Why do Fighting games still exist?

Why do Fighting games still exist?
In every way, RTS has them beat.
Larger active playerbases, better metas, and active devs. Multiple units add nuance to offense and defense. Imperfect information adds further nuance since you can't just blindly tech into counters or rely on a single move to make up for your weaknesses.
The maps are gorgeous, there's real single-player content, you can play alongside friends, and you instantly become a sexier man.
There's no downside to making the switch. Come on already.

Attached: RTS v FG.jpg (731x460, 33.45K)

They're both dead niche genres why do you care

idk I think fighting games should just move over to story adventure games with "fighting" in between, like Mortal Kombat Armageddon did

Fighting games
>Pick grappler
>Guess right once
>Win
RTS
>Pick protoss
>Win

Huh, they really are the same shit.

>better metas
>metas
>in fighting game
fuck off, casual.

RTS games are far from being "Dead". They're primarily a 1v1 experience, so 20k players is more than enough.

Fine. Real metagames as opposed to character tier lists.

Also fighting games have been too DLC oriented, like Soulcalibur VI which is like 90% DLC. I didn't buy it during Summer sale and I'm a decent Soul Calibur fan

>he doesn't know what tier lists are
why would you make this thread if you didn't even try fighting games? did you get your ass beaten on your first match and lost all interest like the autistic zoomer you are? then odds are you don't even play RTS neither, go watch your favorite AoE streamer / broodwar esport chink again and close this website.

>why would you make this thread if you didn't even try fighting games?
If
>did you get your ass beaten on your first match and lost all interest like the autistic zoomer you are?
All this, just because I said there's a metagame...
>then odds are
Scuse, but could you stop making assumptions? This is an embarrassing read.

Don't compare AoE2, the eternal GOAT, to newer games

Also

Attached: aoe4.png (735x466, 145.36K)

it's called a deduction, not an assumption. a tier list is made by players and entirely depends on who are the strongest players of the said characters and it seems you had no clue about that

Why do other people play games that I don't play? If it doesn't make a billion dollars a year it is objectively shit and shouldn't exist.

Let's compare two completely different styles of games. It just makes sense okay.

>and it seems you had no clue about that
Expand on this.

>There's no downside to making the switch.
But I play both kinds of games since I hate team games. By that I mean I equally suck at both.

Age of Empires 4 failed because it rejected all sound RTS design. It deserved to fall to the level of Kekken.

you made it sound like the top of the tier lists are a "meta" when in reality it's more like:
>be pro player
>decide to play random character because he's stylish or original or whatever
>community now puts your character at the top of the tier list wtf

Even the total failures that are AoE4 and AoE3 have comparable numbers to some of fighting games' biggest successes, but you have to keep in mind a lot of those people are playing single player stuff. The real problem RTSs have is that if you are not:
>AoE
>SC
>CoH
You're dead, unless you count non-traditional stuff like Total War and small communities playing stuff like SupCom. So it might be the case that there is no market for RTSs in general, just like there is no market for MOBAs in general, MOBA fans only want to play LoL/Dota. A lot of people only want to play AoE2 or Broodwar and will not accept or even care about a new game release. Fighting game players are a little more open to different games I think but not much more.

>you made it sound like the top of the tier lists are a "meta"
No, I'm saying the character tier lists are the closest thing fighting games have to a "meta", and it's not even that. It's what you said.

Fighting games' inputs are arbitrary, challenging to memorize. An RTS build order is approximately 4 minutes.

You have to do that to make a choice what to play.

I only like a few RTS games (basically SupCom and the sequel) because they designed and innovated enough to have and keep my attention over others; I could criticize AoE II's lack of moving while attacking, small group sizes, limited and random resources, inability to zoom out and back in to view large areas of the map or to relocate the camera (thus relying on clicking the minimap), and inability to queue actions -- why would I want to play such mechanical gameplay? Even within the genre, there are different styles of play; but producing and controlling large armies is more strategy because it compares players' effectiveness, and it's more intense and fun fantasy.

Attached: R.jpg (1455x1156, 539.43K)

Stfu aoe2fag nobody likes you
T.aoe3fag

A build order only gets your economy started in the match. You can't memorize most elements or rely on repetition to win in RTS games.

Ironically that's just like fighting games. If you're not Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat or Tekken, you're considered dead too.

backpedal as much as you can, you already look like a moron to me and most actual players of this board