That point was more about chained lights linking into mediums, which is where most of the 1f links in SFIV came from.
That still doesnât address the fact that crouch tech OS is exactly that, an OPTION SELECT.
Motivation is one thing, but what is important in the design of a competitive game isnât exactly subjective. Whether or not performing hard links/combos provides you motivation or satisfaction is irrelevant. As David Sirlin pointed out in his book âPlaying to Winâ, the correct attitude towards competitive play is to âplay to win, not do âdifficult movesââ.
Iâm a regular dude who canât pull off basic shit in sf but that evil ryu avatar got virtua fighter all wrong.
Sf is 2d, vf is 3d. 3d games is all about where you move, how you move, why you moved, what youâre moving away/towards, controlling space around you and stuff.
Sf has that, but has wayy less focus on just that.
3d fighters are more complex by default because of extra movement options being thrown into the mix, and since they 3d you have to be more weary by default of how you play it.
in a 3d fighter, you have 6 ways to get in from JUST movement options.
in a 2d fighter itâs simplified to 2. Neither is better than the other, at ALL. Just different.
Doa and sf are the shit for different reasons. Mkx is a strange little creature, it feels like alittle of both but that doesnât detract from it in the slightest either.
bullshit combos arenât Important, fighting games arenât mind chess, you can repeat the words âbuttonsâ , âfootsiesâ , âneutralâ A thousand times but it still wonât change the fact that for a huge portion
of the community, combos and a certain level of rewarding execution is a key part of an enjoyable fighting game. And nobody can invalidate that, gamedev or not.
Completely agree, sometimes people forget itâs just a video game and avenues of enjoyment arenât just the competitive mindset, I love doing combos and watching crazy combo videos. Hell, you can even fuck around in MOBAs with dumb shit and theyâre the dominant kings of e-sports.
There will still be high level executions to learn in SFV. You canât just remove execution from fighting games and just because SFV doesnât have all of the SFIV executions doesnât mean it wonât have its own SFV executions. The executions for combos and neutral differ wildly between different SF games. SFIV, ST and CVS2 focus heavily on links. Alpha and SF3 do not but still have their own things.
These things are usually learned by the players, not just pasted into the game by devs necessarily.
I think this is the basis for how SF5 is being designed. They want to pull in as many players as they can cross platform, so itâs being designed with a simpler approach. It kind of reminds me of what DICE has done to Starwars battlefront. Theyâve stripped it down so anyone can play it and enjoy it then they will make cash from add ons and game purchases, but it plays nothing like their previous in depth shooters.
Whether this works in the bigger picture long term I donât know. In a way itâs the technical side of the game and its development that keep many coming back and the competitive scene sort of drives the game, not the casual players.
Weâre just going to have to wait and see though, hopefully they get the balance right so both sets of players can enjoy it.
Ehhh, saying SFV doesnât play like any of the past iterations is just not true. I get it, you like SFIV, but jeez really?
And the idea that capcom has the same idea as dice isnât correct either. Dice made a Star Wars game with battlefield mechanics but didnât want a battlefield clone. Battlefield is a arcade shooter with some sim mechanics, battlefront never had any intention on being any sort of sim. Also what other platforms are they pulling from? SFV will be available on less platforms over its life span than SFIV. There isnât any logic in that statement. Four had huge numbers from the start because itâs street fighter, and because it was a good fighting game on a platform that was void of that. not because the majority of people love FADC omg look at this combo.
Itâs not true on a surface level, since it will always include similarities due to the genre. Iâm pointing out theyâve clearly targeted a simpler system. No HKD, less ranged throws, less hit confirms, easier execution, counter hits on DP, no safe reversals. How can you deny that those things donât appeal to casual players?
Iâm not saying thatâs a bad thing, Iâm saying itâs clear the objectives are different this time. Theyâve flat out said the game will be updated via DLC.
The difference between SFIV upgrade model and SFV is there will be one physically release⌠If you donât think we wonât be getting super SFV patch 2.0 then idk. How does updating a game via dlc mean itâs more casual oriented? I agree some of he changes are aimed at lowering the barrier of entry because there are folks out there that deem some of the mechanics from the predecessor unessasary, actual we never mind. Donât understand the dlc angle though.
I think casual in the gaming sense as looked upon as bad maybe that is why I didnât get your angle at first.
By pulling together two systems they effectively double the player pool online ( the casual arena) which helps with the longevity of the game ( in theory) and also opens up the possibility of online tournaments. There are more online players than tournament players.
With regards the DLC Iâm simply pointing out they are trying to generate game life and cash by updating the game via DLC each 6-12 months which seems to be where games are headed now.
Those sound more like things that appeal to those old school players who didnât like SFIV. Half of those things you mentioned make the game play more like 3rd Strike.
But you donât think that same casual audience wasnât there at the start of SFIV life span? I think the idea is the start something new and build and improve upon that.
I got you now, Iâm not going to tell anyone to take a wait and see approach but Iâm not going to damn the game off of 2 betas and a PC hack, especially with all the changes that happen with each version.
Simple doesnât always mean less complicated. Also, counter hits on DP and no safe reversals pretty much instantly caters to the hardcore. There is no noob or scrub that will like being counter hit on DP or not having a safe reversal. Thatâs why when I play the beta everyone that is mashing on shit that would have had a chance against me in SFIV, just gets wrecked quickly in V. People have to actually block sometimes now (or resort to jumping backwards/backdashing to corner which is OG scrub defense) and the ones that donât block are pretty much throwing all their chips on the table trying to win now.
Older games had very few HKD things so if youâre catering to old hardcore men, removing HKDâs makes sense generally. Less throw range is arguable. Some old people like big throw ranges, others donât. Less hit confirms is arguable also since the game may end up like 3S where there is an emphasis on one hit confirms which is just as difficult or arguably more difficult than one frame links in some cases as far as what you have to account for.
Easier execution for links is true, but there may be other things that are found that force heavier execution. Bnbs that require just frame execution just doesnât make sense for promoting footsies any way. Just makes it take longer for the nubs and scrubs to learn footsies and itâs pretty much a design flaw IMO when the basic ways to land damage are locked behind heavy execution. In other older games the heavy execution was set usually for the more flashy combos and setups. Not the basic aspects of landing damage. Itâs like being forced to do the moonwalk before you can do your lay up. Why canât you just do the lay up and score 2?