Originally posted by Digi
The things you listed are mostly just refinements on move options, not new gameplay mechanics. I stand by my earlier comments.And "ignorance of high level fighting game mechanics" just reinforces my other point: that it's needlessly complex and for a niche market. Every good game has 'higher level mechanics' for players to learn. But when it hundreds of rote memorizations, instead of more intuitive, that's not a 'higher' level I want to be a part of. Yes, it's a deep experience for the hardcore fighting gamers. But for those who reject the mindless premise involved in becoming so skilled, it remains a waste of time, despite the possible depth.
That's the thing though. They are game mechanics. If you want additions not movement based, there are things like high crushes, sabakis, true mids, some of the things I said in my last post, or even chakra draining in some of the Naruto games. As for just movement options, I don't see why you wouldn't consider it a gameplay mechanic. Even sidestepping was a new concept at a point in fighting game history. I'm not sure if you're looking for something more obvious, like the absence of life bars in Bushido Blade, but fighting games do evolve just like most other genres.
I mostly agree with you here actually. The less mainstream fighters, those not named Soul Calibur/MK/Tekken, tend to alienate the casual gamer. The higher level gameplay takes a bit more effort and many people do not wish to achieve this level. I've no problem with that. It's not for everyone. However, I do disagree with two points. I could be wrong, but it seems that you think fighting games consist of just rote memorization. Like I said, it's more than just the movelist involved in a high level match. Adaptability becomes paramount at this time. At any given instant, you must consider so many things such as zoning, matchups, frame data, priority, and everything I've mentioned so far. Secondly, is that it's "needlessly complex." It's the increasing complexity that is evidence that the genre isn't stagnant. This complexity is no more needless than the complexity or "ingenuity" you claim most other genres have. Do you feel the same way about first person shooters?
I'm not trying to convince anyone who does not like fighting games to suddenly like them, but I don't see how they are a stagnant. The problem for most people is that they can't notice the changes without actually knowing of more advanced fighting gameplay mechanics. It's obviously fine if you don't like them. I can actually see why many people are put off by them, but do you honestly believe that that have not grown as a genre?