Google+

Topics

Great Debate

We Recommend

31 comments

  • -me- - July 26, 2013 11:54 p.m.

    Justin some how managed to beat himself in this debate. "Justin says: 3D allows for spectacular environmental traversal" ...so we're pretending that Super Smash Bros isn't a fighting game right? "No 2D game has anything like that in it..." MKvDC comes to mind Lucas says: 2D is more intuitive This is a somewhat wacky point. 2D fighters are probably should be more intuitive. Fighting in a 3D space in real life is a tricky concept for most people as it (IRL, people frequently use linear planes). Adding a computer interface to the process should just add complications. But intuitive is the wrong word. The QCF montion is not something that one would simply assume would do anything, Honda's Hundred Hand Slap on the other hand is. The real point here (as far as I can tell) is that 2d fighters are closer to 'standardized' and so you don't have to re-map your muscle memory for ever new game. Everytime you pick up a new 3D franchise, you have no idea what button does what. Justin has a good point here, but there are of course outliers (I'm looking at you Summon Suffering). One final note here, if QCF is really 'blister-baiting' for you, the simple solution is to just put down the Genesis D-Pad. "In a true 3D ring, that extra dimension of movement yields a wealth of new tactical options..." (...which only a few have really capitalized on, moreover:) "It’s true that some 2D games have roll moves that give the impression the character has rolled around an attack or their opponent." Good Point. Justin says: 3D animation is better REALISTIC IS NOT INHERIENTLY BETTER. (Sorry for the caps, but I was trying to say that loud enough for Call of Duty and it's clones to here me.) Anyway, Lucas does a good job here. But I would like to add that for my money the Darkstalkers franchise has some of the best looking backgrounds of any fighter. "Well, I think you’ll find the number of outspoken and active fans of 2D games falls well below the much higher number of gamers who grew up playing Tekken, Soulcalibur and Dead or Alive." Really? Are you even being serious here? 'Cause the number of people that have even heard of Tekken, Soul Calibur, and DOA (all together) is probably less then the number of gamers who grew up playing Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat. The 2d tourney community is bigger than it's ever been and Evo only felt the need to feature one truly 3d game this year. At least in America, 2d reigns supreme. Justin says: Real 3D fighting can make for a unique experience. But the haven't yet. Power Stone is unique but pretty obscure. Are you really saying that there is no real difference in play between SF, MK, Capcom vs the human attention span, KoF, or Sam Sho just to name some mainstream one. If 2D’s so great, why hasn’t anyone significantly improved 2D gameplay over Street Fighter II? In 20 years? They did... alot. Just one example, combos were technically apart of SF2 but Darkstalkers inovated Capcom's current system. KI took the concept and beat it until it was dead. And MvC ressurected it. Then there's Supers, Combo Breakers, Alpha Counters, Gaurd Crushing and the entire subgenre of Tag Team games... oh and Ring Outs (if you count Fatal Fury/Real Bout as 2d), weapon based fighters, and cinematic stage interactions... Since Virtua Fighter 3d games have improved immensely in terms of physics and graphics. But their innovations are either comming from technology advancing or 2d games.
  • Jasman - October 1, 2012 3:22 p.m.

    If I was to grossly generalize, I'd say that 3D fighters tend to be more instantly gratifying, whereas 2D fighters often favour advanced tactics and high-level mind games. You can't just jump into Street Fighter 4 and immediately kick the face off your opponent like you can when playing Tekken Tag or DOA 5. Street Fighter requires you to understand its language of quarter-circles and move-cancels before you make any real progress, while most 3D fighters simply insist you learn the differences between punch, block and kick. If I want to beat someone up, I play a 3D fighter. If I want a tactical battle, I go 2D. Virtua Fighter 5 is probably the only game that fits perfectly in both camps.
  • keith-wayne - July 20, 2013 10:47 p.m.

    funny cuz the 3d fighting game genre is actually generally harder and more complex despite PKG being the only buttons. Imo, 3d fighters feel more natural to me with the >>P and <PK like stuff to me. they're also more entertaining to watch as well for me cuz i can see the mindgames, and decision making more clear. and the best part about it is it's accessible to newcomers with three buttons, and insanely complex to high level players.
  • rxb - September 30, 2012 1:13 p.m.

    I think Towelly had a lot of good points and 3d may give a better representation of 'real' fighting but I think 2d makes better a fighting game. Bringing up powerstone made my decision harder but thats the exception in book.
  • Clovin64 - September 29, 2012 10:33 a.m.

    As a sausage-fingered casual fighting game fan, I tend to prefer 3D fighters as they're just more accesible and easier to get into than 2D for me personally. Also I've been in love with Soulcalibur's smooth and fluid 8 way run system since Dreamcast. That said, I've a huge amount of respect for the hardcore dedicated 2D fighter fanbase who have spent hundreds of hours mastering the system. But I'm just not one of them.
  • yoyoguy - September 28, 2012 12:09 p.m.

    I don't really think either is better. They both are vastly different, have their places in the FGC and I think comparing them doesn't really do anything. I mainly play 2D fighters, but I'm absolutely loving DoA5 which I feel can play just as important a role in the community as Street Fighter.
  • Risonhighmer - September 28, 2012 12:09 p.m.

    Up until a couple months ago I would have said 2D is better hands down. Then I let myself get immersed into VF5 Final Showdown and I have an incredible respect for the genre now. They both have their pros and cons and what really matters is how well the game is balanced and how many options are given to the player.
  • bamit11 - September 28, 2012 8:01 a.m.

    I like 3D fighters like some old Mortal Komabts and Soulcaliber 2, but I like 2D fighters more. Even though Dadly Alliance and MK 4 were 3D, I hope the remake is 2D.
  • winner2 - September 28, 2012 7:11 a.m.

    I was going to say something but then I saw the train simulator ad on the right and forgot while I laughed
  • ericthesmith - September 28, 2012 6:49 a.m.

    It wasn't an easy decision. But while I've spent just as many hours in Soul Caliber 2 as I have in Marvel Vs. Capcom 2, I still play the latter. Arguments were solid all-around though. However, I can't help but think... Can't we all just get along?
  • avantguardian - September 28, 2012 12:35 a.m.

    i'm gonna have to go 2d on this one. there's just something so pure about them.
  • virtuaman - September 27, 2012 11:59 p.m.

    Whoa nice article here, I'm a fighting gamers myself, and my first 2D fighting games was street fighter on NES. Also my first 3D fighting games was Virtua Fighter on arcade. Up till now those two series was my favourite all time, but i also played wide varied of fighting games such as SC, Tekken, KoF, GG and so on. But from this article topic i maybe prefer 2D fighting games over 3D ones. I just like how the developer draw either using sprites or vector animated. Vote for 2D
  • samsneeze - September 27, 2012 11:08 p.m.

    I'm rolling with the 3D fighters in this case. Much more fun and open to play. Though the sheer popularity of 2D fighters means that this was a battle lost before it even began.
  • J-Fid - September 27, 2012 8:23 p.m.

    I enjoy both, as two of my favorite gaming series are Street Fighter and Soul Calibur. That being said, Lucas definitely won this match. Congrats on your (soon to be) first win!
  • Cyberninja - September 27, 2012 8:09 p.m.

    I say both had really good arguments but I have to side with Lucas because he had a few more good points and Justin clearly hasn't played the new 2D fighters this gen if he thinks they still play like the 1991 counterparts.
  • dlam - September 27, 2012 5:18 p.m.

    2d way better k gg
  • shawksta - September 27, 2012 4:19 p.m.

    2D fighters are simply more popular and is overall better to spectate but 3D are no way inferior as they are well done and just don't have the appeal as 2D fighters, it has it's own style that compliments it and make it appealing to it's own content. And then we have Anachary reins, which will be one heck of a 3D fighter as Smash bros was to 2D fighting
  • minimaxi - September 27, 2012 4:02 p.m.

    a non-debatable topic for me, I happen to like both.

Showing 1-20 of 31 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.