I didn’t understand what the author meant by “fighting game” until the end of the first page. Maybe a definition of that term would have helped those of us who aren’t so familiar with different types of gameplay.
The arguments the author made make no sense without some sort of a baseline though. 'The majority always play online' for instance points to a fairly tight definition, and may even be tautological (No True fighting game is designed for offline play).
Every fighting game is designed for offline play, and has been for 25+ years. But that doesn't mean that's where the majority of players are, and that's the point the author is making.
The issue with this is if you don't know what a fighting game is, explaining the genre would take up a lot of space in an article targeted at gamers that know the genre. Sure they could have opened up with "A fighting game, like Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat", but you might not know what those are either. This is like an article about React getting posted and complaining that you don't know what a UI or Javascript is. At some point Google is probably better at filling gaps in assumed information than the article itself.
