>>209896
>no one would've liked Power Stone,
Which hasn't seen a new game since 2000.
>Virtual-On
Which took them 15 years to create a new entry, that was exclusive to Japan, and was tied to an anime license.
>Smash
Smash hasn't been good since
Melee with the only saving grace for
Brawl being the SSE campaign. Outside of that, people only play it because of the characters, not the gameplay.
>or any of the Naruto or Dragon Ball games
Which are popular because
they're Naruto and Dragon Ball.
>Speaking of Smash, It was never meant to be a serious competitive game
A lot of "competitive" games were
NEVER meant to be seriously competitive. They devs just designed a fun game, and people ran with it. However, an overwhelming amount of multiplayer games, today,
ARE designed to be competitive. Which is where the issue occurs. A fight game isn't treated as a "serious" fighting game unless it's copying
SF2 and takes out everything fun that the game can do.
>Brawl was specifically made to piss off tourneyfags
No, it was made because some random NoA employee kicked Sakurai's ass in
Melee, and he resigned to the think that
Melee was "too difficult" for your average child to play.
>>209897
>You both seem to understand that fighting game retards are stupid, and the people who try to mash Smash Bros into being a fighting game are stupid.
Smash already was a fighting game since the beginning. The problem is that people then seek to justify it by turning off everything that makes
Smash Bros. what it is. Think of it like how
DoA wanted to be taken seriously, so the big marketing around
DoA6 was how they were toning down the lewd aspects (But, not really), and the game flopped and no one is playing it.
>>209898
>Actual fighting games are being casualized into party games
They arguably always were party games.
Killer Instinct,
Street Fighter, and
Mortal Kombat served the same purpose back in the 90's as
CoD does today.
>>209900
>Is the removal of single player casualization or not?
It is.