Nonsense! Balance?!! There has never been balance! (Or has there...in fighting games?)
Balance in video games. Some say it's a misnomer. Others say it exist. Some say as it exists, very few games get it right. Some say as it exists, most get it right. I say, it most definitely exists. But when it comes to games that don't quite follow, say, a definite narrative, or a narrative at all, balance may be harder to pin down. NBA Jam brings a crap ton of frustration when the computer just gets incredibly harder to deal with in later quarters...oh, and you miss your shots more. Mario Kart games just love to throw in that lead-killing item like a blue shell to mess you up; however, it's the extra items that take you down after one of those comes up. Kick me when I'm down, right? When it comes to fighting games....this has been one complex issue.
Ok, let's start off by stating that fighting games are not for everyone. But for those it's for, like most art forms, it's subjective as to which is good and which isn't good. Or, which games are better than other games. I know, I wrote a bunch of lists on top fighting games and whatnot, but I actually agreed with Screwattack's list because, honestly, it made the most sense to me. You're comparing the games within a series to each other and are picking out the game that most would probably still play to this day. So, is it any real coincidence that, even to this day, as good as SF IV and V are, people still clamor to 3rd Strike? Or that no matter how optimal SSB for the Wii U/3DS is, people still love some of that Melee...more than reasonably so? Or how about MK II? Why do we still return to it even with MK 9 or X out there for our gaming pleasure? I can go on and on, but this isn't about what games I feel are the best. These are about what games I feel are the most balanced. Sometimes, the best games aren't the most balanced. And sometimes, the most balanced aren't the best games. Well, on this list, there may be some truth to all of that.
So, looking at the top gaming series in my view, here are the top 10 most balanced games in the best video game series ever. For this list, I'm going to tell you what I feel are the most balanced games to play and why playing them will leave you not as salty as you might be when you play a game that just reeks of unfairness. They may or may not be the best in their series, but they are playable, and possibly even with growing fanbases. But enough of the chitter-chatter! Let's get into it!
It took some fine tuning as it always does, but in the end, I feel this is the game that gets it nice and balanced. All the characters you can ask for are here. In fact, all of them that have existed from the beginning have existed. This was the last of the games until the most recent, Guilty Gear Xrd, was released. So, I guess it's fitting that they get it nice and balanced by the end. Sadly, no Leopaldon...I think. However, with the proper amount of characters, tweaks to gameplay, and appeal, this game remains the most balanced in the series.
Samurai Shodown: Samurai Shodown 2
Samurai Shodown may very well be one of SNK's best fighting games series in its illustrious history. The series takes battles between samurai, ronin, and the like and make them one very dazzling encounter to say the least. Now, with 6 2-D fighting games, 3 3-D fighting games, and even an RPG under their belt, which game brings the balance to the series proper? My guess goes to the very second game in the series, Samurai Shodown 2. Little known fact: when going in chronological order of events (which are actually based on real occurrences), Samurai Shodown 2 is the final game of the 2-D fighters. Fitting way to end, eh?
So why Samurai Shodown 2? Samurai Shodown 2 vastly expanded on the first game. First, they added more characters, which is expected. Then, each character received an extra move or two, which was a definite help to their fighting styles. When it came to the nuances of the game, you had characters that could duck and crawl as well as wall-jumpers. However, the real standouts were the mechanics in combat that allow you to be more defense based.. You can circle around your opponent, grab them by the weapon and throw them, you can "parry" attacks (the ability to block an attack at the instant it hits), roll or hop forward or backward, and the big one: use a super move when your POW meter is full. In part 1, the meter just made you very strong, as it grew to maximum levels with every hit you suffered. Now, you have the option to pull out a super move out of desperation that, once connected, makes your opponent's weapon break. This leaves them literally defenseless until their weapon returns. When compared to the other games, Samurai Shodown 2 gets it just right, where part 1 was the first and very minimal and the sequels, I feel, added way too much, and not quite getting it on the mark.
Soul Weapon series: Soul Calibur
I still, to this day, find this to be one of my favorite 3-D fighting game series. I was already heavily into Samurai Shodown when I first saw Soul Edge. I wondered if they could ever make a 3-D weapon game, and my questions were answered. So, that said, there was Edge, Calibur, Calibur II, Calibur III, Calibur IV, and Calibur V, with Calibur VI coming or already out. Since I've done as much looking and searching as I can for a balanced game, I feel that Soul Calibur, like Samurai Shodown, gets it just right.
Soul Edge was a great starting point as many characters had different weapons and styles to use. However, it didn't take long to see how lopsided the game was when it came to who to use in combat. Mitsurugi was your standard fare character to be sure, so he's a given. But, we all remember Siegfried's very cheesy 3-hit combo that just chopped away health. This also goes for how difficult it was to use characters like Li Long, or how unfair it could be when you fought an experienced Hwang user. Soul Calibur got it all right, not just by tweaking characters definitively, but allowing other useful nuances. We have the 8-way run mechanic, making the game very high on mobility and very popular. We have Soul charging, allowing your character to charge up their strength to do damage. We also have parries to absorb and deflect attacks with pinpoint accuracy. Throw in more characters to choose from and you got one stellar game that most of us go back to every now and again.
Soul Calibur II was a solid game. It was a great title, improving on various things the first part has wrought. However, when it comes to game balance, that's where it falters. Three major versions of the game were made for three different systems: PS2, XBox, and GameCube. Each had their own specific character made for that system: Heihachi, Spawn and Link, respectfully. In the general scheme of quality, the PS2 had the best controls with the best controller but the worst specific character. XBox had the best graphics but not only the worst controller but an O.K. specific character. Gamecube had the worst controls but the best specific character. The arcade version had no specific character. This does definitely throw a wrench into game balance. I'll admit that I did not play the remaining Soul Calibur games after this one, but the reviews for them were pretty telling. They were solid titles, but not the same staying power as the first, nor not nearly as balanced, either. That said, your best bet for a solid, balanced Soul game has to go to Soul Calibur.
Tekken: Tekken 3
My favorite Tekken game of all time will always be Tekken 4, flaws and all. I had hoped that it was the most balanced after making the decision to scrap every character, nuance, etc. from the first 3 games that made the series convoluted, if not over-packed with characters and stuff. Turns out as they tried to trim and change, Tekken 4 was not well-received. It was actually more broken than the previous 3 games. Uh oh. So, where does the balance lie? It lies with Namco's first attempt at trim and change, Tekken 3.
For starters, the new characters were definitely new editions of the characters previously. Xiaoyu was the student of Wang Jinrey, with a Rising Phoenix stance. Hwoarang was Baek's best pupil who had the ability to lead his Tae Kwon Do stance with the left or the right side. King was a fan of the original king, who was injured and put out of commission; this version had grabs that chained. Forest Law was the son of Marshall Law with a distinct Jeet Kun Do style. Jin Kazama was the son of Jun Kazama and Kazuya Mishima, so his style was a blend of mother and father. There was no Heihachi at all, and Ogre was the final boss. Also, we had some completely new characters like Bryan who was another created fighter and Eddy Gordo who brought Capoiera into the mix. This crew of fighters made the transition from old to new very seamless and very balanced. It was one fair approach to the series' evolution. So, it should be no surprise that fans of this game were not fans of the jarring change of part 4, which included a whole new fighting style for Jin. Tekken 5 wasn't balanced, otherwise the game, Dark Resurrection, wouldn't have been made to balance it out. Also, to my chagrin, a bunch of characters who were gone before were brought back, off-setting the game's balance to going "back the way it was", which wasn't balanced to me. Tekken 6 improved on part 5, but like part 5, it had to be re-balanced. Tekken 7 has the jury still out, so, until then, part 3 is the way to be for a solid Tekken experience. No, the Tag games are not balanced...and it's better they aren't. Not supposed to be, anyway.
The King of Fighters: The King of Fighters 1998 (any edition)
The King of Fighters series was one of the first of its kind: a 2-D fighter that utilized team combat between the various stars of SNK. It was by elimination, no tags were made, the bosses were challenging, the desperation moves were plentiful and the appeal was through the roof. However, if there was one thing SNK games do a little too well, it's create an environment of challenge in each match as everyone wises up to your abilities, even on the smallest level. This makes for some pretty cheap moments, unfair priority, and lost quarters trying to finish the game. However, in this case, it's tripled as you have 3 fighters to work with as opposed to just one. Once folks got wind of how it all went down, it was clear that KOF did not have any balanced games to its name, until the 1998 edition.
The King of Fighters 1998 was billed as a dream match scenario as it gathered a vast majority of the fighters from the first 4 games (1994-1997) and placed them all in one game. The team edit mechanic from 1995 was saved and the super meter style of 1997 was also used. This combined two very well appreciated nuances to the game. Throw in virtually every character from each of the first four games and you have one solid entry. Very solid, actually. Rugal Bernstein, the final boss, was created to be the cheapest, most unbalanced boss in history. He was brutal in 1994 and 1995. 1996 and 1997 had different but equally difficult bosses. When it came to actual playable characters, it was no surprise who had better priorities over others. So, team edit saw a lot of play from constant favorites if not for their appeal, then for their ability to be better. 1998 finally fixed this problem all around, especially including more characters to choose from, making your battles more viable on your side. There have been a number of ports and revamps of this game, improving on various things like game mechanics, characters, and balance. Even with these tweaks, this game stands as the most balanced of all in the series. The later games...they don't hold a candle (well, maybe 2002, but that's a stretch, IMO). If you want a KOF experience that begs for a little more decency, this would be that go-to game.
Virtua Fighter: Virtua Fighter 5: Final Showdown
Virtua Fighter has done an impressive job being the originator of 3-D fighting games. After its debut in the 1990s, the sequels were not as commonplace like some of the game's rivals and peers. It would be a while before part 4 would become a reality, being released late in the PS2's life cycle. Part 5 would come around the debut of the PS3 and was seen as the most balanced Virtua Fighter game in the series. Because of such, VF5 was seen as the best in the series. However, like VF4, another update to balance it further with additional features had to be released. Hence, we have VF5: Final Showdown.
This game not only balances Virtua Fighter 5, but it adds another character and returns a classic character. Taka-Arashi returns to the game for the first time since his disappearance in part 4. We also have the debut of Jean Kujo. He has ash-blond hair, he wears a red karate gi, he studies karate....oh my, could this be Sega's attempt at giving us a version of Ken? Probably, but probably not. Although if I had to guess, I'd say we have a standard rival for Akira, the game's mascot and most popular character. Either way, the game has received great reviews, much play time, and an amount of polish that can make up for those years of dormancy. Currently, there is no VF6 on the horizon, but with this game, we don't have to worry too much about that. Still, we gamers can be an impatient lot....
Mortal Kombat: Mortal Kombat XL
This was a bit of a tough decision to make as far as game balance goes. The reason is because, in all honesty, Mortal Kombat was never a balanced fighting game series. I'm pretty sure the developers, the gamers and such know this. However, they still soldier on playing and enjoying it. However, in my experience, even though it was a challenge to find a balanced game, there may very well be one in the form of the latest game. Why? To see this, let's look back the others and where they may have gone wrong. You see, by proxy, this may be the most balanced due to the fact that the others might not have been so.
The first Mortal Kombat game is a classic title, definitely on any top video games list. That said, like Street Fighter, people discovered combos by accident. And like Street Fighter, the combos drained a ton of damage. Also, it was quite clear that Scorpion and Sub-Zero were not just the most popular characters, but they were practically the best, right down to their jump kicks. So, we were given part 2, and we got more characters and a tougher way to do combos. That didn't stop them from being made and just as damaging. There were more characters to go around, so there were more options to choose from. Regardless, those combos made it clear that if you did one, you could not lose. This continued into part 3, only this game added a Run button that allowed for combos to be done on the ground with specific button presses. This combo type would continue well into the series; a specific set of buttons to press for the combo to work. You could say they were "Dial-A-Combos", but honestly, that could be a bit pejorative. If anything, the combo method left gamers forced to do that specific combo instead of their own creation. The 3-D MK games up until Armageddon were on the right track, but for my money, those same combos made the game very "stiff" in a way. There wasn't a lot of flow from one move to another. So, why XL and say, not MK9? It seems to me that XL has the game balance idea better cared for although MK9 was also on the right track. Throw in the return of Brutalities and how they are easier to do (any specific special move to beat an opponent with little to no life left would get a killing animation of said move), and this game came out better than part 9, if not by a little.
Super Smash Bros: Super Smash Bros for the Wii U and 3DS
Yup, I said it. I'll stay with it. And I'm not going to change the opinion. The latest iteration of Smash Bros., patches, updates and all, is the most balanced game in the series. Now, the most balanced games don't have to be the most favorite, I know. But, that doesn't change my opinion. I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for Melee. Never going to change. But, I'm not going to throw Smash 4 under the bus and call it garbage because certain things from Melee (specific things that made the game unbalanced in the first place) are missing. Now this did coerce folks to create upgrades for Melee, along with completely different versions of Smash Bros. Brawl (Project M: Brawl played exactly like Melee, included missing characters and Melee versions of certain characters). However, that may very well show why those games are nearly as balanced.
Smash Bros. for the N64 is a great game, with great items, and sets the tone for what this "competitive action game" is going to do for the gaming world. Once people took the game as a unique take on the fighting game genre, people took to playing the game competitively. Ground rules like no items and certain stages were banned. This caused a bit of a divide in ways. First, you had fighting game enthusiasts that never acknowledged Smash as a fighting game (and will never). Then, you had those who exclusively played with these ground rules, proclaiming that anyone who didn't weren't playing the game right or were no good at the game. Let's not forget that the game's strength and initial appeal was the fact that you could fight with Nintendo mascots and with items from various Nintendo games. If you choose to play without them, that's your prerogative, but don't get all judgmental and say that the only pure way to play is with no items. Doing that actually showcases those unbalances that have to be fixed if they can. This is something Nintendo took full advantage of with this new game.
Upon seeing how certain characters had very unfair advantages over others, they chose to tweak them after the fact to make the game open to all gamers on all levels. This may never sit well with those who like Melee or Project M. But, guess what? You have the option to play what you like. And you have the option to not. But, if you're just going to critique a game you either aren't ever going to play or even like over what you're playing, what does that serve you to spread your opinion to those who, like you, will just play the game that you hate? Smash 4, even with its vast amount of characters, is balanced enough for each of these characters to get wins in competitive and casual play with enough optimization, practice, strategy and skill. That's something the other games can't say outright, at all. The first heavily was dominated by about, say 3 to 4 characters. The second had more but still a dominant set of characters remained that were practically unbeatable (you haven't seen anything until you see the Ice Climbers "wobble" their way to victory). The third was so despised that people went out of their way to patch it themselves with their own version to make it more like Melee (look up Project M). And the thing is, neither of those games could have been tweaked or changed without hacking to make it viable on a balanced level. Nintendo, upon seeing this, they made it a point to balance the latest game, and in my opinion, the current version works very well in tournaments as well as casual play. Everyone gets chosen. Most stages are chosen. Everyone can beat everyone. It's not the "(Insert character here) Show". It plays like Smash was intended: for any type of player in a group setting. Not much to add to that, except that I hope this ported and updated for the Nintendo Switch. Otherwise, I'm keeping my Wii U.
Capcom Vs. games: Marvel Super Heroes Vs. Street Fighter
The various games where Capcom or its entities are taking on other companies and their entities have been made very popular since 1996. From the very first game, X-Men Vs. Street Fighter, up until their latest game(s), Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 and Marvel Vs. Capcom: Infinite, these series have really brought the fighting game community front and center, ready to get their game on. However, as I'm sure the developers and even the gamers know, the series isn't very balanced. A variety of the games come at you with a lot of content, characters, supers, etc. However, with that frenetic, non-stop, all-out pace, there could be some game balance, right? Honestly, there is. The game that brings it is the second game in the Capcom Vs. series, Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter.
X-men vs. SF was a great start, no question. However, if you get to the guts of the game, various characters bring some game-breaking infinite combos. In fact, everyone who is capable of such is practically who you'll see used in the game most, and only. Out of 17 people, it covers half the roster. Marvel Vs. Capcom, game #3 in the series, is also unbalanced. Firstly, you have two to three secret characters that come up commonly (Gold War Machine, for example, because he has body armor). Also, the assist characters bring about more issues. Psylocke, Colossus, and anyone who has a solid rush assist will more than likely be picked. Yes, it's good strategy, but the other helpers are useful, too. Marvel Vs Capcom 2 is one of the greatest fighting games in history. However, out of 56 characters, a scant 20 or so are pickable for any kind of victory as per tournaments. Two interesting facts include that these characters: Cable, Storm, Magneto, Psylocke and Sentinel, are the best in the game. Any team with any combination of 1-3 of them will guarantee victory. The other fact is that Cammy is the only Street Fighter character you will see in use as she has proven to be the only useful character from that game that has any effect on winning matches. The Capcom vs. SNK series shows its lack of balance in the second game, where breaking guard is important. Characters with good strength and range are good at that. Then, you have super moves. C, A, N, and K grooves are the ones that pop up the most. If not C, then definitely P for the parry purposes. Out of 48 characters, the three person teams skew towards characters from SF with good range, decent to great power, and the ability to break guards easily. The newer vs. games that came out after this may or may not have been balanced with patches, but from what I have heard, Tekkaman was a threat and a half in Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, and Dormammu was an unstoppable force in MVC3. Meanwhile, Sentinel in MVC3 had dropped qualitatively into obscurity.
So that brings us to Marvel Vs. Street Fighter. Among all the games, this game has a stable roster of characters that are legitimate threats in combat. No one character can be a poor addition to a team, nor does anyone seem out of place on a team. Infinite combos are more of a challenge to attempt and secure. The same ones from before no longer work. Also, there is an assist attack here, but it's your partner stepping in to help. This was before MVC used random CPU characters for assist attacks; MVC2 returned to MvSF's method with the assists. The hidden characters aren't so overpowering that winning is a challenge and a half. Also, the characters are all welcome inclusions as the game has its focus on the Marvel Super Heroes arcade game roster as well as more characters from Street Fighter Alpha. I will always hold this game in esteem as the most balanced of the Capcom Vs. games. Not only that, but it has one awesome soundtrack.
Street Fighter: Street Fighter III: Third Strike
Even with the learning curve being pretty high, even with the list of characters being relatively moderate compared to today's standards, and even as it is currently closing in on its 20th anniversary, the most balanced Street Fighter game in the series goes to Street Fighter III: Third Strike. I've had some pretty heated discussions in the past over this. I've even thrown some very vehement shade over other games like Street Fighter IV over this. Currently, I still hold to this, acknowledging the other games in the series are also solid titles. I just feel that this game gets the nod as the most balanced title of the games.
First, the character list of 20 (19 characters and 1 boss to unlock) all have the optimal capability to win in matches casually and in tournament. This has been exhibited many times over the years in its existence. Players have optimized the abilities of each character in amazing ways, right down to the characters that have tremendous challenges winning matches. Also, each character can do tremendously well against the CPU. Everyone has a litany of strengths and weaknesses. In combat, they come out in various ways and the matches always are a sight behold. Street Fighter II has had so many issues with game balance, that they had a litany of various sequels that tweaked the game extensively to make sure all was well. Street Fighters IV and V already have shown me that the game has its power characters that are almost unbeatable. This not only called for a patch to balance the game, but two more iterations of IV to give fans more. Sounds like Capcom alright. To this day, I can watch a 3rd Strike match and say, "I wonder who's going to win?". I can't tell at all, and in all honestly, that's a sign of a balanced game with a balanced roster. There were later versions made to tweak any issues, but it's almost so seamless, you'd swear the game was left alone almost all the time. That's pretty amazing.
And that's it. Now, I'm sure I dropped a lot of tough statements that beg a lot of discussion if not inflammatory rebuttal. Please understand that based on what I've seen and played, this is the best opinion I can conjure up per each game. In time, maybe more experience may change my mind. Until then, for my money, these are the most balanced games in each game series. They aren't necessarily the best in the series, but for gameplay, they make for a very even experience. Because, everyone wants a fighting chance of some sort...even in video games.
Ok, let's start off by stating that fighting games are not for everyone. But for those it's for, like most art forms, it's subjective as to which is good and which isn't good. Or, which games are better than other games. I know, I wrote a bunch of lists on top fighting games and whatnot, but I actually agreed with Screwattack's list because, honestly, it made the most sense to me. You're comparing the games within a series to each other and are picking out the game that most would probably still play to this day. So, is it any real coincidence that, even to this day, as good as SF IV and V are, people still clamor to 3rd Strike? Or that no matter how optimal SSB for the Wii U/3DS is, people still love some of that Melee...more than reasonably so? Or how about MK II? Why do we still return to it even with MK 9 or X out there for our gaming pleasure? I can go on and on, but this isn't about what games I feel are the best. These are about what games I feel are the most balanced. Sometimes, the best games aren't the most balanced. And sometimes, the most balanced aren't the best games. Well, on this list, there may be some truth to all of that.
So, looking at the top gaming series in my view, here are the top 10 most balanced games in the best video game series ever. For this list, I'm going to tell you what I feel are the most balanced games to play and why playing them will leave you not as salty as you might be when you play a game that just reeks of unfairness. They may or may not be the best in their series, but they are playable, and possibly even with growing fanbases. But enough of the chitter-chatter! Let's get into it!
Honorable Mention: Dead or Alive - Dead or Alive 2
Now, to be fair, I haven't nearly played enough of this series to see which are or aren't the balanced games. That said, I can see that Dead or Alive 2 still holds a proper place in the hearts of fighting game fans. So, all that can be said is that this is the most balanced one. No, not gonna get into the jiggle physics or what-not. Go somewhere else for that.
Honorable Mention: Killer Instinct - Killer Instinct
This gets the same reason as DOA. I have only played the very first Killer Instinct. And it turns out, it may have a much better spot in the hearts of gamers than the second game or even the X-Box One series. Whatever the case, this does seem like the most balanced of the games, even with the game-breaking combos from certain characters. I have been wrong before. However, this is just an honorable mention, so no harm, no foul.
Guilty Gear: Guilty Gear XX - Accent Core
Guilty Gear has been on amazing breakout series since its humble beginnings in the late 1990s. Once Guilty Gear X became one of gaming's best kept secrets revealed, the fighting game world was turned on its head. Now the series is well known for its great graphics, obscure characters, amazing soundtrack, dynamic combos, and instant kills, to name a few. However, with all these good things come some serious balance issues. It didn't take long before certain characters were exposed for their
unbalanced nature. Things like Dust Loops made this a reality. A "Dust" attack is an attack that launches opponents into the air to be combo attacked relentlessly. Once it was discovered that you can loop these attacks, certain characters became ungodly with their abilities.
unbalanced nature. Things like Dust Loops made this a reality. A "Dust" attack is an attack that launches opponents into the air to be combo attacked relentlessly. Once it was discovered that you can loop these attacks, certain characters became ungodly with their abilities.
It took some fine tuning as it always does, but in the end, I feel this is the game that gets it nice and balanced. All the characters you can ask for are here. In fact, all of them that have existed from the beginning have existed. This was the last of the games until the most recent, Guilty Gear Xrd, was released. So, I guess it's fitting that they get it nice and balanced by the end. Sadly, no Leopaldon...I think. However, with the proper amount of characters, tweaks to gameplay, and appeal, this game remains the most balanced in the series.
Samurai Shodown: Samurai Shodown 2
Samurai Shodown may very well be one of SNK's best fighting games series in its illustrious history. The series takes battles between samurai, ronin, and the like and make them one very dazzling encounter to say the least. Now, with 6 2-D fighting games, 3 3-D fighting games, and even an RPG under their belt, which game brings the balance to the series proper? My guess goes to the very second game in the series, Samurai Shodown 2. Little known fact: when going in chronological order of events (which are actually based on real occurrences), Samurai Shodown 2 is the final game of the 2-D fighters. Fitting way to end, eh?
So why Samurai Shodown 2? Samurai Shodown 2 vastly expanded on the first game. First, they added more characters, which is expected. Then, each character received an extra move or two, which was a definite help to their fighting styles. When it came to the nuances of the game, you had characters that could duck and crawl as well as wall-jumpers. However, the real standouts were the mechanics in combat that allow you to be more defense based.. You can circle around your opponent, grab them by the weapon and throw them, you can "parry" attacks (the ability to block an attack at the instant it hits), roll or hop forward or backward, and the big one: use a super move when your POW meter is full. In part 1, the meter just made you very strong, as it grew to maximum levels with every hit you suffered. Now, you have the option to pull out a super move out of desperation that, once connected, makes your opponent's weapon break. This leaves them literally defenseless until their weapon returns. When compared to the other games, Samurai Shodown 2 gets it just right, where part 1 was the first and very minimal and the sequels, I feel, added way too much, and not quite getting it on the mark.
Soul Weapon series: Soul Calibur
I still, to this day, find this to be one of my favorite 3-D fighting game series. I was already heavily into Samurai Shodown when I first saw Soul Edge. I wondered if they could ever make a 3-D weapon game, and my questions were answered. So, that said, there was Edge, Calibur, Calibur II, Calibur III, Calibur IV, and Calibur V, with Calibur VI coming or already out. Since I've done as much looking and searching as I can for a balanced game, I feel that Soul Calibur, like Samurai Shodown, gets it just right.
Soul Edge was a great starting point as many characters had different weapons and styles to use. However, it didn't take long to see how lopsided the game was when it came to who to use in combat. Mitsurugi was your standard fare character to be sure, so he's a given. But, we all remember Siegfried's very cheesy 3-hit combo that just chopped away health. This also goes for how difficult it was to use characters like Li Long, or how unfair it could be when you fought an experienced Hwang user. Soul Calibur got it all right, not just by tweaking characters definitively, but allowing other useful nuances. We have the 8-way run mechanic, making the game very high on mobility and very popular. We have Soul charging, allowing your character to charge up their strength to do damage. We also have parries to absorb and deflect attacks with pinpoint accuracy. Throw in more characters to choose from and you got one stellar game that most of us go back to every now and again.
Soul Calibur II was a solid game. It was a great title, improving on various things the first part has wrought. However, when it comes to game balance, that's where it falters. Three major versions of the game were made for three different systems: PS2, XBox, and GameCube. Each had their own specific character made for that system: Heihachi, Spawn and Link, respectfully. In the general scheme of quality, the PS2 had the best controls with the best controller but the worst specific character. XBox had the best graphics but not only the worst controller but an O.K. specific character. Gamecube had the worst controls but the best specific character. The arcade version had no specific character. This does definitely throw a wrench into game balance. I'll admit that I did not play the remaining Soul Calibur games after this one, but the reviews for them were pretty telling. They were solid titles, but not the same staying power as the first, nor not nearly as balanced, either. That said, your best bet for a solid, balanced Soul game has to go to Soul Calibur.
Tekken: Tekken 3
My favorite Tekken game of all time will always be Tekken 4, flaws and all. I had hoped that it was the most balanced after making the decision to scrap every character, nuance, etc. from the first 3 games that made the series convoluted, if not over-packed with characters and stuff. Turns out as they tried to trim and change, Tekken 4 was not well-received. It was actually more broken than the previous 3 games. Uh oh. So, where does the balance lie? It lies with Namco's first attempt at trim and change, Tekken 3.
For starters, the new characters were definitely new editions of the characters previously. Xiaoyu was the student of Wang Jinrey, with a Rising Phoenix stance. Hwoarang was Baek's best pupil who had the ability to lead his Tae Kwon Do stance with the left or the right side. King was a fan of the original king, who was injured and put out of commission; this version had grabs that chained. Forest Law was the son of Marshall Law with a distinct Jeet Kun Do style. Jin Kazama was the son of Jun Kazama and Kazuya Mishima, so his style was a blend of mother and father. There was no Heihachi at all, and Ogre was the final boss. Also, we had some completely new characters like Bryan who was another created fighter and Eddy Gordo who brought Capoiera into the mix. This crew of fighters made the transition from old to new very seamless and very balanced. It was one fair approach to the series' evolution. So, it should be no surprise that fans of this game were not fans of the jarring change of part 4, which included a whole new fighting style for Jin. Tekken 5 wasn't balanced, otherwise the game, Dark Resurrection, wouldn't have been made to balance it out. Also, to my chagrin, a bunch of characters who were gone before were brought back, off-setting the game's balance to going "back the way it was", which wasn't balanced to me. Tekken 6 improved on part 5, but like part 5, it had to be re-balanced. Tekken 7 has the jury still out, so, until then, part 3 is the way to be for a solid Tekken experience. No, the Tag games are not balanced...and it's better they aren't. Not supposed to be, anyway.
The King of Fighters: The King of Fighters 1998 (any edition)
The King of Fighters series was one of the first of its kind: a 2-D fighter that utilized team combat between the various stars of SNK. It was by elimination, no tags were made, the bosses were challenging, the desperation moves were plentiful and the appeal was through the roof. However, if there was one thing SNK games do a little too well, it's create an environment of challenge in each match as everyone wises up to your abilities, even on the smallest level. This makes for some pretty cheap moments, unfair priority, and lost quarters trying to finish the game. However, in this case, it's tripled as you have 3 fighters to work with as opposed to just one. Once folks got wind of how it all went down, it was clear that KOF did not have any balanced games to its name, until the 1998 edition.
The King of Fighters 1998 was billed as a dream match scenario as it gathered a vast majority of the fighters from the first 4 games (1994-1997) and placed them all in one game. The team edit mechanic from 1995 was saved and the super meter style of 1997 was also used. This combined two very well appreciated nuances to the game. Throw in virtually every character from each of the first four games and you have one solid entry. Very solid, actually. Rugal Bernstein, the final boss, was created to be the cheapest, most unbalanced boss in history. He was brutal in 1994 and 1995. 1996 and 1997 had different but equally difficult bosses. When it came to actual playable characters, it was no surprise who had better priorities over others. So, team edit saw a lot of play from constant favorites if not for their appeal, then for their ability to be better. 1998 finally fixed this problem all around, especially including more characters to choose from, making your battles more viable on your side. There have been a number of ports and revamps of this game, improving on various things like game mechanics, characters, and balance. Even with these tweaks, this game stands as the most balanced of all in the series. The later games...they don't hold a candle (well, maybe 2002, but that's a stretch, IMO). If you want a KOF experience that begs for a little more decency, this would be that go-to game.
Virtua Fighter: Virtua Fighter 5: Final Showdown
Virtua Fighter has done an impressive job being the originator of 3-D fighting games. After its debut in the 1990s, the sequels were not as commonplace like some of the game's rivals and peers. It would be a while before part 4 would become a reality, being released late in the PS2's life cycle. Part 5 would come around the debut of the PS3 and was seen as the most balanced Virtua Fighter game in the series. Because of such, VF5 was seen as the best in the series. However, like VF4, another update to balance it further with additional features had to be released. Hence, we have VF5: Final Showdown.
This game not only balances Virtua Fighter 5, but it adds another character and returns a classic character. Taka-Arashi returns to the game for the first time since his disappearance in part 4. We also have the debut of Jean Kujo. He has ash-blond hair, he wears a red karate gi, he studies karate....oh my, could this be Sega's attempt at giving us a version of Ken? Probably, but probably not. Although if I had to guess, I'd say we have a standard rival for Akira, the game's mascot and most popular character. Either way, the game has received great reviews, much play time, and an amount of polish that can make up for those years of dormancy. Currently, there is no VF6 on the horizon, but with this game, we don't have to worry too much about that. Still, we gamers can be an impatient lot....
Mortal Kombat: Mortal Kombat XL
This was a bit of a tough decision to make as far as game balance goes. The reason is because, in all honesty, Mortal Kombat was never a balanced fighting game series. I'm pretty sure the developers, the gamers and such know this. However, they still soldier on playing and enjoying it. However, in my experience, even though it was a challenge to find a balanced game, there may very well be one in the form of the latest game. Why? To see this, let's look back the others and where they may have gone wrong. You see, by proxy, this may be the most balanced due to the fact that the others might not have been so.
The first Mortal Kombat game is a classic title, definitely on any top video games list. That said, like Street Fighter, people discovered combos by accident. And like Street Fighter, the combos drained a ton of damage. Also, it was quite clear that Scorpion and Sub-Zero were not just the most popular characters, but they were practically the best, right down to their jump kicks. So, we were given part 2, and we got more characters and a tougher way to do combos. That didn't stop them from being made and just as damaging. There were more characters to go around, so there were more options to choose from. Regardless, those combos made it clear that if you did one, you could not lose. This continued into part 3, only this game added a Run button that allowed for combos to be done on the ground with specific button presses. This combo type would continue well into the series; a specific set of buttons to press for the combo to work. You could say they were "Dial-A-Combos", but honestly, that could be a bit pejorative. If anything, the combo method left gamers forced to do that specific combo instead of their own creation. The 3-D MK games up until Armageddon were on the right track, but for my money, those same combos made the game very "stiff" in a way. There wasn't a lot of flow from one move to another. So, why XL and say, not MK9? It seems to me that XL has the game balance idea better cared for although MK9 was also on the right track. Throw in the return of Brutalities and how they are easier to do (any specific special move to beat an opponent with little to no life left would get a killing animation of said move), and this game came out better than part 9, if not by a little.
Super Smash Bros: Super Smash Bros for the Wii U and 3DS
Yup, I said it. I'll stay with it. And I'm not going to change the opinion. The latest iteration of Smash Bros., patches, updates and all, is the most balanced game in the series. Now, the most balanced games don't have to be the most favorite, I know. But, that doesn't change my opinion. I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for Melee. Never going to change. But, I'm not going to throw Smash 4 under the bus and call it garbage because certain things from Melee (specific things that made the game unbalanced in the first place) are missing. Now this did coerce folks to create upgrades for Melee, along with completely different versions of Smash Bros. Brawl (Project M: Brawl played exactly like Melee, included missing characters and Melee versions of certain characters). However, that may very well show why those games are nearly as balanced.
Smash Bros. for the N64 is a great game, with great items, and sets the tone for what this "competitive action game" is going to do for the gaming world. Once people took the game as a unique take on the fighting game genre, people took to playing the game competitively. Ground rules like no items and certain stages were banned. This caused a bit of a divide in ways. First, you had fighting game enthusiasts that never acknowledged Smash as a fighting game (and will never). Then, you had those who exclusively played with these ground rules, proclaiming that anyone who didn't weren't playing the game right or were no good at the game. Let's not forget that the game's strength and initial appeal was the fact that you could fight with Nintendo mascots and with items from various Nintendo games. If you choose to play without them, that's your prerogative, but don't get all judgmental and say that the only pure way to play is with no items. Doing that actually showcases those unbalances that have to be fixed if they can. This is something Nintendo took full advantage of with this new game.
Upon seeing how certain characters had very unfair advantages over others, they chose to tweak them after the fact to make the game open to all gamers on all levels. This may never sit well with those who like Melee or Project M. But, guess what? You have the option to play what you like. And you have the option to not. But, if you're just going to critique a game you either aren't ever going to play or even like over what you're playing, what does that serve you to spread your opinion to those who, like you, will just play the game that you hate? Smash 4, even with its vast amount of characters, is balanced enough for each of these characters to get wins in competitive and casual play with enough optimization, practice, strategy and skill. That's something the other games can't say outright, at all. The first heavily was dominated by about, say 3 to 4 characters. The second had more but still a dominant set of characters remained that were practically unbeatable (you haven't seen anything until you see the Ice Climbers "wobble" their way to victory). The third was so despised that people went out of their way to patch it themselves with their own version to make it more like Melee (look up Project M). And the thing is, neither of those games could have been tweaked or changed without hacking to make it viable on a balanced level. Nintendo, upon seeing this, they made it a point to balance the latest game, and in my opinion, the current version works very well in tournaments as well as casual play. Everyone gets chosen. Most stages are chosen. Everyone can beat everyone. It's not the "(Insert character here) Show". It plays like Smash was intended: for any type of player in a group setting. Not much to add to that, except that I hope this ported and updated for the Nintendo Switch. Otherwise, I'm keeping my Wii U.
Capcom Vs. games: Marvel Super Heroes Vs. Street Fighter
The various games where Capcom or its entities are taking on other companies and their entities have been made very popular since 1996. From the very first game, X-Men Vs. Street Fighter, up until their latest game(s), Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 and Marvel Vs. Capcom: Infinite, these series have really brought the fighting game community front and center, ready to get their game on. However, as I'm sure the developers and even the gamers know, the series isn't very balanced. A variety of the games come at you with a lot of content, characters, supers, etc. However, with that frenetic, non-stop, all-out pace, there could be some game balance, right? Honestly, there is. The game that brings it is the second game in the Capcom Vs. series, Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter.
X-men vs. SF was a great start, no question. However, if you get to the guts of the game, various characters bring some game-breaking infinite combos. In fact, everyone who is capable of such is practically who you'll see used in the game most, and only. Out of 17 people, it covers half the roster. Marvel Vs. Capcom, game #3 in the series, is also unbalanced. Firstly, you have two to three secret characters that come up commonly (Gold War Machine, for example, because he has body armor). Also, the assist characters bring about more issues. Psylocke, Colossus, and anyone who has a solid rush assist will more than likely be picked. Yes, it's good strategy, but the other helpers are useful, too. Marvel Vs Capcom 2 is one of the greatest fighting games in history. However, out of 56 characters, a scant 20 or so are pickable for any kind of victory as per tournaments. Two interesting facts include that these characters: Cable, Storm, Magneto, Psylocke and Sentinel, are the best in the game. Any team with any combination of 1-3 of them will guarantee victory. The other fact is that Cammy is the only Street Fighter character you will see in use as she has proven to be the only useful character from that game that has any effect on winning matches. The Capcom vs. SNK series shows its lack of balance in the second game, where breaking guard is important. Characters with good strength and range are good at that. Then, you have super moves. C, A, N, and K grooves are the ones that pop up the most. If not C, then definitely P for the parry purposes. Out of 48 characters, the three person teams skew towards characters from SF with good range, decent to great power, and the ability to break guards easily. The newer vs. games that came out after this may or may not have been balanced with patches, but from what I have heard, Tekkaman was a threat and a half in Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, and Dormammu was an unstoppable force in MVC3. Meanwhile, Sentinel in MVC3 had dropped qualitatively into obscurity.
So that brings us to Marvel Vs. Street Fighter. Among all the games, this game has a stable roster of characters that are legitimate threats in combat. No one character can be a poor addition to a team, nor does anyone seem out of place on a team. Infinite combos are more of a challenge to attempt and secure. The same ones from before no longer work. Also, there is an assist attack here, but it's your partner stepping in to help. This was before MVC used random CPU characters for assist attacks; MVC2 returned to MvSF's method with the assists. The hidden characters aren't so overpowering that winning is a challenge and a half. Also, the characters are all welcome inclusions as the game has its focus on the Marvel Super Heroes arcade game roster as well as more characters from Street Fighter Alpha. I will always hold this game in esteem as the most balanced of the Capcom Vs. games. Not only that, but it has one awesome soundtrack.
Street Fighter: Street Fighter III: Third Strike
Even with the learning curve being pretty high, even with the list of characters being relatively moderate compared to today's standards, and even as it is currently closing in on its 20th anniversary, the most balanced Street Fighter game in the series goes to Street Fighter III: Third Strike. I've had some pretty heated discussions in the past over this. I've even thrown some very vehement shade over other games like Street Fighter IV over this. Currently, I still hold to this, acknowledging the other games in the series are also solid titles. I just feel that this game gets the nod as the most balanced title of the games.
First, the character list of 20 (19 characters and 1 boss to unlock) all have the optimal capability to win in matches casually and in tournament. This has been exhibited many times over the years in its existence. Players have optimized the abilities of each character in amazing ways, right down to the characters that have tremendous challenges winning matches. Also, each character can do tremendously well against the CPU. Everyone has a litany of strengths and weaknesses. In combat, they come out in various ways and the matches always are a sight behold. Street Fighter II has had so many issues with game balance, that they had a litany of various sequels that tweaked the game extensively to make sure all was well. Street Fighters IV and V already have shown me that the game has its power characters that are almost unbeatable. This not only called for a patch to balance the game, but two more iterations of IV to give fans more. Sounds like Capcom alright. To this day, I can watch a 3rd Strike match and say, "I wonder who's going to win?". I can't tell at all, and in all honestly, that's a sign of a balanced game with a balanced roster. There were later versions made to tweak any issues, but it's almost so seamless, you'd swear the game was left alone almost all the time. That's pretty amazing.
And that's it. Now, I'm sure I dropped a lot of tough statements that beg a lot of discussion if not inflammatory rebuttal. Please understand that based on what I've seen and played, this is the best opinion I can conjure up per each game. In time, maybe more experience may change my mind. Until then, for my money, these are the most balanced games in each game series. They aren't necessarily the best in the series, but for gameplay, they make for a very even experience. Because, everyone wants a fighting chance of some sort...even in video games.
Comments
Post a Comment