where the player can turn 360 degrees around the environment he is in.

From what we know of Street Fighter 4, there are some parts of the game where it isn't just completely 2D gameplay (sidescrolling). What Femto is saying that in these events, when the game switches to its 3D gameplay (not graphics) the controls becomes harder to manage since the controls was designed to be on the 2D plane. In terms of difference of controls for example, in 2D-gameplay fighters, up is typically the jump button, while in 3D-gameplay fighters, up moves the character around the environment, and another jump button is assigned.

Might I remind you, you are a moderator not a mediator.

Seriously these are good points, and actually helped address some of my previous confusion regarding the issues being discussed.

[War Machine]

From what I read from the points presented on both sides is:

MadDogMike is talking about 2D/3D in terms of graphics engine.

Femto is talking 2D/3D in terms of gameplay. 2D gameplay being the sidescroller, while 3D gameplay is where the player can turn 360 degrees around the environment he is in.

From what we know of Street Fighter 4, there are some parts of the game where it isn't just completely 2D gameplay (sidescrolling). What Femto is saying that in these events, when the game switches to its 3D gameplay (not graphics) the controls becomes harder to manage since the controls was designed to be on the 2D plane. In terms of difference of controls for example, in 2D-gameplay fighters, up is typically the jump button, while in 3D-gameplay fighters, up moves the character around the environment, and another jump button is assigned.

I understand what you're saying, but in SFIV, the camera only turns when they're doing some kind of special move. Afterwards, the game continues in the same sidescrolling battle. They don't even use sidestepping at all. So the problem you mention, about a jump becoming a move in the Z-axis, can't happen because they don't use it that way.

[Femto]

They have to start from somewhere. OVer time there is only so much you can do with a 2-D fighting engine, before you can't evolve anymore without making shit a bunch of crazy animations.

That's fucking exactly it, motherfucker!

The engine in 3rd Strike is absolutely perfect and cannot be improved upon.

Now there could be a better game than 3rd Strike but the improvements wouldn't come from engine fixes but from gameplay fixes, i.e. more balance, perhaps a more diverse roster (there are no command counter characters in 3rd Strike) or removing the guessing game that's so ingrained in 3rd Strike's gameplay (is he going to attack high or low after a wake-up and how should I attempt to parry?).

I was disappointed when I saw that SFIV was 3D, even though I was 100% sure that was the only way Capcom would make this game, but then I read that interview with Ono from EGM where he says that he believes they've gone as far as they can with sprites in 3rd Strike and it's absolutely true.

I mean, you can improve animation (though 3rd Strike's animation is no less than stellar) or make them high resolution but you can't get better than the 2D engine in 3rd Strike.

3D fighting games have not reached that point yet and that's probably because they started coming out when fighting games were already in decline so there was perhaps less of a push to be creative. Whatever the reason may be, when developers really start to brainstorm a 3D fighting game engine that does what 3rd Strike did to 2D games, it'll be amazing in many ways but it'll still be absolutely different than a 2D fighting game.

I'm starting to realize that might the problem here, that Street Fighter IV is attempting to be both at the same time.

But listen, I finally figured you out.

You love to instigate but you're not as stupid as you pretend to be.

Cheers.