Neo Geo Beat em ups...

andsuchisdeath

General Morden's Aide
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Posts
7,576
...Even though SOR is a beat-em-up, there is a different design philosophy when developing arcade games vs home games.

Exactly.

I mean, I consider SOR2 kind of an anomaly of the genre. It's a charming audio/visual experience, with a distinct flavor that really touched the psyche/resonated with of a whole lot of people back in the day. But....it's like, the "easy listening"/pop music equivalent of beat 'em ups so to speak. No matter how revered and how much charm the game may have, from a design philosophy it's just too different and shouldn't be compared to arcade titles in the genre.

And whenever arcade titles in the genre are discussed, there's always a sizable group of people that uphold the "anomaly" of SOR2 as a gold standard that every other (arcade) game in the genre miserably failed to come close too. But, it shouldn't be viewed at as a "gold" standard, it should be viewed as a "home" standard.
 
Last edited:

titchgamer

Guerilla Warrior
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
1,731
Yeh you can stun lock stuff in SOR2 but if you try that shit in the arcade version you are gunna get your ass kicked, They throw everything including the kitchen sink at you and without the 1ups in its a tough completion.

That as a aside, SOR2 is not just a gold standard from a audio/visual POV, It is IMO a gold standard for the technicality of the control scheme.

The MD had 3 buttons, 1 of them was dedicated to special, 1 jump and 1 attack, Yet with a combination of just 2 of those buttons and directions you could achieve a wide ranging move set with differing combos, blitz attacks, reverse attacks, and jump attacks.
Hell it even had 2 specials off a single button.
SOR3 built on it further but despite that lost the rest of the stuff the first 2 games had in droves.

So if I come back to Neo Geo which had 4 buttons the possibilities could of been even more huge, Hell with the fighting move aspect they had it could of been bigger with only 3 buttons.
Again I refer back to Top Hunter with the quarter turn special moves etc.

This is the standard by which I really judge a beat em up, And most fall short.
I dont want to just constantly button mash one button to continually punch a enemy.
I want the strategy of being able to choose a move to a situation.
 

Raguy

New Challenger
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Posts
53
Sor 2 is a very good bta, but it's not the best bta for me.
On neo geo, i prefer sengoku 2 that is not ridiculous in front of many capcom bta. It's certainly the only neo geo bta that can be compare equally with warrior of fate or cadillac and dinosaur.
In arcade, there are many bta better than sor 2 as konami bta ( violent storm, vendetta...), irem ( ninja baseball batman, undercover cops ), capcom ( many cps1 and 2 games ), guardians 2 , golden axe death adder, igs pgm bta...
I like sor 2, my only flaw is the rythm of blow combination, it is the same speed even if you push button quickly. And i like less the last stages.

In neo geo, snk tried different gameplay than capcom bta, to appreciate robo army ( ennemies killed with 2 or 3 hit) or sengoku 1 and 2, we have to forget capcom model.
 

yagamikun

Art of Typing Wiz
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2000
Posts
2,343
This is the standard by which I really judge a beat em up, And most fall short.
I dont want to just constantly button mash one button to continually punch a enemy.
I want the strategy of being able to choose a move to a situation.

I mean, to be fair, that's pretty much the definition of a fighting game. :)

I'm being cheeky. I get where you're coming from, though. The "special" button in SOR2 having multiple functions helps to break the monotony and give you more to work with than a single button.

I recently put up a review on my website for Mutation Nation, and I take some time to really dig into all the options in that game - as the amount of choice you have, and the way you can interrupt combo strings with other moves is a really nice touch. The game has a great flow to it, and is really fully featured. 100% worth a second look if you haven't played it in a while. It's not SOR2, but it's not trying to be. It's an SNK arcade brawler - not perfect, but it has some good ideas going for it that make it feel unique. For a brawler to feel "unique" it has to be doing something right. :)
 

titchgamer

Guerilla Warrior
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
1,731
I mean, to be fair, that's pretty much the definition of a fighting game. :)

I'm being cheeky. I get where you're coming from, though. The "special" button in SOR2 having multiple functions helps to break the monotony and give you more to work with than a single button.

I recently put up a review on my website for Mutation Nation, and I take some time to really dig into all the options in that game - as the amount of choice you have, and the way you can interrupt combo strings with other moves is a really nice touch. The game has a great flow to it, and is really fully featured. 100% worth a second look if you haven't played it in a while. It's not SOR2, but it's not trying to be. It's an SNK arcade brawler - not perfect, but it has some good ideas going for it that make it feel unique. For a brawler to feel "unique" it has to be doing something right. :)

Well thats it really, I think the best ones are like fighting games!
Just against multiple opponents and in co-op lol

Mutation nation is a fun game, But it lacks something that I cant quite put my finger on.
I played it maybe 6 months ago and although I played it most of the way through I started getting bored towards the end.
 

andsuchisdeath

General Morden's Aide
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Posts
7,576
Mutation nation is a fun game, But it lacks something that I cant quite put my finger on.
I played it maybe 6 months ago and although I played it most of the way through I started getting bored towards the end.

So you're lazily credit feeding through the game? If so, you're essentially blinding yourself to what makes Mutation Nation fun : utilizing, strategically implementing and making the most of the tools they give you to survive.

I'm not down playing the importance of being drawn in by a game through a character, or move/moveset, aesthetic, presentation. All of that stuff is important..and if you're not stimulated, or are turned off by the (lack of) these elements (or "tools"), that's totally fair, and is a very real thing.

But you're not giving yourself the opportunity to see why the game is designed the way it is if you're just credit feeding to the last stage. Of course you're going to be bored. And hey, people have the right to credit feed their games all they like. But chances are...they're going to think that way more games suck than they actually should.
 
Last edited:

ForeverSublime

6400|!!|Kyo Clone
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2001
Posts
6,416
Early 2000's, I remember an animated spoof video of SOR2. The gag where one guy is getting beat up, but Eddie can't help because he's "Stuck in a (weapon pickup loop)" still gives me a little chuckle.

Anyone recall this?
 

joecommando

Amusaka's Lacky
10 Year Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Posts
970
While I wouldn't agree Sengoku 2 is the best beat em up ever (That goes to SOR2 imo) I do agree its good, And that some of the others are fun.
But fun does not mean great.

They are fun just to pick up and play but ultimately they give me no desire to replay them other than once in a blue moon and tend to be a bit cheap.
I know they are arcade games and are supposed to be cheap to a degree but I dont think that level of cheapness works for a beat em up.
Maybe thats the problem with them, SNK was to coin op focused maybe?

I personally don't find the genre to have much replayability at all anyways. I pick a beat em up when im in the mood for one, play through it and then im good on beat em ups for a while. They are all very repetitive and play out the same way every time so I think the genre just lends itself to poor replay value.
 

yagamikun

Art of Typing Wiz
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2000
Posts
2,343
So you're lazily credit feeding through the game? If so, you're essentially blinding yourself to what makes Mutation Nation fun : utilizing, strategically implementing and making the most of the tools they give you to survive.

I'm not down playing the importance of being drawn in by a game through a character, or move/moveset, aesthetic, presentation. All of that stuff is important..and if you're not stimulated, or are turned off by the (lack of) these elements (or "tools"), that's totally fair, and is a very real thing.

But you're not giving yourself the opportunity to see why the game is designed the way it is if you're just credit feeding to the last stage. Of course you're going to be bored. And hey, people have the right to credit feed their games all they like. But chances are...they're going to think that way more games suck than they actually should.

Seconded. For me, even if I have the option of free play, I most always limit my credits to the Neo default of 4. It provides me with a goal to overcome and forces me to think smarter about every situation I'm in because there is risk involved. When those "4 quarters" are gone, it's game over for now. Basically: higher risk = more enjoyment. Dark Souls works on a similar kind of high risk/high reward accomplishment loop.

I mean, hell, even Metal Slug can get repetitive/boring if you just credit feed - you can just run to the right, shoot shit without thinking, and eventually win the game in 40 minutes or so. You beat the game, but where's the sense of accomplishment?

Early 2000's, I remember an animated spoof video of SOR2. The gag where one guy is getting beat up, but Eddie can't help because he's "Stuck in a (weapon pickup loop)" still gives me a little chuckle.

Anyone recall this?

I DO remember this, lol!
 

titchgamer

Guerilla Warrior
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
1,731
So you're lazily credit feeding through the game? If so, you're essentially blinding yourself to what makes Mutation Nation fun : utilizing, strategically implementing and making the most of the tools they give you to survive.

I'm not down playing the importance of being drawn in by a game through a character, or move/moveset, aesthetic, presentation. All of that stuff is important..and if you're not stimulated, or are turned off by the (lack of) these elements (or "tools"), that's totally fair, and is a very real thing.

But you're not giving yourself the opportunity to see why the game is designed the way it is if you're just credit feeding to the last stage. Of course you're going to be bored. And hey, people have the right to credit feed their games all they like. But chances are...they're going to think that way more games suck than they actually should.

I have played it through via credit feeding, But last time I played it I was just playing it in AES mode, I agree with what you are saying though.
But for me it just lacks something I dont know what.
Its one of those games I am happy to pick up and play especially with someone but its not a game I could repeat over and over.


Early 2000's, I remember an animated spoof video of SOR2. The gag where one guy is getting beat up, but Eddie can't help because he's "Stuck in a (weapon pickup loop)" still gives me a little chuckle.

Anyone recall this?

Nope, never heard of that, would be interesting to see!

I personally don't find the genre to have much replayability at all anyways. I pick a beat em up when im in the mood for one, play through it and then im good on beat em ups for a while. They are all very repetitive and play out the same way every time so I think the genre just lends itself to poor replay value.

I agree to a degree, Some I feel I can play repeatedly others are a 1 shot and then prob not play it for 6 months plus again.

SOR2 I have completed more times than any other game I have ever played, SOR4 I have unlocked nearly all the trophies so completed that like 30 times now, The SOR remake I played through allot as well.
Golden Axe I hammered the hell out of as well.
On the flip side SOR 1&3 I have only completed a hand full of times despite them being great games.

I really like beat em ups, they are probably my fave genre but it really depends if a game grabs me or not if I feel the desire to keep playing it over.

I have a similar feeling with fighting games, Where some I can play over and over to complete with every character, Where others I will get on to have a quick few rounds and then not play again until I feel like I want to.

Maybe I should start another thread with a list of peoples fave beat em ups, I mean I have played loads of them with varying levels of quality and interest but there has to be more out there that I have not played or heard of :p
 

Neo Alec

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2000
Posts
11,925
Sor 2 is a very good bta, but it's not the best bta for me.
On neo geo, i prefer sengoku 2 that is not ridiculous in front of many capcom bta. It's certainly the only neo geo bta that can be compare equally with warrior of fate or cadillac and dinosaur.
In arcade, there are many bta better than sor 2 as konami bta ( violent storm, vendetta...), irem ( ninja baseball batman, undercover cops ), capcom ( many cps1 and 2 games ), guardians 2 , golden axe death adder, igs pgm bta...
I like sor 2, my only flaw is the rythm of blow combination, it is the same speed even if you push button quickly. And i like less the last stages.

In neo geo, snk tried different gameplay than capcom bta, to appreciate robo army ( ennemies killed with 2 or 3 hit) or sengoku 1 and 2, we have to forget capcom model.
Capcom and Sega were brought up, but no mention of Konami until page 2 of this thread. That is wrong. Even if the games weren't the most technical, Konami deserves credit for keeping the genre front and center in the minds of the wider public at the time. TMNT, XMen and Simpsons were just plain fun party games that drew people in at first glance.
 

titchgamer

Guerilla Warrior
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
1,731
Capcom and Sega were brought up, but no mention of Konami until page 2 of this thread. That is wrong. Even if the games weren't the most technical, Konami deserves credit for keeping the genre front and center in the minds of the wider public at the time. TMNT, XMen and Simpsons were just plain fun party games that drew people in at first glance.

Yeah they were really on to something with the 4 player games.
As you say by no means technical but very very fun!
 

Atro

Who?,
20 Year Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
9,209
Seconded. For me, even if I have the option of free play, I most always limit my credits to the Neo default of 4. It provides me with a goal to overcome and forces me to think smarter about every situation I'm in because there is risk involved. When those "4 quarters" are gone, it's game over for now. Basically: higher risk = more enjoyment. Dark Souls works on a similar kind of high risk/high reward accomplishment loop.

I've never thought of this but, could the reason of SNK having the games limited just to 4 credits, to simulate the player going through the game with a single dollar in the pocket?

That, having in mind the "quarter" dollar as base. In regions like Hong Kong, Macau and some place in China, the cost to play a credit was like 10 cents in most places I went to.
 
Top