Dead or Alive 5 Ultimate

Dead or Alive: Fighter Chronicles (Part 1) by IGN is out. Detailing behind a behind the scenes look at Dead or Alive 5 and what the team has been doing for the past 7 years.

 
Age_of_Truth said:
​
​
About 1 and 2, I feel these changes would be pretty drastic to DOA's gameplay, basically 'genericising' it, making it more like other fighting games. I don't really like the idea of this. At the very least, I'd like to play a 'demo' version or something with these changes implemented, to see how it would work, before I'd support it.​
​
​
3 ok a no-brainer, should be done for DOA5 and any sequels.​
​
​
I thought the same as you about 4, I feel that the low counter is too good an option, especially as low throws are generally less powerful than normal ones. I have suggested before that maybe a good idea would be to have an almost standing animation, and I think what you described makes a lot of sense. Again, I'd prefer to play a demo with the changes before lending full support, but this seems less drastic and more logical to me.

About 5 I'm also more positive. I think it would be a good idea to make the prone player more vulnerable. It always looks kind of bad when the attacking player retreats after knocking the opponent down. However there must be a reason for wakeup kicks being so strong: maybe TN wanted to emphasise defensive options at all times, so that players couldn't be 'bullied' to death after being knocked down.

6 I thought the same about blocking low, it does seem slow, though no-one would believe me! So if this is true then yeah I would support this for DOA5. Not sure why ducking would take >1 frame.

The 7 changes again seem kind of drastic, but instinctively it does make sense for holds to have less active and more recovery frames. This would reward actual reads and make random guessing more risky. I think the danger with some of these changes would be that they might spoil the 'frantic action' gameplay element of DOA, making it feel more slow and sticky, stuck in the mud. Which is why it would be great to try these things out first. I suspect the developers HAVE tried these things out and didn't like them, which might be why they decided not to implement them.

With 8 I repeat what I said for 1 and 2, that these changes are so drastic so as to make another VF rather than a new DOA. I think fundamentals are just different in DOA. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are a lot of the players who crave 'more rewarding fundamentals' in DOA actually experts in other fighting games who have taken up DOA?
Click to expand...

I have to go, so I'll finish replying to your post later, because I have quite a few thoughts, but #8, not exactly. Many people on FreeStepDodge are people like that. However, I'll tell you what I am. You've seen me around this forum for sure, as a Soul Calibur player I know you have. But, to be completely honest with you, my first fighting game was DOA3 in 01. I didn't play fighting games full time again until SC4, though played all the Calibur games except 3, and also played DOA4.

The majority of these guys though have all liked DOA in some way shape and form, just couldn't get around DOA4. Then they, in the process of going away from DOA4 are trying to go all the way back to something that seems to be talked about a lot on that forum, but never really seen much. In fact, even I haven't played it. Supposedly, once upon a time, there was a version of DOA called DOA++. Apparently it was a game with 6 counter-holds, and stuns only once in a blue moon.

To be completely honest with you, the way I look about the changes in 7, is it'd be to attempt to reign in the stun system to make just a tad bit more knowledge required to learn DOA. Probably not even as much as Calibur, but to allow things like natural hit combos, and actual combos for certain moves. Sure, not having string delay might seem drastic, but free-canceling by itself is already so good that by the time someone free-cancels in the game you can just throw out a parry and probably catch them anyway.

I'll post a bit more when I return. Ask Wah if you want to hear more about ++ and their stun system, because, from what I hear, it was pretty fun. I'm working on getting a MAME emulator to play it.

Edit:

Alright, more time now. In response to 1), the game needs more pokes. It's very hard to play a full-evasive game without any good pokes to use. Besides, in DOA most character have really long range moves that can compensate for people being able to poke and space anyway, very similar to Calibur.

In response to 2), personally, I'm an advocate for longer windows, but that's because the way the moves branch into different levels so frequently.

In response to #7, yes, but, I have big problems with this. For instance, I would only want that to be taken care of if string delay is taken care of accordingly to the list as well. Mix-Ups are WAY too good in DOA, and having a nerfed hold to deal with them is among one of the stupider things I've seen. So, that's why both String Delay nerfing and hold nerfing is on the list, because dealing with string delay/free cancels is even more difficult with bad holds.

Sure, a lot of the changes I offer to make are drastic, but there's a lot of drastic things that are hidden in the actual data and frames behind DOA that, if seen, would make no sense. Sure, the game is meant to be almost all action, but that doesn't excuse the fact that, in this game, playing defense on a competitive level is at times so non-logical that it's almost hard to play. DOA3 is one of my favorite fighting games to this day, but even I saw that one pretty clearly. And it was really sad.
 
Mr.Wah said:
​

See, maybe it's just me, but I love the fact the low hold tech crouches. Why? Well that's because the chances of getting a normal hit force crouch are slim. I'd rather Stun an opponent see them low hold, and do a mid attack. Did I mention that (1) they increased the recovery animations of the holds making it easier to visually punish them with attacks, and (2) that being in a crouch state changes properties of attacks. In the case of DOA5, an attack that would cause a stomach crumple may cause a sit-down stun (which is unholdable and guarantees attacks otherwise). For example, I use Bayman and do 3P to start the stun. The opponent mashes low hold, I see the low hold, and I respond with 3K which causes sit-down. Since the opponent is near full threshold now I can opt to launch with 236P which they can't hold and since sit-down is considered low crouch status then I get ultra-high launch height, or I can opt for a Critical burst attack as well. If the opponent is not stagger escaping then the critical burst attack will connect otherwise it would be guarded.

Just playing some devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

That's true, but the fix is also so horribly lazy. And doesn't make sense if you think about it? Why should one hold be completely different, especially the one for the attack level that's different? -.-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top