Support NeoGAF

[triphero]

Beat em ups are a tiny tiny genre.

But Mother Russia Bleeds is an awesome awesome game. They can be great

 

[Soapbox Killer]

I like peanut butter AND jelly.

 

[poodaddy]

Nah.

Shits sick. I actively wish most things were just beat em ups. They're just too goddamn rad man.

 

[Majormaxxx]

Beat em ups are a tiny tiny genre.

But Mother Russia Bleeds is an awesome awesome game. They can be great

It was a fun game but it was like 10% too hard. I beat it but was slightly frustrated by the difficulty.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

I prefer the hack'n'slash genre.
Beat'n'ups are simple, arcade games to me, just like high-score games, I don't play any of them without a great dose of nostalgia.

 

[Dr_Salt]

too bad they don't really exist outside of yakuza, the warriors and bully

And Godhand which is arguably the best beat em up ever made.

 

[GymWolf]

Your dick is overrated.

 

[Jigsaah]

What's a 2D beat em up that's overrated? I always felt they have gotten lukewarm reception in recent years. TMNT games, Streets of Rage, Battletoads are 3 I can think of.

I mean you got your classics...Golden Axe, Final Fight, Altered Beast (kinda). One stand out I can think of is Castle Crashers and honestly that game deserved all the praise it got.

When you say hack and slashes are you referring to like...Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, Nioh?

I'm having a hard time understanding why they are being compared to begin with, and therefore the purpose of this thread.

 

[Js562]

Streets of Rage 4 is dope. Combo system is on point alone or with a group of people. I'll stick with beat em ups if that's what your talking about. They can always add more and that's what they did.

 

[NT80]

I like them as much as the next guy but can't we all admit hack and slashes are a far more diverse, complex and interesting genre (even if the majoritys of them are singleplayer)
Most modern 2d beatemups never really do much to advance the genre as much as they just cash in on nostalgia of the arcade, (look at streets of rage 4 to prove my point) while hack and slash games have been carrying that torch for decades now with amazing animation, intricate combo systems and a flurry of moves to execute (as well as just being more cinematically appealing- like look at MGR which looks genuinely insane)
Honestly, it feels like a very outdated relic of the past that was resurrected just for the sake of cashing in on nostalgia
what do you think though

Haven't got round to playing it but I thought SOR4 did kind of advance the genre in introducing much more in depth combat. It's more what an evolution of the beat em up you might expect in the mid 90s rather than something over 20 years later since they really died out then. The new turtles game seems to be doing something like that too. It's not a major change but it's enough of an advancement to me for now. The multi player aspect and offline co op is a big part of the appeal too. I think isometric action rpgs like Diablo are closer to the beat em up than games like DMC/modern Ninja Gaiden etc.

 

[mortal]

Yea I agree that they are, but some of them are pretty cool.

 

[Bakkus]

I agree. Most games in the genre are too repetitive, little to no depth to the combat, and slow limited movement. Which is why I love Castle Crashers.

 

[NT80]

It's a silly comparison. Hack-n-slash games tend to be focused on intricate combos and significantly more complicated mechanics. Beat-em-ups are readily understandable and streamline that complexity. The genre is more focused on crowd control, managing the screen, and smart use of very scarce resources (eg. weapons, health pick-ups, your own health bar if it's depleted to perform certain attacks.) It's a totally different type of appeal, but one that arguably has a similar amount of depth. Granted, there are beat-em-ups that do approach hack-n-slash games in terms of complexity, like Knights of Valour, Gaia Crusaders, and Guardians (aka Denjin Makai II).

Modern beat-em-ups are okay, but generally kind of pale imitations that are dumbed down to make sense for a console audience. Castle Crashers was the beginning of the end for the genre.

How are they dumbed down exactly? Looks more like the opposite in the case of Streets of Rage 4, Dragon's Crown and Okinawa Rush.

 

[RoadHazard]

Yeah, they're boring as shit.

 

[Alexios]

What are you comparing, different things have been called hack and slash, including beat 'em ups with weapons in character sprites. I guess you wanna compare modern character action games a la DMC and MGR to 80s/90s arcadey beat 'em ups (or retro modern games taking after them)? Weird.

Character action game roots are in beat 'em ups like God Hand, games like Batman, Sifu, Guacamelee & even Yakuza are also beat 'em up based, but some folks still like going back to the arcadey stuff which take skill and patience to master (vs infinite continuing to the end once), for good reason.

 

[radewagon]

 

[Fbh]

They are ok as a fun, quick and easy to pick up local coop game.

But as a single player experience I've never seen the appeal. The combat isn't better than any decent metroidvania, except in a metroidvania you also get much better and more complex level design, platforming, puzzles, exploration, etc.

 

[64bitmodels]

`

Yesterday: TMNT announced to be day 1 on a certain subscription service.
Today: 2d beat-em-ups are overrated

i own an xbox

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

They’re dumb fun, especially with friends. It’s fun to walk around and beat the shit out of a bunch of thugs who had it coming.

If anything I think the Musou games are the evolution of this genre.

 

[anothertech]

Beat em ups shit on FPS

Fight me

 

[cireza]

Overrated

SEGA delivering the goods, as usual

 

[YCoCg]

Remember when Tekken games used to come with Force mode as a bonus?

 

[64bitmodels]

Remember when Tekken games used to come with Force mode as a bonus?

that's epic!! i think that's cooler though because fighting games like tekken are based off of crazy combos and making sure your opponent can't attack, so it's actually deeper than a lot of other beatemups

 

[Kev Kev]

also i think i have the EXACT TYPE of game for you

aw i loved castle crashers

 

[March Climber]

I like them as much as the next guy but can't we all admit hack and slashes are a far more diverse, complex and interesting genre (even if the majoritys of them are singleplayer)
Most modern 2d beatemups never really do much to advance the genre as much as they just cash in on nostalgia of the arcade, (look at streets of rage 4 to prove my point) while hack and slash games have been carrying that torch for decades now with amazing animation, intricate combo systems and a flurry of moves to execute (as well as just being more cinematically appealing- like look at MGR which looks genuinely insane)
Honestly, it feels like a very outdated relic of the past that was resurrected just for the sake of cashing in on nostalgia
what do you think though

It's mostly about the setting you play them in. Try them out locally at a friend's place or go to one of those newer arcades or game zones that put home releases like SoR 4 on giant arcade-style cabinets.

 

[Kiddo Cabbusses]

How the heck did we go from the early 2000's, with beat-em-ups being the butt monkey of the gaming press, Godhand and Advance Guardian Heroes getting unfairly dunked on, and Final Fight basically dying as an IP by trying to distance itself from it's roots and failing, to this very NeoGAF thread?

 

[Neff]

I hugely prefer character action games, it's only natural. They took everything which made belt scrollers fun, borrowed a bunch of fighting game mechanics, dropped it into a lite 3D adventure world and hit 'blend'. They're some of the best games around.

But belt scrollers were a huge chunk of my youth and they'll always have their place (literally in my case, the 1-Up TMNT cab is in my bedroom).

 

[Pejo]

Theses genres are so niche that there is absolutely room for both. It is saying something that 2D beat'em ups never really surpassed Guardian Heroes though. Not sure if they've been resting on their laurels and familiarity, or if Guardian Heroes is truly one of the best games of all time.

 

[Kiddo Cabbusses]

Theses genres are so niche that there is absolutely room for both. It is saying something that 2D beat'em ups never really surpassed Guardian Heroes though. Not sure if they've been resting on their laurels and familiarity, or if Guardian Heroes is truly one of the best games of all time.

Guardian Heroes is nice and all but:

1) I'll take the more free-roaming movement of TMNT, Final Fight and SoR over the 3-plane system any day. Even Advance Guardian Heroes felt better to play in spite of much else being more simplified because I could simply walk up and down.
"But then I couldn't duck!" you say, as if that ever actually helped you do anything in Guardian Heroes, a game where the vast majority of the projectiles are either homing or consume the entire screen.

2) Golden SIlver is the only mechanically interesting boss, and that's because of the gimmick he took with him from Gunstar Heroes. Every other boss basically amounts to "find your best combo and wail on them with it before they launch their attack". They all basically amount to characters who hit harder, move faster and shoot more fireballs and bigger laser beams, but with no heavy deviation in strengths/weaknesses, AI/tactics, or gameplay divergence. We don't even get the usually-expected types like the "non-stop mook spawning" boss, the "punishes blind aggression and encourages you to wait for an opening" boss, or even notable Treasure-staple boss types like the "boss with 7 phases back-to-back", or the "boss that disables attacks so your only hope is to master dodging and defense".

I will give the caveat that this is probably so that the multiplayer mode can even be a viable thing, but man, it's pretty disappointing. Even Mad Stalker, the game Guardian Heroes is inspired by, has more variation in it's boss design, in spite of how each boss also counts as a fighting game character for 2P mode.

3) The RPG mechanics are too baked into the game's core; there's no real way to do a low-level run, and the main "difficulty" of the game comes from buffing stats to such absurd degrees that grinding and raising your own stats is necessary.

4) The branching story paths are great, but it's annoying having that mid-game intersect that doesn't change no matter what. The replay value takes a hit having to watch the same cutscene 8 or so times, ESPECIALLY when it's the longest cutscene in the entire game.

5) WHERE ARE MY GRAPPLES, SUPLEXES AND THROWS? It's not even like they'd be all that out of place, there's several characters that are built like they could do them!

 

[teezzy]

Boring, repetitive boomer drivel

 

[alabtrosMyster]

If you played the Capcom ones after Final Fight they're all more or less samey, other companies (Konami, Sega... not sure which others) sometimes offer games with more depth.

 

[SF Kosmo]

I kind of agree about arcade beat em ups, like heyday beat em ups were mostly formulaic button mashers designed to steal your quarters. They were fun to play with a friend, but they don't really hold up great.

But I think some of their console counterparts hold up better. Games like Streets of Rage, River City Ransom, and Guardian Heroes were actually designed to be beaten, not to just drain your pockets 25 cents at a time.

 

[lachesis]

As a main game, yes. I love playing 1 level or 2 every so often, but most games I lose interest after 3-4 stages rather quickly.
Just like older shoot them ups like Space Invader or Galaga. They become rather stale.

But as a part of larger package - say, Yakuza series or even side scrolling action game like Treasure's Astroboy Omega Factor on GBA for example... it becomes integral element.

 

[names are for friends]

I'm with the OP. Even as a kid playing on Mega Drive back in the 90s I knew shit like Streets of Rage was boring. There's very little to these games as far as technique goes, they're almost braindead.