It used to mean something, then people like that got ahold of it 
Section of Brooklyn Iâm from called it the flip kickâŚ
The term died with arcades. You had to pay to play. So if someone came up and challenged you and kept challenging you and losing every single time, the term âstay freeâ was used because you didnât have to use any money. 10-0 would be âfreeâ while 10-1 would not be free unless the opponent beats you in the last game and you decide not to waste any quarters to challenge again. In that specific case 10-1 would count as free because it was common for people to get bored of winning, throw the last match, and go home.
The above is based on information from pre-2002, I havenât been to arcades since then. /old man
Thereâs no hard and fast rule I can give you, but technology is, for example, the game console or arcade cabinet youâre playing on, the controller youâre playing with, the game engine upon which the game youâre strategizing for is built, and even the game itself. All examples of actual technology. Combo design is not technology.
When its moves like Hadouken then it doesnât really matter since everyone knows what that is, but when it isnât as obvious as moves in SF (especially when characters have japanese move names. I have no clue then), it can be very jarring; especially when you are trying to learn a new character and their combos. I mean the whole point of typing up combos is that everyone can understand it. If you type up a proper transcript then i can at least do the combo then and there without having to find out what moves are. I usually post a full transcript when typing combos since i can never remember the names of moves, it is easier to write and (at least for me) easier to understand.
They probably do know what it means, but only ascribe it to others when itâs convenient for them and never recognizing they were free, because that would be too damaging to their pre-teen ego.
Except thatâs itâs totally technology.
Technology isnât just machinery. Methods (aka, anti-Zero technology) are also technology. So the term fits.
Before you argue this, look up what technology means, because Iâm right and youâre wrong.
seriously how is this âhumorâ?
Person A: "I donât like it when people say âpenisâ.
Person B: âPENIS PENIS PENISâ
At least one person in the audience: âLol Epic!â
iantothemax has another FP posting with everyones favorite term so I left him this:
I never said that technology was only machinery. My example included software as well, and the actual term surely includes other things that I didnât bother to consider. Simply saying that technology means methods is a gross oversimplification of the term. And your heavy-handed (and childish-sounding, to be honest) claim that youâre right and Iâm wrong was a rather ineffective bluff. Look it up? I did.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/technology
http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/technology
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/technology
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/american-english/technology (Just the American English version of the above)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/technology
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/technology?r=66
In fact, a couple of those links include definitions that prove youâre right⌠vastly outnumbered by the definitions that prove youâre wrong. And in fact, the links even provide more insight as to why the term pisses me off when you read some of the definitionsâ great contrast to how the term is used here. So are you satisfied, or are you gonna make me argue this even more? Because Iâd really rather not.
âHappy birthdayâ
âNew techâ
what does this even mean
Happy Birthday
Free
Salty
Noticed people with anime avatars hate the term anime fighter. Hmm
Youâre an idiot.
I can explain. In his infinite cunning, TiZ thinks that because some of the definitions he found didnât include methods and methodology, that heâs somehow correct, as though words were defined by majority vote. Thatâs not even touching on his inability to read, as many of the definitions he provides make the use of âtechnologyâ in the fighting game context 100% valid.
People donât like âanime fighterâ because they think its derogatory. (Altho I should note I like it myself, but still thatâs the reason people get mad about it)
Yeah that shit was mad funny.
I hate it when people say word my local scene doesnât use, but word my local scene uses is okay.
Fine, Iâll play this game with you.
Letâs take a recent example of âtechnologyâ and break it down, see how well the term applies to it with various definitions. Weâll use the Anti-Phoenix one since itâs recent. As a quick summary, the recent Anti-Phoenix âtechnologyâ is basically the capability of X-Factor cancelling an up or down exchange into a side exchange, which works as long as the Phoenix player is mashing to counter side exchange; the player being comboed upon canât make another counter attempt for 15 frames. As for options to counteract this, the defender can try to guess the first exchange direction (up->side, down->side, or just side), or wait until after X-Factor to counter the side exchange, whereas the attacker can just go straight for the side exchange if they know that their opponent is aware of this trick. Itâs certainly an ingenious trick, and introduces another layer of depth into gameplay vs. Phoenix. But is it âtechnologyâ?
"the study of or a collection of techniques."
Under this definition, yes, it is technology. And the techniques involved are pretty comprehensively documented, too.
"the practical application of knowledge especially in a particular area [âŚ] a capability given by the practical application of knowledge [âŚ] a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge"
Yes, under this definition, it is technology as well. Itâs most certainly practical to stop Phoenix from transforming, and weâre applying the knowlege of frame data and X-Factor cancelling in order to accomplish that.
"the application of practical sciences to industry or commerce"
And hereâs where it starts to break down. Fighting game technique and comprehensive understanding and utilization of its rules is not practical science by any stretch of the imagination⌠nor does it have anything to do with industry or commerce. No, fighting games are not an industry, and if youâre going to say they are, get over yourself. They are part of the gaming industry, but the act of playing them at a high level is, while impressive and indicative of intelligence, technical skill, and manual dexterity, NOT an industry. Not technology under this definition.
"(the study and knowledge of) the practical, especially industrial, use of scientific discoveries"
And if you think youâre a scientist for coming up with a practical combo or solution to a difficult gameplay problem, then you also need to get over yourself. Youâre ingenious, but youâre not a scientist. No under this definition.
"the branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the environment, drawing upon such subjects as industrial arts, engineering, applied science, and pure science."
Fighting game technique does not utilise industrial arts, engineering, applied science, or pure science. No under this definition.
"advanced scientific knowledge used for practical purposes, especially in industry"
Nope here too.
"The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives."
Nope.
"That branch of knowledge which deals with the various industrial arts; the science or systematic knowledge of the industrial arts, as spinning, metal-working, or brewing."
Nope.
"the discipline dealing with the art or science of applying scientific knowledge to practical problems"
Nope.
Thatâs two definitions in your favor, and seven in mine. And you are certainly right in that majority does not determine definition in and of itself, but the majority is indicative of what most people understand the word to mean, and the FGCâs use of it fails under most peopleâs understanding of it. We can mash all of these definitions together into one simplified defintion, âThe practical application of technical knowledge from various branches of science,â and the way the FGC uses the word still fails under it, and cuts straight to the core of why I hate this particular piece of lingo.
Yes, it takes intelligence and ingenuity to devise and discover effective combos, methods, tricks, and exploits for use in fighting games, which developers go out of their way to try and make as rock-solid stable and balanced as possible. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back, you deserve it. Youâre advancing the gameâs depth and technical knowledge base, and making it more fun to play (or sometimes just breaking it outright, that works too). But when you use âtechnologyâ to try to refer to such discoveries, youâre obviously just trying to use a âfancyâ word to make yourself and your discoveries look cool, and trying to pass yourself off as some sort of hot-shit scientist. Itâs pretentious, itâs egotistical, and it irritates me all to hell, and a lot of people in this thread feel the same way. The word âtechniqueâ is easily sufficient, way more accurate, and isnât pretentious and egotistical.
You can argue that youâre right and that Iâm wrong all you want, but the best case scenario for you at this point is a difference of opinion. If I were you, I would leave it at that.
I donât mind the termâŚWhen it makes sense.
People consider BB a anime fighter, but not GG?
To me, an anime fighter is a game that has had an animated show/movie.
Melty Blood, Street Fighter, TMNT, Arcana Heart, ANIME FIGHTERS.
Now, people will see Street Fighter, and say âHey, thatâs not an anime fighter.â
Why not, itâs had an anime?
I also hate when people use the term pejoratively, that I do not understand.