Dissidia Duodecim Final Fantasy continues Squeenix's tradition of stupid titles

[Regulus Tera]

Originally Posted by mudah.swf

The solution to all the space issues is the port the game to an actual console. Even an XBLA/PSN release will do.

I hope it gets ported to 3DS just to spite you.

[Kim]

3DS cartridges still have more space than a PSP UMD! (Though that would still be a terrible idea)

[Nique]

In short, fighting games, in my opinion, are served better by FEWER buttons because it improves reaction time and lowers the learning curve. More is not always better. You reach a point where it becomes bloat.

Blues, that is not how that works. At all.

Yeah actually I'm not quite following either.

Like 'Press A, B, C, B, B, B, A' for a finishing move is better than 'Press D' for a finishing move'?

Really the number of buttons should only be limited by what the human hand can control, so there's some effective upper limit, sure. But I think a fighting game is served more by good/consistent/simplified internal controls, rather than the gamepad itself.

So like, yeah I mean the SNES controller is pretty much the best IMO but the joysticks on the PS pads are useful too, especially since the usually just replace the D-Pad rather add more necessary functions.

[Regulus Tera]

Originally Posted by NonCon

3DS cartridges still have more space than a PSP UMD! (Though that would still be a terrible idea)

I cast Ultima on your face.

[bluestarultor]

I guess I wasn't really clear. Let me complicate things a bit. XD

Having more buttons is fine. You just have to rely on them being used responsibly. Hadoken is a quarter circle and punch for a reason. Something like D-pad Up, Left Analog Down, Right Stick Full Circle, Triangle, R3, L1+L2, Analog/Home is an irresponsible use of button inputs. Obviously, that example is intentionally atrocious, but you get the idea. Having a button to perform a single simple action is ideal.

It's a matter of balance. Control schemes tend to shine because of their limitations. A PC fighting game that abused the keyboard and assigned a function to every key would have many simple actions. They'd be easy to execute, but it's a lot to keep track of. Limiting to one button like Evil Zone is workable, but limits depth. Adding more moves without resorting to range and timing factors to determine the effects like Evil Zone did would be prohibitively difficult.

So when I say a fighting game needs fewer buttons, I mean that the balance of the average kicker favors close to what the average controller sports, minus a few. All buttons are within easy reach and you have enough to designate simple functions to some of them. Your triggers are generally going to take those roles because combos are easier to execute with the face buttons. Not all inputs need to be used.

In this case, the PSP has a good number of buttons for the game. You have the D-pad and analog slider, 2 triggers, and 4 face buttons, which, if you're being responsible with your move set, is consistent with what you'll need. Putting a fighting game on a console just to take advantage of having more buttons provides only marginal benefit at best with the addition to L/R2, which are best used for single actions. Not having them to work with doesn't hurt much.




Why I said what I did how I did is because of my personal preference. It used to be that developers used only the controls they needed for their idea and a lot of inputs (at least for the PS1) weren't used. They designed the controls around the game and games were simpler. That's fine in its own way, but wastes potential when too much goes unused. With newer games, it's rare to see one that leaves anything but the triggers and L/R3 out of the mix. The face buttons are always used, usually L/R1 are used, and often so are L/R2. I'm not saying that devs are working to fill all the inputs with functions, but it's a normal, sensible practice to design the game around the controller, which implicitly encourages more of the inputs to be used. It's a different way of thinking and it better takes advantage of the hardware. The balance is better up to a certain point.

On the other hand, when games have controls adequate to fly a space shuttle, I get particularly irked. Things like expecting the player to switch between the analog sticks and the D-pad and face buttons can work just fine, but they need to be implemented right. Expecting the player to do rapid, constant switching isn't reasonable because humans only have so much coordination. R-stick for the camera works fine because players can leave the camera alone safely enough to use the face buttons. On the other hand, abusing R3 is a dangerous prospect. If R3 is a prominent control, which I've seen in some games, the time it takes to use it takes away from time that the player can use the face buttons, which are more convenient. It's like DS games that expect you to have a third arm for the stylus. There is only a certain amount of finesse that can be reasonably expected from the player and which developers need to design for.



Control schemes need to be adequately elegant to both provide the desired functions and maintain usability. Different genres need different balances. An MMORPG is better served by more buttons, while a kicker is served by fewer. An RPG can get by on even fewer than that.

Saying "more buttons are better" isn't a true statement. You don't need more buttons; you need the right amount. Too many leads to overload, while too few leads to unnecessary limitations.

[Kim]

I have never seen a fighting game force use of R3 or L3. I doubt Squeenix would be the first to do it. The reason Mudah said he'd prefer the PS3 is because of L2 and R2, because then you'd have fewer instances where you have to hold multiple buttons at a time. Having more buttons, like the PS3 controller provides, is preferable to holding multiple buttons at a time to accomplish something. I've played too many games that would be better on a console because the console controls would be preferable but instead we get it crammed and squeezed onto a portable system. Your talk about how simplicity is best is more an argument in favor of the more buttons solution than against it.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by NonCon

I have never seen a fighting game force use of R3 or L3. I doubt Squeenix would be the first to do it. The reason Mudah said he'd prefer the PS3 is because of L2 and R2, because then you'd have fewer instances where you have to hold multiple buttons at a time. Having more buttons, like the PS3 controller provides, is preferable to holding multiple buttons at a time to accomplish something. I've played too many games that would be better on a console because the console controls would be preferable but instead we get it crammed and squeezed onto a portable system. Your talk about how simplicity is best is more an argument in favor of the more buttons solution than against it.

First off, I never said a fighting game would use L/R3, but other games do, and not always responsibly. Second, if a game suffers because there aren't enough buttons, then we're back to not designing the game around the controller. Thirdly, I specifically said that simplicity is a balance. Trying to argue that a single button press is always better than multiple presses is naive. It depends on what limbs are being used and how many buttons they're responsible for, which is a much higher ratio for the thumbs than for the fingers.



In the case of a fighting game, the question really is why you'd desperately need the extra shoulder buttons. First off, it's only 2 buttons. They might be nice to have if they're lying around, but you already have 6 buttons to work with, and the shoulder buttons are easy to operate independently of movement and the face buttons. Counting the shoulder buttons as a separate group, having 2 allows you 3 easy press combinations: one, the other, or both. Having 4 raises that to 4 + top (2) + bottom (2) + left (2) + right (2) + diagonal (2) + all but one (4) + all (1) = 19 possible presses, which is excessive in any context. In a fighting game, probably only single buttons (and possibly the top and/or bottom pairs) will ever be used, meaning the most likely scenario is that with 2 buttons, you're only short one input and sacrifice zero ease of execution because the shoulders are all your index fingers ever do and each finger is only responsible for one button. If you really need the top and/or bottom presses with the 4-trigger setup, you're already delving into unnecessary complexity and need to consider whether or not your systems should be pared down. If you have 5 functions that aren't covered by the face buttons and combinations thereof when the most simple attacks you should ever need in a punch/kick setup is 6 buttons (in which case you'd have only 3 extra functions), you have to ask yourself if you're addressing accessibility. If you're on a handheld, your first question should be whether you really need medium punch/kick even BEFORE you start planning out other systems.


It all boils down to optimization, making the best use of what you have. There is a gradient of marginal benefits that need to be weighed. It's not all black and white.

[POS Industries]

You guys are overcomplicating things. The real reason it can't be put on the PS3 or 360 is because I can't afford that shit so shut the fuck up, assholes.

[bluestarultor]

So, uh, yeah, uhhh... SPOILERS!

Cosmos is alive at the end of Dissidia in the secret ending. Chaos is assumed dead, but bad guys don't always stay that way.

How do you all think they're going to work with this? Will there be two new forces? Who might they be?

[mudah.swf]

Just a polite question: Why on earth are you bringing traditional fighting games into this? Dissidia doesn't control like any of them, it plays differently, it has nothing in common with them except you deplete another guy's health bar. Traditional fighting games have almost always been built around a 3-6 button arcade stick and also tend to include various button combinations, but they're not bad because the layout of the controller makes stuff like that easy to do. It's when they're ported to consoles and thus become playable on pad they get uncomfortable to play.

Dissidia has a whole host of different functions, such as camera control, 360 degree movement, an individual block button, a button for running around on the environment, a button for jumping and two attack buttons, as well as a button combination for EX-Bursting and a button for disabling the lock-on feature. All these use every single button on the PSP already, and if the bars in that one scan are any indication, Square are adding MORE stuff, which would need at least a two-button combination to activate unless Square remove some functions, which I doubt they'll do. Considering that the PSP is a small machine with a somewhat cramped button configuration and one analog slider, I personally think that Square would be better served with a console controller that has real room for what they want to add, rather than making the player put up with another button combination.

But I do see your point, Blue. In fact, thinking about it more I would say that the button layout itself matters a lot too. Fighting games can be played comfortably on a stick, but not so much a controller. It was even worse on early handheld systems, where fighting game ports could only use two, maybe 4 buttons, so had to use a terrible control scheme involving holding buttons (such as the Gameboy SF2 port) or removing normals entirely, thus limiting what a character can do, and in the case of characters with PPP/KKK moves, removing them entirely.

I believe we're getting more than a little bit off topic now. I'll give a list of things I'd like to see changed in Dissidia 2:

-Faster attacks or changed Dodge mechanics, so you can actually hit people or not get massively punished for ANY whiffed attack.
-The total removal of the Chase sequences, they add nothing to the game.
-Faster EX meter growth maybe? Make it rise with hits taken or something.
-More combos! Implement some form of damage scaling to prevent people building up masses of Brave with a single combo and then whacking you with an unavoiable HP attack, which wouldn't be very fun.
-Remove levelling and have some other form of progression, or give players in multiplayer matches an option to boost their characters to equal levels.
-ONLINE PLAY, JESUS CHRIST I CAN'T EXPRESS HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS. SO MUCH SO THAT I'M TYPING IN CAPS.