Soul Calibur VI: General discussion

SSfox

[14] Master
Mk11 was really disappointing. Characters feel one dimensional and stiff. Boon designed all the characters the same way.
Actually it's not, characters are quite unique, but it's true that you can't do much in terms of combos with the characters compare to MKX.

perhaps with netherrealm games the audience fades out fairly quick, as the studio pumps out new games every 2 years
It's a possibility, i also wonder if it's the gore thing that don't fit much FGC, i mean fatalities, gore and all are cool and all for a lot of people,especially the first days, but "maybe" it's not something same people would like in long run. In comparison i think that one of reason SF4 worked well is because of its Comic/Fun/Not too serious art direction that appeal to large audience in general and on all kind of people no matter how old they are. (of course outside of its good gameplay for its time)
 

sytus

[13] Hero
It's a possibility, i also wonder if it's the gore thing that don't fit much FGC, i mean fatalities, gore and all are cool and all for a lot of people,especially the first days, but "maybe" it's not something same people would like in long run.
Modern MK fatalities have completely missed the mark what the original were about which were these secret cool moves to style on your opponent. Now it's all about watching your character play with guts at the price of some real world dollarly doos. The only fatalities that are hitting the mark are the brutalities because they're stylish and don't over stay their welcome with unnecessary cinematography.
 

Rusted Blade

[11] Champion
Because it has almost nothing to keep casuals hooked on. Features and presentation matter, and sadly, VF is as appealing as snail served on a plate.

I don't even think it's the casuals that need to be kept hooked it's just extremely important for any fighting game to have stellar presentation for everyone due to looking at the same stuff over and over again. I look at Virtua Fighter and think it's really missing flare and that satisfying crunch in attacks that you get with Tekken and Calibur. I would even start the series anew and probably under a different name so if it did go tits up then they can go back to the original series like Capcom did with Devil May Cry.
I'd like to provide a competing view: I think Virtua Fighter looks and feels great to the aesthetic eye and feedback senses of a great many players--and in my case at least, I think it is attributable to being someone who has trained in actual martial arts. I'm not trying to throwdown the purist card here, but without question, of all the major 3D fighters I have sampled (and that's all of them in existence at some time or another, I think), the style, the range of movement, and the simulated biomechanics and force of the characters as virtual bodies in motion is closest to being rooted in reality for Virtua Fighter. Mind you, it's not super realistic by any means, but leaps and bounds closer than a Tekken, Soulcalibur, or DOA.

The same is true of other aspects of it's artistic design, including character, stage design, and visual effects. Probably it does err* on the side of being a little too minimalist and unobtrusive. But if it wasn't perfect in that regard, I think it all still worked exceedingly well as a total package, and Virtua Fighter was always did have a more nuts and bolts obsessed fanbase.

But even if I disagree as to the assessment of the quality of the visual design, there could be something to Aries' argument insofar as a casual players/blue ocean consumers can probably be fairly described as being attracted to flash. I don't know that we can ever truly know, beyond pretty subjective speculation, all these years on, how much VF's plain jane visuals affected its bottom line, but for those going further to pronounce that it fell into torpor and possible permanent franchise death because of its innate qualities, I think you need to widen your examination of relevant facts. Virtua Fighter died first and foremost because it was a Sega property, and Sega is now a tiny player relative to what it once was when it comes to the console software market, with a comporably immense portfolio of IP licenses, most of which do not get utilized anymore, with games made by internal studios and teams which are now largely defunct or severely diminished in output capacity. Soulcalibur on the other hand, is owned by a holding of Bandai Namco Group, one of the largest players in gaming in the world, with a massive publishing arm in Bandai Namco Entertainment.

This is why I always laughed whenever someone would say "SCV has killed the franchise!" Or, in its more contemporary form "SCV almost killed the franchise!" LOL, no: at most it delayed the next game a little. SC has long been in a development cycle that ebbs and flows relative to Tekken's and going back even further than that, every single Soulcalibur game has taken a little longer than the one before it to finish: after 25 years, I don't know why (other than rationalized enthusiasm and overly-rosey hopes) anyone is ever surprised when that doesn't change, especially as production times in the industry at large continue on an upward trend.

Anyway, is Virtua Fighter out for the count? I hope not, I really do; I occasionally go on a mission to scour industry media for any major changes to the companies that now seem to own the relevant IP and inherited the relevant teams and talent, such as they still remain with Sega (not much of it, alas). But to compare it being unpaltable and/or label its fate as justified and born solely on its strenghts or appeal is not really an accurate description of what happened to it, regardless. And I think it would still have a loyal fanbase today had it been in the hands of a thriving developer during the last decade.

* Did err, I guess we can say; even I, a huge fan of the franchise, am about ready to give up the ghost on a return.
 
Last edited:

Dissidia

Premium Member
I was looking at footage of VF5 vanilla and it reminded me of how damn good the game looked for a 2006 title. It blew Tekken 6 out of the water before that even came out... Strangely VF5 Final Showdown on PS3/360 got a slight downgrade visually compared to the vanilla release.

I then looked at VF4 and saw that the arcades had a game that looked sort of original Xbox quality in graphics but was downgraded for the PS2 version (it looks rough on PS2) I lament the death of virtua fighter because it is the death of fighting games being top of the line visually. Nowadays they are very "budget titles" in scope and visuals.

Honestly I think Virtua Fighter coming back would be a breath of fresh air to have a 3D game away from tekken's long juggles. SoulCalibur fits this niche but SoulCalibur is so unique that it feels like its own thing. (Thankfully!)
 

SSfox

[14] Master
I was looking at footage of VF5 vanilla and it reminded me of how damn good the game looked for a 2006 title. It blew Tekken 6 out of the water before that even came out... Strangely VF5 Final Showdown on PS3/360 got a slight downgrade visually compared to the vanilla release.

I then looked at VF4 and saw that the arcades had a game that looked sort of original Xbox quality in graphics but was downgraded for the PS2 version (it looks rough on PS2) I lament the death of virtua fighter because it is the death of fighting games being top of the line visually. Nowadays they are very "budget titles" in scope and visuals.

VF5 was super slow tho, VF5FS is more speed, fluid and fun, and gameplay got improvement and more deep and characters got some cool new moves, it's overall a way superior game than Vanilla.

But it came late AF in consoles, this and the only Digital release plus almost nothing in term on singleplayer just didn't help at all the game in terms of sales.

Also releasing a game with a subtitle doesn't help a game, especially a fighting game to sell to the large audience, people may see it as spin off for those who don't follow the genre.


Wasn't it VF4 FT (final tuned)? it was the last version of VF4 and it was release only on arcade and never came to consoles, it was the huge update after Evo and it even got a graphical update. Another reason why it's not too surprise to see the death of this iconic franchise, especially considering Evo sold very well in PS2, but Sega just being Sega and didn't bother to bring FT to consoles.
 
Last edited:

Heniek

[12] Conqueror
I'd like to provide a competing view: I think Virtua Fighter looks and feels great to the aesthetic eye and feedback senses of a great many players--and in my case at least, I think it is attributable to being someone who has trained in actual martial arts. I'm not trying to throwdown the purist card here, but without question, of all the major 3D fighters I have sampled (and that's all of them in existence at some time or another, I think), the style, the range of movement, and the simulated biomechanics and force of the characters as virtual bodies in motion is closest to being rooted in reality for Virtua Fighter. Mind you, it's not super realistic by any means, but leaps and bounds closer than a Tekken, Soulcalibur, or DOA.

The same is true of other aspects of it's artistic design, including character, stage design, and visual effects. Probably it does err* on the side of being a little too minimalist and unobtrusive. But if it wasn't perfect in that regard, I think it all still worked exceedingly well as a total package, and Virtua Fighter was always did have a more nuts and bolts obsessed fanbase.

But even if I disagree as to the assessment of the quality of the visual design, there could be something to Aries' argument insofar as a casual players/blue ocean consumers can probably be fairly described as being attracted to flash. I don't know that we can ever truly know, beyond pretty subjective speculation, all these years on, how much VF's plain jane visuals affected its bottom line, but for those going further to pronounce that it fell into torpor and possible permanent franchise death because of its innate qualities, I think you need to widen your examination of relevant facts. Virtua Fighter died first and foremost because it was a Sega property, and Sega is now a tiny player relative to what it once was when it comes to the console software market, with a comporably immense portfolio of IP licenses, most of which do not get utilized anymore, with games made by internal studios and teams which are now largely defunct or severely diminished in output capacity. Soulcalibur on the other hand, is owned by a holding of Bandai Namco Group, one of the largest players in gaming in the world, with a massive publishing arm in Bandai Namco Entertainment.

This is why I always laughed whenever someone would say "SCV has killed the franchise!" Or, in its more contemporary form "SCV almost killed the franchise!" LOL, no: at most it delayed the next game a little. SC has long been in a development cycle that ebbs and flows relative to Tekken's and going back even further than that, every single Soulcalibur game has taken a little longer than the one before it to finish: after 25 years, I don't know why (other than rationalized enthusiasm and overly-rosey hopes) anyone is ever surprised when that doesn't change, especially as production times in the industry at large continue on an upward trend.

Anyway, is Virtua Fighter out for the count? I hope not, I really do; I occasionally go on a mission to scour industry media for any major changes to the companies that now seem to own the relevant IP and inherited the relevant teams and talent, such as they still remain with Sega (not much of it, alas). But to compare it being unpaltable and/or label its fate as justified and born solely on its strenghts or appeal is not really an accurate description of what happened to it, regardless. And I think it would still have a loyal fanbase today had it been in the hands of a thriving developer during the last decade.

* Did err, I guess we can say; even I, a huge fan of the franchise, am about ready to give up the ghost on a return.
It made me think again of how wonderful it would be for Bushido Blade like game to appear again, refined with updated visuals.
Damn I miss clarity in those games - it's all about whoosh and bling now
 

Rusted Blade

[11] Champion
It made me think again of how wonderful it would be for Bushido Blade like game to appear again, refined with updated visuals.
Damn I miss clarity in those games - it's all about whoosh and bling now
Bushido Blade was so good and about as unique a fighter as was ever made, and certainly the one that most closely tries to simulate real-world armed combat. It's very interesting to me that the two most industry defining 3D weapon fighters took such radically different approaches to the concept: one system where any serious blow is lethal and even minor wounds can lead to incapacity and the battle can be over in seconds, and another system where the combatants grind away at a meter but any given blow can seemingly split an opponent in half, only to have them stagger back unscathed time and again. Some of the failure of Bushido Blade can be attributed to factors that have nothing to do with its core mechanics, but I just don't understand why no one tried again, outside a few kitschy indie projects like Nidhogg, years later.

On the other hand, there is little question why the meter-based/perfectly-immune-until-the-final-blow model has remained popular: it had the inertia of earlier games being based in similar mechanics since well before the 3D gaming era, it provides match progress feedback players of all skill levels can easily identify, and the format lengthens contests, even between vastly disproportionate adversaries--one thing that a game like Bushido Blade has to contend with is how discouraging an experience it can be to be a newcomer against opponents with well-honed skills, since death can be immediate, and this might happen repeatedly at the beginning of one's experience.

Still, I can't help but feel that there is a market for this sort of game. Part of the problem, I think, is with some of the current habits of consumers, many of who just cannot allow some games to not be all things at once. Nidhogg can avoid story because it is a low-budget 2D experience. But if a company tries to split the difference and create a major release game that is a stripped down fighter using a non-combo/non-juggle/non-HP-based system, huge swaths of the consumer base will not only not buy it, but actively bad-mouth it if it doesn't have enough of a campaign mode... Even if the developer cuts the content a little and sell the base game at $30-40, too few people will go along for the ride to allow for much experimentation. So every game needs a huge budget and huge presentation, and multiple modes, and stretched out plot (which is invariably goofy and tedious).

And when you combine that need for initial investment with an experience that is going to be somewhat niche even within the fighting game community itself, the difficulties in a 3D variant of the instant-kill formula making it to publication become obvious. What a shame. I'd pre-order five copies of Bushido Blade III in a crowd funder if there were one, provided it was being done by a serious team.
 
Last edited:

sytus

[13] Hero
Bushido Blade isn't a game I'm familiar with and one of the fighting games that I've missed playing entirely but from the outset it looks like the 1v1 mode in For Honor could very well be classed as a spiritual sequel to that game.
 

Rusted Blade

[11] Champion
Bushido Blade isn't a game I'm familiar with and one of the fighting games that I've missed playing entirely but from the outset it looks like the 1v1 mode in For Honor could very well be classed as a spiritual sequel to that game.
Kinda-sorta, yeah. They certainly both carry an emphasis on mind games involving the interplay between various attacking, blocking, and parrying options. And they both take a somewhat less laisez-faire attitude towards torso and head wounds than would a Soulcalibur or such--although, of the three, I think Bushido Blade is by far the least forgiving, even compared to For Honor. But the inputs, perspective, and interface are quite different. I'd say For Honor may be the closest example from among big budget games in recent memory, but the gameplay of each shows the similarity is more a shared concept and less a direct lineage of design influence, if that makes any sense.
 
Last edited:

AriesWarlock

[12] Conqueror
I'd like to provide a competing view: I think Virtua Fighter looks and feels great to the aesthetic eye and feedback senses of a great many players--and in my case at least, I think it is attributable to being someone who has trained in actual martial arts. I'm not trying to throwdown the purist card here, but without question, of all the major 3D fighters I have sampled (and that's all of them in existence at some time or another, I think), the style, the range of movement, and the simulated biomechanics and force of the characters as virtual bodies in motion is closest to being rooted in reality for Virtua Fighter. Mind you, it's not super realistic by any means, but leaps and bounds closer than a Tekken, Soulcalibur, or DOA.

The same is true of other aspects of it's artistic design, including character, stage design, and visual effects. Probably it does err* on the side of being a little too minimalist and unobtrusive. But if it wasn't perfect in that regard, I think it all still worked exceedingly well as a total package, and Virtua Fighter was always did have a more nuts and bolts obsessed fanbase.

But even if I disagree as to the assessment of the quality of the visual design, there could be something to Aries' argument insofar as a casual players/blue ocean consumers can probably be fairly described as being attracted to flash. I don't know that we can ever truly know, beyond pretty subjective speculation, all these years on, how much VF's plain jane visuals affected its bottom line, but for those going further to pronounce that it fell into torpor and possible permanent franchise death because of its innate qualities, I think you need to widen your examination of relevant facts. Virtua Fighter died first and foremost because it was a Sega property, and Sega is now a tiny player relative to what it once was when it comes to the console software market, with a comporably immense portfolio of IP licenses, most of which do not get utilized anymore, with games made by internal studios and teams which are now largely defunct or severely diminished in output capacity. Soulcalibur on the other hand, is owned by a holding of Bandai Namco Group, one of the largest players in gaming in the world, with a massive publishing arm in Bandai Namco Entertainment.

This is why I always laughed whenever someone would say "SCV has killed the franchise!" Or, in its more contemporary form "SCV almost killed the franchise!" LOL, no: at most it delayed the next game a little. SC has long been in a development cycle that ebbs and flows relative to Tekken's and going back even further than that, every single Soulcalibur game has taken a little longer than the one before it to finish: after 25 years, I don't know why (other than rationalized enthusiasm and overly-rosey hopes) anyone is ever surprised when that doesn't change, especially as production times in the industry at large continue on an upward trend.
As someone with some martial arts training, and fan of the arts, I also like VF. Though I do not think being a Sega property did anything to kill it. VF5 was on PS3, xbox 360, and arcade. The last 3 SC games haven't had an arcade release in comparison. VF5 had more updates than the last 3 SC games. Still people didn't flock to VF5. It's got no hook for casuals.
Did you know they wanted the game to be called VirtuaL Fighter, but couldn't use it because Virtual was trademarked?

 
Last edited:

Dissidia

Premium Member
As someone with some martial arts training, and fan of the arts, I also like VF. Though I do not think being a Sega property did anything to kill it. VF5 was on PS3, xbox 360, and arcade. The last 3 SC games haven't had an arcade release in comparison. VF5 had more updates than the last 3 SC games. Still people didn't flock to VF5. It's got no hook for casuals.
Did you know they wanted the game to be called VirtuaL Fighter, but couldn't use it because Virtual was trademarked?

well I do think VF5 Final Showdown was a bit of a botched release. VF5 FS does feel like the "friendliest" game in the series to newcomers imo.
 

REPROBEAN_CHILD

[14] Master
People are entitled to their opinions about fighting games. Calibur isn't for everyone, and that's fine.

That being said, seeing Melee so highly requested makes me want to vomit.
I could understand if Ultimate was the most requested, but Melee was released in 2001. That's roughly 19 years old. Why the hell is that still relevant to evo, especially with Ultimate being out?