More asinine arguments of gaeming's Prime Grand Primitive Pinnacle of Intellectual Deception coming up, considering I've never properly "fought" these ones; lel.

Before I talk 'bout this stupid argument, I'm going to bring up 2 gaems: Dragon Ball: Advanced Adventure (GBA) and Dragon Ball: Revenge of King Piccolo (Wii). These games are quintessentially 2D and 3D counterparts of each other, except the 3D one on the Wii sucks major ass in comparison. Both of these have the "fighting game" aspect ripped out of their genre categorizations, despite both having these, and the "fighting game" aspect of the Wii one is the only good part. The GBA one is technically a "platformer", but GameFAQs lists it as a "beat-em-up"... What is the one for Wii? Technically, it's a "beat-em-up", but it's listed as "Action -> General"... ("Quintessentially" my ass)

In Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl, the "Platformer" aspects of "Adventure Mode" and "Subspace Emissary" are discarded, but it pretty much plays like the GBA game up there and a few others. It basically proves that the genre of the "main game" is the -only- genre one should ever bother to comprehend in a game that covers more than one, whilst also considering whatever category you could consider the "home run" part. What's the genre of Guilty Gear Isuka? Did you play the "beat-em-up" part first, even though you want to call it a "fighting game", considering I'm not allowed to categorize what every segment of the game is as part of the genre(s)?

What "genre" is Super Smash Bros. and the "main game" of the sequels? What's the main difference between the 4-player-fest of Isuka and the 4-player-fest of Smash Bros.? Is it a couple of platforms, free-form movement and lack of "Shoryuken Movesets"? Does it play like Advanced Adventure's Vs. Mode, exempt from platforms?

Did I mention the ridiculousness of how people decided to use the term "Shoryuken" to describe these games in the same way the term "Metroidvania" came to be? "BIRTH OF THIS CONCEPT WAS STEERT FETTIGHR!!!!111!! NAME EVERYTHING HEREAFTER AFTER IT FOR JUSTICE GREAT!!!11!"

So, what do you want me to call this thing? Maybe I wasn't clear enough with my previous rants against "what makes an RPG; you play a role in every game, evar!1!" that go on for days. Considering we have semantic arguments about using the definition of "fighting" such as, "There's fighting in Pokemon, does that make it a fighting game?", I'm just going to say, again, "go f*ck yourselves really f*cking hard". If we come up with the genre "Versus", I'll only hear "yeah, but you go against each other in Mario Bros. Does that make it a "versus" game?" Talkin' 'bout the old arcade game classified as a "platformer", here. Compare the 2-player mode to Super Smash. Yes, Smash Bros. is technically a "platformer", just like that Dragon Ball game... that's called a "beat-em-up"... ugh.

Since other moronic breakaway-genres like "survival horror" exist, why can't "Platformer Fighter" exist? Why can't "Versus Platformer" exist? I can't legitimately define this horribly thought out naming process (mine too, since I'm using these sh*tty genre classifications in an attempt to define this f*cking thing). There is no proper classification for the "fighting" genre, especially the attempted classification of "Party Fighter".

That's just plainly f*cking dumb. I can't even think of the whole... "party" genre. What does that even mean? I can "fight" 3 other people on Call of Duty at a "party", does that make it...

Pip pip, cheerio.