Oh Sentinel!  I Remember the good old days, when you had so much health.  I could call you to assist with wanton abandon.  I could count on you to be there for me, even after having three characters DHC thier way through your life bar.  I could let the first 2 members of my team die, only to have you come out last and save the day with level 3 X-Factor.  Those were the good old days, and I remember them fondly.

It certainly has been an interesting event for fighting game players.  Unlike our FPS/Strategy gaming counterparts, we have found comfort in knowing that a fighting game when released was final, and that what you saw was what you got.  Now, what we see is what we get, maybe.

In one camp we have the player base arguing that fighting game players used to know how to adapt, and that patching games prematurely doesn’t give the game enough time to develop.  MVC2 is a great example, where the game managed to last for 10 years competitively, with the tier list and strategies constantly developing.  When the game was first released, Cable seemed unstoppable, near the end of its life, Cable was still formidable, but as people figured him out, no where near as dangerous.  If MVC2 had been patched every time a new “Cable” emerged, would it have survived for the time that it did?

 

On the other side of the coin, we have the argument that MVC2 and it’s ilk were made in a time when the technology was not widely available for most fighters to be regularly patched.  And that if we can do it, why wouldn’t we?  There is a much larger focus on a game being commercially viable now.  And for a game to last in the competitive fighting scene, it seems that it has to be forgiving enough for the casual player to pick it up and have a go.  The ability to patch and ensure that “abusable” tactics are weeded out quickly, definitely appeals to your average joe on XBOX live.

 

So what’s your take on it?  I personally don’t mind the idea of patching.  I think that as a gaming community we need to move with the times, and embrace what every other genre has now accepted as the norm.  And I honestly believe that in ten years time, while playing Marvel vs. Capcom 6, when I download the next Sentinel Nerf patch, that while there will still be crys and moans, that we will all accept it as the norm.

 

Jump on the forum or comment below about what you think about patching in fighting games.

Comments  

 
0 # jsculls 2011-05-19 12:39
Personally, I think the ability to patch is a good thing as long as it is used sparingly and well. The good news is that Sentinel is still a viable character choice but must be protected like most other assists and not called randomly.

The best thing MVC3 has going for it over MVC2 is that you can actually make a viable team from just about any group of characters. MVC2 had about 6 characters that were viable at the top level. If it has to be patched to maintain that then it's cool, was it too quick? That doesn't matter anymore.
 
 
0 # Sdj 2011-05-24 20:55
AgQuoting jsculls:
Personally, I think the ability to patch is a good thing as long as it is used sparingly and well. The good news is that Sentinel is still a viable character choice but must be protected like most other assists and not called randomly.

The best thing MVC3 has going for it over MVC2 is that you can actually make a viable team from just about any group of characters. MVC2 had about 6 characters that were viable at the top level. If it has to be patched to maintain that then it's cool, was it too quick? That doesn't matter anymore.


Total agreement with Jsculls on this one. Patching in FG's is already in existence since the beginning only it's disguised as the 'new' edition of the series. certain FG's on release will change the systems, animations, layout, camera, nerf's etc i could go on.
 
 
0 # Sdj 2011-05-24 20:56
But here is why the 'current' system of gaming is practical in this aspect. DLC, Patching, expansion. it's so much more cost and time effective than the previous whereas arcade would Beta.test and release first vers. then patch it for worldwide once or twice.

hence feedback was only really consider at those few months of beta before a world wide.release date was set.

with dlc, patching and Online us consumers can now have a wider broad of exposure to current vers. and (main point is..) we can also give direct feedback/start bitching as a community to the creators e.g. actually have our say for in a more common ground
 
 
0 # Optimus Dave 2011-05-24 22:06
I dont like patching, but I see it as a way to move with the times.....even though I think it takes away something...

I cant quite name it just yet, but it just doesnt feel right to me
 
 
0 # Sdj 2011-05-24 22:28
Hype....

i feel it too :,(