Do Fighting games take more skill than other games?

I find myself bothered by the attitude of some people here suggesting that there's more skill in 2d fighters then FPS titles. It's all relative (and I totally agree with Alchy here) so in a fighting game you remember moves/combos/counters/matchUps and in an FPS you remember weapons/stages/counters/matchups. Plus both have their quirks (you can't be snuck up on in a fighting game).

Short answer - No they don't it's like debating whether mathematics or medicine is the harder skill to learn. It depends on the person and a multitude of additional factors. How many fighting game pros claim FPS's take no skill but I can almost assure you suck at them compared to Pro-FPS games (and the reverse is also true).

 

I have a feeling Jp is basing his generalizations on just a few times he played an FPS where some guy kept sniping him.

IMO, it depends on the quality of said game in the genre. Some FPSs are broken pieces of shit with no skill weapons. Example: Halo and Rockets in a small map with a few players. With the sniper rifle though? Its only cheap when it doesn't have a good counter or the map design sucks. Halo 3 definitely has some sniper maps, but they aren't nearly as bad as the first games. Blood Gulch sniping...lord. Anyways, the Sniper Rifle requires good hand-eye coordination and reflexes, otherwise it wouldn't be effective, now would it?

Anyways, it really depends on what you call "Skill". Some people think abusing as many glitches and exploits as you can makes it a skillful game. See: Smashboards. Nothing wrong with competitive gaming but l canceling, wavedashing, hippo hopping, and all the other crap is insane.

One of my friends showed me lots of tricks for Halo 2, and boy were they insane, and yes, the involve skill. He knew the PRECISE angle to throw grenades against walls so that they'd land behind someone pursuing him and he got it right each time, almost.

I've never played many fighting games, about the only one I've played was MK and Marvel Vs. Capcom 2 (which is hear is really unbalanced and lacks complicated moves) but I think saying FPSs don't require skill or strategy, yes, even Halo, is kind of arrogant and a tad fanboyish.

 

Arrogant and a tad fanboysih...?

 

Arrogant for saying most FPSs require no skill.

And I think someone who would do that and then say another genre is better would be a bit biased.

Wouldn't you think that?

 

http://www.bungie.net/stats/PlayerStatsHalo3.aspx?player=pzykotikjp


Yeah apparently...

Thats why I'm stuck gathering experience since I hit too high of a skill level too soon since I don't play Halo 3 that much.

And if CoD4 has the same dealie, I can link to the times I played that as well.


As someone who is fairly competent at FPSs (and plays them in my spare time) and plays 2D shooters for score competitively (sort of), I still say FPSs require a lot less skill than 2D shooters.

 

I think this is comparing apples to oranges. Also, when I first saw the name of this thread I thought the same exact thing. Comparing totally different genres is like comparing apples to oranges. Both game types have different types of skill, but both are twitch. Unless there is some revolutionary new 2d shooter out there where the AI goes in new patterns based on how you play or something it might be a different story, but 2d shooters also depend on how used you are to the level and knowing the patterns of certain enemies, and of course the reflexes that go with it.

And for the record, I think Halo 3 is pretty well balanced when it comes to weapons. Ok the heatseeking missile launcher is overpowered, but its one of those weapons both teams start with and only in certain team based maps. In Halo its usually more of a rush to the tank, if there is one in that game. I can think of another example of a map with a flamethrower where whoever gets the flamethrower is really at an advantage, but then again its about the only map to have the flamethrower...I haven't tried any new maps in a while however. Notice how almost everything I'm talking about are those weapons that make you a slow-ass moving sniper target.

 

Well, to an extent I can see where you're coming from, but I still disagree.

For instance, to play Virtua Fighter games competitively you have to watch the very frames of animation and respond accordingly with split second timing.

And while that is certainly an extreme example, in general I find that, in fighting games, you not only have to have a very solid grasp of the character you're playing as well as the character your opponent has chosen, but to play them competitively you have to have obscene hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

And in my opinion, as someone who spent many an evening on Unreal Tournament back in the day and has played his fair share of (and done fairly well at) Halo 3, which IS easily the most balanced of the trilogy, I've always felt like FPS depend too heavily on what weapon you happen you have.

Mind you, in UT that wasn't that much of an issue. But in Halo and as far as I can tell, CoD4, it is.

I mean, in a fighting game, the game itself will never give you the upper hand. You have your skill and your skill alone. Whereas in Halo 3, well, if I'm in a corridor freshly spawned with the assault rifle and someone with a shotgun or sword runs up, I'm dead. And what I find in Halo 3 is that, whoever controls the sword/shotgun/rockets pretty much will control the match.

And its not a matter of me being anti-Sniper I assure you. I'm quite good at sniping in Halo 3. ;-)

Or rather, its like this:
If someone who has had a FPS (in general) for a little bit and has played through the maps a little bit goes up against someone completely fresh to the game, chances are the slightly (SLIGHTLY, mind you) more experienced player will win. Why? Because they know the map. They know where the good weapons are. So they can easily dominate. Rocket launcher vs. pistol... well, very rarely will skill be a determining factor in that confrontation. Or sniper from across the map vs. assault rifle... I mean, there's just no way. Unless the person with the better weapons absolutely positively outright sucks, then the person with the better weapons will generally win and skill is rather negligible.

On the other hand, I have found from fighting games that, even if someone has a somewhat decent level of understanding about a game, they can still be effectively taken down by pure skill.

For instance: Soul Calibur. Or rather, Soul Calibur II. I played SC2 about... two or three times I think. I played the first one a lot, but never got into the second. And when I did play SC2, it was always against someone who owned the game, but I never lost. Despite not knowing any moves, I was able to take down people who played the game A LOT more than me based off of basic reflexes/skill alone.

Same goes for when I first played X-Men vs. Street Fighter. The guy I was playing against had played the game a lot, it was my first time, and I didn't even know how to do the super moves or whatever. But I still consistently beat him, even without knowing how to pull off the crazy moves he was doing all over the place, just based off of basic skill alone.

Would that ever happen in Halo or virtually any FPS? Probably not. I would probably turn the corner with my little assault rifle and get killed in one shot by the shotgun, or stabbed with the sword.

Now, in so far as 2D shooters (of which I have 1CC'd almost 50, including Radiant Silvergun, Batsugun, and Metal Black), there's so much more going on that its not even comparable. I mean, yeah, you're weaving through patterns, but its all happening so fast generally that you not only HAVE to know the level, but you HAVE to have the reflexes and basic skill to do it. I mean, just because you put 1000 hours into Radiant Silvergun does not mean you're necessarily going to one day throw down on Xiga. Or just because you spend 100 hours on Batsugun certainly doesn't mean you'll ever tackle Ground of the Galaxy. Thats why 2D shooters are an insane adrenaline rush to me, whereas FPSs are typically things I find more laid back and I only feel the need to play them casually. Because generally speaking I find that the people that are "better" than me at say, Halo or Gears of War or Call of Duty 4 or whatever, aren't winning because they're more skilled, but rather because they've spent far more time with the game than I have.

And straight up, some of my best shmup runs have been on the very first run I made on a game.

 

That 1 CC shit is insane. Since I've been playing Saturn a ton lately, I should try it. Sounds like it could be really fun, and as you said, an adrenaline rush.

I just don't care about competitive games. I think there fun regardless, but 9 times out of ten, I get fucked by some dude with a sniper or something. Fighting games, I get fucked by whoever has played it the longest, but that's 3D fighters, I haven't gotten to play many 2D fighters with people.

I don't suck at the games, like Halo 3, even without resorting to shotguns and snipers (I love spikers) I'm still running with a positive KD. I guess I'm just not that aggresive or competitive. I don't want to be the asshole with the sniper/shotgun spree.

COD4 was fun for a bit but the game turned into me running out and getting sniped by some asshole on the roof. I can't play those kind of FPS. I always thought the people playing that nonstop just love it because your enemy dies so fast. I hate waiting around so I run out with my cock out.

 

Someone actually thinks an FPS requires more skill than a versus fighting game? Any of them for that matter? I guess maybe the ones w/ the dumber engines that promote button-mashing style can be compared, but nothing compares to one w/ a proper engine. This is where VF always shined, but apparently Tekken has surpassed (I'm just assuming). Versus fighting is just far more complex... most people are going to say that it requires more skill to have finesse in.

 

Super Smash Bros. Melee.

 

I cannot grasp Virtua Fighter 2. I haven't been able to sit down and learn the moves and stuff, but just fucking around in single player I find myself flying around the air kicking and winning, or having the AI completely destroy me.

 

I think you ought to watch some Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament videos. The level of hand-eye coordination on display is breathtaking and is easily up there with the best players of 2D shooters and fighting games. I'm amazed you're still arguing this one as it really isn't something that's up for debate: twitch FPS games require insane reflexes. End of argument.

 

Still. in an FPS you can get good results by being random. Fighting games against somebody who knows what they're doing. Being random gets you your ass kicked. Even in the overly broken ones like MVC2.

and Shmups. YOU DO NEED MAD SKILL to be good at. I'm not a master of the genre even though it's a favorite of mine. HAS ANYONE EVER 1CCed Ikaruga their first go through?

Prob not. to be good at a Shmup you either need to study the game......or have Autism.

 

IMO, the only FPS games that rely purely on skill are the ones with perfectly balanced weapons ( Unreal Tournament, Quake3). Stuff like Halo, or even GoW if were talking 3rdPS, Whoever has the rockets or sword ( in halo ) or the Boomshot or Torque Bow ( Gow), 9 times out of 10 they will win the match. Im not saying that FPS thake more skill than fighting, or vice-versa, but Im saying it boils down more to the game design itself.

 

Lets play the reversal game once again. In a fighter you can get good result by being random. FPS games against somebody who knows what they're doing. Being random gets your ass kicked. Even in the overly broken ones.

I dont see how any one genre of game could be harder then the other at any higher level of skill. Fuck, Sudoku at any level is harder then any other game out there for myself, does that make it omg hardz0r?

And where do the other genres even factor into this fighting game or shump > all in skill levels? What about a racing game, playing with professionals, where shaving .05 off your lap will win you the race? How does that take any more or less skill then learning combos and the insane stuff that goes on in some fighters or shumps?

 

How very, very true. I thinks all games take an equal amount of skill, just they utilize differing skill sets. Most RPG's take no actual playing skill, but the ability to think ahead to play out your attacks and such. IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL! some people will find certain games harder than others.

 

I have to get in on this since it doesn't seem like ANY of you have every seen or played a competitive doom match. Or if they've watched they have no idea what's going on. You do need to know the map but you also need to know
How to effectively strafe-90 while aiming. Strafe-90 takes your ability to turn although it increases your speed. Look it up on the doom wiki.
How to aim worth a damn going at obscene speeds
The speed the bullets go at
Plasma/Rocket curving
Rocket running which is shooting your rocket outrunning it and having the explosion propel you forward instead of killing you. You'll just be propeled forward and won't take damage if your on the very outer edge of the explosion but that's more complicated.
Plasma running which is strafe-90+some other speed method so you effectively run faster then your plasma which in turn begins to hit you and propel you forward

Doom has a myriad of tricks that can be much more complicated than conventional fighters. Please don't say something is "simple" just because you don't know anything about it and fatality is decent i haven't seen anything that would label him better than let's say Mr.Goth. I've been playing doom since the year it came out. When the ability to play doom online came around shortly after i stayed at the top then leaderboards came around i was able to maintain a steady 20th+ place the only reason i would drop lower is because i didn't have time to constantly play but doom was about the only game i would play. If anything a professional Doom deathmatch is more complex than any mainstream fps i can think of. I switched to quake 3 for a bit but i stuck with doom until it finally died in 2005. I had never met anyone able to completely whoop me online at doom. I dumped alot of my life into that game and i'll be damned if i'll let people say "Oh fighters are more complicated cuzzzzz it has a movezset and stuffs and in fpss you just walk around and press shoot lawlawl" Well i gotta tell you. Turning and aiming takes reflexes too. Having every weapon mapped to a button? Quickswitching? Bunnyhopping? Wallrunning? There's a massive list of basic things you NEED to do in competitive fps's. Doom and Quake much moreso than any fps i can think of. Unreal tournament is for the people who don't competivley play Quake it doesn't have nearly the depth or complexity of either of those games. In street fighter or mvc2 you can just memorize the moveset off the manual. In doom or quake? Learning to strafe-90 or hell even just strafe-50 takes effectively takes more practice than most people could imagine and you have to actually learn the trick from a pro you can't read it in the manual. Don't say it's simple just because you don't understand what's going on when you watch a pro match.

 

UT not complex???? WTF are you smoking because i want some of that:lol:. seriously though, ive played every Doom, every Quake, All 3 Halos, every UT and some other FPS games that i cant recall right now, and UT is the definately way more complex than Quake 3. Double jumping into a wall jump while lining up a shock combo is something only like, oh i dunno, maybe 1 or 2 percent of the UT player base can do. Im not saying Quake isnt complex, but i am saying UT definately has it beat in terms of balance and complexity.

 

You clearly don' know anything about competitive quake or doom. There's a reason quake is THE game for pro's. Balance. Fuck no not when they're a weapon like the flact cannon and bio-rifle. It isn't very complex when compared to doom especially. And just bringing up halo shows how little you know on the subject of competitive doom'ing. I didn't say average person "oh i played it a bit... i beat it on uv." No i'm talking competition level doom and quake and Compent N quality stuff. Not the crap your talking about

 

I was just saying that ive played halo, how the hell does me having played halo indicate that i have no idea of competitive quake of competitive doom?? I know nothing about competitive gaming??? Check my leaderboard spot for UT3 on 360. I wasnt ranked half shabby on Quake 3 when I played it, and i was regularly one of the better UT99 players. I DO know quite a bit about competitive quake and competitive doom. Im sorry, I just never realized that playing Halo instantly destroys any credibility you have towards other shooters. I just said that ive played it, not "OMG Itz da bestest game EVAR!!!LOLZ". Honestly, Halo is a joke. Obviously you have no idea what I was talking about.