Originally posted by Watchdog
I\'m just saying that DOA2 is not a button masher. A skilled player beats a lesser skilled player almost everytime.
I think you are confused as to what a button smasher is. A skilled player will beat a button smasher in
every fighting game. That is common sense. A button smasher is someone who smashes his buttons and does tons of cool moves without knowing how to do them. So yes, DOA3 would be considered a button smasher. MvsC2 would be considered a button smasher. Eddy in Tekken is considered a button smasher character. Steve in T4 is considered a buttons smasher character even though buttons smashers who use Steve never win. etc.
The roster of moves isn\'t as deep as VF\'s, but they are as deep as Tekken\'s. The first DOA has pretty weak, but the series has come a long way, but all people remember is the bouncing boobs and shallow game play of the first. If the game\'s designers moved away from the centerfold fighter look, it would get more respect or if this game was called Tekken 5 most people here would love it. I said most.
The DOA fighting style is flawed. If you like it, then that\'s fine. But a lot of us here don\'t because of how shallow the game is.
Yes forward tap is an evolution, but it\'s not like countering wasn\'t in previous games--it just makes it easier and by making it easier. Now almost anyone can counter, while before it was an art form that I took the time to master. I think it cheapened the series.
The forward tap move isn\'t the only addition to SF3. Their were also tons of new characters (something that most fighting game sequals don\'t have, but if SF3 didn\'t have them, it would be considered a rehash IMO). The animation was a lot more fluid, and a lot of moves had different properties to them (different reaches, different comboing attributes, etc).
But like Ryu said, there is no reason to be debating this. If you like DOA2, than you\'ll like DOA3. If you didn\'t, than you won\'t. It\'s as simple as that.
