Mortal Kombat 11

[Leo656]

The three MK games in the 2000s sold roughly 10 million copies combined. The SoulCalibur series sold around 13 million. DOA series sold about 8 million. The Tekken franchise sold over 50 million copies (although granted about half of that was likely during the PS1 era). Each of those series had multiple games come out in the 2000s that got great review scores, word-of-mouth, and awards from the independent gaming media. Hard Facts.

If they "weren't popular" in that era then I'd like to know how you define the word "popular", that's all I gotta say. ((Shrug)) I don't know how an entire genre of games moves 60-80 million units in a vacuum.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Leo656

The three MK games in the 2000s sold roughly 10 million copies combined. The SoulCalibur series sold around 13 million. DOA series sold about 8 million. The Tekken franchise sold over 50 million copies (although granted about half of that was likely during the PS1 era). Each of those series had multiple games come out in the 2000s that got great review scores, word-of-mouth, and awards from the independent gaming media. Hard Facts.

If they "weren't popular" in that era then I'd like to know how you define the word "popular", that's all I gotta say. ((Shrug)) I don't know how an entire genre of games moves 60-80 million units in a vacuum.

I didn't say they were not popular at all.
Just that genre was not as poplar as in 90s.

[Leo656]

Well yeah, clearly, but again, wouldn't you say that had more to do with arcades dying than anything else?

That's why I tried to limit the conversation just to the home console market; there are fewer variables and more hard data for comparison. Obviously the visibility and impact of the genre was diminished slightly when arcades died, because fighters were 90% of the reason to even go to the arcade and that's where they thrived the most. But Cubed's implication that they were suddenly "invisible" after that simply isn't true. They just weren't THE most popular thing in gaming, anymore. But that's different than what he was initially implying. He pretty much said that fighters were "dead" in the 2000s and that simply isn't accurate.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Well yeah, clearly, but again, wouldn't you say that had more to do with arcades dying than anything else?

There are multiple factors - arcades dying is just one of them.

Another factor was that fighting games used to show power of the hardware, especially 3D ones. However, once consoles reached parity with arcade machines and PCs, game developers decided that using First Person Shooters is much better, because, not only they are more casual friendly, but they also allowed modding, which lead to bigger communities as opposed to fighting games.

Also, early 00s online didn't allow for good fighting in online mode, but was sufficient for FPSs.

[sdp]

Originally Posted by Sumac

However, once consoles reached parity with arcade machines and PCs, g

consoles have never and will never reach PCs.

[Andrew NDB]

Hmm... I'd personally attribute the "decline" of the middle era of MK (MK4, Deadly Alliance, Deception, Armageddon), if not in sales then in general interest or "public impact"... well, a combination of the waning of arcade games, too many games pumped out over a fairly tight timespan (while they never bothered to really evolve the game, Capcom has been relatively good about putting out a new Street Fighter game at about "the right time" every time, conversely), and well, the games in that era being kind of sameish. Adding more characters and maybe fighting styles and all that... but how long will the same base still care about ripping off someone's head as Sub-Zero? If there was like 1 MK on PS1, 1 on PS2, then 1 on PS3, there'd have been much more "punch," I think. You have to at least make people crave seeing their favorite characters in next gen graphic engines. As is, MK4 kind of hit and actually made a decent impact as I recall in the arcades... but Deadly Alliance-Armageddon all kind of blur together for most people. And why is "Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe" considered a numerical entry when it's neither canonical or a proper entry at all? Because as is it goes MK1-4, Deadly Alliance = 5, Deception = 6, Armageddon =7, the reboot = 8, and then MKX = ... 9?

Question: Can someone explain to me the history and chronology of Sub-Zero? I looked at a couple of wikis but I'm still confused. I figured the original Sub-Zero "died" during the first game, and it was his brother in every game afterward. But not so? And then the "reboot" revived the original anyway?

Also, I found pretty perfect emulation for "Deadly Alliance," "Deception," and "Armageddon" for PS2, which just leaves MK1-4, which are all available on GOG. But those are just pulling from the console versions... would it be more advantageous to try and emulate the arcade versions, graphically and otherwise?

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Question: Can someone explain to me the history and chronology of Sub-Zero? I looked at a couple of wikis but I'm still confused. I figured the original Sub-Zero "died" during the first game, and it was his brother in every game afterward. But not so? And then the "reboot" revived the original anyway?

No, that's right. And it's not actully very complicated. The original Sub-Zero (Bi-Han) was only "Sub-Zero" in the story of the very first MK game. According to the official series canon (which discounts individual characters' endings after winning the Arcade mode as non-canon), Sub-Zero was killed by Scorpion at the end of the first game's Mortal Kombat Tournament. After his death, his younger brother became the new Sub-Zero from MKII through MK Armageddon, while Bi-Han was resurrected by Quan Chi as Noob Saibot.

MK9 (the 2011 reboot simply titled "Mortal Kombat") goes back to the beginning and retells the story of the first three MK games, but with slightly different events happening along the way as Raiden tries to stop the Armageddon timeline from happening. So in the first section of the Story mode, Sub-Zero is once again Bi-Han, until he is once again killed by Scorpion, just like in the original timeline. At that point, his brother again assumes the Sub-Zero mantle nd Bi-Han is again resurrected as Noob Saibot, just like in the original timeline. The only major difference from how things played out for the Sub-Zeros in the original timeline is that when Raiden saves Smoke from being turned into a cyborg by the Lin Kuei, Sub-Zero II gets turned instead. After Sub-Zero II was killed by Sindel and resurrected by Quan Chi, he was returned to human form.

In any case, the reboot game didn't change much with regard to the Sub-Zero's: Bi-Han dies at the end of the events of the first Tournament and becomes Noob, while his brother becomes the new Sub-Zero, and they each retain those identities for the duration of each of the two timelines (MKII through Armageddon in the original timeline, "Mortal Kombat" through MK11 in the Reboot Timeline).

So, put simply, you only see/play Bi-Han as Sub-Zero during the events of MK1; after that it's his brother, and it's the same in either timeline. In the reboot game's Arcade and Exhibition modes, both Sub-Zeros share a character slot and moveset but are differentiated by their costume skins. The unlockable "Cyber Sub-Zero" is obviously Sub-Zero II as per the game's Story mode.

I think the only reason it's confusing for some people, is because in MK3 they unmasked Sub-Zero II, but then after that he went back to dressing like the original one again. They specifically unmasked him so that people would know it was a different character than the original, and that worked, but people preferred the masked costume so much that they put him back into it and kept him there for the rest of the series. I can see that maybe being confusing, but otherwise its pretty simple.

Bi-Han was also Sub-Zero during the events of "Mortal Kombat Mythologies: Sub Zero", but that should be obvious as that game was a prequel to the first MK.
-----------

And MK vs. DCU is considered "MK8" simply because it was the eight game to come out for the series and they didn't want to confuse things any more than they have to or already did. Conveniently enough, it came out at a time when they weren't doing numbered entries so it wasn't an issue then anyway; but when it was time for the tenth game to come out they probably didn't want to break the numbering flow and/or miss the chance to call it "MKX."

It's true that it doesn't truly "fit" in canonically with the rest of the games, but it was the eighth game in a row to come out, so there it is. If you dance around it being the eighth game then MKX would have had a much sh*ttier title. They were just keeping it as simple as possible. Best not to over-think it.

[Andrew NDB]

Ah. So MKX is... exactly like the iPhone X. Got it. And I actually really, really enjoyed and got a ton of play out of MK vs. DCU. I got really good at playing as GL in it and unlike a lot of other fighters when I brave the online mode... I was actually owning a lot of cats, consistently.

So... interesting. Every time we've ever seen Noob Saibot, it has been the original Sub-Zero? Though wasn't he a thing in some version of MK1, or am I misremembering that?

[Leo656]

MKX is called that because it's the tenth game and sounds cool. Completely the opposite of "Mega Man X", which sounded cool but was NOT the tenth game in the series and thus confused the crap out of everyone.

Yes, every time we've ever seen Noob it was Bi-Han (aka "Sub-Zero 1"), although that wasn't made explicitly clear until more recently, in "Deception" to be precise. It's fuzzy on whether or not he was always planned to be Bi-Han or if it's a retcon. Regardless, retroactively Noob has "always" been Sub-Zero revived, even if that wasn't the original plan. And it may very well have been the plan, anyway, as one of his first in-game appearances and Bio described him as "a lost fighter" from the first game's MK Tournament; considering that his first appearance sprite was literally just a black Sub-Zero, and Sub-Zero canonically died after the MK1 Tournament, who else could it have even been, anyway?

What I think happened was, they decided early on (maybe from the beginning) that Noob was Bi-Han and just didn't want to explain it right away, let people try and guess at it. OR they just decided later on that Noob had to be someone "important" and decided that it all just fit together too perfectly to ignore. I can believe either.

And he debuted as "Noob" in MKII as a secret opponent, so the timeline fits. Like I said, if his identity WAS a retcon, it's all pretty airtight so I can actually believe that it was either planned all along or decided upon very early on. On the other hand, one could wonder why it took them five whole games to reveal it, if it was always the plan.

Either way, it's creative. I dig it. I feel like Bi-Han/Sub-Zero 1 was too important and iconic of a character to just be "The guy who got killed offscreen between the first and second game"; being Noob gives him a continued major ongoing role in things. It feels right, even if it may have been a late-game retcon.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

MKX is called that because it's the tenth game and sounds cool.

But it's not REALLY the tenth game. No one was ever calling "Street Fighter x Tekken" Street Fighter 5 or Tekken 7 or anything.

Though really... why wouldn't they just make MK vs. DCU canonical? They can still say it happened. It doesn't mean we ever need to see Superman or Batman in an MK game again.

Completely the opposite of "Mega Man X", which sounded cool but was NOT the tenth game in the series and thus confused the crap out of everyone.

It didn't confuse me but as time went on I wished they'd made that be the case. Like, stop at MM9 and then just continue the X series... seamless.

Also, I've never played Mortal Kombat (9). Did any of the characters from the original timeline carry on into the new timeline? Some of the story stuff in 11 makes me wonder.

[Leo656]

Given the fact that you once insisted on calling the first BayTurtles movie "TMNT 4", or whatever it was (was it "TMNT 5"? I forget if you counted the 2007 movie in your "chronology" ), I'm not sure we need to split these particular hairs.

It was simply the tenth fighting game in a row with "Mortal Kombat" in the title; thus, "MKX". The alternative would have been to call it something like "The NEW Mortal Kombat II" and that would have been both confusing AND stupid. You're right, other games had different precedents, but I'm willing to allow for each brand-holder to use their own discretion in such matters. In this case, being the tenth game released was good enough to let it have that title, and it ultimately had more to do with simplicity than anything else.

I mean, given the fact that MK2011 was a storyline reboot that covered MK1, 2 and 3's material, if we're going strictly by storyline and what's "canon", then "MKX" could have even been called something like "The New MK4". Since everything from the original games' chronology from 4 through "Armageddon" was thrown out by what Raiden did. But even that's all kind of confusing, if we apply your logic to it even a little bit. Should MK2011 have been called "NEW MK1-3" or "New MK Trilogy", or something, since it remixed the events of the original three games? And then where would that leave MKX? Is it "New MK2", since it's only the second game in the Reboot Timeline? Or is it "New MK4", since it picks up where the original MK4 would have been and overwrites it in the new timeline?

You can see why they didn't dwell on things being in "storyline order" when they named it MKX. It's not even the tenth game "storyline-wise" since most of the previous games' events were "erased". It's simply the tenth game in the series to be called "Mortal Kombat". That was 100% of their logic and frankly that's all the thought that needed to be put into it.
------------

As for any storyline or canon implications to MK vs. DCU, allegedly that game technically happens parallel to the events of the original MKII. But nobody's honestly very concerned about it.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Also, I've never played Mortal Kombat (9). Did any of the characters from the original timeline carry on into the new timeline? Some of the story stuff in 11 makes me wonder.

Ah, you should. Many of your questions would be answered. I'm actually playing it now, almost done with the Story mode.

I haven't played MKX or MK11, yet, so I'm fuzzy on this myself. I know that most of the original characters are dead because Raiden's attempt to prevent the Armageddon timeline did not go at all as he'd planned and he accidentally got a lot of the main characters killed. Some of them get resurrected, I think, but I haven't played the sequels yet so I don't know.

All I know for sure is that the events of MK1, 2 and 3 happen slightly differently in MK2011, and that after that things go in a completely new direction and everything from MK4 and beyond never happened at all, thanks to Raiden changing the timeline.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by sdp

consoles have never and will never reach PCs.

Relatively they did - as long as they can run the same games as PC without compromising them.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Hmm... I'd personally attribute the "decline" of the middle era of MK (MK4, Deadly Alliance, Deception, Armageddon), if not in sales then in general interest or "public impact"... well, a combination of the waning of arcade games, too many games pumped out over a fairly tight timespan (while they never bothered to really evolve the game, Capcom has been relatively good about putting out a new Street Fighter game at about "the right time" every time, conversely), and well, the games in that era being kind of sameish.

I agree with this - especially with the part of them being sameish - Midway pumped out MK-MK4 in a span of just 6 years, but games were so different from each other, so they managed to stood on their own.

Also, it should be mentioned, that it was time of general decline of interest in fighting games and the fact that gore was no longer selling point of the series, since by that time there were plenty of gory games everywhere. Not to mention that gore in MKDA-MKA looked laughable.

I mean, character ripping some meaty looking things from bodies leaving no wounds and copious amounts of blood, which looked like syrup? Far cry from MK2 or even MK3.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

And why is "Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe" considered a numerical entry when it's neither canonical or a proper entry at all? Because as is it goes MK1-4, Deadly Alliance = 5, Deception = 6, Armageddon =7, the reboot = 8, and then MKX = ... 9?

I don't know either.
MKvsDC has started as canonical MK8, but quite soon Midway higher ups somehow made a deal with Warners and the game was turned into crossover. For whatever reason developers still consider it not only 8th game in the series (which is true), but 8th MK chapter, as if it was another canonical game, which is strange, since MKvsDC set in a separate world and has no consequences for MK universe.

It makes as much sense, if they considered Shaolin Monks as canonical MK7.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Question: Can someone explain to me the history and chronology of Sub-Zero? I looked at a couple of wikis but I'm still confused. I figured the original Sub-Zero "died" during the first game, and it was his brother in every game afterward. But not so? And then the "reboot" revived the original anyway?

Elder Sub-Zero, Bi-Han, was hired to kill Shang Tsung in MK1, but was killed by Scorpion. Then he was revived as Noob Saibot and was acting as a spy until events of MKDA, where he lethally wounded Goro and found Smoke cyborg in Shao Kahns' fortress.

He wanted to create army of demon-cyborgs and nearly killed his younger brother, but was stopped by Sareena. Then he attacked Delia's temple, which served as Sub-Zero Junior's headquarters in the Arctic, but was defeated by Taven. After that he died during battle near Argus Pyramid.

Sub-Zero Junior, Kuai Liang, was sent to Outworld to kill Shang Tsung in MK2, but helped Earth Realm warriors instead. In MK3 he deserted from Lin Kuei and helped to defeat Shao Kahn and cyborgs send after him. In MK4 he helped to defeat Shinnok's army and then defeated Sektor, who attempted to usurp control over Link Kuei.

After that, he reformed Lin Kuei into force fighting to defend Earth and was summoned by Raiden to defeat Deadly Alliance. He took his apprentice Frost with him and she betrayed him, trying to stole his medallion, which could give her enormous power boost. She was unable to control it and was frozen to death. Sub-Zero buried her, found tomb of his ancestors and later saved life of deadly wounded Kenshi. Together they've escaped from Outworld and later were killed in the battle near Argus Pyramid.

Basically everyone, but Shao Kahn, have died in the battle near Argus Pyramid, which prompted Raiden to reboot MK universe and story has started from MK1 basically.

In the new timeline:
Sub-Zero Senior, Bi-Han, participated in MK1 not to kill Shang Tsung, but to seize victory for the Outworld. He is killed by Scorpion in the MK1 events and revived as Noob-Saibot. Then he was thrown into Soulnado by Nightwolf, I think, and killed. In MK11 he was revived by Kronika.

Sub-Zero Junior, Kuai Li , escaped to Outworld on his own, without Lin Kuei orders to find out what had happened with his brother. He was captured by Link Kuei cyborgs and transformed into cyborg himself. Somehow, he was killed by Sindel, during Shao Earth invasion. But revived by Quan Chi, who brainwashed him into loyal revenant. Later, he was cured from brainwashing, alongside with Scorpion and Jax and restarted Lin Kuei as a force to defend Earth. He made piece with Scorpion and took Frost as his apprentice.

During events of MK11 Lin Kuei was attacked by cyber Frost, but he defeated her.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Also, I found pretty perfect emulation for "Deadly Alliance," "Deception," and "Armageddon" for PS2, which just leaves MK1-4, which are all available on GOG. But those are just pulling from the console versions... would it be more advantageous to try and emulate the arcade versions, graphically and otherwise?

There was a MK Classic Arcade Collection, but it was removed from all platforms for some reason. Also, MK1 was included in MK Deception in US and MK Shaolin Monks had MK2, once again, only in US. There were also Midway collections released, but I think, they can't be bought on any platforms anymore.

In general, all first MK games can be emulated by MAME, no problem. So you get your perfect arcade experience with no compromises.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

So... interesting. Every time we've ever seen Noob Saibot, it has been the original Sub-Zero? Though wasn't he a thing in some version of MK1, or am I misremembering that?

I think, it was not invented until MK Deception.

Originally Posted by Leo656

What I think happened was, they decided early on (maybe from the beginning) that Noob was Bi-Han and just didn't want to explain it right away, let people try and guess at it. OR they just decided later on that Noob had to be someone "important" and decided that it all just fit together too perfectly to ignore. I can believe either.

I think, it was not the case: UMK3 had Classic Sub-Zero, which was kinda supposed to represent Sub-Zero from MK1 and Noob as separate characters. And nothing indicated that they were the same character up until revelation in MKD.

But this retcon was absolutely masterful - it is a rare case, when retcon fits perfectly in an established timeline without messing anything and enriched story of both characters.

Even with MK Mythology in mind it still works. In fact, MKM can be seen as prediction of Bi-Han's fate.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Also, I've never played Mortal Kombat (9). Did any of the characters from the original timeline carry on into the new timeline? Some of the story stuff in 11 makes me wonder.

No, all characters, except for Raiden, were "nullified" after reboot and don't remember about OG timeline.

And some of their background stories were drastically altered without any explanation or Raiden's interference.

Originally Posted by Leo656

You can see why they didn't dwell on things being in "storyline order" when they named it MKX. It's not even the tenth game "storyline-wise" since most of the previous games' events were "erased". It's simply the tenth game in the series to be called "Mortal Kombat". That was 100% of their logic and frankly that's all the thought that needed to be put into it.

Argument can be made that, since MK9 (reboot) is also a continuation of old timeline, than MKX can be considered as next numbered chapter.

Originally Posted by Leo656

All I know for sure is that the events of MK1, 2 and 3 happen slightly differently in MK2011, and that after that things go in a completely new direction and everything from MK4 and beyond never happened at all, thanks to Raiden changing the timeline.

MKX was kinda-sorta based on MK4, but it quickly went awry in favor of touching story about daughter of Johnny and Sonya.

[Leo656]

I know this is the "Mortal Kombat 11" thread, but I've been playing the MK 2011 game for the last few days and I figured it just made more sense to talk about it here than the "Currently Playing" thread.

I only played it a little bit when it first came out, for whatever reason; I beat the Arcade Ladder with Sub-Zero and did about 50 Challenges, and after that I guess I got distracted by something else because I never went back to it. I feel bad about it now, though, because I'm having a lot of fun with it... Even though I still am not very good at these types of games.

I think that's a Positive, though, that even someone like me who can barely string a combo together can find a lot to do and have fun with. So far I played through the Story mode, did a bunch more Challenge Tower stuff, and unlocked a little over half of the Krypt, but there's still a ton more stuff to do. I know I've said this before, but I'm a huge fan of how so many fighting games in recent years come with such a robust amount of single-player content. When I was a kid, I didn't play fighting games very often since I wasn't competent enough to play against other people and so the experience was very thin. Like I'd play SFII or MK for like an hour or so every once in a while, but after that I'd pretty much be done with it. But ever since SoulCalibur II, so many fighting games are just packed with stuff to keep busy with in Single-Player, and it just makes for a much richer overall experience, I feel.

I'm still not good, but so far at least I haven't run into anything I couldn't eventually figure out with persistence. The Challenge Tower does a good job at subtly teaching you some of the game's finer points, too.

Good game, lots of fun. I plan to keep with it at least until I've unlocked the whole Krypt and hopefully I'll be able to do all the Challenge Tower stuff, too. And I'll probably try and beat Arcade mode with a few other characters, at least.

[Sumac]

Sadly there are no unlockable characters in a Krypt and reward for completing Challenge Tower is...so-so. But as they say, journey is more important than the goal.

[Andrew NDB]

It looks like the only way I can play MK (2011) is by getting it on PC. The 360 version isn't compatible with X-Box One and the only way to play it on PS4 or PS5 is by paying not just for Sony's online service, but their other service that lets you stream old PS3 and PS2 games.

[Leo656]

That's a bummer. Glad we keep all of our old consoles over here.

When I was having problems with my Microsoft account, the customer service rep (who was VERY helpful and polite, I have to stress) did ask me while we were waiting for one of his superiors to try and address a problem, "So I have to ask, if you have an Xbox One, why are you still downloading and playing games on your 360? Just curious." And I basically was like "That's just how I roll, man," and then I mentioned how I was playing my NES a couple'a weeks ago and the guy was like, "...WOW."

But yeah, I gotta replace my original Xbox so I can play "MK: Shaolin Monks" one'a these days, too. I only watched my wife play it for a bit but it looked awesome.

[AquaParade]

Shaolin Monks was dope. There is a code to play as Sub Zero and Scorpion, if I remember correctly.

[IMJ]

I've been looking at those Jazwares 3 3/4" Mortal Kombat figures online now because of you influential SOB's.....

Thank God they are outlandishly expensive, causing me to delay action as I've made no preparation to buy them... yet. Ugh.

[Leo656]

My wife's got a couple of the new-ish McFarlane ones. They're pretty spiffy!

For my part, I have those Funko "Savage World" 5.5-scale MOTU knock-off figures. They're actually great for being little 5-POA throwback figures. Except Kitana's fans don't stay in her hands for sh*t.

I also have the "Savage World" Street Fighter wave they did, because I am a f*cking fiend for 5.5-scale action figures. Hook that sh*t t'muh veins!

[Sumac]

Shaolin Monks can be emulated perfectly from what I've heard.