Try reading my post(s) for the answer smart guy.
If you don’t give a shit what people think, don’t make a thread asking what they think.
Its funny how he says theres no a3 tournaments. yet theresone every year at the Toronto tournaments. And then theres the A-cho match vids that seem to happen more than often. I mean how could this possibly be?
And 3s not a tournament game? Wtf would you like us to play? Rock siccors paper? Prolly not because, you know ho you can link a low short to rock attact and the guy cant parry it, That shits broken. I guess games like chess and checkers is out of the question as well.
Geez we gotta get with the times and buckle down with some mvsh just like this guy says. :rolleyes:
I didn’t make the thread ya dumb fak! Maybe read the first post ya idiot
you didnt define what makes a tourney worthy game… you mentioned guilty gear and you only did so bc it was fun to watch the finals for those tourneys… pls tell me that cant be your reasoning smart guy
playing a game in a tourney like it was a casual game = good tourney game?
another thing you shouldnt judge what most top players do to win a tourney and then blame that on the make of the game… many chars in third strike can take the cake in that game you just dont see it happen that often bc most top players simply want to rely on what they know will work with minimum effort… do i think its cool to watch chun vs chun matches all day… fuck no
the thing about it is winners like winning and they’ll do what it takes to make it happen and if it makes for “boring” matches then so be it… that doesnt mean its not tourney worthy it just means you cant stand to watch that shit… and thats ok, i hate watching that shit too… but thats why i have to give props to the aussies. Those motherfuckers dont give a shit they play with heart and run with their fav chars not just the ones that are easier to win with… perfect example this dude Kechu, who imo is probably the best alex player in the world, took the last aussie tourney with relative ease against chuns, yuns and the whole shabang… and dont knock the aussies most of those fools are buff in 3s they can hang with the japanese.
i think if americans followed that creed of play style you’d see more variety in the matches bc you can play 3s dynamically the game was built to be played with however you want to use… the thing is people are so used to seeing the top players stick with tiers that it leaks downward and everybody wants to be the next jwong chun or ohnuki… everyone wants to be umehara ken or pyro yun… you follow?
your not stating the faults found inherent in the game your stating faults inherent in the FGC as a whole… and again i can agree with you that most 3s tourney finals are boring as hell to watch but you will find nuggets of gold if you know where to look… shit just recently vic vances duds took out amir chun at a tourney over here at AI… that shit was beefy
Yeah, I’ve got that, I’ve been lookin’ for other SRK members but have found none.
also xvsf is dope and should continue to run side tourneys at evo… ill see you fuckers there… ill be the dude beasting with juggs/ryu :wgrin:
lol you sound like I hate the game, 1st of all you misunderstand. Ive watched people play in tournaments all they do is infinites unless there using Storm. You shouldn’t post anymore, in fact its people like you that make me want to become a premy. MSH is a far better game then XvSF, its not all about landing a infinite combo, you and all you people who are wondering why no one plays this game in tournaments have no idea what your saying.
I know and other people already know why this game isnt in tournaments, and if you still cant understand your a fool.
I like XvSF but playing it, cometitvely it isnt fun. Like people said before a 10000000000000 times who ever lands a infinite wins.
[media=youtube]QDi95CX5ZNk[/media]
[media=youtube]PWrJyF0aNtY[/media]
As you see the infinites arent even hard at all so why not use them? Its like playing Cable and not using his AVBX3
A good game doesn’t greatly restrict what is effective at higher levels. Of course the play at high levels is better but when you find a lot of what you did at intermediate levels obsolete without any real replacement you have a problem.
I don’t want to get into whether US 3S players are lazy or why the 3S tourney scene is the way it is. But the fact is 3S tourneys at Evo use about 1% of the total gameplay available in 3S. You have a game that lets you do a whole bunch of stuff and choose a bunch of characters but in the end most of it just doesn’t matter. The game is degenerate. It’s like having a character with 200 moves but you only use 3 of them.
In some games a higher degree of difficulty translates into more effectiveness- makes sense right? In XSF the easiest combos are the most effective ones and the crazy hard ones are relatively pointless. Higher risk, lower reward - bad.
XSF has a very open combo system that encourages you to have fun and do crazy shit - except that stuff isn’t as effective as a combo I can do after practicing for 5 minutes. The range of available things you can do is huge but the range of effective things is much much smaller.
It comes down to how much of the available gameplay is viable at high levels? No game is at 100% but that is the ideal.
XSF is particularly bad because the thing that many people find the most fun, the creative combos and resets and such, basically don’t matter at high levels at all. There isn’t any point in a reset when there are no dizzies, low damage scaling and you can do 100% damage off an infinite. And there isn’t any point in being creative when jumping and doing the same 3 moves over and over is a sure win once your combo is started.
Now of course some people don’t find the combo engine of XSF the fun part, they enjoy the positioning, avoiding infinites and setting them up, etc. Fine. That’s a valid opinion - but not a popular one. If you read through this thread and others like it you will see time and time again the reason people like XSF is the openness of the engine and specifically the combo freedom you have.
Which in the end doesn’t matter at all.
yawn
:rolleyes: wont even tuch it
i see what you’re saying and i can agree with most of it however i still fail to see why these games aren’t good tourney games… to me it seems mostly just opinion on whether you would want to play these games in a tourney as opposed to them just being unbalanced or broken thus rendering these games unplayable in a competitive format… fuck i really have no idea what the metric is to gauge what makes a game tourney worthy… cause you could say balance, but then you got games like MvC2 (no hate) where the char balance is completely lopsided but people still play the shit out of that…
Argument:
A game is problematically designed if the high level play strategies dominate lower-level playing strategies.
Countargument:
A game where “intermediate” strategies are very much competitive against “high level” strategies blurs the true difference in skill levels between players.
I won’t speak on 3S as it is simply not my strongest suit and we are indeed discussing XSF… but…
The above logic is carried over into your arguments against XSF as a competitive game, so let’s work with that, shall we?
Disagree in many ways. First of all, the psychological edge. Second of all, the flexibility of these “relatively pointless” combos is not to be denied. High level XSF is all about play for space. Set-ups, mix-ups, mind games, staggering hits for more range, flying screen deterioration, it’s all very circumstancially effective and I think it’s more than a tad ignorant to simply dismiss the effectiveness of the comboes and say that “oh, the game is all about 3 hit corner infinites.”
This I will agree with.
I just completely disagree with this statement. How are you getting this combo off? Under what circumstances?
You can’t be serious. Hmm. XSF has damaging special moves. Does this mean that pokes into supers should be a viable tournament strategy? Oh wait. People do that shit all the time. Ever thrown down with someone who could run a decent Bison?
… I don’t mean to be presumptuous, but I just get the impression that you might have gotten beasted by some kids because your execution wasn’t tight and you didn’t properly play for space, which led to you getting cheesed out one too many times.
If this is the case, that, I am not sorry to say, is entirely your fault.
-
Resets maintain offensive tempo. Additionally, it’s your perogative whether or not to let someone out of an infinite. That, my friend, is called a handicap. Like in Golf. Helps you get your mind game on.
-
No dizzies? Uhh… umm… uhhhhhhhhhhhh… XD
HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO
If i could phoneticize a wolverine claw noise i would put it here too.
But how are you getting the combo started? You haven’t addressed this once. You’ve just fixated on the ability of people to corner infinite.
Not to mention the fact that the “crazy and fun but unplayable comboes” often set up these infinites. I like that people can either find 1) the combo engine or 2) technical play to be the selling point of the game, but not both. Maybe I missed something…
Put together, your two selling points of the game perfectly summarize why it is such a fantastic competitive game.
Seriously, if we come down to Evo, let’s arrange some XSF. You and anyone else are welcome to play some XSF against us (the Ottawa gang). Given that you know so much about this game and it’s obviously simply about fluking out a corner infinite, you should have no prooooooblems trouncing the rest of us philistines. I mean, lord knows that all the advanced movement, mixups, FSD combos, resets and the like will be nothing before your corner infinite MADNESS 
margalis your posts are an absolute joke. You’ve shown to know nothing about this game…despite your claim to being able to figure out the ‘winning’ solution in 5 minutes… oh man. It’s way too funny and annoying at the same time. There’s so much to address but I don’t want to bother (the reset bullshit is fucking too much though - you know NOTHING).
You’ve also managed to label CvS2, 3S and Alpha 3 as bad tournament games… this is too much…good entertainment though…
man if you guys roll thru im definitely down for some xvsf action… the games been getting a resurgence of love at james games and super arcade over here… we aren’t beasts or nothing but we dont suck either:wink:
The difference being that those three characters have solid counters (e.g. Shuma, Jug) removing a lot of the sting of their dominance. Spidey and Wolvie are good, but far from unbeatable. IM is middle-tier.
I have won many, many matches with characters you classify as “mid tier” against characters you classify as top tier. Just for starters, Spidey and Wolvie have no low-hitting ground combo that will result in a launch against a high-blocking Jug (which removes the “one low short” threat) and neither one of them can combo off of a throw that is midscreen or in the opponent’s corner (which makes the throw/no throw guessing game vs. Shuma extremely unbalanced, as it results in ~15% damage if they guess right but death if they guess wrong).
IM has too many problems with Spidey and Wolvie to be considered top tier.
Sim/Juggy > James Games!
…okay, not really, but I wish 
IMO, you have a good argument, except for this.
Rock/paper/scissors use 100% of the available gameplay at high levels. 3 moves (and maybe some shenanigans with your hand).
Marvel uses just a small percentage of its avaliable; 70000 possibilities or something like this.
Percentage is absolutely irrelevant. What should matter (for your criteria) is variety in high level play. Take MvC2: Each Magneto traingle jump has a different height, a different timing, a different goal and etc, but iunteremdiate players only see combos.
Bad players see just a tiny bit of the game. There is barely any in depth strategy. So when they see a high level video, they have no clue about the advanced stuff (its just snapback, its just low forward into super, its just 3 hit infinites) is a reaction form people who simply cant comprehend what they’re seeing.
My point is:
- Only high level matters
- How cool or varied middle level game is irrelevant for tourney play
- Percentage of stuff that is kept from sucky levels in high levels is not a sign of a good game. Ground AHVB s would not make high level Marvel cooler.
I didn’t phrase that very well I admit. My point is that the game should not radically change. Of course some character use and move use and strategies are going to be different to some degree. Obviously the exact same strategies aren’t going to be effective at all levels of play, but the overall tenor of the game should not radically change.
If you look at a game like CVS2 low-fierce era, the high level game plays totally differently from mid-level - it basically isn’t the same game any more.
Let me make it clear once again that I like XSF. It does take skill and it is fun. Setting up infinites does take skill, as does avoiding them. Getting people into the position you want them takes skill. It has mindgames. It has strategy.
My problem again is that what people enjoy at the middle levels, really the main selling point of the game, has very little bearing on high-level play.
Sorry, I meant “undizzies” there, not “dizzies”.
Why would you let someone out of an infinite? My point (badly made thanks to that typo) was that in MVC2 with undizzies and damage scaling resets are a good strategy. In XSF an inifnite is always going to kill outright or dizzy - so why bother reseting? Yeah, it is your perogative I guess but if you are playing to win that doesn’t make any sense. Who handicaps themself in serious play?
That’s an example of a fun option that is irrelevant in a tournament setting. Whereas again in MVC2 resets are more viable for a variety of reasons. Not only because of damage scaling and undizzies but also because doing damage faster matters more with the 2 partners healing.
The only reason to go for a reset in XSF is that you aren’t in position to land an infinite. That’s it.
I know that being good at XSF is far more than learning infinites.
**Look at what CallMeANewb wrote above. That infinites are cheesy and deserve a soft-ban. **
CallMeANewb is an XSF advocate. He started the damn thread! And in his mind, infinites are cheesy, not fun, and should potentially be soft-banned. Those are his words, not mine.
A lot of XSF players think like CallMeANewb.
Personally I think that when the dominant tournament strategies are not fun to use or play against that the game isn’t a good tournament game. Winning and having fun are not mutually exclusive.
A lot of XSF fans don’t enjoy tournament-style XSF, even the ones that create threads advocating XSF.
If ground HVB was viable that would make Marvel .01% better. Moves that are totally useless in high level play are kind of silly - waste of time by Capcom to put them in. Obviously you don’t want to see supposedly high-level players trading ground HVBs with each other but more moves being useful at high levels is a good thing.
Percentage vs. absolute number, you can quibble. One thing that annoys me is devs spending time on features that have no use in the end. And it is a problem when people enjoy the full breadth of the game only to find out that most of that breadth doesn’t matter at all.
ground hyperviper beam sidesteps projectiles, it’s pretty fucking funny and really useful vs HSF
random
Margalis, You said the top known “competively playable” games aren’t competitively playable. CallMeANewb said that ST OSagat/Vega are softbanned in Japan, to make a point that all many competitive games have simple, boring techniques at the highest rung of play that are annoying to play against.
I bet checkers doesn’t. Go play checkers. We’ll have fun.
Kthx.
OSagat and Claw are not soft-banned at EVO or anywhere in the US, and reports of their soft-ban in Japan are exaggerated.
The fact is OSagat and Claw have some simple techniques but those techniques are not super effective. Yes they are good but they aren’t the two best characters in the game.
That argument has no merit. US ST players are fine playing against OSagat and Claw, those matchups are fun and those strats don’t dominate. How often does Claw win tournies or even place in the top few spots? It’s not like ST tournaments are consistently dominated by repeated Tiger Shots and Wall Dives.
Compare Claw and OSagat to Chun and Yun in 3S. Chun and Yun do consistently dominate, their simple boring techniques are the best techniques in the game. The fact is ST is not dominated by simple, boring techniques, which is why it is still on the tournament scene. Character selection and tactics have not reached a degenerate state, the game is still diverse and healthy.
My CVS2 comments apply only to low-fierce era CVS2. (As I stated many times) The game during the low-fierce era was a crap tournament game. Clearly that was the low point of the CVS2 tournament scene - I don’t see how anyone could disagree with that. Thankfully we got beyond the point where every player’s strategy was to go with two jobbers and Sagat low fierce batting cleanup. When your entire tournament scene is defined by one move you have a problem. (Or, in the case of 3S today, 2 moves)
I’m the only person who has even bothered to state what it means for a game to be tournament worthy or competitively playable.
The best CallMeANewb could offer was that popularity is the same as tournament worthy, which indicates that MK is the most tournament worthy game. I notice he didn’t persue that line of reasoning…