I'd LOVE to face Yahtzee at this game! He seems like the biggest scrub ever, what with the throw-spamming and all.

Woe Is You:

Indigo_Dingo:

JakobLogan:

Black yeoman:
Also SC means splintercell

and starcraft, but does it really matter as long as its clear what we are talking about?

Actually man, by a month, Soul Calibur was the first series.

Soul Calibur arcade release: July 30, 1998 (according to Wikipedia, GameFAQs has July 1998.)
StarCraft release: March 31, 1998 (according to Wikipedia, GameFAQs places it at April 1st.)

But Super Cobra was released in 1981 for the Atari 2600, so that'll probably be more entitled to the SC acronym than any of these others, if we're going by this stupid assumption that you can only have one game with it.

No, its by which current series was the first established. As Super Cobra hasn't had any game recently, I think StarCraft gets the SC.

HadesWTF:
Honestly I don't know why you would review a game that is of the genre you don't like in the first place. Seems like it would waste your time and the outcome was already visible before you started.

I personally don't care, but you know people are going to be butthurt about it. *looks up at above posts* Yep. (Oh and I thought it was funny, especially the random "Herbal Bath" picture that kept popping up. LOL good stuff.)

Oh and for the record I was hyped about this game because I loved SC2. Bought it, played it for a week, and then got so bored with it I felt like I wasted my money.

The reason why people (including myself) may be up in arms, is because Yahtzee just shat on a genre that he seriously does not understand, using lots of BS reasons, as opposed to a single game. Also, this is a genre that many people have put lots of effort into, and have got lots of fun out of.

And there is a difference between Yahtzee shitting on fighting games, and Yahtzee shitting on JRPGs (which I also happen to like). In fighting games, you get out what you put in, and various levels of skill will determine the type of experiences you have with those types of games. In JRPGs, the difference in skill is not as vast, so that comes down more to taste, as most gamers will experience more or less the same thing.

Actually his reasons were quite legit. They wearn't BS.
"Also, this is a genre that many people have put lots of effort into, and have got lots of fun out of."
Maybe so but Yahtzee got almost no fun out of it, he was able to beat normal AND hard with just the throw button. Deal with it people.

Tell me which of his reasons were BS? I've played Soul Caliber 4 at a friends house and he was spot on. My friend play 2 and 3 before playing 4 and i still beat him, by randomly smashing buttons.

funny yet intellectually interesting

Stelman257:
Actually his reasons were quite legit. They wearn't BS.
"Also, this is a genre that many people have put lots of effort into, and have got lots of fun out of."
Maybe so but Yahtzee got almost no fun out of it, he was able to beat normal AND hard with just the throw button. Deal with it people.

Tell me which of his reasons were BS? I've played Soul Caliber 4 at a friends house and he was spot on. My friend play 2 and 3 before playing 4 and i still beat him, by randomly smashing buttons.

Like I said, I don't like the Soul Calibur series for much of the stuff that has already been mentioned. It is the extension of his opinions of this game to all of the genre that I have a problem with.

Soul Calibur is a button mashers dream, that is a fact. However, just because your friend played 2 and 3 does not automatically make him good at it, or fighting games at all for that matter. As for the BS: giving the story as much weight as he did is BS when it comes to fighting games; playing against the CPU in a game made for vs. is BS; thinking that he could write a review of a game with an extremely high learning curve accurately after playing through single player mode a few times is BS.

Oh, and he did not indicate that he beat all of hard mode using throws, just a match. But that really does not matter.

Ah... who am I kidding... I just feel peeved because I spent most of my childhood inside playing Street Fighter, instead of being outside flying kites and chasing girls around. I now feel like I wasted my life.

Actually all of his reasons were legit. If you look through (after 7 pages I think its acceptable to just skim) most of us have pretty much thumbed our collective noses at Soul Caliber as a serious fighting game. Our arguments are based around the genre, which for some reason he decided to bash at the very end. Now, I'm not a frothing fan boy, I get that thats just comedy. It's still a little out of place though, even with his disclaimers of, "I don't hate the genre, I just don't get it."

However, Soul Caliber is as good as any other place to discuss the classic shortcomings/misconceptions of the genre. Also, your friend who had played previous games in the series... there's a difference between the casual guy who drops an hour or two every now and again and the people who methodically look to use all the mechanics of the game. As I mentioned before: parrying, side stepping, using kicks effectively, noting the difference between horizontal and vertical slashes is important. Was he trying to do any of that or did he just try to button mash right back at you?

Also, this is a genre that many people have put lots of effort into, and have got lots of fun out of.

But there is a button smash issue. I've played against multiple people who knew the moves, but couldn't win from buttonsmash and went "no fair!"... Effort -> no Fun

And there is a difference between Yahtzee shitting fighting games

He's not just shtting the genre as opposed to a game... he's shitting people. That's lame. Extremely funny but lame :p

*looks at Ivy*

I'm sorry, I can't understand you- your breasticles are in the way.

Solid review, Yahtz-meister. Though I thought Link fit in half-decently with the Soul Calibur cast compared to pretty much all the other guest stars.

Panayjon:

I'll ignore that your name reminds me of Ancestral Recall, which is the last thing in all of gaming that should be talking about balance. Instead I'll just say this. Games. Work. Two words that should not be in the same sentence. Fighting games have a steep learning curve. To call it a lack of work ethic might be going too far, since a good game should be fun from start to end. I'm resigned to say that fighting games are a niche appeal.

At any rate I actually wanted to bring an idea to the table about balance. Now that consoles are hooked up to the internet and all, how about patches and updates? I feel as if fighting games would benefit greatly from this, so that once an abuse/glitch is found it can killed off. Whereas currently people will find something to abuse and then abuse it. Also... what's up with all the characters in fighting games. Ken from SF has always been top tier for instance, but why are there tiers of characters? Shouldn't a good game be balanced? Rather than having a whole slew of characters that are great and others that comparatively suck?

Note that this is simply the observations of someone who likes fighting games. Recognizing and fixing these issues would help alleviate the genre from its limited appeal.

First of all, my name should not remind of Ancestral Recall, it should remind you of Ancestral Vision.

Next, about work and games in the same sentence. It's a bit of personal taste as to how much work you want to put into a game. Let's face it; God of War is great fun, but even on easy you have to think for a second before mashing triangle. At the extreme high-end, we have MMORPGs where the combat is redundant and the entire premise is working to improve your character. Obviously I think that's going overboard, but I do think that mastery of a game can be intensely gratifying depending on your personality type, so it really comes down to how deep of a game you want to master. Some people like mastering Tetris, I prefer mastering Street Fighter. And yes, fighters are a niche, as it's about at the FPS range of complexity minus the aiming and adding lots of frustration learning timing rules and character matchups.

On the balance front, it really is a moral question. For example, do you think that all the wavedashing/L-cancelling/chaingrabbing stuff from Smash Bros. Melee was a negative thing that needed to be removed? Tournament players are in agreement that these techniques ended up making the game deeper by increasing the number of viable options in a match. On the other hand, you might say that the game wasn't meant to be played that way, but people thinking like this must realize that tournaments will only ban techniques/characters/etc. if they can be EMPIRICALLY proven to dominate high-level play, and even then only if it proves to be nigh-uncounterable. Yun's Genei-Jin in SF3: 3rd Strike is counterable. Snipers in Halo 3 are counterable. They are powerful, but not unbeatable. The same can be said of 99% of glitches/exploits found in a multiplayer game. That said, patching for console fighters to remove the few game-breaking glitches would be awesome.

And as far as tiers go, it really has nothing to do with the way the game is made. The developers do not make characters crappy (with the notable exception of Dan from the SF:Alpha games and soon SF4). A tier list arises out of evidence gathered from the highest levels of tournament play, and really doesn't mean much. It's simply a list of characters that have been shown to win more often. It is entirely possible that Dan could kick Ken's butt in a tournament. In fact, I would say that if you even LOOK at a tier list without intending to soon win tournaments that you should slap yourself for being too impressionable. It is only useful for tournament die-hards and no one else.

I never could resist an argument! Lets also start off with that I'm not really a fan of soulcaibur either. Also, as much as I enjoy these reviews, I don't really think Yahtzee needs defending, I just figure if you're going to type all that you may as well have someone respond... righto, that out the way, onward!

A note about objectivity - in the world of games it frankly does not exist. Some people find things fun, other people do not. So while reviewers usually try to be objective in a review, it's not possible to do it overly well past a 'well we didn't like it but if you like this kind of game you probably will'. Yahtzee has never been overly objective, but thats a big part of the reason why his reviews are so popular (in my not-very-objective-opinion).

XPats:
With that out of the way, I must say that I am terribly terribly disappointed with this video. In the past when Yahtzee were to say things that I found untrue or arbitrary about a game I liked, they were usually funny, and it was ok. However, this video was nothing more than an amateurish verbal display that underlined his ignorance in a very specific game genre. It also was not funny, so I was unable to overlook his obvious missing of the point. It is not a problem if you do not like fighting games, or if you don't understand them, but as was mentioned before, just because YOU don't understand them, that does not mean they are steaming piles of shit.

OK.. first off, what was wrong with his critisism? It was pretty much all accurate.. the story was terrible, the story mode was literally a 15 minutes experiance (not to mention the voice over was TERRIBLE...) and you can quite easily win any match by spamming the throw button. I agree that even for him it was a little overly negative from the start, and it DOES seem a bit pointless to review a type of game you don't get... but reviewers don't like every game, so it's nice to see someone reviewing a game in a genre that they themselves do not really lean towards.

XPats:
Yahtzee, somebody who hates multiplayer and hates competitive gaming generally, has no real business reviewing, or criticizing, or video blogging about a fighting game. That is like a 6 year old trying to say helpful or interesting things about Citizen Kane. Sure, they can have an opinion, but it is not valid as said 6 year old does not have the proper frame of reference or experience.

Not really a valid argument in my opinion. You have to assume that a variety a gamers will pick up this title - some new to fighting games, some who have only ever played a certain kind of fighting game, some who have played them but aren't real fans and are just trying it out and some who live for them. The internet is FULL of reviews from people who are fans of fighting games and play them in and out etc etc, why do we need another one? Everyones opinion (including the 6 year old) is valid from a point of view. Now often that point of view is 'they're a god damn idiot' and thus can be dismissed. But all Yahtzee has done is give a review from someone who does not really get fighting games but is trying it anyway in case it's the one that they actually enjoy (or else he was asked to by the escapist), then adding his usual style (ie, ripping it apart). The fact that the first thing he says in his review is "I don't get fighting games" immedately lets everyone know where his opinion is based.

XPats:
In order for Yahtzee to accurately blog about this game, he should have had like 4 friends over, 2 of which who are very good, 1 who is average, and a beginner. That way, he could notice the different levels of play, and how they interact with each other, as well as experiencing a fighting game in the way it was meant to be played; with other people. Here is another simile for you all: Playing a fighting game by yourself is like buying a watergun, with nobody to play with. It is just not the way it was meant to be.

That's not reviewing. That's playtesting. A review is an impression a game gives to a reviewer and is supposed to be a guide for ANYONE who wants to go and pick it up. Now I do agree that fighting games should be played with other people, but if they put a single player mode in that isn't 'practice' mode, then it is fair and reasonable for someone to buy it to play on their own.

When my mates come round for a game of street fighter there is one who just edges me out most of the time when he uses his favourite character and who is fairly even with me on most other characters, one who I usually beat and the rest I can destroy. Thats me. From their point of view one of them wins most of the time. The rest lose most of the time. It's not possible to have the scenario you described, because having it for you instantly means it's different for someone else.

XPats:
However, I need to repeat that I am not a fan of the Soul Calibur series. The fact that somebody called them the cream of fighting games almost made me fall out of my chair. Soul Calibur is the most random, most button mashing friendly game I have played in a while, and is just a bit better than the Dead or Alive series. However, it is not nearly as shallow as Yahtzee makes out, and the points he uses to extend his opinions to all fighting games are in no way valid.

Well thats all fairly accurate I guess... and I hate DOA, it annoys me.

XPats:
I am a hardcore fighting game player. I buy large arcade style sticks because they allow me to perform certain things more easily. I spend lots of time in practice mode to etch out what works and what does not work.

And therefore it becomes VERY hard for you to think of a game from the point of view of someone who does not like these kind of games so much.

XPats:
I have fighting game marathons at my house whenever I can get enough people. As was said before, if somebody were to only throw, or only low kick, especially if said low kick is known to be broken, or the game mechanics make it difficult to evade throws, then that person would be shunned, and would have to make the trip of shame to the store to get more beer, or pizza.

Sorry this is the only thing you've posted which made me lose some respect for you. If someone does this at my gatherings, the response is simpley to figure out how to beat them. The only time I tell people to back off is when someone starts spamming cheap moves at someone who is already far less skilled at the game then them - it instantly makes it no fun for the other person at all and it just being a complete prick. But if those playing are close in skill, go for it.

However that said, the whole sending them for beer and pizza idea is pretty good...

XPats:
But good players playing well made games usually can handle such tactics easily. And button mashers in games like Tekken, or Street Fighter are absolutely no trouble at all. Fighting games ARE like a competitive dance, where flash, skill, timing, response under pressure, creativity, adaptability, unpredictability, and ability to predict will gain you respect in my house. There is a certain flow to well made fighting games, and the best players are the ones who utilize that flow the best.

No arguments here.

XPats:
Anybody who says that all fighting games never have a skill element, is either a troll, or is too dumb notice strategy and intricacies in a constantly moving environment. While I may not say that all fighting games are akin to chess, some are, and at the very least, well made fighting games are much more complex than a game of connect four between 2 fairly smart people.

Again, all good points.

XPats:
And to reply to some of the earlier posts:

I do believe that memorizing long combo strings takes skill. Not only because you need to memorize more than one, as well as execute them at the right times, but you also have to do them sometimes under lots of pressure. Handling pressure in fighting game is a show of skill and experience.

Pressure??? In a fighting game with friends? I'm sorry but no. Intense yes, pressure no - don't mistake the two. Don't know what you do for a living, but my job often brings fourth REAL pressure.. and there is definately a difference between that and even the most intense gaming session against a long time rival. Tournaments might bring on the pressure, but then you're not really playing, you're competing.

As for combos... yes and no. It depends on the combo as to if it takes skill or not to pull off. The ones that ALSO require split second timing, yeah thats skill. Personally I don't like combos in fighting games, and the new street fighters system actually reflects this (when the thing comes out anyway).

XPats:
In games that were primarily made to be played in versus mode, story is not important. True, this may turn people off, and that is ok. However, that simply is the nature of these games. Knocking a fighting game's story is simply useless.

If they put a single player in the game and it's crap, people are going to call them on it. If the game is about multiplayer, then thats all they should be putting in.

XPats:
Character design is important, and does help to keep a fighting gamer interested, but comes WAY after the fighting engine and game play. WAY WAY after.

I agree in principle, but in practical terms for selling a game, it's a big thing for a lot of people so it needs to be an important issue.

XPats:
Now I know that most people who are commenting here won't feel the same way that I do about fighting games as it is true that hardcore fighting game play is a niche, and a dying niche as well. But it is a farce to rip something you don't understand.

Welcome to the internet! Unfortunately games are too mainstream to expect this argument to stand anymore. Sad I know, but you need to accept this when it comes to reviews - noone reviews for the niche crowd because there is no POINT!

Example - Street Fighter is my fighting game of choice. I will be buying number 4. I already know all the characters that will be in there, the new features, pretty much ALL the released details. I've seen all the videos and previews etc etc.

So... whats the point of a reviewer aiming their review at me? There isn't. Odds are I know more then they do and am going to buy the game anyway and try it for myself.. their review isn't going to make a difference. Hence they don't, they aim it at people who don't have the knowledge people like us do.

---

Now, all that said, I would consider your post perfectly valid if it were about any reviewer other then Yahtzee. Is this because he's special? No. It's because although I often agree with what he says, thats not why I watch his stuff. I watch it because it's funny! And I found this review amusing. Some people might not, same as you might laugh at one of a comedians jokes then look on in bewilderment as other people laugh it up at another.

If I want an objective review about a game that I don't know much about, I'll go to IGN or a few other places like that. I come here for the amusement, even if I do agree with him more often then not.

Re: my last comment

that's better 8)

miller483:
I'd LOVE to face Yahtzee at this game! He seems like the biggest scrub ever, what with the throw-spamming and all.

Just curious: Were you calling him a scrub for throw spamming or for saying it's cheap? If it's the first one, you are in fact the scrub. If it's the second one, then you may have a point, but it's ambiguous whether Yahtzee was complaining it was a cheap method or because the combat's unbalanced.

Oh, if you picked option 3, that he isn't good at the game, that's not really the competitive definition of scrub (the word would probably be newb or noob).

I absolutely hate fighting games, no matter what I say to myself about them I will always hate them. The last fighting game I liked was Super Smash Bros Melee and even that was an iffy.

My friend got me the game because he's going to take it back when he gets a PS3 (don't ask), so I played Soul Calibur 4 a couple of times and somehow, watching Yahtzee point out all the things I hated and more just made me feel good inside and just made this overall review better.

Don't get me wrong, if you like the SC games then that's fine, but no matter what I say to myself I will always hate fighting games. damn spammers...

I myself enjoy fighting games. I get one for every councle. And that's it really, you don't need the whole series, just one. You learn the moves, and then have fun beating the crud out of people wherever you go if it's a handheld or after work when you're sick and tired of retarded customers who have zeroed in on you and proceed to atack you with questions that prove, in the event of a zombie attack, they would be safe and the zombies would STARVE!

I hope he does Too Human next week. That game has "amazing" written all over it.

... And I don't mean that in a good way.

i find this weeks review lacking mainly because i watched this guys review http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXQnvGErmmc its much more indepth mainly because the review actually likes the game and has played all the others so he knows what hes talking about, were yahtzee's is just an angry rant of soughts. very disappointing for me

Aginor27:
This has been bugging me for awhile, whenever Yahtzee says "anybody" or something along those lines, it shows the same picture of a man. Who is that man.

I second that, I'm dying to know. I KNOW who it is, but I can't flipping place it.

It's making me so mad I'm going to have to hit the throw button!!

As for the game, fighting games in general - I completely see where he's coming from. 10 years ago I bought damn near any fighting game that came out. I would furitively learn EVERY move for EVERY character, ensuring that I could pull it off. That was my goal in life, master every move!

And guess what, I could!

But then I'd play with my wife, and what would she do? Button mash me to death while I tried to pull off some Zhangief style 360 degree spin, and end up dying at the hands of someone who thinks action gaming means "Kings Quest point and click"

ANYWAY - i want to know who that guy is, and hurrah to a great review. Nothing beats out NGII as my favorite as of late.

milskidasith:

miller483:
I'd LOVE to face Yahtzee at this game! He seems like the biggest scrub ever, what with the throw-spamming and all.

Just curious: Were you calling him a scrub for throw spamming or for saying it's cheap? If it's the first one, you are in fact the scrub. If it's the second one, then you may have a point, but it's ambiguous whether Yahtzee was complaining it was a cheap method or because the combat's unbalanced.

Oh, if you picked option 3, that he isn't good at the game, that's not really the competitive definition of scrub (the word would probably be newb or noob).

It's mainly 3. And now that I think about it, you're right. He's a noob, not a scrub. And grabs are easy as all hell to dodge. All you have to do is crouch. (Which ten dollars say Yahtzee is unable to do just that.)

Also, fighting games are highly subjective (for lack of a better word) anyway. You have to be pretty skilled at them to get the most enjoyment out of them.

the point of fighting games is to play with other people and compete, the throws are a bit overwhelming, but, you can get out of them with a single buton press.

its not about story, smshing people, creating a character, or anything else, its about finding a right move at the right time, timing in general, its more like a fast game of chess then real battle.

however when played as a stress reliever all fighting games look shallow and easy.

Well if it wasn't for Yahtzee sticking the gun in his mouth I would have said "meh" - but now I say "LOL!"

Can't wait for next week.

Jumplion:
I absolutely hate fighting games, no matter what I say to myself about them I will always hate them. The last fighting game I liked was Super Smash Bros Melee and even that was an iffy.

My friend got me the game because he's going to take it back when he gets a PS3 (don't ask), so I played Soul Calibur 4 a couple of times and somehow, watching Yahtzee point out all the things I hated and more just made me feel good inside and just made this overall review better.

Don't get me wrong, if you like the SC games then that's fine, but no matter what I say to myself I will always hate fighting games. damn spammers...

Damn you, the reason I bought the damn game was cause you were always playing it.

I've been waiting for him to do BF:BC for awhile, I guess I don't know when and if it releases in Australia. I personally think that it was a nicely solid game with fantastic sound design as well as good writing (not necessarily plot, but dialouge) and decent mechanics. It also doesn't try to be more than it is.

I think it would also be cool if he took a look at the major holiday releases, seeing how things are slowing down until October.

personally i think yahtzee did great with this review.
me and a couple of friends played around with the 360 version and basically:
A) button mashing/ throw spamming is very hard to beat
B) yoda sucks worse than the chick with the bladed hula-hoop
C) i feel create a character got nerfed simply because of how broken the shuriken class was in SC3
D) the game does feel like its a series of mini games and not a cohesive whole. sure they try to hold it together with the "story" but its not good enough.

then again the only game in the series i was good at was SC2 thanks to how broken talim was.

CAB0SE:
I've been waiting for him to do BF:BC for awhile, I guess I don't know when and if it releases in Australia. I personally think that it was a nicely solid game with fantastic sound design as well as good writing (not necessarily plot, but dialouge) and decent mechanics. It also doesn't try to be more than it is.

I think it would also be cool if he took a look at the major holiday releases, seeing how things are slowing down until October.

It is out in Australia, he just hasn't reviewed it.

And they aren't slowing down, there are plenty of releases coming out.

Ivy was my favourite character in Soul Calibur 2... In Soul Calibur 4 she looks like a pair of boobs with white hair.

It's pathetic the way all fighting games are going these days; Bigger tits, less clothing, and superior jiggle physics. Why don't they just turn it into a porn simulator and get it over with.

Wow, sometimes it pays to stare at the wall. QFT, Sparcrypt. (and, weirdly enough (not like I don't have enough coincidences in my life right now, esp. w/ my g/f), his join date was on my b-day last year...)

But I agree, Yahtzee is a reviewer, asked by The Escapist to review games and post his thoughts about them. Why do they ask him to do that? Partially, because it's funny, but mostly because he does a good job at pointing out flaws within the gameplay, storyline, etc. Just because he presents this in a hilarious manner doesn't make him any less credible than if he pointed this out in a serious manner. You can take it or leave it, but most of us seem to agree with what he says.