S.T.A.G.E. said:
jarrod said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
jarrod said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Final Fight is classified as a 2D beat em up or side scrolling brawler. SSMB is a competitive brawler. It cannot take credit in revitalizing the fighting genre.
|
A "competitive brawler" *is* a fighting game. The genres are inherently linked, with some pretty direct crossover back and forth.
Smash Bros. may not be a traditional fighter, it definitely doesn't fall into the SF or VF molds (which the rest of the genre mainly take after) but it's still closer to those games than anything else. Same for Powerstone. Same for Virtual On.
Ad no, Smash Bros. can't take credit for revitalizing the lagging fighting genre... mainly because the genre at large hasn't been revitalized. Street Fighter has, but everything else (Tekken, Soulcalibur, KOF, VF, Samurai Showdown, etc, etc) has pretty much nosedived this gen. Blazblue successfully established itself off Guilty Gear's corpse, Smash Brawl was huge as usual, and that's about it.
|
SSMB is a competitive brawler that is linked to a series of party games from Nintendo. In essence it stands alone. Microsoft has tried to replicate this new genre Nintendo created but failed. TVC is the main fighter on the Wii.
|
It's a fighting game. A fighting game quite literally is a "competitive brawler" or "competitive beat 'em up". That's where games like Yei Air King Fu or Street Fighter originated from.
Seth Killian, of Capcom, world ranked Street Fighter champion said when asked about Smash Bros. that "It's a real fighting game. I didn't always think that, but I changed my mind after spending more time playing both Melee and Brawl". Smash has been featured at Evo. It has a HUGE competitive tournament scene. These things are reflective of fighting games. Not brawlers. Not "party" games. Fighters.
|
Dude, SSMB is a party brawler (much like naruto for the gamecube). It s a button mash fest. Fighting games have more sophisticated controls that control limbs more appropriately, executing different special abilities. Brawl does all that with a couple buttons compared. If SSMB (or the franchise at all) contributed anything to the fighting genre it would've received praise for saving a dying genre, but whilst it made its millions in sales while actual fighting games were dying it continued. SSMB is far too different to be taken seriously. The most one could give it is a sub genre created by Nintendo.
|
It *is* a subgenre I guess, I've already said (repeatedly) it doesn't slot into the classic SF or VF molds (which most modern fighters do) and it's even had it's own imitators (TV Mix World Fighters, Small Arms, etc). As is though, Brawl uses more buttons that Virtua Fighter if we're getting into button counts (lol seriously?) and "limbs based" buttons is hardly a qualifier. If it were then Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom isn't a fighter. Virtual On isn't a fighter. Blazblue isn't a fighter. Of course, there's also brawlers with "limbs based" button assignments too... I guess Diehard Arcade is fighter? ;)
And the success argument is such a non-starter, since Smash's success has been largely insular. Mario Kart DS/Wii haven't revived the flagging racing genre despite gigantic success, they're not racing games? Platformers are still on life support after NSMB/Galaxy rebounded the Mario series to record success, I guess it's not a platformer?
If Smash weren't a fighter, it wouldn't have been at Evo. Period. Seth Killian wouldn't be calling it a fighter. Period.
