Poll: Never heard of PORTAL?

[PhiMed]

I see the point you're making, but when I refer to the puzzles being static, I'm referring to the fact that they can't adapt to oppose you the way a human can. Of course, if a puzzle game could react to the player in such a way (like, say, abruptly disabling Chell's portals in mid-jump, thus causing her to fall to her death), the game would become unwinnable and thus defeat the entire purpose. That's the key; a good puzzle developer might strive for puzzles that are difficult, devious, infuriating, but ultimately solvable. A good fighting game player, on the other hand, has no interest in letting you win, and will therefore do everything to stop you, up to and including countering to your every move with something superior.

Also, I think it's kind of a leap to assume most fighting game players just mash buttons. A lot of players do play that way, sure, but for every player who mashes buttons, there's about a hundred players who actually know what they're doing.

It's also an unfair (and frankly immature) assumption to imply that people who are good at fighting games don't do more important things with their lives. I work a job and go to college, and I don't find it impossible to enjoy some Street Fighter in my downtime. I don't play at the level of those $10,000-per-tourney professionals, sure, but I do well enough. And my case is hardly special, there are countless players in identical situations. It's entirely possible to balance a hobby and more pressing responsibilities, believe it or not.

You're saying that someone, anyone working against you in real time automatically makes something a more analytical endeavor. I couldn't disagree more. You've invalidated your own argument when you used the word "superior" to describe a fighting move. If a "superior" move exists, then that's a knowledge of existing balancing issues inherent to the game, not a strategic choice. If there is a definitive hierarchy of moves, then victory is determined by rote memorization of the inputs and their position in the hierarchy, not any sort of strategy. This is how most fighting game victories occur.

If you're asserting that over 99% of the people who are playing fighting games are playing games that are determined by strategy rather than technical proficiency, I'm just going to go ahead and call shenanigans. That's just not true. With the exception of organized tournaments (something in which most players do not participate), the skill differential is almost always the determinant, not the strategy invoked.

As for your allegations of immaturity surrounding my (audacious, I know) suggestion that people who don't take the time to achieve virtuoso status on fighting games might do so because they have better things to do: "Believe it or not", there are a lot of people who have more pressing responsibilities than those of a college student.

 

[PhiMed]

Odds on whether or not the OP showed up to the midnight release wearing a partially soiled "The Cake is a Lie" t-shirt?

Odds on you being a plastic bag filled with a mixture of water and vinegar used for internal cleansing purposes?

 

[PhiMed]

As others have said outside of the gaming community Portal is pretty much unknown.

The guy you were speaking with was probably not a gamer, but rather just someone who plays video games. Sort of the difference between someone who plays golf on occasion and a golfer.

If I played golf, but only as an occasional diversion, I would not really think of calling myself a golfer. It's about investment into the activity. Once the activity hits the level of being a hobby[footnote]Thinking of activity investment as linear scale with points in a certain order[footnote]Occasional Amusement --- Hobby --- Profession[footnote]Not all possible points shown and positions on line are not to scale, line only demonstrates relative positions[/footnote][/footnote][/footnote] then the label [insert-activity-name-here]-er becomes applicable.

I agree with you to a point, but here's a story.

PING announces a new line of golf clubs. A guy pre-orders a set prior to its arrival at retail stores. He shows up at his favorite sporting goods store the day the trucks arrive well outside normal operating hours, so that he can be among the first to get his hands on it the instant it hits shelves.

What do you think the odds are that person's interest in golf is casual?

 

[Nimzar]

As others have said outside of the gaming community Portal is pretty much unknown.

The guy you were speaking with was probably not a gamer, but rather just someone who plays video games. Sort of the difference between someone who plays golf on occasion and a golfer.

If I played golf, but only as an occasional diversion, I would not really think of calling myself a golfer. It's about investment into the activity. Once the activity hits the level of being a hobby[footnote]Thinking of activity investment as linear scale with points in a certain order[footnote]Occasional Amusement --- Hobby --- Profession[footnote]Not all possible points shown and positions on line are not to scale, line only demonstrates relative positions[/footnote][/footnote][/footnote] then the label [insert-activity-name-here]-er becomes applicable.

I agree with you to a point, but here's a story.

PING announces a new line of golf clubs. A guy pre-orders a set prior to its arrival at retail stores. He shows up at his favorite sporting goods store the day the trucks arrive well outside normal operating hours, so that he can be among the first to get his hands on it the instant it hits shelves.

What do you think the odds are that person's interest in golf is casual?

I have a counter story. The local golf course had announced months ago that they were working on a new section of course. Casual McGolfPlayer and few friends show up on the first day its open because its new. Casual McGolfPlayer is still only casually interested in golf but likes new things.

 

[hem dazon 90]

So I was really excited about the release of Portal 2, and I actually went to the midnight release (something I never do anymore). I was really surprised to see an absolute mob scene.

Just as my faith in humanity and the gaming community was about to be restored, I saw a couple guys playing the new Mortal Kombat, and realized that it was being released on the same day.

While there's nothing wrong with MK, it's certainly not the "thinking person's game" Portal is, so I was a little disappointed. This was compounded when I struck up a conversation with a guy in line.

Me: "What are you here to get?"
Guy: "Mortal Kombat, same as everybody else.
Me: "Oh. I'm actually here to get Portal 2."
Guy: "What's that?"
Me: "Here." (showing him the box from a display) "The original was pretty awesome."
Guy: "Never heard of it."
Me: "It won several game of the year awards."
Guy: (regarding box) "Oh. Looks weird. And the graphics look old."

Now, it's entirely possible that he could've been messing with me, but I don't think he was. Here was a guy, involved enough in gaming to show up at a midnight release on a Monday night, who had never heard of the game Portal. Is it just me, or is this bizarre?

And, additionally, which game were you most excited about? Am I a starry-eyed idealist for thinking that Portal 2 is the more widely-anticipated game?

GRR PEOPLE DNT LIKE WHAT I LIEK. THEY STOOPID!

Welcome to the escapist

 

[GeorgW]

If it were any other game, it would have been fine. But Portal? It's gotten extremely big. And deserving. Everyone should play it. EVERYONE!

 

[Halo Fanboy]

snip.

You're missing the context. This particular puzzle game is easy and can easily be solved in an afternoon. In contrast I doubt their is anyone who has "solved" a fighting game in an afternoon. In a fighting game give a genius and expert player all the frame data, hitbox data and knowledge of every little mechanical quirk and I doubt they'll be able to discover any strategies that will still be used after ten years of expert competition.

 

[mikev7.0]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

 

[mikev7.0]

The strategies of figuring out which combo to use when, the advantages of a particular character, keeping an eye on your ultra meter (or whatever they call it now), how to CHANGE your combo if something unexpected happens, what strategy your opponent is using and what weaknesses it has...there is quite a lot going on in the mind of a professional in the middle of a very fast-paced game. When you look at the network of decisions, I don't think you can automatically say it's a smaller network than that of Portal's puzzles.

It's more about being able to read movements of the other player than any of that really.

Not really. High level play in a balanced fighting game is quite similar to fencing. When proper execution has become second nature (i.e. a player can instantly do any combo or special move with almost no chance of failure due to poor input), success is awarded to the person who controls the flow of the match. This is more than simply reacting to the other player; it is, fundamentally, about forcing them down a particular path that makes them vulnerable to some strategy you have devised.

There are, in effect, three basic tiers of skill in fighting games. The first is mechanical mastery. Most players fall into this group and the player who has the most robust grasp of the command input process generally wins. The second tier occurs when players become adept at command input but have not yet delved into the larger meta game. In this case, the player that is best able to read an action on the part of the enemy and respond appropriately is generally going to win. From this third tier a player naturally grows into playing the game in the second or third intention where actions are used specifically to draw a suitable response from the other player.

Fighting games are similar to chess in this regard and indeed one can see the same basic process in chess mastery. Such a thing requires a different sort of thinking than a puzzle game of course but that does not mean it is devoid or hostile to the application of brain power.

That was VERY well put. Yes, I agree. Fighting games are like Chess if the graphics didn't suck, you had room to fight, and there was some actual impetus to action.

 

[mikev7.0]

As for the argument that fighting games require more thought than puzzle games: There's a lot of thought, strategy, and forethought that goes into a professional game of tennis, but if someone tried to assert that it was more of a "thinking person's game" than chess, they would correctly be labelled a contrarian idiot.

This analogy would make more sense if Portal were a game that pitted you against real, thinking opponents, which it doesn't. Again, there's no arguing that you have to be clever to do well in Portal, but at the end of the day, there's only one solution to each puzzle; once you've found it, all you need to do is implement it.

In fighting games, much like in chess and tennis, finding a strategy that you think might work isn't nearly as difficult as finding a way to implement it against an opponent that is constantly shifting and re-evaluating to meet your challenge.

Incidentally, there's no need to resort to name calling. This has been a fairly civil discussion so far, don't take it down to the level of a common forum shouting match.

In portal I could have sworn that there were more than one solution to many of the puzzles. One of the things I love about it was that I wasn't required to use just one way to win.

 

[Moc]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

OK I firmly apologize here, as I said, I have no real working knowledge about the fighting game genre at all. But the few times I played some of these, and it was neither Soul Calibur or Street Fighter it was random button smashing for all of us exept the guy who owned the game. But I am aware of, that many of these games require a huge portion of skill and knowledge, I admire anyone who is able to memorize a huge junk of button combos, I could only memorize useless crap, which does never help me online or in real life

 

[mikev7.0]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

OK I firmly apologize here, as I said, I have no real working knowledge about the fighting game genre at all. But the few times I played some of these, and it was neither Soul Calibur or Street Fighter it was random button smashing for all of us exept the guy who owned the game. But I am aware of, that many of these games require a huge portion of skill and knowledge, I admire anyone who is able to memorize a huge junk of button combos, I could only memorize useless crap, which does never help me online or in real life

There's no need to appologize for just having a differnt opinion, Moc. Also I think you sell yourself short. You have the ability to memorize whatever you want to put effort into, we all do. Yes fighting games take (and develop) skill and knowledge, but more importantly they take practice. So does memorizing anything usefull online or in real life. What I love most about fighting games is that they are constantly teaching me that I can do things that I once would not have believed I could. It just takes practice and perserverence, just like life.

 

[Moc]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

OK I firmly apologize here, as I said, I have no real working knowledge about the fighting game genre at all. But the few times I played some of these, and it was neither Soul Calibur or Street Fighter it was random button smashing for all of us exept the guy who owned the game. But I am aware of, that many of these games require a huge portion of skill and knowledge, I admire anyone who is able to memorize a huge junk of button combos, I could only memorize useless crap, which does never help me online or in real life

There's no need to appologize for just having a differnt opinion, Moc. Also I think you sell yourself short. You have the ability to memorize whatever you want to put effort into, we all do. Yes fighting games take (and develop) skill and knowledge, but more importantly they take practice. So does memorizing anything usefull online or in real life. What I love most about fighting games is that they are constantly teaching me that I can do things that I once would not have believed I could. It just takes practice and perserverence, just like life.

Well, I thought about getting Mortal Kombat after my exams, which reminds me, I should practise for these tests, otherwise, I will fail, and then I do not really know what to do next. Just one final question: Which fighting game would you recommend, since you seem to have a huge amount of experience.(For the 360 if possible)

 

[mikev7.0]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

OK I firmly apologize here, as I said, I have no real working knowledge about the fighting game genre at all. But the few times I played some of these, and it was neither Soul Calibur or Street Fighter it was random button smashing for all of us exept the guy who owned the game. But I am aware of, that many of these games require a huge portion of skill and knowledge, I admire anyone who is able to memorize a huge junk of button combos, I could only memorize useless crap, which does never help me online or in real life

There's no need to appologize for just having a differnt opinion, Moc. Also I think you sell yourself short. You have the ability to memorize whatever you want to put effort into, we all do. Yes fighting games take (and develop) skill and knowledge, but more importantly they take practice. So does memorizing anything usefull online or in real life. What I love most about fighting games is that they are constantly teaching me that I can do things that I once would not have believed I could. It just takes practice and perserverence, just like life.

Well, I thought about getting Mortal Kombat after my exams, which reminds me, I should practise for these tests, otherwise, I will fail, and then I do not really know what to do next. Just one final question: Which fighting game would you recommend, since you seem to have a huge amount of experience.(For the 360 if possible)

You are right about your test, that should always take priority, I'm about to leave for class myself.

As for which fighting game, I admit I'm biased having started with Street Fighter but it really depends on your preference. Blazblue has a great story mode as well as a tutorial mode that is made specifically for players new to fighting games, that I really wish Street Fighter had, as long as you don't mind being constantly (although comically) chided by a child vampire with a posh accent. There is also an excellent Blazblue group here where there really ARE great players with lots of experience (I'm really just a hobbyist with a deep love for the genre.) that really seem to enjoy helping people new to the game (like me) out, without being annoyed by my Street Fighter fanboyism.

Then of course theres Street Fighter which is my preference because I prefer to have six different options for different punches and kicks (Jab, Strong, Fierce, Short, Foward, Roundhouse) than to have only three basic attack buttons and a special button which is the scheme used by Blazblue and Marvel VS. Capcom 3. Street Fighter does not have such a robust learning system however and the story mode pales compared to the expansive content in Blazblue. (Wow, part of me can not believe I just typed that....but it's true.) Also the DLC for Blazblue is free from what I've heard. (which is why I will once again be entering the breach known as XBOX Live) If you do pick Street Fighter until you are comfortable with the basics I would recommend you use E. Honda, Guile, or Chun-Li at first as their charge moves require the least practice to learn, allowing you to focus on the fundamentals. As for Blazblue I'm nearly as new as you would be but I would recommend Ragna or Noel. (Probably just because I like them though.)

Whatever you choose I give you the words of arguably one of the best tournament players Tomo Ohira: "Everything comes down to TDR Timing, Distance, and Response. These are the fundamentals to master."

In the end it's all for fun so if you go on XBOX Live look me up (gamertag: "lightdance") and I'll help you as much as I can, just don't be too surprised when you kick my butt, remember any balanced game should come out at about 50/50 between two players who enjoy it equally.

 

[Moc]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

OK I firmly apologize here, as I said, I have no real working knowledge about the fighting game genre at all. But the few times I played some of these, and it was neither Soul Calibur or Street Fighter it was random button smashing for all of us exept the guy who owned the game. But I am aware of, that many of these games require a huge portion of skill and knowledge, I admire anyone who is able to memorize a huge junk of button combos, I could only memorize useless crap, which does never help me online or in real life

There's no need to appologize for just having a differnt opinion, Moc. Also I think you sell yourself short. You have the ability to memorize whatever you want to put effort into, we all do. Yes fighting games take (and develop) skill and knowledge, but more importantly they take practice. So does memorizing anything usefull online or in real life. What I love most about fighting games is that they are constantly teaching me that I can do things that I once would not have believed I could. It just takes practice and perserverence, just like life.

Well, I thought about getting Mortal Kombat after my exams, which reminds me, I should practise for these tests, otherwise, I will fail, and then I do not really know what to do next. Just one final question: Which fighting game would you recommend, since you seem to have a huge amount of experience.(For the 360 if possible)

You are right about your test, that should always take priority, I'm about to leave for class myself.

As for which fighting game, I admit I'm biased having started with Street Fighter but it really depends on your preference. Blazblue has a great story mode as well as a tutorial mode that is made specifically for players new to fighting games, that I really wish Street Fighter had, as long as you don't mind being constantly (although comically) chided by a child vampire with a posh accent. There is also an excellent Blazblue group here where there really ARE great players with lots of experience (I'm really just a hobbyist with a deep love for the genre.) that really seem to enjoy helping people new to the game (like me) out, without being annoyed by my Street Fighter fanboyism.

Then of course theres Street Fighter which is my preference because I prefer to have six different options for different punches and kicks (Jab, Strong, Fierce, Short, Foward, Roundhouse) than to have only three basic attack buttons and a special button which is the scheme used by Blazblue and Marvel VS. Capcom 3. Street Fighter does not have such a robust learning system however and the story mode pales compared to the expansive content in Blazblue. (Wow, part of me can not believe I just typed that....but it's true.) Also the DLC for Blazblue is free from what I've heard. (which is why I will once again be entering the breach known as XBOX Live) If you do pick Street Fighter until you are comfortable with the basics I would recommend you use E. Honda, Guile, or Chun-Li at first as their charge moves require the least practice to learn, allowing you to focus on the fundamentals. As for Blazblue I'm nearly as new as you would be but I would recommend Ragna or Noel. (Probably just because I like them though.)

Whatever you choose I give you the words of arguably one of the best tournament players Tomo Ohira: "Everything comes down to TDR Timing, Distance, and Response. These are the fundamentals to master."

In the end it's all for fun so if you go on XBOX Live look me up (gamertag: "lightdance") and I'll help you as much as I can, just don't be too surprised when you kick my butt, remember any balanced game should come out at about 50/50 between two players who enjoy it equally.

I will make a note about this, my main problem is time at the moment, I have nearby null precent of free time to spend because of learning, and this crap will go on until two months from now. In two months when all tests are written I think I will have tons of time to spend until university starts. So in two months I will come back to you. And thank you for your elaborared advice, I always thought fighting games looked really cool and might be fun to play, but other than virtura fighter 6, I think, for the PC I never had much experience in the genre.

 

[Tibs]

I actually went to get SOCOM 4...

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

While there's nothing wrong with MK, it's certainly not the "thinking person's game" Portal is, so I was a little disappointed. This was compounded when I struck up a conversation with a guy in line.

Pretentious-Man....AWAY!! Congratulations. You are claiming your popular game is more mature than another. What does it feel like to be the new Halo / CoD fan?

Anyway, I don't care about either, but I'd be kind of surprised if after all that ARG stuff and advertising everywhere, Portal 2 falls behind MK. I mean, MK has definitely existed longer, but I didn't think there was still so big of a fanbase for it.

No, I'm saying that a puzzle game requires more analytical thought than a fighting game. That's a pretty indisputable fact. If you want to argue that particular point, I'm going to just go ahead and assume you're trolling and ignore you for the rest of the thread.

Em it kinda is an indisputable point. As puzzle games go Portal is super easy. I've had harder games of Tetris than that. The only puzzles that require any thought or logic are the extra challenges. Even the time trial ones are more twitch than skill. If you think Portal requires more thought than the people that count frames in games of Street Fighter 4 I would have to call you silly.

OT: I am kinda looking forward to Mortal Kombat more. I found Portal 1 to be a very average easy puzzle game with its few saving graces being the humour(and part of the Orange Box). It looks like they did improve on the problems I did have with Portal 1 so that is good for me anyway.

 

[McMarbles]

Which am I looking forward to? Neither. I never liked Mortal Kombat, and while I probably would've liked Portal, overzealous Valve fans and about a billion too many cake jokes have permanently soured me toward it.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I really liked the original, and maybe Portal 2 will get a shot. too, after I finished school in about three months. Mortal Kombat, I think it looks nice, plus I liked fighting games, especially in multiplayer, but I only played a few at partys since I don't own ANY console. But guys consider this: Fighting games you could win by random button smashing, and don't even prentent like its not true.

With 3-D games I would agree with you but with 2-D it's simply not true. This is why Mortal Kombat "feels right" again to it's old fanbase. It's 2-D again. As ever MK is reverse engineered Street Fighter. 3-D combined with vast move sets was making it too easy to slop moves, some of them intended to require a great deal of practice. If you randomly button mash against a practiced player in Street Fighter they will mop the floor with you 9 times out of 10 I've had people try it only to realize that this isn't Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 4. If they are a tournament level player? 10 of 10. The same goes for Blazblue. Marvel Vs. Capcom I'm iffy on since holding down two buttons can now unleash all holy heck.

As for how much thought is used in Portal 2 Vs. a Fighting game? In my opinion they are equal yet different. Both games require a great deal of thought but in two very disparate ways. (Full disclosure: I am only on Chapter 3 of Portal 2. I just finished the first one on release night! I have beaten the other fighters I've mentioned multiple times, they are my favorite genre.)

I really resent that little Soul Calibur quip. While it may not have the degree of obsession Street Fighter has with things like frame counting if someone who actually knows what they are doing(is able to do Impacts etc) it is the same story in Street Fighter. There is more to the Soul Series than button bashing. You can get away with that shit against the computer but not a real player.