Link to original post: [drupal=3253]What would a 2-D Smash fighter look like?[/drupal]
Time for a thought experiment: what if Smash was a traditional, competitive 2-D fighter? Right off the bat, items and stages are gone, but that's obvious. What other things would have to be changed, and what would have to remain to distinguish Smash 2-D from BlazBlue, Street Fighter and the other 2-D series?
For me, the biggest thing that would have to change is the character balance, or lack thereof. As it stands, only about 1/3 of the cast in each Smash game is truly tournament viable (maybe even less for Smash 64). That's not a knock on the games themselves; they weren't designed to be tournament games, so the developers didn't worry about balance, especially with no items and on restricted stages.
However, a 2-D Smash game would be competitive in design, and character balance would be a major part of that. Balancing 37 characters would be difficult (in my mind, 2-D Smash would have the Brawl roster), but not impossible, and could open up some really interesting possibilities for the cast. Perhaps give Bowser the same kind of attributes that Juggernaut has in MvC2, or just on certain moves like Potemkin in Guilty Gear? Alot of neat stuff could be done.
And this leads to the other vital question: what would the game engine look like? Obviously it would be 2-D (or 2.5-D like SF 4), but beyond that? Do we institute command inputs for specials? I don't think so. One of the best things about Smash is its control scheme. It's deceptively easy to understand, and yields some great results for advanced stuff. Adopting that control scheme to a 2-D fighter could be really cool.
As I see it, the two biggest issues with the game engine would be winning and DI. Smash 2-D would almost certainly have to be a life bar fighter, like every other 2-D fighter. That decision alone radically alters the game. Once again, there are obvious implications to that, and I'll leave those to you to imagne. But suddenly, Fox and Falco have to be changed, because laser camping goes from merely annoying to game-breaking. There are thousands of things that would have to be adjusted to the new system. However, although the primary method of victory would be to reduce your opponent's life to zero, the idea of kill zones doesn't have to be completely eliminated. Many 3-D fighters, and some of the KoF series, used a "ring out" system where being knocked out of the ring meant losing the round. Smash 2-D could incorporate such a system, where the lower a character's health, the further a move will knock them back, or some such compromise.
That leads to the DI question. I have mixed feelings about DI. One one hand, it's one of the things that makes Smash so unique. On the other, it's hard to see how it would work in a 2-D fighter. Crouch canceling would definitely have to go. Knockdown attacks have to knock down, no matter what.
These are just a few thoughts about a 2-D Smash game, I'll add more as I think about it in greater detail. But what do you think? What would you like to see in 2-D Smash?
Time for a thought experiment: what if Smash was a traditional, competitive 2-D fighter? Right off the bat, items and stages are gone, but that's obvious. What other things would have to be changed, and what would have to remain to distinguish Smash 2-D from BlazBlue, Street Fighter and the other 2-D series?
For me, the biggest thing that would have to change is the character balance, or lack thereof. As it stands, only about 1/3 of the cast in each Smash game is truly tournament viable (maybe even less for Smash 64). That's not a knock on the games themselves; they weren't designed to be tournament games, so the developers didn't worry about balance, especially with no items and on restricted stages.
However, a 2-D Smash game would be competitive in design, and character balance would be a major part of that. Balancing 37 characters would be difficult (in my mind, 2-D Smash would have the Brawl roster), but not impossible, and could open up some really interesting possibilities for the cast. Perhaps give Bowser the same kind of attributes that Juggernaut has in MvC2, or just on certain moves like Potemkin in Guilty Gear? Alot of neat stuff could be done.
And this leads to the other vital question: what would the game engine look like? Obviously it would be 2-D (or 2.5-D like SF 4), but beyond that? Do we institute command inputs for specials? I don't think so. One of the best things about Smash is its control scheme. It's deceptively easy to understand, and yields some great results for advanced stuff. Adopting that control scheme to a 2-D fighter could be really cool.
As I see it, the two biggest issues with the game engine would be winning and DI. Smash 2-D would almost certainly have to be a life bar fighter, like every other 2-D fighter. That decision alone radically alters the game. Once again, there are obvious implications to that, and I'll leave those to you to imagne. But suddenly, Fox and Falco have to be changed, because laser camping goes from merely annoying to game-breaking. There are thousands of things that would have to be adjusted to the new system. However, although the primary method of victory would be to reduce your opponent's life to zero, the idea of kill zones doesn't have to be completely eliminated. Many 3-D fighters, and some of the KoF series, used a "ring out" system where being knocked out of the ring meant losing the round. Smash 2-D could incorporate such a system, where the lower a character's health, the further a move will knock them back, or some such compromise.
That leads to the DI question. I have mixed feelings about DI. One one hand, it's one of the things that makes Smash so unique. On the other, it's hard to see how it would work in a 2-D fighter. Crouch canceling would definitely have to go. Knockdown attacks have to knock down, no matter what.
These are just a few thoughts about a 2-D Smash game, I'll add more as I think about it in greater detail. But what do you think? What would you like to see in 2-D Smash?
