“I Got Next”: What’s keeping fighting games from being as popular as other sports?
These essays, and video essays, are made possible by contributors from Patreon by viewers like you. Thank you.
Fighting games are growing. Tournaments that were once the purview of grassroots organizers have become part of a circuit with multimillion dollar prizes. And events like the Evolution Championship Series (aka EVO) have become focal points, not only attracting new audiences through streaming, but also appearing on major television channels like ESPN and Disney XD. There’s also no shortage of dramatic player stories, which sites like Waypoint were keen to point out in their guide to EVO.
Despite all this, fighting games remain difficult to comprehend, and relatively niche in terms of an actual playerbase. Larger gaming sites are beginning to see dedicated teams be created to cover eSports and fighting games, but mainstream understanding of the genre, both by journalists and everyday players, remains low. Why is that?
A lot of people are quick to point the execution barrier as the primary culprit in keeping out a wider audience. That definitely plays a large part in it. Fighting games are notorious for having complicated inputs and moves that require precise timing to pull off. And while that’s a subject that’s worth exploring, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Plenty of other games require complex movements, and it’s easy to forget that even something as basic as using two analog sticks presents a huge barrier to a lot of people.
There’s also been plenty of games that require complex, situational controls that have flourished despite this. Take a look at the command list for NBA2K games:
Since NBA2k4, the series of basketball sims has used the right analog stick to perform increasingly complex motions that vary by situation, positioning, whether modifier buttons are held down, or with recent entries, how much force is applied to the analog stick. Some of these motions aren’t unlike the ones required in Street Fighter, and many of them will even be changed between entries in the series. So why is it that these games continue to be played and enjoyed by millions with each new release? Well, the same thing that’s kept basketball itself a part of our daily lives — the cultural institution.
Simply put, sports like basketball have become a part of our culture. They help form our social spaces, create a sense of identity, and can be enjoyed in a variety of different ways, both as active and passive participants. And crucially, they’re something that gets passed on and taught to the next generation.
This is why sports games never explain to you the rules of the sport itself. They assume that if you’re there you already understand something about how it should be played. And they’re probably right, thanks to all the opportunities most of us get to at least be exposed to each sport, if not take part in it. Plenty of sports also have rulesets that are as complicated as Street Fighter, if not moreso, especially if you’re following rules used in professional leagues. Execution is arguably even tougher — it’s probably easier to practice quarter circles than to run drills to get the dexterity to dribble quickly or consistently throw a football well. The difference is that our culture gives us way more resources for improving and understanding sports.
Sports also have an advantage in that they are simultaneously rigid and flexible. High level play takes place in leagues like the NBA, where a particular set of rules has been agreed upon that try to get at what is most “fair”. These rules do change, and often in very political ways, but for the most part change is slow and rules established. At the same time, less formal ways to play exist everywhere. If you want to play basketball you can join a group at a community center, or play in pickup games. You can play full-court, half-court, 3 on 3, streetball, 21 or H-O-R-S-E. And you can adjust each of these to fit the composition of your group or environment.
Fighting games rarely have this level of consistency or flexibility. Games need to change in order to stay dynamic and balanced, with multiple versions of fighters being the standard for any game that’s remotely competitive. Alongside downloadable patches, this means that the details of the competition can change from week to week. After enough time a series will also see an entirely new entry, which will likely carry over aspects of the previous game, but will change the entire structure of the competition.
On top of that, videogames are complex programs whose control lies in the hands of developers. This is (usually) fine for high level competition, but also means that fighters rarely give people the tools to create their own variations. Variations often come as a result of hacking, which requires technical expertise and can often break the base game. And while many sports can be played with a ball and some goalposts, fighters require a lot of expensive technology, even before you get to buying the software itself.
The precision nature of these fighters also means they’re best played locally, where internet connections can’t disrupt play, and a more social experience can happen. Arcades generally act as hubs for this kind of competition, but these are becoming less common, and some games, such as Street Fighter V, don’t even receive arcade releases. But these arcades still prove to be a pivotal force in building communities, even today. If you look at who the best players are you’ll often find they come from areas where this scene has flourished, like California and Japan, which have a stronger arcade culture. There are even players who’ve gone as far as moving to Japan in order to find proper competition for their favorite games.
Arcades provided the closest fighting games have to a larger cultural recognition, and it’s no surprise that the fighters that have the most mindshare, such as Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat, occurred during the heyday of arcades. It’s also no coincidence that the revivals of these franchises closely mirrored these arcade entries, with online lobbies in Mortal Kombat 9 even attempting to replicate the “winner goes on” format alongside an emphasis on spectating.
Arcades were also places where “house rules” could act as part of a social experience and allow local variations that weren’t hardwired into the systems of the game. The early days of fighters often saw rules that limited the use of throws or fireballs, which proved to be an overwhelming tactic before everyone knew the methods for dealing with them. In some places it might even be considered polite for the stronger player to allow the other to win the second round in a 2 out of 3 match. With the rise of online play and the focus on competition, these practices have largely died out. It’s much easier to play dirty when there aren’t any social repercussions. There’s also been a rise in the “playing to win” mentality. Tactics previously considered “cheap” have largely been accepted as part of the game, and those who fail to deal with them simply haven’t done their homework and refuse to play the game properly. Anyone who complains about this will be called a scrub and have a copy of David Sirlin’s book thrown at them.
These changes have in some ways pushed competitive fighters to a new level, but at the same time distanced fighters from the idea that they’re something you can play casually. Either you commit to playing competitive or you get out. But it doesn’t have to be all or nothing. While many major studios have focused on the competitive scene, at times to the detriment to the larger audience, studios like Netherrealm have found success in playing both to the casual and competitive scene. Both Injustice and their reboot of Mortal Kombat are heavy on story and singleplayer challenges, with plenty of alternatives to serious competition. At the same time they’re built with continuous updates in mind, and provide everything from detailed training modes to the frame data of every move.
So where does this leave us? What is that fighting games need in order to grow and gain larger recognition?
Education is one approach, and it’s something that the fighting game community is slowly taking on themselves. For every major fighter there exist a myriad of tutorials in both video and article form, with major game sites like Polygon even dedicating space to break games down to their fundamental elements. There are also channels that focus on larger questions around the culture of fighting games, and different ways to approach them.
There’s also a slow push to make fighters themselves more accessible, and plenty of questions about what that means and what the consequences of that could be. It’s something that’s hotly debated, and often becomes volatile territory that exasperates the ideological differences between the established culture of fighters and those looking for a way in.
It should be emphasized that there is no singular solution that will immediately turn the genre into a cultural institution. The genre is full of established traditions and problems, and every change will be subject to pushback. More than anything it will require a conceited effort as a community to grow the space, and the recognition that fighting games are more than a competition — they’re a social space. After all, there’s no competition for Player One without a Player Two.
FURTHER READING:
*The Art of Nothing: A Look at Negative Space in Videogames
*Elastic Energy: What Makes a Parry so Satisfying?
Liked this story? Buy the author a coffee at ko-fi.com.
Amr is the Editor-in-Chief of deorbital.media (@deorbital), and clickbliss.net (@clickbliss).
