It's fascinating how developers love to keep talking about how "they were inspired by fighting game mechanics!" yet:
> The mechanics feel convoluted and purposeless—just adding new things for the sake of it without thinking what it implies on the overall, unlike in Guilty Gear +R, where you can clearly pinpoint the purpose of each element.
> The tutorial is hot garbage—overly long yet failing to explain key concepts and their usage (there were things the community didn't even know existed before the manual was released, lmao), unlike French Bread games, where after the tutorial, all that's left is labbing for second priority details, like frame data, combos and tech.
> 70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design, unlike King of Fighters or any crossover fighter, which adapt each borrowed character from other franchises to the new system respectfully and gracefully.
> Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked, so it's basically Strive!
When you realize from the developers' lingo and actions that "fighting games" for them just means Smash Bros, it becomes clear why so little thought was put into making this. Most FG players wouldn't even call most of this "FG design" but "arcade design", though I doubt the devs have ever set foot into one in their lives...
> The mechanics feel convoluted and purposeless—just adding new things for the sake of it without thinking what it implies on the overall, unlike in Guilty Gear +R, where you can clearly pinpoint the purpose of each element.
> The tutorial is hot garbage—overly long yet failing to explain key concepts and their usage (there were things the community didn't even know existed before the manual was released, lmao), unlike French Bread games, where after the tutorial, all that's left is labbing for second priority details, like frame data, combos and tech.
> 70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design, unlike King of Fighters or any crossover fighter, which adapt each borrowed character from other franchises to the new system respectfully and gracefully.
> Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked, so it's basically Strive!
When you realize from the developers' lingo and actions that "fighting games" for them just means Smash Bros, it becomes clear why so little thought was put into making this. Most FG players wouldn't even call most of this "FG design" but "arcade design", though I doubt the devs have ever set foot into one in their lives...
12 Comments
Why are you so aggressive towards the developers for no reason
@cyanplaza
> Yeah, they reward you with Silver Bullet sections, lol. It doesn't matter much if they reward you for using things like Ding, Wavedashing, or the air directional mechanic (I forgot the name), if these don’t actually serve any purpose in the game’s overall design. Like, what is the point of Ding? Does it make you go faster, or is it fun to use? Nah, it's just another mechanic adde for the sake of having more mechanics.
> I was talking about +R mechanics here, not its balance. I can actually see the purpose of all mechanics, even the ones I don't like (like the defense modifier, which is there so you always keep fighting hard to the end instead of just fishing for a big hit when the opponent life bar is low, although it’s debatable if it actually works). It’s pretty dishonest to say, "it was a miracle the game turned out well," like Daisuke was just throwing shit at the wall to see what works, when it's clearly one of the most well thought out FGs tehre is. This comparison doesn’t even make sense since probably the only thing keeping Ring Racers from being unbalanced is that all the characters are the same aside from two modifiers (and yet, heavy characters are still at a disadvantage, lmao).
> I should have mentioned Under Night specifically since idgaf about Type Lumina. My bad. I don't know who mentioned MvC2 here when I specifically mentioned KoF. There are some crossover fighters that aren't 100% well thought out... Congrats, I guess?
> Yeah, there are some banger maps in the game, which are in the 30% division, lmao.
> I never said XX/Xrd are similar to Strive, just that the way those games did things was better. I doubt you can say Strive’s Elphelt is more fun to play than Xrd’s, unless you don't know how Xrd works. If I understood correctly, you really didn't play SRB2Kart, so I guess my point is still correct.
> Well, sure, I’m not saying I’m an FG expert here; I’m just using the knowledge I have from playing them. You can’t make this point when you clearly misinterpreted almost everything I said, though.
> You might not call it arcade design, but it definitely isn’t an FG mindset, honestly.
I don't have any grudge against the devs btw, it's just what they said really struck a nerve with me and really explains a lot. Sorry if I was seeming agressive here, but in the end they only did a bad game, nothing serious.
> Yeah, they reward you with Silver Bullet sections, lol. It doesn't matter much if they reward you for using things like Ding, Wavedashing, or the air directional mechanic (I forgot the name), if these don’t actually serve any purpose in the game’s overall design. Like, what is the point of Ding? Does it make you go faster, or is it fun to use? Nah, it's just another mechanic adde for the sake of having more mechanics.
> I was talking about +R mechanics here, not its balance. I can actually see the purpose of all mechanics, even the ones I don't like (like the defense modifier, which is there so you always keep fighting hard to the end instead of just fishing for a big hit when the opponent life bar is low, although it’s debatable if it actually works). It’s pretty dishonest to say, "it was a miracle the game turned out well," like Daisuke was just throwing shit at the wall to see what works, when it's clearly one of the most well thought out FGs tehre is. This comparison doesn’t even make sense since probably the only thing keeping Ring Racers from being unbalanced is that all the characters are the same aside from two modifiers (and yet, heavy characters are still at a disadvantage, lmao).
> I should have mentioned Under Night specifically since idgaf about Type Lumina. My bad. I don't know who mentioned MvC2 here when I specifically mentioned KoF. There are some crossover fighters that aren't 100% well thought out... Congrats, I guess?
> Yeah, there are some banger maps in the game, which are in the 30% division, lmao.
> I never said XX/Xrd are similar to Strive, just that the way those games did things was better. I doubt you can say Strive’s Elphelt is more fun to play than Xrd’s, unless you don't know how Xrd works. If I understood correctly, you really didn't play SRB2Kart, so I guess my point is still correct.
> Well, sure, I’m not saying I’m an FG expert here; I’m just using the knowledge I have from playing them. You can’t make this point when you clearly misinterpreted almost everything I said, though.
> You might not call it arcade design, but it definitely isn’t an FG mindset, honestly.
I don't have any grudge against the devs btw, it's just what they said really struck a nerve with me and really explains a lot. Sorry if I was seeming agressive here, but in the end they only did a bad game, nothing serious.
didn't read bad post
fuck you then bitch lmao
"It's fascinating how developers love to keep talking about how "they were inspired by fighting game mechanics!""
I think that they meant that they took direct inspiration from Sonic The Fighters' VISUAL mechanics, like its text bubbles, not its gameplay.
"The mechanics feel convoluted and purposeless—just adding new things for the sake of it without thinking what it implies on the overall, unlike in Guilty Gear +R, where you can clearly pinpoint the purpose of each element."
The tutorial is long and has extra steps to skip it so that you can play it to understand the game. My patience made me understand it fairly well with it's usage of visual arrows, and reading what Tails and Dr. Robotnik have to say.
"70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design" You do realize this game is a community game, right? I know that might imply there might not be one clear vision but it seems like it ended up actually feeling almost entirely cohesive. Not only that, but their gameplay feels really well to me after having played the tutorial, so I don't know what you are talking about. And while they might be historically inaccurate with stages from Sonic Adventure, a Dreamcast game, in a (pretending to be) Sega Saturn game. you could just simply not care about that. It would be nice if stages with references to games made after 1997 weren't in the main courses, and included as extras, but it doesn't matter to me as those tracks look amazing and play really well. Maybe I would've wanted some loops in Emerald Coast like in the tutorial, and in Sonic Adventure, but I still was in ecstasy in that stage. Not joking.
"The tutorial is hot garbage—overly long yet failing to explain key concepts and their usage (there were things the community didn't even know existed before the manual was released, lmao), unlike French Bread games, where after the tutorial, all that's left is labbing for second priority details, like frame data, combos and tech."
Did you go through the tutorial or did you get so frustrated that you put in the password to skip it? I got frustrated at its length too, but I thought that it must be that way for a reason. And it was, because key concepts like ring boosting, item throwing, and tripwires were all explained. You didn't elaborate on what concepts it might've failed to explain, so I maybe assume you were struggling at it like that guy at Cuphead's tutorial.
Mechanics unexplained in the tutorial I haven't seen in racing games before like getting faster when near another racer (tethering) I understood whilst playing the game for enough time (enough time as in after 1 race).
"Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked, so it's basically Strive!" Have you played Mario Kart? I looked at your profile, and I see you did play multiple games in that series. Anybody who has played any games in the Mario Kart series would understand this game, as it would be obvious to us that it is Mario Kart but Sonic Robo Blast 2.
There is a tutorial that tells you how the game fundamentally works anyways, with even the most basic of mechanics being explained like stepping on the gas to drive around the map.
"When you realize from the developers' lingo and actions that "fighting games" for them just means Smash Bros" What? This game does not feel like any it has inspiration from any of the Super Smash Bros. games. Did they ever say that directly, or are you assuming that? I think however, that it definitely is inspired by Sonic The Fighters (and maybe Slap Happy Rhythm Busters, but only its visuals? I'm very not sure about this, though, so please don't take that as fact), but that should obviously mean it doesn't make it a fighting game just because you were inspired by a fighting game. You can be inspired from various different aspects of a game happens to be a fighting game, such as the visuals, but that doesn't make your game a fighting game. Half-Life was inspired by Stephen King's book, "The Mist", and the movie "Alien", but that doesn't make Half-Life just a movie or just a book, as it isn't a piece of media in purely literature or video format. It is a video game where you have almost full control of the movement of the protagonist of a story that would really fit a science fiction movie from the time of which it was released. You should think for yourself what something is, instead of just relying on what you are told, whilst also possibly misinterpreting what you were told. Which brings me to:
"Most FG players wouldn't even call most of this "FG design" but "arcade design", though I doubt the devs have ever set foot into one in their lives...".
...Yes. because this is an arcade-y racing game, as was SRB2Kart.
This isn't a fighting game.
Also, I didn't understand you abbreviated fighting game until after 10 minutes writing this comment. I can see why you were so impatient in the tutorial, and as a result found the game "convoluted" (because you abbreviated two words to type them faster, and as a result made them less understandable for others to read your non-thorough review).
If you don't like playing arcade-y games, and like fighting games, then don't play arcade-y games, and play fighting games. I would tell you if you want to play a Sonic Fighting game, to go play Sonic The Fighters, but you rated that game 1.5, as I assume it was hard for you as well at the end, which I do agree is a bit too unfair, but I could find the enjoyment in almost every part of the game (Trust Me. I would Know) aside from the last two of its levels. I'd recommend playing something else that has little to no learning curves, as learning curves in video games seem to might not suit you.
I think that they meant that they took direct inspiration from Sonic The Fighters' VISUAL mechanics, like its text bubbles, not its gameplay.
"The mechanics feel convoluted and purposeless—just adding new things for the sake of it without thinking what it implies on the overall, unlike in Guilty Gear +R, where you can clearly pinpoint the purpose of each element."
The tutorial is long and has extra steps to skip it so that you can play it to understand the game. My patience made me understand it fairly well with it's usage of visual arrows, and reading what Tails and Dr. Robotnik have to say.
"70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design" You do realize this game is a community game, right? I know that might imply there might not be one clear vision but it seems like it ended up actually feeling almost entirely cohesive. Not only that, but their gameplay feels really well to me after having played the tutorial, so I don't know what you are talking about. And while they might be historically inaccurate with stages from Sonic Adventure, a Dreamcast game, in a (pretending to be) Sega Saturn game. you could just simply not care about that. It would be nice if stages with references to games made after 1997 weren't in the main courses, and included as extras, but it doesn't matter to me as those tracks look amazing and play really well. Maybe I would've wanted some loops in Emerald Coast like in the tutorial, and in Sonic Adventure, but I still was in ecstasy in that stage. Not joking.
"The tutorial is hot garbage—overly long yet failing to explain key concepts and their usage (there were things the community didn't even know existed before the manual was released, lmao), unlike French Bread games, where after the tutorial, all that's left is labbing for second priority details, like frame data, combos and tech."
Did you go through the tutorial or did you get so frustrated that you put in the password to skip it? I got frustrated at its length too, but I thought that it must be that way for a reason. And it was, because key concepts like ring boosting, item throwing, and tripwires were all explained. You didn't elaborate on what concepts it might've failed to explain, so I maybe assume you were struggling at it like that guy at Cuphead's tutorial.
Mechanics unexplained in the tutorial I haven't seen in racing games before like getting faster when near another racer (tethering) I understood whilst playing the game for enough time (enough time as in after 1 race).
"Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked, so it's basically Strive!" Have you played Mario Kart? I looked at your profile, and I see you did play multiple games in that series. Anybody who has played any games in the Mario Kart series would understand this game, as it would be obvious to us that it is Mario Kart but Sonic Robo Blast 2.
There is a tutorial that tells you how the game fundamentally works anyways, with even the most basic of mechanics being explained like stepping on the gas to drive around the map.
"When you realize from the developers' lingo and actions that "fighting games" for them just means Smash Bros" What? This game does not feel like any it has inspiration from any of the Super Smash Bros. games. Did they ever say that directly, or are you assuming that? I think however, that it definitely is inspired by Sonic The Fighters (and maybe Slap Happy Rhythm Busters, but only its visuals? I'm very not sure about this, though, so please don't take that as fact), but that should obviously mean it doesn't make it a fighting game just because you were inspired by a fighting game. You can be inspired from various different aspects of a game happens to be a fighting game, such as the visuals, but that doesn't make your game a fighting game. Half-Life was inspired by Stephen King's book, "The Mist", and the movie "Alien", but that doesn't make Half-Life just a movie or just a book, as it isn't a piece of media in purely literature or video format. It is a video game where you have almost full control of the movement of the protagonist of a story that would really fit a science fiction movie from the time of which it was released. You should think for yourself what something is, instead of just relying on what you are told, whilst also possibly misinterpreting what you were told. Which brings me to:
"Most FG players wouldn't even call most of this "FG design" but "arcade design", though I doubt the devs have ever set foot into one in their lives...".
...Yes. because this is an arcade-y racing game, as was SRB2Kart.
This isn't a fighting game.
Also, I didn't understand you abbreviated fighting game until after 10 minutes writing this comment. I can see why you were so impatient in the tutorial, and as a result found the game "convoluted" (because you abbreviated two words to type them faster, and as a result made them less understandable for others to read your non-thorough review).
If you don't like playing arcade-y games, and like fighting games, then don't play arcade-y games, and play fighting games. I would tell you if you want to play a Sonic Fighting game, to go play Sonic The Fighters, but you rated that game 1.5, as I assume it was hard for you as well at the end, which I do agree is a bit too unfair, but I could find the enjoyment in almost every part of the game (Trust Me. I would Know) aside from the last two of its levels. I'd recommend playing something else that has little to no learning curves, as learning curves in video games seem to might not suit you.
"Yeah, they reward you with Silver Bullet sections, lol. It doesn't matter much if they reward you for using things like Ding, Wavedashing, or the air directional mechanic (I forgot the name), if these don’t actually serve any purpose in the game’s overall design. Like, what is the point of Ding? Does it make you go faster, or is it fun to use? Nah, it's just another mechanic adde for the sake of having more mechanics"
The point is that they REWARD you for using these mechanics skillfully, you literally just said it yourself
also, assuming "Ding" means using rings then yes? it does make you go faster lmao???? if you use all of these mechanics well (like combining ring boost and momentum from the level design) you, like @cyanplaza said, can go through shortcuts you could only do using a boost item otherwise
also your comment about "70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design" is just a wrong, most community maps where totally changed and the few that were barely changed (like crimson core and 765 stadium) are still some of the best maps in the game
please tell me how Opulence plays in srb2k: https://youtu.be/UV7gnWrVgnA?si=Nq6UnHaCbnp2btIX
is even remotely similar to how it plays in Ring Racers: https://youtu.be/6gY8qYCbleQ?si=k1zF24f-VZlxYQxx
not saying its objectively "better" but it defo isn't "minimal effort"
The point is that they REWARD you for using these mechanics skillfully, you literally just said it yourself
also, assuming "Ding" means using rings then yes? it does make you go faster lmao???? if you use all of these mechanics well (like combining ring boost and momentum from the level design) you, like @cyanplaza said, can go through shortcuts you could only do using a boost item otherwise
also your comment about "70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design" is just a wrong, most community maps where totally changed and the few that were barely changed (like crimson core and 765 stadium) are still some of the best maps in the game
please tell me how Opulence plays in srb2k: https://youtu.be/UV7gnWrVgnA?si=Nq6UnHaCbnp2btIX
is even remotely similar to how it plays in Ring Racers: https://youtu.be/6gY8qYCbleQ?si=k1zF24f-VZlxYQxx
not saying its objectively "better" but it defo isn't "minimal effort"
Not gonna gonna waste my time rebutting these texts just for some reddit-ass thinking cap respond with "didn't care ratio omegalul", since having any meaningful discussion in this site is impossible and fruitless.
Gonna elaborate a bit on the tutorial though: @mario7 On the top of my head, sliptiding and tethering are missing and they are pratically essential to winning any online match, not to mention sections that really need an overhaul like the drifting one, you know, your main form of gaining speed through the game besides rings? I don't know who thought it would be a good idea to pay such an emphasis on Rainbow Drifiting in which you will never use ever while leaving basic shit like drift steering in an optional text box, and not even mentioning Drift Storage of course. It also so superficial, leaves way too much as "you gonna get the feeling bro trust me", like cool that I have to build speed before drifting, but how exactly? How exactly my driving changes when I am underwater? In the way it's layed out, players will just resort to common mistakes instead of actually learning, like using rings aimlessly while treating drifting as secondary, or not caring to change your playstyle underwater at all. If I am going to have to lab for basic shit then I can basically treat it as the first game which didn't have a tutorial and skip it lmao, I have better uses of my time. Also trust me new players WON'T pick up tethering by themselves, let alone after 1 race.
Also yes I finished the tutorial, and no it being frustating ins't a quality. I am well versed enough to understand more or less how this works, someone who only plays Mario Kart surely will just throw out the game or skip the tutorial and he will be within reason since it doens't teach shit. He probably will do fine too since this is one of those games you can win races against the CPU without even knowing what you're doing exactly. Fuck off with this passive aggressive bullshit too, you know this ins't the same thing as the Cuphead tutorial, you're not an idiot.
Even the cyan dude agrees this tutorial is garbage so I really don't know where you're coming from (although mid lumina excuses not caring for the tutorial apparently). Everyone has been shitting on this so much they must have changed by now probably, props to them if they did. Not gonna bother revising this.
Gonna elaborate a bit on the tutorial though: @mario7 On the top of my head, sliptiding and tethering are missing and they are pratically essential to winning any online match, not to mention sections that really need an overhaul like the drifting one, you know, your main form of gaining speed through the game besides rings? I don't know who thought it would be a good idea to pay such an emphasis on Rainbow Drifiting in which you will never use ever while leaving basic shit like drift steering in an optional text box, and not even mentioning Drift Storage of course. It also so superficial, leaves way too much as "you gonna get the feeling bro trust me", like cool that I have to build speed before drifting, but how exactly? How exactly my driving changes when I am underwater? In the way it's layed out, players will just resort to common mistakes instead of actually learning, like using rings aimlessly while treating drifting as secondary, or not caring to change your playstyle underwater at all. If I am going to have to lab for basic shit then I can basically treat it as the first game which didn't have a tutorial and skip it lmao, I have better uses of my time. Also trust me new players WON'T pick up tethering by themselves, let alone after 1 race.
Also yes I finished the tutorial, and no it being frustating ins't a quality. I am well versed enough to understand more or less how this works, someone who only plays Mario Kart surely will just throw out the game or skip the tutorial and he will be within reason since it doens't teach shit. He probably will do fine too since this is one of those games you can win races against the CPU without even knowing what you're doing exactly. Fuck off with this passive aggressive bullshit too, you know this ins't the same thing as the Cuphead tutorial, you're not an idiot.
Even the cyan dude agrees this tutorial is garbage so I really don't know where you're coming from (although mid lumina excuses not caring for the tutorial apparently). Everyone has been shitting on this so much they must have changed by now probably, props to them if they did. Not gonna bother revising this.
"Also trust me new players WON'T pick up tethering by themselves, let alone after 1 race."
You know what? You're right. I only got the hang of tethering after exactly two races (in Ring Cup's panic city), not one. Props to you for doing the math.
"You can't have meaningful discussion" my ass. You don't care and just pull up insults from your youtuber-opinionated ass and deny that you might be bad at video games.
You know what? You're right. I only got the hang of tethering after exactly two races (in Ring Cup's panic city), not one. Props to you for doing the math.
"You can't have meaningful discussion" my ass. You don't care and just pull up insults from your youtuber-opinionated ass and deny that you might be bad at video games.
It isn't bad to be bad at video games. It's just that when you are bad at playing one and calling the game as a whole bad unconsciously because of that reason, it's kind of sad.
If I was pulling opinion's from Youtubers on this game I would actually have a positive opinion on it.
Love how you're overemphasizing I being bad at this game with nothing to support it (I never even said I was good) as a self defense for me to not call you thrash at DRRR though, fantastic character development here.
You didn't even bother answering any of my arguments and only focused on the "insults", so yeah I am right it's pointless bro.
Love how you're overemphasizing I being bad at this game with nothing to support it (I never even said I was good) as a self defense for me to not call you thrash at DRRR though, fantastic character development here.
You didn't even bother answering any of my arguments and only focused on the "insults", so yeah I am right it's pointless bro.
"The mechanics feel convoluted and purposeless"
"The tutorial is hot garbage"
"Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked"
Damn they weren't kidding about being inspired by fighting games lmao
"The tutorial is hot garbage"
"Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked"
Damn they weren't kidding about being inspired by fighting games lmao
cyanplaza
28 days ago
Totally disagree, while not every map makes use of every mechanic, there's an attention to the player's abilities that makes things like shortcuts so much more interesting once you're willing to dive into the mechanics. The first map of the game has a shortcut section that seems inaccessible without a boost power up, but understanding the drift system allows you to reach it whenever. There's so much like that in the game.
"unlike in Guilty Gear +R, where you can clearly pinpoint the purpose of each element."
Brother they forgot to program half of Kliff's hitboxes. Zappa has a 1/3~ chance of getting random summons leaving blockstun that he can use to combo break. MOP loops exist. Ky/Venom are severely gimped due to meter restrictions. The XX series was a sinking ship where they constantly had to patch holes in the hull to prevent it from sinking, and the game turning out as well as it did is a miracle.
unlike French Bread games, where after the tutorial, all that's left is labbing for second priority details, like frame data, combos and tech.
The tutorial is shit, but don't pretend like FB has good tutorials either. One of the most common complaints about TL among new players when that game came out is that they had zero clue on how the shield system works. If anything, the two games have similar issues in that they present a bunch of information that you will have to know at one point in order to win, but deluge the player and assume that they'll be able to handle the rest.
70% of the stages are terrible because they were imported randomly from community packs with minimal effort to make them decent or to fit with the game's new design, unlike King of Fighters or any crossover fighter, which adapt each borrowed character from other franchises to the new system respectfully and gracefully.
1) There are some banger maps in this game, again, if you understand the system mechanics. They also look and sound great.
2) "any crossover fighter" 3/4ths of MvC2's sprites were stuff they had laying around since 1994, and even then they probably cut animation frames.
Overall, there's no reason to play this garbage unless you're unfamiliar with how the previous entry worked, so it's basically Strive!
I didn't play the previous game and after learning how shit worked, I was hooked. Also, Strive doesn't play anything like XX/Xrd, outside of burst and "spend 50 meter to cancel a move". Do you really wanna argue that Strive Elphelt is anything like Xrd Elphelt?
When you realize from the developers' lingo and actions that "fighting games" for them just means Smash Bros, it becomes clear why so little thought was put into making this. Most FG players wouldn't even call most of this "FG design" but "arcade design", though I doubt the devs have ever set foot into one in their lives...
1) I don't think you know as much about fighting games as you claim.
2) I wouldn't call it arcade game design. It's design that asks more of the player than what you'd be used to in other racing games, and rewards it with a sense of control and speed beyond its peers.