81

Interesting topic, I must have missed it last time it popped up.

I’ll just come out and say it, I think that execution-centric games are simply not on par with the older games with simpler(simplistic?) mechanics. I’m certainly biased towards games like ST which, in my mind, emphasize very different strengths and styles of play from, say, CVS2 or GGXX#R-SlashV2.455 AC Jr. the 3rd.

I think that different people play for vastly different reasons. I won’t so brazen as to say that winning isn’t the main factor when I play, but there are other things I also like to consider. For example, the predominant “american” mentality is that there is no such thing as “cheap tactics.” You play to win and you use whatever strategy/tactic (I’m not here to argue about semantics) happens to be the most effective means to that end. Fine, that’s great…to an extent. However, I’m going to go against the grain and say that there should be another variable added to the equation of what makes a “good” game.

Consider this: How much satisfaction do you derive from pummeling someone with the same brain-dead tactic ad nauseum? If something can be used and abused over and over with little discretion, that’s hardly good game design. Regardless of how difficult it is to do you know SOMEONE will devote the time necessary to nail it, thereby forcing anyone who wants to compete with said braindead tactic to implement it within their arsenal or lose to the same sequence of robotic movements.

Well done, you’ve just reduced the entire scope of the game to a handful of idiotic button presses. If you look beyond the layers of bright flashes and whatnot, is the game really any more enjoyable? Sometimes I get the impression that if you heard a little “chime” sound at the end of a well placed move, more people would like ST.

I suppose you could blame the game creators, but I don’t think that any of us are so naive as to believe that there is such a thing as a perfect fighting game anymore. Already we make allowances for this by banning certain game breaking glitches, so why not go a step further? How many games have been left by the wayside because a single tactic was deemed so utterly broken as to render the entire game completely unplayable? (SvC, DOA, SC3 anyone?)

I’ll admit it’s a fine line to walk and I’m not saying I want to go back to the “throws are cheap” era of street fighter, but I think that, as players, we’ve certainly matured enough to be able judge certain broader characteristics that make a “good” fighting game. This of course would still take account of different tastes in the genre. I’m not shitting on anyone who likes GG. I actually like it too, but I just can’t see myself devoting the time necessary to reach the level where I’m enjoying for the reasons I enjoy the other simpler fighting games.

Have you seen a high level CvS2 match? That shit is boring as fuck.

The most enjoyable matches to me are the ones where I truly feel like I outsmarted my opponent to get the win. I can’t help but feel like I’m cheating myself when I know right off the bat that a certain matchup is lopsided in my favor. In that instance a win feels pretty meaningless me (though if my opponent can win something like Guile vs OG Sagat in ST well props to him :tup:).

On the flipside, nothing infuriates me more than completely dominating someone for an entire round only to lose to some bullshit like RC scissor knee into paint the fence or Chun cr.jabx2 into death combo(Or how about random activate into shosho? That’s a valid tactic). Can you tell I think CvS2 is dumb as fuck?

Risk vs Reward? What’s that? :rolleyes:

I suppose all games have that element though, even ST. I guess the difference is that execution isn’t so much of a factor so it becomes pretty apparent as to why a particular tactic goes against the spirit of the game. Personally I have infinitely more respect for, say, a good Ryu player than I do for a “good” Claw player.

Vega as a character design is so utterly flawed it’s not even funny. He breaks all the rules that the other characters have to adhere to:

-First of all being able to jump fireballs on reaction is a HUGE advantage in a game like ST(I guess Blanka can also do this, but he’s basically a watered down Vega).

-Random crossup wall-dives are just plain moronic(though they don’t require any execution :rofl:).
-Walk up throw… “holy shit dude that was tight, where did you learn that?”
-Cr. strong stuffs fireball attempt “nicely spammed safe, ridiculouly fast, long range poke man”
-No cr.strong opponent whiffs desperate dp attempt and gets comboed “Dude how did you know I’d go for that?”
-Slide into ridiculous wall dive games “Dude I can’t handle these intense mind games.”

I could go on, but my point is that I can’t see how anyone can pick him and think anything other than “Fuck this is dumb, it’s like I’m playing a different game than my opponent.” Moreover, even if all these things were 5 times more difficult to do he’d still be a stupid design, but one that required actual dexterity to play well. Would that make me respect a Vega player any more? Probably not.

And before I get labeled as a “scrub,” yes, I understand how the games work. I’ve been playing fighting games for longer than some of you have been alive and I could probably school most of you at the games I actually like.

So there you go. That concludes my elitist prick rant.

Stupid is stupid, no matter how long you have to practice to get it down.

P.S. 3s sucks donkey balls too.:arazz:

82

I understand what you are saying when you say “Stupid is stupid, no matter how long you have to practice to get it down.” but I believe the quality of the game lies in how well that the varying levels of stupid can be minimized. I think the quality of the developer lies within how well they can adjust the stupidity in a particular game that is being revised after it’s gotten some field research in the arcade.

I dont know how valid my points may be, but I think if I were to make a new game(if I was a designer) then I would base my mechanic off VF because despite how boring it may be to new players IT IS the closest thing we have to a perfect fighting game. I think that fighting games are really easy to make and become passable, but in order to make a good one then you have to really really have to do alot of study in the competitive scene to truly understand what makes a game good on an intimate level. For most game developers this is beyond what they have to work with in a corporation setting. I dont know if this makes sense to anyone but this is what I believe.

P.S. I only label people as scrubs if they expect to be good in a game on a high level without much practice.

83

If I had my way, all attacks would be made as simple as possible and combos would be autocombos. Anything having to do with execution I can do without.

84

I’ll probably be negged bombed for this, but fuck it. The kinda talk I’m hearing in this thread is both depressing and disgusting.

Lets think about all of the tactics that have been created from scratch over the years. Footsies. Kara-Cancels. assist aided combos and various bullshit in Marvel. Infinites. None of these were intended by the developer, but they were created and accepted among players. It takes skill to do some of them, while some like CCs didn’t take that much. There’s some high ranked players that don’t use all of the techiques, just the ones they prefer or excel at, and there’s no shit talking about it.

If I came in here bitching about how differcult it would be to use any of these, If I complained that the mechanics and execution should be different to suit my preferences, or that infinites suck ass, I would get laughed out of SRK and called a scrub.

Now why the double standard when it comes to GG or newer games? I’ll never understand it. I’ve seen a lot of haters lately, especially the Basara threads, acting like babies over the same complaints over and over like you can’t play the fucking game without this or that, or afraid of being called a scrub. Like being called a scrub means any damn thing, it’s not like they cut your balls off. Or certain little maggots claiming that if you like GG or MB, you’re only going with the trends or seeking popularity among the scrubs that can’t hang with ‘a real game’. (And to them, I say shove that attitude up your ass.)

I understand where some of you are coming from. There are some things in GG that are differcult to pull off your first few times, but Jesus Christ why are you bitching like you HAVE to use them all to play? If you hate FRCs or one frame combos, don’t focus on them. There’s plenty of other options available, focus on what you can do and only worry about the other shit in regards to developing a defense against it. If you don’t like Tournment players stradgies for a character, create your own style like you did playing every other game.

In short, suck it up and just play, just like we did with Street Fighter back before bitching on the internet became a sport. Where the hell is the drive?

85

THere is no double standard, this conversation has been around since way before GGXX. Why do you think SF was re-released so many times? Cause all the players stfu and played? Noone ever commented on what they liked and didn’t like about the engine? Check the history books please.

There is also a difference between scrub whining and this conversation. If you choose to play a game, you do have to accept how that game works. For instance if you play in a GGXX tournament, you have to accept that there are FRCs, if you play CvS2 you have to accept that RCs and customs are in the game, etc… But that doesn’t mean you have to accept them as great design.

This conversation is totally different, this is not a “how to win a GGXX Tournament” thread, we’re basically designing hypothetical games, upgrades to games, etc. The current games are just to illustrate points, and different decisions made by the game designers. To think that the game designers got everything perfect is just being overly nieve.

86

My execution isn’t that good, so I largely prefer strategic games.

87

Depends on the game.

If you’re wondering why people complain more- here’s the main reason- fighting games have to compete- with older fighting games. Back in the days of SF2, if you didn’t like it- your only options were MK or maybe Fatal Fury 2. Now, you have a lot more options, so people have more opinions cause they can play other stuff and have fun, like ST, Tekken, 3s.

A lot of people, including myself, aren’t a fan of the Guilty Gearification of the genre (don’t get me wrong- Guilty Gear has become a well-designed game itself, even if some of its many clones aren’t). Japan has lost its originality in making fighters- judging by the stuff coming out. I’ll even lay even odds that KOF XII ends up adding a GG mechanic to it that breaks it (and breaks my patience with the genre).

88

That and we’re forgetting one very important thing. Only anime phags play games that require execution.

89

Just a thought…

The more complicated execution becomes the less relevant your opponent becomes.

If controller inputs become too extreme, your battle becomes more “1 player” than “2 player versus”…as if you’re fighting against your hands and the controller, not your opponent. And, so when you lose, you start to question whether you lost to your opponent, you lost to yourself, or you lost to the joystick. That’s a lot of opponents to deal with at once…which one took YOU out?

super hard inputs = more ways to “lose”

more ways to “lose” = more convoluted meaning of the word “win”

Or course, the alternative would be super easy controls…at which point “intent” becomes an issue. Did that guy/gal just use Akira’s Stun Palm combo on purpose? Did they just parry-into-Gigas Breaker on reaction? Or was it all just random button mashing?

I think a balance is in order. You want the controls the be difficult enough to guarantee intent. But, you don’t want them difficult enough to complicate the meaning of the word “win”…because the word already is complicated enough.

90

I don’t really see the complaining about FRC’s really, I mean yeah they’re difficult. But some of the timing required by games as CvS2 is nearly, if not as hard as doing FRC’s, FRC’s just rub it into your face that you are in fact performing something with incredible timing, and that you are indeed going in the right direction when practising a difficult combo, while with older games there was absolutely no indication until you actually pulled off the full combo.

My opinion on `difficulty’ has vastly changed. I used to think charge characters were the stupidest shit ever, until I played Melty Blood, and noticed how essential they sometimes are. Charging adds a whole different dimension to how you set up your combo’s and attacks. Which is of course obvious to everyone around here. But I still think it gets fucking stupid if you need to do those charging ST supers, there’s no point in making them so hard.

But when I finally got over my scrubbiness in hating on charging, I started hating on 360’s and especially 720’s. But once again these techniques NEED to be this hard, they influence how the character plays, because if you could just qcf into a grab, you wouldn’t need to do all that short hopping, and buffering your 360’s in blockstun etc. etc. Which would just influence the gameplay of a grabber completely.

And although these are only simple' examples. I'm sure people have run into it. But this also goes for the more difficult things. 1 frame links are of course a bitch, but changing it would change the whole way a game plays. Of course you could sayjust don’t put shit like that in’, and then you have smash brothers, which works well in it’s own way, but most people from the FG community; which makes you wonder, what the hell *do * we want. We don’t want difficult shit, but the easy shit ain’t good either.

It’s probably a really difficult issue that also the game devvers have problems with balancing this out.

Whatever, I just pretty much repeated what everyone else said, could’ve just said `I agree’, but you guys surely know what I mean :stuck_out_tongue:

91

There really aren’t that many difficult techniques out there. I used to think that the supers in the KOF games were hard to do until I got used to them back in 94’ when it first came out. But now, I think there are only 3 moves in the fighthing game universe that are damn near impossible for even most high level players to pull off in an actual match.

2 of those moves belong to Ivy and the 3rd move belonging to Hayate in DOA4. It’s been reported that only 2 people are able to do Hayate’s multi part throw. Even though the move is extremly had to do, it isn’t the most damaging. So I guess that really doesn’t matter. I can manage to do 1 of Ivy’s 2 throws every now and then in an actual match. It’s well worth it to learn how to do it. Some players were actually good enough to just pull it off. I can sometimes, but most times but more than 90% of the time, I have to buffer it from something else. Otherwise, it’s a no go. It’s all about practicing and timing. I remeber when Tekken 2 came out. I must have played that game about 12+ hours straight learning every move for all the characters and I payed special attention to the multi part throws. I’m not saying that everyone should practice that much, but everyones learning curve is different.

ONEZ

92

execution is what will give you an edge over opponents that dont have as good execution.

does that mean your smarter? no.
does it mean your better? not to a sense.

but that just means that you will most likely to get hit by a super and have less chances to make mistakes.

its like when ppl say “your lucky I missed that super” :rolleyes:
you can get lucky sometimes BUT it was most likely the person not practicing his or her execution after links.

93

Every sport has its share of execution. When pitching a baseball there’s a lot of things to consider, and an awful lot of practice and effort need to go into it. Properly hitting a ball in golf requires practice to. There are even instrumental competitions. Violinists and pianists have to work their fingers off to work on their technique and execution to be a competitive soloist.

Obviously, my point is that execution in various degrees exists in almost all competitive sports and activities.

To be truly competitive, you have to practice. Of course, the current issue is do games like Guilty Gear and their ilk have needlessly difficult executions. Let me go back to my instument example, though (I’m a bit of a musician). Some are way harder to pick up than others. The trumpet is a fairly easy one to learn. Sure, like any great art or sport, it takes a lot of work to get good at. At first you start of with learning the simple buzz, then to basic fingerings and you work your way up. Guitar was a bit harder for me. Having to keep track of two hands on six stings with various chord setups, that can be tricky for the beginner, even downright disheartening. Of course, those are just two examples, but I think the analogy is valid.

Games, like all these other activities, are meant to be recreational. We make the choice whether or not we want to be good and/or competitive at them. If you want to be good, but don’t want to spend the effort, then that’s too bad.

My personal opinion: Yes, recent fighters do focus a lot on techniques with difficult execution. This is the current trend, and it doesn’t seem to be changing soon. I’d honestly prefer more of a mixture of game types (simple execution vs complicated) but I honestly really like Guilty Gear and ST both. I’ll play what I like, and that’s that.

(bracing for negbomb)

94

Well, there’s no execution in chess, the greatest competitive game of all time. Nor is there in go, nine men’s morris, backgammon, or any of the other great strategy games. And that’s one of the geniuses of those games, that they have simple rules but more complexity than anything else.

In any game, before you can start playing strategically you need to know all the rules. In chess etc all you need to start playing is a familiarity with what each piece can do; in fighting games, you need to know that too (ie, each character’s moves and the characteristics of each move, which I think is cool), but you also need to be able to move your fingers quickly and nimbly in unintuitive ways.

This is a gigantic barrier to entry. Over the years I’ve had some friends say they’d like to pick up Street Fighter, but when they’d try to play they’d realize just how much time they’d have to spend learning rote nonsense like Geese’s pretzel super or Akuma’s raging demon and they’d quit. In my opinion, that barrier to entry is retarded because it specifically excludes anyone who either realizes he can get his fix of strategy in other games without learning how to buffer 720 or doesn’t yet realize just how in-depth the strategy in fighting games can be; in other words, it’s a surefire way to make the scene smaller than it could be.

95

My rant on a double standard didn’t refer to everyone in the thread, or this thread specifically FM Jaguar, just wanted to make that clear. It was more certain people I see that appear to have one, trying to cause drama in any thread that even mentions arcsys or GG/MB/etc and it’s getting annoying. See the Basara thread for what I mean. A new fighting game and instead of excitement, we see a lot of pissing and moaning.

Back on topic: Neo DX90 summed up my opinons on the issue pretty nicely. And I do feel there’s a bit too much blame on harder execution being the root of all evil, and the idea that simplifying them automatically cures everything isn’t accurate. Maybe it’s because I’ve see the flipside of that arugement with people who hate on Soul Cailber because it’s too easy to mash and pull off something fancy. Or people hating on the Boost idea when all it really is is Custom Combos slightly modified to be less retarded.

Then again, I wonder what the hell fighting fans want nowadays as phoenixnl commented. There’s complaints for wanting something new in the genre, and the moment something new is tried there’s a shitload of complaints and wanting to go back to the days we couldn’t airblock, air dash, or tag or any of the newer concepts we’ve seen lately. And no, I’m not talking about truly broken shit like SvC, I mean the concepts that actually work.

96

many of you are making bad points (including slide i think, like i’m going to read that novel of a post) because you’re not making a distinction between execution-intensive mechanics that are there as a necessity/inevitability, and those that serve no real purpose. yeah, we know link combos are inevitable, and that, say, a DP can’t just be a 1-button move because that would make reaction DPs way too easy - no longer would it be necessary to divide your concentration in order to anticipate a jump-in, leaving yourself more open to attacks from other trajectories because you’re so focused on looking for that jump - that is execution actually interacting with strategy, giving the game depth (although really you could have the same effect by giving a DP, say, 3 frames of vulnerable startup that don’t occur if you do it in a reversal situation). the difficulty in pulling off an FRC, on the other hand, don’t generally interact with strategy in this way - it’s just an arbitrary barrier than doesn’t add to the game.

97

Dude…

Cmon.

98

In the setup above, i don’t think the empty jump setup needs to be simplified at all. The question is, if you did all that work and research to land a scissor kick, why the hell do you need to do hp+hk, DPx45243542 to do the rest of the damage? Does that latter part actually add to the game? Your opponent can’t stop it, you aren’t going to ever choose to not do those DPs, it’s just some little exercise in button pressing thats there for no reason.

The even worse part is that if you execute the setup perfectly, but do 2 DPs in a row, it does no damage, even though you executed the setup perfectly.

The correction, IMO, would be to just remove that paint the fence combo at the end, at the end of the scissor kick, you press a button, you get PTF damage (and lose your meter and go to the corner), you can choose not to do the combo (just like you could in the normal game).

So where does this leave us… IMO, everything is the same about the game, except that people that don’t want to do a million DPs for no reason can also play. Does this mean that some scrub is going to beat BAS? no, cause the game isn’t going to land any scissor kicks for you, and it’s not going to decide to do the combo after, you still do those parts of the game.

In GGXX there’s more to it, since sometimes you can actually decide to do different combos and setups, there’s more work to simplify them, but the point is that if your not actually deciding what to do, why is there extra execution?

99

the execution aspect of sf is what make it exciting. being clutch, doing something impressive at the last minute to win a game.

honestly, if you have a problem with execution, why play sf? play chess or go or something.

100

A lot of people blame the lack of main street fighting game popularity on how esoteric they have become, so I do think that they hurt if you want a lot of people playing.

That said, it’s not that simple.