Clearly you haven't been on SRK.Well that's you and that's the problem. Most other FGC sites don't have this stigma.
-Actually it is quite the opposite. You are here complaining that we are asking for something the game is not, and stating other FGC communities have not gone through it. The above proves my point to a T.
-And this is where you stop. You cannot make assumptions of what you feel The team was thinking, or where they may have gone. The collective talking with them states the exact opposite of what you have claimed. We were told exactly why they chose not to go said route, and it has absolutely nothing to do with sale figures. If this was the sole reason for gamplay changes, Doa5 would be a far different fighter. The game that is closest to Doa5(which is Doa4) sold far less than the combined sales of all the different varients of Doa2, and Sold far less than that of doa3. This would indicate that Doa4 was not liked well by its consumers.
Clearly you haven't been on SRK.
Are you wise enough to understand this is not a democracy?
I can make all the assumptions all I want as long as I can back them up.
And the biggest reason that DOA4 failed is because you guys made it a mission to bad mouth the game.
Even still DOA4 was the most publicized DOA game media wise of all the DOA games.It also introduced many casual players to the offline scene. It made quite of few you fighting game superstars and video game celebrity's.That lead to sponsorship's and getting paid to play. DOA4 may not have sold as well as other DOA games but in terms of making the series relevant it served a purpose more so than any previous DOA game.
They may have told you game sales don't matter but I call bullshit on that.The sales figures dose matter.No only to maintain the companies bottom line but to also please the share holders. Their decisions also must have come down to keeping the the integrity of the game as a series. And that is all up to them.
How about because DOA4's system was ass. Itagaki's video for 4 runs contrary to good fighting game design. There's a reason every combo breaking mechanics in most legitimate competitive fighters are all limited in some form or other - because doing otherwise simply makes the game more random at best, and rewards bad players who suck at the neutral game at worst.
You can't though.
You're making more assumptions without being able to back them up.
Yes, it now serves as a major point of resentment for every other superior fighting game with a community that wanted equal opportunity. Thank you for pointing out yet another major stigma it has against it.
I don't think you understand how much benefit a Japanese development team actually notices if their game does well. Basically, "oh thank god I'm not fired."
Unless of course you do too successful. Then they think your product is gold and replace you with someone they think will monetize it further, like with what happened to the director behind Dark Souls.
Actually since we are in America it is a democracy. But by all means if you feel that what I have to say is so bad to make me ban worthy than I can't stop you. You mentioned something about freedom of speech in one of your earlier posts. I believe that applies to me as well.
No, you are on the internet on a privately owned website. You have no rights that are not given to you. You are a guest in someone else's house, and they determine the rules.
Furthermore America is not a democracy, it is a republic. A democracy would be if everyone threw in a stone to vote for every single issue. We don't do that in America. That's what the senate and congress are for.
This whole concept of the "integrity" of the series is the problem. The best fighting series and developers are the ones that recognize the fact that fighting games as a genre are "emergent." This means that how the games are eventually played is dictated by the players.Their decisions also must have come down to keeping the the integrity of the game as a series.
Except, thanks to how it was broken, MvC2 had a level of depth and competitiveness that few games can hope to match. All the "broken" stuff, all that was what kept the players coming back. This was a game where the top tiers changed drastically years after it came out - a point where other games would have died out. And even after that, the game kept developing and evolving, way beyond what the developers envisioned.Maybe, but that is your opinion.I'm sure a lot of others here share that opinion. I have played worse fighting games on technical level than DOA4 those. MvC2 was a broken hot mess.Yet that community embraced that crappy ass game and maintained a competitive active community for at least 10 yrs.
-You would like to think so but it contradicts your whole argument. Contradictions only prove one point, and it disproved yours.It also proves my point as well.
-Here is the definition of Assumption for you:I can make all the assumptions all I want as long as I can back them up.
-Another inaccuracy from your part. Can you please start using some facts. For the record. Doa4 was supported very heavily by the community for two years before nothing good was found about it. This is what killied the game, not anyones bad mouthing.And the biggest reason that DOA4 failed is because you guys made it a mission to bad mouth the game
-This assumption of yours is making you a bad debater. You are also picking irrelavent topics to argue about. So I would suggest that you start using some facts, and debate what is being presented, not some fallicious argument that is not being made.They may have told you game sales don't matter but I call bullshit on that.The sales figures does matter.No only to maintain the companies bottom line but to also please the share holders. Their decisions also must have come down to keeping the the integrity of the game as a series. And that is all up to them.
-You must not know how debates go. Your credibility/knowledge was brought into discussion due to you making statements about changing doa into something that it is not, than also bringing in how other Fighting game communities do not go through this. You yourself opened up the door for such questioning to take place. Posts are getting smaller because all you are doing is rambling and making assumptions, and going in circles.So far I'm doing a pretty good job even though the caffeine is wearing off and I am sleep deprived. Because so far your posts are getting smaller and your trying to attack my credibility on my knowledge of the FGC and DOA as a whole instead of staying on topic. Your out of ammo and I'm out of coffee.
This whole concept of the "integrity" of the series is the problem. The best fighting series and developers are the ones that recognize the fact that fighting games as a genre are "emergent." This means that how the games are eventually played is dictated by the players.
Except, thanks to how it was broken, MvC2 had a level of depth and competitiveness that few games can hope to match. All the "broken" stuff, all that was what kept the players coming back. This was a game where the top tiers changed drastically years after it came out - a point where other games would have died out. And even after that, the game kept developing and evolving, way beyond what the developers envisioned.
Compare this to the only "balanced" Marvel game - Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter. This is arguably the one with the flattest tier list. The problem however is that this was done by limiting what the players could discover. Outside of Omega Red and Wolverine, everybody had the same playstyle and the same combo flow of ground > launch > air combo > knockdown. By limiting and controlling what the players could do, the game ended up being flat with no room from growth.
Except, thanks to how it was broken, MvC2 had a level of depth and competitiveness that few games can hope to match. All the "broken" stuff, all that was what kept the players coming back. This was a game where the top tiers changed drastically years after it came out - a point where other games would have died out. And even after that, the game kept developing and evolving, way beyond what the developers envisioned.
-You would like to think so but it contradicts your whole argument. Contradictions only prove one point, and it disproved yours.
-Here is the definition of Assumption for you:
A thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof: "they made certain assumptions about the market".
-You, unlike I have no proof in the matter at hand. You can back up your assumptions with more assumptions, yet you will continue to have no proof. This is why your statements will continue to have no validation, and come off as both arrogant and ignorant.
-Another inaccuracy from your part. Can you please start using some facts. For the record. Doa4 was supported very heavily by the community for two years before nothing good was found about it. This is what killied the game, not anyones bad mouthing.
-This assumption of yours is making you a bad debater. You are also picking irrelavent topics to argue about. So I would suggest that you start using some facts, and debate what is being presented, not some fallicious argument that is not being made.
You missed the whole point of his argument:
You don't need to be good at debating to piss people off.
You just have to keep talking.