Jump to content

Talk:Fighting game/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2


Mechanism of fighting game

Mechanism of fighting game was just created and seems borderline original research/essay-like. Is it possible we can merge anything relevant here as opposed to outright deleting that page? –MuZemike 03:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

One of the basic fundamentals to master in fighting games is movement, which includes walking, jumping, crouching, sidestepping, or the much quicker dash, which may be done in some games such as Marvel vs. Capcom while the character is in the air.[1] Movement is controlled with the joystick; moving the stick in specific manners can produce particular movements, such as the dash. Moreover, learning to maneuver enables a player to produce effective attacks, to dodge an attack, or to launch a counterattack.

At the heart of the fighting game is, of course, the attack, which is achieved by pressing the attack buttons either singly or in combination with other buttons as well as the joystick. A successful attack may result in a knockdown, especially one that incapacitates the enemy. Sometimes, a successful counterattack may be generated even while the enemy is attacking. In “tandem” games, it is also possible to call out a supporting character that helps the active character being played, such in the Marvel vs. Capcom series. In most games, it is possible for the player to unleash a super attack, which is usually indicated by an on-screen indicator and utilized by pressing the right button combination.[2] It is also important that a player learns how to block and deflect or minimize the effects of an attack. This is usually done with the character standing, crouching, or even while up in the air. Learning to block is as important as learning to master an attack. When done properly, it is possible to minimize the damage of a super attack and even be able to execute a reversal or counterattack. Throwing an enemy character is also a useful skill that gives players an advantage.[3]

The most effective and damaging attacks are usually done in combinations or strings known as “combos,” and this can be done by inputting the command for the next attack even while an attack move is being carried out by the character on-screen. Timing is usually the key to achieving this, and a player can become a very serious match if he or she gets this skill mastered accordingly.

The goal of most fighting games is to win matches, and maybe even progress along a storyline. Fulfilling these goals may result in the unlocking of new playable characters or new skills.[4] Whatever the end-goal, fighting games encourage players to employ strategy and be creative in their gaming skills. The best players are those who become involved in strategy and not just mash buttons together. Whether in the arcade or on-line, fighting games also offer a level of social interaction as players are given a level playing field without any discrimination regarding appearance or skill as opposed to reality.[5] Indeed, with fighting games, there is more to simply playing the buttons. The true mechanisms of fighting games lies in the people who make them and play them. Chohang 10:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Definitely needs merged. Looks largely redundant on skim reading; maybe just add any new sources to this article. Needs a serious trim and copy edit and least. bridies (talk) 10:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Agree with the merger, it seems that the creator of this page is a robot (not bot). He doesn't reply accurately. Look at his post above. He only copied and pasted his work here. Maybe we can help him. Kiddie Techie Talk 23:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Merge, though a skim reading here would seem to indicate that most content is already covered. Haruth (talk) 01:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 Done Redirected to game design section, as everything is already covered here. Haruth (talk) 23:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

First with assistant secondary characters

Are there any reliable sources to cite that Data East's Avengers in Galactic Storm invented the concept of assistant secondary characters? It even introduced duplex desperation moves (or "Super Combos" to those of you starting with Capcom's fighting games). Parrothead1983 (talk) 06:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Fatal Fury released before Street Fighter II

This is false, the article that is quoted is a review, and the review is also false. Street Fighter II was release in arcades in march of 1991 and Fatal Fury was released in November/December of 1991. I don't know how to edit wiki articles correctly, but someone needs to correct it. MajinHurricane (talk) 19:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

However, according to this interview of 1UP.com, Fatal Fury's development started before Street Fighter II was released. Parrothead1983 (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Was there some problem with being verbose?

Why'd we rake out all the info on the conditions of victory? I thought information was good.SuperSonicTH (talk) 13:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I just couldn't find any sources to verify it. It seems to be the kind of thing that's so obvious to gamers, that reviewers don't mention it. I'm trying to find sources for the whole gameplay section and then tidy it up. Perhaps something will turn up and I can put some of it back in, it was kind of a mess. bridies (talk) 14:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Titles

OK, I want to change the sub-heading titles in the history section (I did but was reverted). I want to change "Early fighting games" to "Early fighting games: 1970s and 80s" and "Rise and peak" to "Rise and peak: early 1990s" simply for clarification, as the chronology in the prose is quite jumbled. Furthermore, nothing is being lost there so it shouldn't matter. I also want to change "decline and shift" to "latter 1990s" because "decline" is somewhat misleading. They may have been retaining a smaller proportion of gamers but they were still popular (bear in mind the video game market is always growing); it seems a bit ridiculous to be labelling the period a decline while simultaneously talking about how successful Tekken, Soul and Dead or Alive were. More importantly there's no indication of what "shift" actually means. "recent history" should be changed to "2000s" again to reduce ambiguity. Who is to say the last eight years defines "recent"? The section is clearly defined by the new millenium and the length of "recent" is otherwise arbitrary. It should at least be "recent history: 2000s". bridies (talk) 19:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the dates are kind of helpful. Although I think we also need the subtitles to summarize their scope. Randomran (talk) 19:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I put them together for a compromise and added them back in. Hopefully this version will be acceptable. bridies (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
It has my support. Worst case, I'd also support renaming the subtitles, but I wouldn't want to go with just a date. Randomran (talk) 19:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

should we try for GA status?

First off, let me say that User:bridies has done a great job of improving this article. I found it easy to expand and verify the history section, but the section on gameplay/design was pretty overwhelming. You really brought this article along! I think we have something that is darn close to GA status, and the hardest work is behind us.

Obviously, we need to copy-edit, and they might make us change a few references if they're unreliable. (Nothing we can't verify somewhere else.) But the first question to ask: are we broad in our coverage of the topic? I think the gameplay section does a good job of covering the main aspects of the topic. But I'm legitimately concerned that I added far too much detail to the history section. Bridies has done a good job of cleaning some of it out. But it's tough to find a balance between depth and breadth: do we cover a lot of games in the history, or do we go into a little bit of depth as to why a few major games had an impact on the genre?

I think we might need to go to peer review, or request comment at a few popular fighting game articles. Thoughts? Randomran (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think, roughly, the balance is okay. I know the history section is probably more than half the article, but I would defend that by arguing it's where most of the "real world information" is. Also, hopefully the history shows how various gameplay aspects evolved (at one point I was entertaining the notion of having the whole thing a "history" section, with all the "gameplay" mixed in, haha). As far as I'm aware the only genre FA is 4X, which has a much more balanced structure. However, that genre clearly has far more complicated gameplay than fighting games, but is much more of a niche. Fighting games are comparatively simple (all the sources that try to define the general gameplay say something like: "two people beating the crap out of each other, that's about it"), but a much richer history; at one point of course, they were massively popular. With regards to the history section itself, I think breath is better, simply because it's more encyclopaedic. It does look reasonably balanced, bearing in mind I think it's length is warranted, indeed I could add a bit more: I think "early years" needs to be brought up to to size, which I think I can do after trawling through all these 80s magazines. I think the biggest game, SF2, has enough space to do it justice. Ultimately I agree, the only way to know for sure is to get some fresh opinions. I'd also go for a peer review, or indeed just stick an informal note on WP:VG asking for some input. bridies (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and some pictures. A shot of Ryu doing a hadouken seems most obvious, but there may be some free software out there that would be preferable according to policy. Photos of arcades would be desirable also. bridies (talk) 19:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Another thing might be the balance of sources. There's probably too much GameSpot, although it might not be a real problem unless it ever get's to FAC, I dunno. bridies (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Sounds good. I think a good first step is to hit up a few article talk pages. Sourcing will be a minor issue, so long as they're all reliable. for the image issue, we can get away with some fair use images. We can argue that Street Fighter II will be necessary, as it popularized the conventions of the genre, and there's no alternative. We might be able to get away with another one or two, assuming they do a good job of illustrating a concept that's hard to show in other games. Let me hit a few article talk pages. Randomran (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  • As far as commentary goes, my only complaints are directed at the "2000s" section, which doesn't hold together thematically as well as the others, with more name-dropping and less analysis. Nifboy (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Any suggestions on how to improve the 2000s section? The paragraph on crossovers should probably stay as it at least has a continuous theme, aside from being only real trend (and an important one at that). We could lose "tatsunoko vs capcom" as it's Japan only and Western reviewers weren't very impressed with it. I think we could also trim "star gladiator" and "fighting viper" off the final 1990s section. I think the last two sections might fit together better if we switch the last two paragraphs of 1990s around and also switch both 2000s paragraphs around. This means it goes from talking about late 1990s crossovers to 2000s crossovers (there's already some overlap there with Capcom VS SNK). bridies (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I implemented these changes, hopefully there's a more coherent thread running into the the final section now. Also I trimmed and rewrote the 1990s crossover info, as it still wasn't quite sourced properly. bridies (talk) 14:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Looks good to me. I made a few additions too. Let's give it another couple of days, then ask for a peer review in preparation for GA status. Randomran (talk) 20:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
What's been done is an improvement, can't offer suggestions on how to improve further though :| Someoneanother 15:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
That's okay. If you notice any glaring errors or omissions, feel free to check in. Randomran (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review request has been up for a week now and there seems to be no major problems. Shall we try for GA? bridies (talk) 04:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's wait for a more comprehensive review, or a sign off from one of the frequent peer reviewers. Although if you're really feeling impatient, you can go ahead and give it a nomination ... Randomran (talk) 21:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Question about crossovers

The first games that I think were the first to feature characters from various franchises were the The King of Fighters '94 and the Marvel vs. Capcom (series). Shouldnt a image be used for those games instead of supersmash.Tintor2 (talk) 15:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I figure there's enough copyrighted material from Capcom as is, and KOF doesn't really do a good job of illustrating the concept to the average person. But if other people feel strongly about changing it, I'll go with the flow. Let's see what other people say. Randomran (talk) 15:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Question about Capcom suing Data East

After hearing a lot of sources saying that Capcom sued Data East, this makes me ask one question: which divisions of Capcom and Data East? The North American divisions (Capcom USA and Data East USA) or the main Japanese ones? Parrothead1983 (talk) 02:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Had a quick look at the Fighter's History article and it seems to be the US branches: [11]. bridies (talk) 06:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
However, this court case was mentioned in a popular video game magazine of Japan titled "Gamest", but I don't know if the court case took place in either Japan or USA, but there are usually more video game-related court cases in USA than elsewhere, correct? Parrothead1983 (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fighting game/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    There is a couple of double-negatives such as without no comparison and not unlink paper-rock-scissors that need to be corrected. (I don't feel comfortable correcting that myself as I might change the meaning of the statement.) There is also some passive voice that can be corrected and made into active voice. Examples include (from top to bottom):
    • Fighters are traditionally shown from a side-view...
    • ...the conventions of the genre were popularized and standardized by Street Fighter II,...
    • Fighters are usually displayed on screen from a side view...
    • Characters are usually confined to...
    • ...the player's actions are limited to different offensive and defensive maneuvers.
    • Combos, in which several attacks are chained together using basic punches and kicks, are another common feature in fighting games...
    • The popularity of early fighting games was limited by technical challenges.
    Got most of the passive voice, I think. bridies (talk) 14:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    Good. That second-to-last sentence above is not passive voice; don't know why I put that there. MuZemike 17:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    The other instances I'll try to correct when I do my customary copyedit-sweep of the article. At that time I will also check for any significant MOS issues.
    MoS issues:
    • Lead section: The lead should be expanded to at least a third paragraph, as this is a rather large (about 43KB) article. (cf. WP:LEAD)
    • Layout: Are there any External Links that can be inserted to provide further reading?
    • Words to avoid: change the following italicized terms to more neutral terms, or remove them alternatively (cf. WP:WTA): noted, however, although, whereas, despite, only, just.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    This MobyGames reference is not considered a reliable as it is self-published; it's taking information in the description section of that source. Please replace with a better source.
    I took the liberty and removed that whole statement with that source. The message conveyed in that paragraph remains fine without that statement. MuZemike 00:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
    Some instablility, but due to either vandalism or regarding the addition of unverifiable material and not with legitimate edit-warring or content dispute.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Fair-use rationales need a little more strengthening. Also, I question whether the Super Smash Bros. image is needed in this article, and including that there is already three other non-free images present. I think it could be simply removed. I'll also look into better fair-use image reductions of the non-free images later on.
    I went ahead and strengthened the fair-use rationales for the non-free images and made some non-free reductions. MuZemike 00:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Nomination placed on hold pending corrections made above. MuZemike 17:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
    I have added MoS issues above. That should be everything. I will also try to make some corrections when I can. MuZemike 03:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

If Randomran is still inactive over the next few days I'll try and fix the issues. Kind of busy with IRL at the moment though. bridies (talk) 07:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

OK. Take your time. MuZemike 07:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I cannot pass this article currently as it still has some prose and MoS issues as noted above, and I think I've given more than enough time for improvements to be made. It can be brought back for another GAN, or just let me know when they do get addressed. MuZemike 17:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Future reference:

Isn't SSBM a fighting game?

More than 2P allowed... Moberg (talk) 16:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Fight Night/UFC Undisputed

Wouldn't EA Sports' Fight Night series and THQ's UFC Undisputed series be classified as fighting games also (as well as sports games)? The two seem to fit the description in the first paragraph of this article quite well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.249.165 (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter whether they "fit the description" or not. What is needed is a reliable source which calls them "fighting games". Also the article can't cover every fighting game so one would need some information saying they are especially important. Aside from that, I'm not familiar with those games, but if they're combat sport games, they could go either way: fighting games (or beat 'em ups) or sports games, it just depends on where the info comes from. bridies (talk) 14:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Even if the sources were reliable, wrestling/mma/boxing games are not fighting games per this definition [6] Chigurgh (talk) 18:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
If wrestling/mma/boxing games don't count, then why include Sega's 1976 Heavyweight Champ? That is a boxing game. The first fighting game was actually Vectorbeam's 1979 Warrior, according to Hardcore Gaming 101's Pre-Street Fighter II Fighting Games article. Parrothead1983 (talk) 23:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
It's there because there's a reliable source to support the statement. One cannot take a definition and use it for original research, which is what Chigurgh's argument is. Excepting the head editor, Hardcore Gaming 101 is not a reliable source. bridies (talk) 05:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  1. ^ Shepard, D. articles/574/1/Marvel-Vs-Capcom-3--Fundamentals-Attacking/Page1.html "Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 - Fundamentals: Attacking". RarityGuide.com. Retrieved 1 May 2011. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help); horizontal tab character in |url= at position 37 (help)
  2. ^ Vorderer, P (2006). Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. {{cite book}}: horizontal tab character in |title= at position 46 (help)
  3. ^ Snow, W. words-street-fighter-iv-101-fighting-fundamentals/ "Fighting Words: Street Fighter IV 101 - Fighting Fundamentals". Retrieved 1 May 2011. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help); horizontal tab character in |url= at position 39 (help)
  4. ^ Adam, E (2010). Fundamentals of Game Design. CA: New Riders.
  5. ^ Yeager, K. "How fighting games induce practice, study, and an appreciation of strategy". BitMob.com. Retrieved 1 May 2011.
  6. ^ http://www.allgame.com/genre.php?id=23

Is Fighting a Genre???

I can't find sources citing this as a legit genre, only as a sub-genre of action.201.43.35.145 (talk) 11:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Escapist Magazine - want more? Marasmusine (talk) 22:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


History of combos

While many believe that Street Fighter II introduced combos, then what kind exactly? Combos existed in pre-Street Fighter II fighting games. Culture Brain's Shanghai Kid was probably the earliest to feature a combo system, while SNK's first fighting game Street Smart introduced a simple combo system that is the first of its kind, which allows players to perform strings of combos with basic moves. And I think I saw some combos in Yie Ar Kung-Fu by Konami and Pit-Fighter by Atari Games. Parrothead1983 (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Moving/Renaming Title

Should this be moved/renamed to Martial arts video games? Also we identical categories on related to this article: Category:Martial arts video games and Category:Fighting games. --72.67.93.68 (talk) 02:30, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

A game can be a martial arts game without being a fighting game. There is no need to move the categories and the two categories you listed are not the same. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 02:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Should Martial arts video games be given its own article to help distinguish the differences between them? --72.67.93.68 (talk) 03:11, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
You could try making the article. I see no reason not to have one. There's actually a link in the martial arts template on video games but it just leads to the category. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 03:31, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Simulation games

All the article is almost about games of fictional characters, and fantasy gameplay; simulation fighting games as fighting nights or UFC undisputed are ignored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palacesblowlittle (talk • contribs) 02:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

They probably deserve a mention, but their mechanics are vastly different from the kind of fighting games covered in this article, and are probably better classified under the "sports" genre. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 05:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Fighting game. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Fighting game. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Fighting game. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:39, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fighting game. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

"Fightan gaems" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fightan gaems. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. TheAwesomeHwyh 18:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 21 January 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved there is no support for the move. (non-admin closure) Tiggerjay (talk) 01:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


Fighting game → Fighting video games – WP:AT this article is not about fighting games, it is about videogames; there are many vicious and bloody fighting games out there having nothing to do with videogames, having existed for all of human history -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 06:15, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fighting_game/Archive_2&oldid=1228132893"