@atirador Uncharted 2 multiplayer? Are you serious? Who plays games like that for the multiplayer? It’s a single player game with multiplayer tacked on. I’m talking about games that focus on the multiplayer and competitive aspect. Games like fighters and COD. COD for example teaches you all the basics and how to apply them during the campaign. So now in multiplayer you know enough so that you can learn more advance tech and strategies by playing. I think if fighters did the same, the execution barrier wouldn’t be such an issue. You can’t just tell a noob to figure it out for themselves and “git gud” with no type of guidance on how too. I’m trying to reach a agreeable solution here. Now you guys comprise and meet me half way. No more of this “that’s the way it has always been, deal with it and git gud noob”
It’s most definitely not and A LOT OF PEOPLE played it online back then. During a big chunk of time I had way more friends playing U2 online than SFIV.
I never touched a modern FPS (god forbid me), but I seriously doubt that if I play the single player campaign for the latest CoD I’ll be able to just jump online and play on a decent level
Except it’s not the same. None of those change other fundamental properties of moves that are meant to balance them such as frame data, hitboxes, damage, etc.
Just because someone only figures out that they can do so-and-so move in a certain situation if they react fast enough does not change the fact that that move could be done in that situation, as defined by its frames and hitboxes. Thinking that you cannot is only an illusion that it could not have been done at that point.
The same could be said about execution as a means for balancing. Saying that so-and-so move is balanced out because not everyone can do it reliably is only an illusion that it is balanced out by that execution barrier. You’re not actually balancing the move, you’re just slowing down the process of people figuring out whether or not it is balanced.
RSF with El Fuerte is extremely broken then…
And Akuma was OP in Vanilla SFIV, way above Sagat, because you could loop a good portion of the cast with far st.HK > st.LP > st.HK
Both combos are theoretically infinite, but you don’t see them being a real problem because no one could do them 100%
I’m mostly arguing against people saying execution is an invalid balancing tool and vilifying it for even existing. More newbie-friendly games would be great, but I’m more in the “make them like Smash” camp. Ground up, designed from the get go for inputs being a certain way rather than taking a traditional skeleton and contorting it to be Easy™.
Like, the inputs being easier or not aren’t even why I played fighting games casually back in the day. I just wanted to get through story mode.
The thing with Fuerte is that RSF doesn’t dominate his gameplan like say Iron Man’s infinite does in MvC2, where almost everything leads into it, and he has other good tools that can lead into it as well. The other thing to consider is that RSF gives diminishing returns compared to infinites in other games, due to SFIV’s harsh scaling, even if you have Desk like execution, you’re eventually going to get less and less per repetition. That’s basically how SFIV handles long combos and infinites, sure you there are those that exist, but they won’t be viable because you’ll get shit for damage.
As for Akuma, even back then, many folks acknowledged that he was better than Sagat.
Of course you wont be able to play at a decent lv from jump. But you know enough to where you can learn from playing and pick up stuff from other players. Fighting games work like this too. But only after you’ve mastered execution and looked up a bunch of on-line tutorials, which the average gamer isn’t gonna go through. Now if there was a single player mode that taught you how to play and apply what you’ve learned…
@Komatik I don’t agree with execution being a balancing tool either. But I can agree with leaving more traditional fighters as is and just making new IP’s with easier execution requirements and gameplay. Also SF has a story mode???
I played Tekken and SoulBlade / Calibur 2.
@BB_Hoody my solution still the same, play fighter that fall in one with your philosophy their been abundance of game oh wait you counter them with inane points. Oh these game not easy because of sub mechanics, this game aesthetically isn’t appealing.
Just admit you want smash game and be done with this because apparently its the only game you think that actually follow your philosophies.
He plays VSav. Which is actually oddly newbie-friendly and ridiculous masochism at the same time.
I even added that game to list of accessible game but he doesn’t agree. I think he just want some clone of smash…witch oddly enough is abundance too. So this whole “we don’t have enough accessible” doesn’t make sense
Exactly, neither memorization, nor reaction speed, nor execution affects the move’s basic properties such as its hitbox, so they are exactly the same in this respect. Not sure how you are arguing they are not?
Exactly, so again you agree they are the same. So why do you single out execution skill as something detrimental, as opposed to all the other skills that affect the game and its balance in exactly the same way?
Why is it ok if a move becomes powerful only if you have great reaction speed, or an excellent strategy, or the memory to know exactly when to use it, but not if you have great execution?
Because, so you say, at the higher level execution becomes a ‘non-factor’. As you would have it, good players perform like a machine, and doing a standing 720 is nothing to them. But this has been repeatedly shown to be completely false.
It’s exactly the same in this respect as performing difficult combos or excellent reads, or knowing exactly when to use a certain move. Through their great skill, top players learn how to cope with the difficulty, but the difficulty never goes away, even when it appears that way.
I don’t think this represents anyone’s stance on the matter, certainly not mine. I say the move’s incredible strength is balanced out by the difficulty of its input, a difficulty that remains relevant always, for all players, at all skill levels. Even something as simple as a DP motion is not performed flawlessly all the time, by anyone, because men are not robots, and even when it is performed flawlessly every single time during an entire match, this great precision comes at the cost of attention that could have been spent elsewhere. Like the man said, attention is a resource.
@keo-bas Now you’re just being silly. I never asked for all games to be like Smash. I just use Smash as a good example of how a game could have a low floor and still be very viable competitively at higher levels. A lot of the games you mentioned while by fighting game standards may have a lower floor, compared to other genre’s not so much. As for aesthetics, people will be shallow and dismiss a game over it, I.E Skullgirls. That’s a sad fact. I said this already. As for me playing Vsav. @Komatik hit the nail on the head, it’s easy in some ways and difficult in others. I.E it’s easy to perform chain combos which dish out decent damage. However good luck trying to get a new player to push block and guard cancel. The former is a prime example of a execution barrier. Push blocking is a key defensive mechanic. Without it you’ll be pressured relentlessly. Yet instead of such an essential mechanic being easy to utilise. You have to input numerous attack buttons during block stun ( 3-6 ) to do it. WTF?!
Fair enough. Making the community bigger has never been one of my concerns.
As long as the game isn’t dumbed down and only a couple hundred are playing competitively or a couple thousand people are playing in total, then that’s good enough for me.
So basically, what you’re saying is that people in this day and age are lazy. If so, I wholeheartedly agree. I mean damn, everything is presented to them on a silver platter.
Scrub: “I’m too lazy to look up shit on my own. Make in-game tutorials please.”
(insert game developer here): "OK.“
Scrub: Doing moves are too hard! I don’t want to have to put in the work to do them on command. Please make a more lenient input system.”
(insert game developer here): “OK.”
I’m sure you’ve heard of the saying “The Dumbing Down of America.”, yes? Well, the situation with fighting games today reminds me of that quote.
LOL, are you serious? Objectively speaking, this simply isn’t true.
of players ≠ quality game.
If everybody was playing this piece of shit game, does a large competitive community make this a good game? Of course not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mip5coYUTRg
Controls? Maybe not. Game mechanics catered towards new players? Definitely.
Look at MvC2 compared to UMvC3. No X-Factor vs. X-Factor.
Objectively speaking, X-Factor makes UMvC3 worse than MvC2, which has no X-Factor.
X-Factor is a TERRIBLE design choice.
Oh wait, MvC2 DOES have X-Factor ― it’s called Execution (ie - JWong Cyclops OCV), not some stupid “increased damage” mechanic.
“If [your objective] is to make the best possible SF game, then catering to novices is obviously going to get in your way.” ― Seth Killian, 1998
If you design a game around new players, the mechanics you choose and input system you choose will also be created for them. Catering to new players will ultimately hurt the game itself in the end.
If you design a game around hardcore players, then you can make it the best possible game it can be. You may not get as many players playing it but the game itself will not suffer. In fact, it will be a better game because there are no scrub mechanics to water down the game.
If this is true, then that’s quite sad. Really, really sad. Arguing over sides is one the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of. But of course, there were also fights and stabbings over SF2 back in the day, so I shouldn’t be surprised.
How about those scrubs learn to do shit on BOTH sides? Novel concept, isn’t it? Why do people like that put limits on themselves?
"Oh, I can’t do so and so on the 2P side. I need the 1P side to do so and so."
Get the fuck outta here.
Stop putting limits on your ability.
Accept the games for what they are and LEARN to play the game. To get good at something takes time.
If you don’t want to take the time to learn and just pick up and play, go ahead. Nothing is stopping you. You’re just not gonna be that good ATM.
Do not try to make games easier, in order to compensate for your LACK of ability, execution, or willingness to spend the time to get good.
So they kept playing fighting games because there was nothing else that they could afford to play on back then? Well, if that’s the case, those types of people can leave the community.
Those types of people don’t really love fighting games because they’re only playing them due to having no other choice.
Those types of people don’t really love fighting games because they do not accept them for what they are.
This is why I never cared about making the community bigger. It’s because of people like that.
If the community remained small, I’d be perfectly fine with that. The community would be comprised of only the hardcore, the ones who TRULY love fighting games for WHAT THEY ARE.
If no new games were released as result of having a small community, I’d be perfectly fine with that too. The games we had before SF4 are good enough for me.
I get the best of both worlds ― a small group of dedicated players playing the best games. I’d be in heaven.
“A good game is a good game, no matter how old. A bad game is bad, no matter how new.” ― Seth Killian, 1996
@Shin Akuma I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to expect a game to show them how to play. Like if someone sold you a car and you asked for the salesman to explain how to use the features in the car, and they told you to look it up on the manufacture’s website, you’d look at them like they’re stupid wouldn’t you?
Or try to get IADs to hit Q-Bee ;_;
OK, yeah. Even I can agree with that.
And I suppose Strategy vs. Execution is subjective too?
Just like how I believe Execution > Strategy, I believe scrub mechanics like X-Factor makes fighting games worse.
Don’t think execution wins over strategy? Just wait… I’m working on something. I’m going to settle this age-old debate once and for all. Not based on subjective opinion, but on objective and factual truth.
Also while on knockdown you have to press buttons to avoid being cornered.
I was used to SF so I had no idea you could do this basic thing!
Problem in that game was that some characters like Rikuo are way too overpowered. I barely train with him and can beat people for fun. I can barely beat people that train with him though. It is even worse than facing Akuma or Urien in 3S!
Other games like KOF98 have way too strong upper tier characters. Eg Daimon, Yashiro, Ralf, Iori, Kyo
You have to be an advanced player to be able to beat those characters.
Only good thing with SF4 is that characters strength gap is smaller between higher and lower tiers. So it is more friendly to newer players and less scary. Regarding older games you really have to love them so as to not give up. There only the knowledgeable players remained