@kwyjibo Street Fighter games have never been designed in a way that would allow for more complex moves like SPDs to be simplified while still maintaining their properties and not creating an imbalance. As for them trying stuff with other fighters. What’s your point?
…but the execution of spd in street fighter have always been simplified while still maintaining their properties.
The difficulty of standing 360° is that during the jump startup, you have to imput 3 commands. For example, for a clockwise movement starting with foward, the jump startup will start at the up-backward. And during it, you will have to press up, up-foward, and the attack button. So the first thing that was done was making the jump startup bigger for grapplers. In the older versions the difference was much smaller.
Then the 2nd thing was to reduce the n° of imputs needed after the jump startup. Not sure about before, but by sf alpha you don’t need to imput the diagonals…so a 270° command ( by clockwise starting with foward, 6248 without 9 in the end) would do the job.
By sf3, you don’t even need to imput it in a clockwise/counterclockwise. 6428 or 4628 works just fine. I will make a assumption: as snk used this movement to differentiate yamazaki regular command grab from the super version before, capcom probably get the idea from this.
Now after the jump startup you only need to press a single button.
By HD remix, the buffer was adjusted in a way that you could use old 360°. or 270°. Or half circle back or foward + any upward direction. DB,D,DF,F,UF+P or DF,D,DB,B,UB+P also work.
This is not even about the size of the buffer and cancels windows, because i’m not qualified to talk about it (i don’t know the numbers). But as sf4 zangief can do 270 p 270 p and get a 360 beeing kara canceled into a 720, my impression is that they were modified a lot too.
Again you’re working on the flawed premise of “it’s powerful therefore it must be hard to do”.
Ukyo_rulz already addressed the whole T. Hawk situation. As he stated, it came it a point where Damdai figured his stuff out and he started pwning folks left and right. At that point, whatever balancing that the execution barrier was supposed to do was totally undone. Remember, a game’s balance is measured at the highest levels of play, and at that point, the highest level of play now included a state where the execution barrier had failed in its supposed mission to “balance” certain things.
Also, the argument falls apart when you bring in stuff like Darkness Illusions and Raging Demons, because we have already seen easily comboable catch supers throughout the series.
Yes, the point is that Street Fighter wasn’t designed that way, despite them having opportunities to do so. You made it sound like they are locked into some formula already, but they’ve shown that they aren’t really afraid to tamper with the formula. And even if they were locked into that formula, they’ve had other fighters to experiment with. There is really no reason why they couldn’t find a balance while making those moves easier to execute. Other games(see SG) have shown that it can be done, but then again MikeZ has made it pretty clear that he cares about making his game input requirements accessible.
I’d argue that “designed that way” has nothing to do with it. At the highest levels of play, execution becomes basically a non-factor when it comes to balance. Whether a move is double motion or single motion and two buttons doesn’t matter because the players at the highest level have their execution on point. At the end of the day, the main reason we still see the motions used in SF in the game is more or less due to the fact that those are what we are used to in SF.
Then why have the execution barrier at all? I suspect it is designed that way, but it’s done so in order to prevent new players from spamming moves that would piss off other new players. That’s the only logic I can see behind that decision.
I don’t play Smash, but do you have any idea how many more years it takes to get proficient execution in Melee, compared to USF4? Consistent execution in that game is no joke.
On topic, I do like how this thread hasn’t devolved into the simple “back in my day we had to do all this but twice as hard!” It can take years for new players to really get into many games because of the initial execution requirements, these days. Think about that. If you wanted to dive into GG as someone completely new to it, you’re not even going to be really playing the game for a year or two.
Compare that to UNIEL, Skullgirls, or even USF4. There is an initial execution barrier at first for sure, but it’s not going to take you months to learn how to just do a headbutt ultra with Balrog. You can actually start getting better at strategy and such.
I really like all the points d3v has made about Skullgirls, I should play that some time, but disliking Marvel and the aesthetics of the game has made me put it off a bit so far.
To please the old guard. To reward people for mindlessly spending hours doing repetitive motions in a training room for a video game instead of something productive or fun. So…stupid reasons.
Because were not saying that there shouldn’t be an execution barrier. We’re saying that it’s a shitty way to balance a move.
Special move input exist for a myriad of reasons, one of which is that they do provide a “chance to fail” without resorting to an RNG, the other is that they allow for delightfully complex movelists and character moveset variety within the limits of a typical game controller.
What we are arguing against, when it comes to the execution barrier, is when it makes it hard for people to execute the most basic stuff in the first place. Execution, for the most part should be an emergent property, coming from stuff that people discover in game, and not arbitrarily put in.
The problem with designing around execution as a way to “balance” powerful moves is that it’s a cop out. It’s the designer saying that the move is possibly too good so they decided to lock it out behind a complex motion when, instead of this, they could have simply better balanced the move in the first place.
EDIT:
Skip to the part in this video where @Mike_Z talks about execution (around 1 hour and 35 minutes in).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpXganAM_qA
Aside from his opinions against half circles and anything beyond a 360, he also says this important thing.
@d3v You misunderstand me d3v. Originally yes that was my thinking. But with your points I actually changed my stance on that. Note in my where I state a more powerful move shouldn’t be don’t wanna say easy, but quick to perform. Hehce motions like 360’s that take a bit longer to perform. But if the fighter can be designed in a way that makes such moves much easier to do, while not nerfing it and not causing an imbalance by giving more options to deal with it. I’m all for it! But a fighter like SF4 just isn’t designed like that. Capcom would really have to go back to the drawing board and start from scratch to make a system where such moves can be so quick and easy to perform without ruining balance.
@caiooa Tell that to the average/casual gamer who isn’t familar with fighters. @Belegorm We’re mainly looking at this as if we were in a casual gamer’s shoes. From that standpoint Smash is a perfect balance between accessibility and depth. Very easy to pick up and learn basics, ( like I’ve never heard anyone say Smash is too hard to learn ) Yet like you said it could take a while to master so there’s plenty of depth and things to discover. But with the game being so easy to learn, you’ll soon start learning advance stuff instead of spending time mastering a 360 motion or 1 frame links. And yeah I like the discussion in this thread. We’re actually acknowledging this issue and really looking at it, instead of “Stop whining and git gud ya filthy casual hurr hurr hurr” @kwyjibo Well it’s a means to balance certain moves but I agree with d3v, it’s a flawed way of providing balance. The game should be designed with such moves in mind instead of relying on complex motions to balance said move
I totally agree with that. I was just saying that, if it doesn’t actually balance the game, then it doesn’t seem likely that Capcom would use it for balance purposes. Unless they are so out of touch with the community that they actually think making moves harder to execute actually balanced them. Or maybe they are more worried about the casual experience, and less worried about high-level play?
Also, MikeZ is such a smart dude. Not sure why I stopped watching his streams, but I really need to start again.
I’m actually agreeing with you here on the whole execution is a bad way to balance a move, but I’m trying to point out there’s an interesting balancing aspect of the 720 that doesn’t necessarily need the entire 720 input to begin with.
As an example of a motion that has almost no execution requirements but has balancing restrictions in the input itself, take a look at Boxer’s TAP. I don’t think anyone would say that TAP is a difficult move to execute, especially with in-built macros in SFIV that allow players to charge 3P or 3K with a single button press. But even with this simplicity in execution, the motion carries a restriction with it. While Boxer is charging TAP, he cannot use punches or kicks (or both if you’re insane) nor can he do anything that would require a P+K input (throw, tech, or FA). This is an interesting restriction associated with the input of the move that has no bearing on the execution requirement.
In the same vein, that’s how I view the 720. Yes, the execution required for the 720 is massively massively higher than that required of TAP. But at the same time, the input required for the 720 carries interesting balancing points that would be worth keeping even if the move was somehow simplified to a single button press.
So for example, how would the 720 motion restriction be captured if the move was now a single button press? Imagine if the player had a single button that did Zangief’s 720. How should that move be balanced if it retained the same amount of power that it does now? One way to do it would be that the grapple just has the character automatically jump. So in this implementation, the move itself would be the character jumping then landing and performing the throw. Sort of like how May’s Overhead Kiss in AC+R forces her to dash forward before she can throw. But what about the fact that it’s possible to do standing 720s if you dash forward or dash backwards or on wakeup or in other bufferable states? Maybe add in an exception to the jump->grab for the button where the game detects if the player is in a bufferable state. If the player is in a bufferable state, then the game would let the player just do the throw without jumping on the button press. But what about the situation where if the player jumps forward and sees that the opponent reacts by jumping away? The player would now be committed to finishing the throw as soon as the player jumps, which is something that a current Zangief player can decide against if the opponent jumps away. Maybe the throw portion would only commence if the player holds down the button for the entirety of the jump. If the player sees the opponent jump away, they let go of the button and don’t have to do the throw. If the player sees the opponent stay grounded, they can hold the button and let the grab fire when they land.
The main point I’m trying to make is, while raw execution for a move is a poor way to balance them, often times the input required for the execution is a balancing point in and of itself. There exists ways to keep the parts of the balance linked to the input while simplifying the overall execution necessary to perform the move in the first place. They may not be identical to the current implementations, but they can capture at least some of the motion restrictions.
i was referencing this
the command of spd have already been simplified multiple times while still mantaining their proprieties. No imbalance was created. It’s not a “true 360” at least since alpha 1. And it can probably be simplified further.
Again, tell that to the average/casual gamer who’s unfamilar with fighters.
Or competitive gamers that are familiar with fighters, but have limited gaming time because of work or life commitments.
The problem is that you’re still tying the motion down to balance (even if you say you aren’t), because you’re saying that the move would be too powerful if it weren’t buffered by something else. This is fundamentally different from TAP where you’re sacrificing the ability to use certain buttons during a match. That one has almost nothing to do with the players “chance to fail” the execution of the move.
What you’re basically saying that so-and-so move would be too strong if the motion didn’t need to be buffered or hidden in another action. You’re still tying it to the risk of something else (in this case, a jump) coming out. If you’re a designer, and you think that a move would be too powerful without that risk, then you’re better of redesigning that move in the first place.
I’m In complete Agreement with d3v If the move appears broken than it most likely is.
Then what’s your opinion on the Sonic Boom motion? There are two key drawbacks involved with the motion from a balancing perspective that I can see that could be worth keeping even if a motion isn’t involved. The time it takes to charge prevents the player from throwing Sonic Boom after Sonic Boom. This first part could be solved like ukyo mentioned earlier by adding a cooldown between being able to use the move repeatedly. The motion itself (holding back) prevents the player from moving forward while charging, unless they happen to have a back+normal move that moves them forward like Guile’s b+lk.
Would you consider either of those restrictions (cooldown, holding back) a worthwhile option to balance a move around, or would you rather eliminate them altogether?
Well a Sonic Boom motion isn’t exactly hard to do now is it. The restriction isn’t that you have a larger chance to mess it up because it has strong properties, as is the case with a 720.
Let me put it this way, there is nothing you can do to get around the timing restriction on a sonic boom/flash kick motion, even buffering the charge does not get rid of the restriction of timing. The motion is designed to slow those moves down. With something like a 720, you have a restriction (risk of jumping) that can be alleviated by buffering, in other words an execution trick to reduce the restriction of risk.