So I’m guessing your brother and sister perform well in Smash tournaments?
And am I only person in the world who ever got a smash when he wanted to do a tilt in a tense tournament match?
Get out of here with that shit…
I never said hadoukens and shoryuken were easy for total newcomer but smash sure isn’t as well.
If you want a game with truly easy controls Soul Calibur might be the most fitting one from what I know.
Smash is easy for newcomers.
I don’t give a shit about your playintrade tournaments.
Your inability to use an analog stick has nothing to do with how difficult the controls are.
I mean for fuck sakes, you stated the flaw with two buttons, but that’s not a flaw with smash at all. No matter what character you pick up day 1, if you know what each of the directions do, you know about what you are going to get. Up is up, down is down, left is left, and right is right. It’s NOTHING like Tekken where each button controls limbs, and with little corelation to what they actually do. Smash is incredibly intuitive. You, again, just really suck at it.
You’re like an xbro who claims that the controller is better for FPSes simply because YOU mess up sometimes.
Getting tilt up without jumping or up smash is a pain in the ass.
Again, it isn’t. You have to jam the analog stick up to get either of those. Learn to analog people. Stop using d-pads, sticks and keyboards. 7 year olds get this concept, I’m always amazed to see people who don’t.
It’s almost like what you’re used to affects how easy it is to grasp a control scheme!
Hey if you want a fighting game with easy inputs, those games exist. Go play them.
Wow its been a while since Anemone said so much dumb shit.
First of all, thanks for not resorting to needless name-calling, everyone.
THIS, F###ing THIS (and I LOVE that Hectacom liked it too, double win)! You just admitted it! The faster people realize this was all I was saying, the faster we can move on.
I understand it’s easier to argue against “one-button fighter” over “inputs were arbitrarily assigned,” but the minute you said this, you agreed with my fundamental point.
I am indeed saying that the input has no relation to the move executed. That’s what I originally getting at:
It’s something people have to learn to accept. The minute you admit this truth, the sooner you have to admit that “execution as a tool to making the game fair” is not something that should come up, unless it is the ONLY way to balance a game. If that’s how narrow anyone (not you) thinks, then there’s no point in speaking with them about this.
I agree wholeheartedly with your Tekken comment about taking years of training to execute, lol! That was my WHOLE point. Yes, the kinect was a little over-the-top and I apologize if that came off as offensive, but you’ve hit what I’ve said bullseye (but someone how made it sound like you were disagreeing with me the whole time, lol). Controls != result.
@Gimnbo, that’s what I think. I strongly think the original design was so everything could be put in, not something they had planned with 10+ years foresight.
@tataki (and Anemone), you just pointed out another aspect of “controls” I was talking about. If SSB seems hard-yet-simple, do you feel that’s a flaw in the control scheme (as in, are you admitting there MAY be a better way for things to be done?), or do you think it’s just part of the game and accept it as is?
Does everyone see this? If you think SF4 controls are “the best of all possible worlds” then you have a screw loose. As soon as we establish this as something reasonable, then does my opinion seem that far-out?
I don’t know who Mike Z is, but I would like to know if he thinks “SF4 controls are flawless in design and schema.” Of course, just because he is a game designer doesn’t make him more right off the bat. What he says has to make sense. Even world-renown physicists can be wrong (Tyson… 
)
So what is your actual point?
I think you’re missing the primary point: many of these moves would have to change, especially since Capcom has to keep in mind all levels of play when making their games. Not to mention all charge characters would require immediate changes to their moves.
If there’s one thing you’ll learn talking to video game fans over and over, the one thing they hate most is change. Any change and all change. There will ALWAYS be a group who hates that change. In a really stupid and impracticle hypothetical, let’s say that Blazblue came out before Guilty Gear (yeah I know, it makes little sense given the evolution of the genre, but just go with me here) and Guilty Gear appeared exactly as it was in GGXXAC. Even a game as universally loved within it’s community as GGXXAC would be subject to a group of people who were annoyed at the changes. That’s not to say that those who currently love Guilty Gear would hate it if this stupid hypothetical was true, but there would be a group who did and would be vocal about it.
Even more, look at balance changes. I’ve never seen a single complete balance update by any company that everyone (even with a bar set for intelligence) was happy with. There are those who feel Guilty Gear XX Slash was the best Guilty Gear, and there are those who think Alpha 3 is preferable to Alpha 2. You can look back at any across the board game changing balance update from any developer and any publisher, and I guarantee you will find those players who preferred a previous version of the game.
It’s like the Third Strike players who are up in arms against even the notion of a balance change, not the silly ones who think the game is one of the most balanced fighters out there because a Japanese player can showup American players with Q, but the players who say things akin to “We like the game’s balance as it stands. We like the unbalance, this is the game we love”
Now, you’re talking about a fundamental, core change to the game and characters themselves. That’s not something that will go over well with the vast majority of ANY fighting game. Look at the response to opening the window for 720 input HDR. there are people who HATE this seemingly sensible change. So why are people against changing the game’s inputs? It’s basically a mirror of what the third strike players said. They like the game’s execution barrier. They like the difficulty, this is the game they love.
Regardless of whether or not their are some objective points to be made, I think your largely missing this point here.
lol the change argument, really?
hey go cut your dick off, change is good!!!
oh you don’t want to? then you must think change is bad!!!
there is good change and bad change. Fighting games for the most part over the last few years have all gotten bad changes to the system. slower fighters, comeback mechanics, lack of mixups compared to previous years, easier damage output on combos etc… what changes have the tournament players received? net code is still garbage and they’re making the games easier? no top player wants to hear that shit.
change is subjective. I’m sure the slaves from Africa embraced the change with open arms right? god damn them for not wanting to change! change is only good when its for the better and whom it betters depends on what perspective you’re looking @ it from.
You’re right. By all means, I don’t think established genres should change, I’m just talking about future implementation (Toshinden Remake! j/k). I was just using SF and other games for the sake of examples. All fighters have a system in place when first made, and it’s hard to deviate from that (I hated that turn around button in one of the Guilty Gear games).
However, I think there’s room for more innovation. All 2D fighters borrowed from SF, including controls. Hell, even 3D fighters use a 2D control system using an imaginary line (ironically, I think Toshinden was the first to have a sidestep feature, but it shows how much “copying” instead of “resolving” goes on). SSB was the only game to go in a wholly different direction, IMO. It was refreshing. We still don’t have a real 3D fighting game simply because we’re stuck approaching it from a 2D perspective (Bushido Blade was the “best” attempt, which shows how far we have to go).
Unfortunately, my full explanation of my opinion will be too fucking long to explain out (see the responses in scrubquotes), but I hope you see where I’m going with this. People on this forum have this holy belief that fighting games are the best they can possibly be in regards to controls and that there is no way to improve on that whatsoever. IMO, if people open their minds, we can get even better fighters in the future. Also, you’ll be hard pressed to find examples in history where “first version” and “best version” are one in the same, especially with programming and design.
Finally, don’t think I want older fighting games to change (or be redone, I hate remakes). I enjoy them as they are now. But I’ve played some pretty awesome games that have one quirk or that one design idea that really pushed the boundaries (Portal?).
@shoultzula
No one called for “easier.” Also, I didn’t say “change is good,” but “change may be better” since “we’re not in the best of all possible” systems (unless you think we are, ala Candid).
EDIT:
Just saw something that confirms my point:
A list of “happy accidents,” some of which are control-oriented. This would suggest things aren’t as perfect as infinitely possible and that there’s definitely room for improvement if not complete change (not to SF! In general!).
i was talking to anemone, wasn’t directed towards you. That guy has tried to swing that argument several times and I’m just tired of looking @ it. Its moronic, terrible and doesn’t make much sense @ all
This is usually code for “I can’t explain my position.”
I don’t think you’ll find a lot of people who disagree with you on this when you state it like that, but it’s pretty facile. Your problem isn’t that you have an opinion that’s offensive or difficult to understand, but that you’re really bad at actually expressing it. Instead of just clarifying when people disagree you get bogged down in semantics and accusations. Why did it take two threads and several pages of writing when you could have just said this in the first place?
This is coming from someone who can’t hold an argument and resorts to straw man tactics and “you don’t know how to argue” (ad hominem, just like this quote and my sentence!). I have thoroughly explained it, and making a proposal takes much longer if you’ve ever written one (sans name-calling).
I explained it quite well the first time around. People just want an easier topic to disagree with, especially you. Yes, my position was “facile.” I dont’ know why people took the time to blow it up (and change it).
Stop adding nothing to the topic and yell at your straw man. He’s the source of your angst. Not me.
Straw man has been said. Time to close down this shit thread.
. . . okay.
Stop this argument while you can and accept defeat. Trust me, I know.
What frustrates me is that you don’t actually go through people’s arguments and attempt to refute them. You just zero in on the insults you get, then reiterate your points as if no one ever replied to you.
The guy who replied to you didn’t only say “In other words, you don’t know shit about fuck.” He said many other things, too, but you essentially ignored them.
holy shit thanks for veering this off topic completely
though the original topic was bound to get some flames going as well