Think of it like puzzles of different number of pieces.
The point of the analogy wasn’t transferability of skills. The point was the fact that most MMOs require you to go through a long slog of grinding before you can even experience the true nature of the game. A game with a ton of grinding can be a great competitive game, but if only 1% of the player population gets to the point where they can experience it, it seems like there are some design choices that could have been made to get more people to that competitive level. The second point was that grinding for levels doesn’t add anything to the competitive scene. It just creates a barrier of entry that’s neither interesting or competitive. That’s what I’m claiming motions are. Sure, there’s a bunch of stuff we’ve learned over the years about motions that have become integral parts of how they’re utilized in games and balanced, but what’s not to say that interesting techniques can pop up in a game without motions? Grinding for gear (combos) is slightly better, as it’s teaching you skills about your character that will be applicable to other people.
I’m trying to say that a no-motion fighting game isn’t an inherently better or inherently worse competitive fighter because it has no motions. In terms of competitive prowess, it’s just different. Either way, the game is more accessible, meaning that more people will play it and stick with it. If the game happens to also be actually good competitively, then there’ll be more people playing it at a competitive level.
I mean, imagine the system I described, except now that all the special move buttons are gone, and now you just press A, B, or C with a motion to do the corresponding move. QCF replaces F+button, down down replaces D+button, QCB replaces, B+button, and uh… nothing really replaces neutral+button, but let’s ignore that for now. What’s gained by converting the single button specials and putting them onto the three normals? Does that really improve the competitive nature of the game by itself? Does it damage the competitive nature? No, it just changes the accessibility. It makes it harder for no good reason, especially when there exist three nice buttons on the bottom row to use for the exact same purpose with no need for motions. At a competitive level, the game is nearly identical save for any option selects that may crop up, which will just be different from the ones that you’d have with single button specials. What’s stopping a player from inputting a qcf+x instead of f+x either?
Are video games really a physical competition? That’s the thing that bothers me. To me, the entire appeal of video games is that they have no (or extremely small) barrier of entry to pick up and play at a basic level, but can be incredibly complex to master. The basics of a rhythm game are essential to playing the rhythm game. Practicing inputs is orthogonal to becoming better at the real meat of any fighter.
I’m assuming when you say no-execution you mean no-motion, because I think I’ve been pretty clear on execution in terms of other aspects of a fighter.
Accessibility is not synonymous with dumbing down fighters. Accessibility can be achieved in different ways, the two major ones discussed so far are informational and mechanical. I don’t think anyone is against fighting games providing better informational methods of teaching players, whether it be through tutorials, better single player experience, social integration/sharing of videos, etc. Mechanical accessibility has been railed against because of the damage we’ve seen it do to franchises that were once considered great. But that doesn’t mean it’s impossible to add mechanical accessibility without damaging the integrity of a game.
Including an zany rule != a lack of a feature.
Also, “scrub” has become completely meaningless.
I was kinda joking…
And regardless of how ‘easy’ or ‘hard’ a developer makes a fighter, the playerbase determines its competitive worthiness.
If a FG doesn’t stand on its own, that means nobody is playing it.
I mean, it’s not like having an “easy” fighting game will really lower the level of mindgames, unless there are bullshit mechanics.
If someone who plays the “harder” games plays against the best player of the “easier” game and win, what was the point of even playing that easier game?
Might as well jump into the deep end of the pool, so by next year, you can go scuba diving.
If you want to try waddling in a 2ft area of water, don’t blame anyone when you’re lost at sea.
Fighting games are brutal because they teach you things, and when you’re really thought, you really learn.
About a month ago, I thought I was improving, got beat by people who don’t even play the game, and learned I was just doing things wrong, hence, I came here.
I learned, and that’s a good thing.
@Darkblade:Aw man, now I feel bad/dumb, we need smilies man, sarcasm is kind of hard to detect of the interwebs.
A lot of Smash players are now playing other fighters so I guess an easier game serves as the gateway to other fighters if it’s the player vs player aspect they are attracted to.
But Smash wasn’t “easier”, it was just dumber.
There’s a difference?
And my point is that the two types of grinding are fundamentally different.
Grinding an MMO for equipment is like going to work to make money to buy hockey gear. Grinding in a fighting game is like practicing your wrist shot so you can get better at the game.
Physical execution in fighting games is hard and requires practice.
QED
That strategy alone constitutes the “meat” of a fighting game is, at best, your opinion only.
what?
Hmmm. Dive Kick?
I think it’s actually Euclid’s schtick, but hey.
Quadratic Equations vs. Differential.
Differential isn’t harder, it’s just dumber.
@Viache:I thought Archimedes said it first, but what do I know?
execution is part of the fgs
you dont plan your strategy around tods if you cant do them
usually better execution is rewarded with better rewards, it could be a more damaging combo, or the fact that you can always land the srk on reaction to someone who jumps against you
Inputs. Get this clear, I’m strictly speaking about inputs in this situation. The physical act of rolling the stick from down to forward is not an exceptionally interesting part of the competitive aspect of a fighting game even executionally. The amount of complexity that the qcf motion adds is subtle at best, and what complexity it does add can be achieved through other methods that ease the motion burden without removing the complexity.
Right, that remains true even without motions. Punishes will still have to be on reaction sometimes and combos can still be difficult.
This entire paragraph makes me say “wut” to myself.
Am I interpreting this wrong?
Have you never played next to anyone?
Have you ever heard them mash an srk or 360?
You ever reacted to the sound of their stick?
I’ve won matches because I heard people buffering ultra.
---------------------------
----------------------------
--------------- —–----
—------—-------–
I don’t think it’s really possible to ensure your fighting game has this much depth or this little depth and tons of people are guaranteed to play it unless you’re a big company like Nintendo or Capcom, so it’s kind of a moot point to begin with. But–
I think there are a lot of competitive-minded players out there that would probably do more than just give fighters the time of day, if the genre didn’t have this stigma that ‘everything is so complex that even learning the basics/fundamentals is hard’. It’s a perception thing.
If something like a Smash game gets people like that to look the other way and get their feet through the door long enough to see why traditional FGs are worth sinking time into to begin with, I do think that’s a win/win for the FGC as a whole.
(and yeah, Ono is a lot of things, a prophet is not one of them)
Or being able to do standing 720s leading you so you can use it in more places.