Akalabeth said:
Tea-bagging's pretty irrelevant too. It's only as relevant as the guy on the other end cares about it. Maybe what he's saying is that violence for the sake of violence is no longer relevant because there have been many games which are equally violent but with a greater amount of meat behind that. Gears of War is over the top violence but there's a whole story behind it, there's more to it than just two guys fighting.
I think his main point is that, MK was relevant back in the day because it was so violent. But since that's no longer unique, having the same game today is kinda weak.
Personally, I would never call teabagging relevant. I was simply saying that Fatalities aren't just about violence for violence's sake. It's about humiliating your opponent. And Yahtzee and a lot of people in this thread have acted like
all this new Mortal Kombat brings to the table is the violence. It's absolutely not "the same game" as it was. It's a really deep fighting game with lots of interesting mechanics and plenty of room for casual and tournament play. There is a story behind Mortal Kombat, so it's not "just two guys fighting." The story in MK is as deep as Gears of Wars' story is; they're both just excuses for gameplay.
Yahtzee demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the game. It seemed like he played the demo a couple times, read the Wikipedia summary on the story, asked a friend about whether or not it's actually a good fighter, then wrote the review.
He's said in the past that he doesn't like fighting games. Neither do I for that matter. I don't know why they're still making Mortal Kombat anyway, they said Mortal Kombat Armageddon or whatever was going to be the last game. Now since then there have been two more! What a joke. They tried a cross-over with DC to revitalize it, and they tried to reboot the original to revitalize it, they're obviously trying to breath new life into a dying series and everything they're doing is copying Capcom's foot steps.
So yes, saying they're struggling to be relevant in today's market is very much an accurate statement.
Have you played it? It sounds like no. Because if you had, you'd know that they're definitely not following in Capcom's footsteps. [EDIT: Not saying any of that in an elitist, derogatory way; sorry about the weird snobby tone.] Capcom needs to take a hard look at this new Mortal Kombat because it really does break new ground for fighting games. The story, while not on the level of BioShock or Grand Theft Auto, is told in such a natural way that it's a wonder we've given fighting games a free pass for so long. There's just no better way to tell a fighting game's story than the format used here. Then there's just a ton of other content. I loved Street Fighter IV, and the core fighting mechanics are arguably deeper and more polished than Mortal Kombat's, but that game is a joke content and innovation-wise by comparison. And as for Armageddon being the last one, they only said that Armageddon was going to be the last one of that style before a major reboot was coming. Which was true.
I feel like the only people who could possibly be saying that Mortal Kombat is "struggling to be relevant in today's market" are the people who took a sideways glance at it, said "yep, looks like Mortal Kombat," and then never played it.