I wish the drive to charlotte wasn’t 2 hours :lame:
Sounds good baby. If everyone that is money matching could make sure they are they by 2pm and I will get it scheduled to be on the stream first thing.
What is the confirmation on the MM’s? Who is it going to be, what game, and how much, and what system would you guys prefer? I will make sure to have them set up and ready to go 
I don’t buy this entirely. Your argument is based on a pretty big assumption, namely that everyone should accept Smash Bros as a competitive game and therefore accept any rules which would enhance its competitive viability. There is nothing ‘wrong’ with this train of thought, but many people who would disagree with you aren’t arguing that.
The typical argument is more accurately described like this: Smash is not a competitive game or Smash shouldn’t be treated as a competitive game.The fact that you have to alter the game so drastically in order to make it competitive is a no go for many people. You might be happy trying to force a round block into a square hole, many other smash players might be-- but if you can’t understand why others don’t then this discussion is going to get really one sided, really fast.
Second thing I have an issue with. You frame this as an issue of ‘bowing down to the developers’ but that’s a silly way to look at it. Nobody here has a shrine to Ono in their house, many people simply don’t want their community to be split apart as a result of uncertainty over rules and regulations. It opens up the game to a substantial amount of player and regional bias that can and has killed scenes. Do you know what happened with Sirlin’s changes to Super Turbo? He was ‘sure’ he knew what was best too. Do you remember or in fact know what happened to Soul Calibur IV?
We’ve had tournaments in parts of this state run by people who try to force their own rules and ideas on to a game because they think they know best (anyone remember the 6 hit combo rule someone tried to instate in GG that time) and I can’t think of a single time it ever actually improved anything. Ever. Why would we open up every game to this kind of mob rule? People have enough problems picking up a game simply because it might be updated at some point in the future, how is turning each community into the Smash Community going to help that? It just adds more dysfunction, more trepidation, more doubt.
Japan is the highwater mark here, if we play a gimped version of the game, it limits ours potential in the long run because we’re suddenly not playing the same game anymore. Maybe a pocket of players in one region play by their own rules, and suddenly instead of the entire fighting game community learning and developing Ragna strategies, people are instead learning and developing 11 or 12 different versions of Ragna to accommodate all these factions. All it takes is one tiny change for a game to become something else entirely. What would Soul Calibur look like if people banned ringouts back in the day? People thought they were too powerful in the early days of 1/2. I can guarantee you people thought about it. How would BB have shaped up as a* series *if we jumped the gun early on and banned characters or mechanics that seemed initially overpowered in Calamity Trigger? Would we have to go through a reappraisal and successive fight for each sequel, who gets to determine these rules and who has the authority to make them legitimate?
How far would rushdown and keep away have advanced as play styles if people simply changed the clock to infinite early on because they didn’t like wins by time over. These changes don’t occur in a vacuum,* they have real effects that aren’t always even limited to that specific game*. Blazblue was built on the back of games like Guilty Gear, Guilty Gear was built on the back of innovations introduced in Street Fighter Alpha, and so on. If you don’t know the history, don’t try to change the future.The 2D fighting games in general are sort of like an ecosystem that has evolved fairly organically because the rules we’ve all been playing by have been set down a pretty long time ago and they really don’t change much. You don’t just start adding a little chlorine to the gene pool because you think it might be neat, the chances are good that you’ll just fuck things up.
If a game isn’t to your liking, play another one. Contribute to the evolution of a game by finding what works and what doesn’t so the next one can be improved, this system works. It’s produced games like 3S, GGAC, BBCS2, Super Turbo, KOF 98/2002 and Tekken 5, it’s produced games like Arcana 3, Soul Calibur 2 and VF5, even MVC2 if that’s your thing. There is a reason that all the games people generally consider to be great are sequels. It’s because great games develop slowly over time, not with knee jerk changes and edits.
Sounds good, and fair enough.
Gears 3 if I had $250 to throw away I would, but I can’t justify betting that on a game I really didn’t think you were serious. I’ll do $50 in gears 3 first to 10 kills. MLG rules lancer/gnasher for starting weapons. No map pickups/smokes just straight up 1 on 1. As far as a map goes do you have any preference? The middle of Mercy or Thrashball seem best fitted for a 1 on 1 to me.
As for Tekken 6, what do you want the rules to be? As I said I don’t play the game so first to 5 is all I really know about, do you normally play best of 3 or 5 in tekken? I really don’t care just let me know.
EDIT: (just saw this)
You are right, smash is not a competitive game with default settings. That’s why the settings must be changed to a competitive standard, and there is no fragmenting of the competitive smash community (well that was before they banned metaknight but even that is widely accepted), the no items/neutral stages are universally agreed upon. It’s much different then say banning a character in street fighter. We are talking about a game mechanic that effects all matches in every game if allowed to be on, and effects it in a random and anti-competitive way.
Now all of the other games you mentioned, I don’t have deep enough knowledge to discuss what should or shouldn’t be banned in a game. But I do feel that the MvC3 community (and by this I mean worldwide, not just U.S) would have been better off if X-Factor was not used in competitive play. If the game had an option to turn off x factor like smash has an option to turn off items, I don’t see why we wouldn’t want to turn it off.
What is this teams rule called? I can’t remember for the life of me…
2v2 each player plays then the winners of each group play unless both players win.
@Jaguar Unfortunately (or fortunately) I’ll be at Season’s Beatings the week of that particular tourney. I should make it no problem to all the rest of the tourneys though.
I’ll probably be in Charlotte the night before if I go, so getting there before 2 wouldn’t be a problem. Only thing I know is confirmed so far is me vs Sofa in 3S FT5 for $50. I’d prefer for it to be on 360. Trying to goad him into AE and MvC3 as well but that has yet to be confirmed.
Me and sofa T6 FT5 $50 , me and sofa gears 3 FT10 kills $50. I prefer 360, pretty sure sofa plays on 360 as well but not entirely sure.
Sounds good. I will let Jaguar know to bring both systems for the stream.
I will ask Priest to bring his setup for Gears. I will not be putting that on the stream though, only fighters, sorry. lol.
Who else?
Honestly, at this point, you don’t see XF used for comebacks nearly as often anymore. It’s generally used to kill the “threat” character off at high levels, and without it you would lose a good amount of the strategy involved in playing a matchup.
Exactly, the thing is you’re too close to the ground level to ever really effectively make those calls. Letting the game evolve naturally is what maximizes its potential, it’s what makes sequels stronger because they’re built on changes that take the full extent of the game into account. Smash is a unique case because you’re changing the game just to get in on the same level as a Street Fighter or whatever, it’s a different thing entirely and it’s not an ideology I’d like to see exported into the mainstream because the results are generally ‘bad’ (like when MLG banned Gouken and Seth at different points, I’m sure they thought they knew what they were doing too).
At high levels unless phoenix is involved X factor is used as soon as you touch the point character, to kill it then mix up the incoming second character and kill that one as well. The game really has come down to this at very high levels. And while I don’t play at this level, I’ve seen an awful lot of it and it’s been done to me an awful lot as well.
Phoenix matches are a whole other subject and played very differently, so I won’t touch on that here.
But if you all would honestly leave X Factor in the game rather then turn the feature off if given the opportunity then I’m missing something and clearly don’t get it.
I’d rather have it all on the table and fix it from there than instead of simply sweeping it under the rug. You can’t just remove one part of the equation in all but the most extreme cases I feel. That’s the different between broken and unbalanced. If something makes the game broken, you’ll know. It won’t be a question or argument, that’s why three months from now people won’t be talking about X factor anymore, yet ten years later you’ll still get laughs with a good petshop reference. Think longterm.
Well I don’t think X Factor is “broken” or unbalanced, for many reasons that is way to much to fit into this post. But I do feel that the game would be a lot more fun without it, the metagame would become much more deeper, matches much less random, and overall more fun.
If the viewpoint is only ban something that is obviously broken that breaks the game, then I can understand why x factor is not something you’d want to see banned. So then I guess the discussion is: does something really need to be broken to be removed? Please note that I’m talking about game mechanics and not characters here. For example while anyone can tell you how much I hate phoenix I understand fully and agree that banning her from MvC3 shouldn’t be done.
Lets take the DLC glitch for example if we stick with marvel. I don’t think it required being removed from the game but no one was crying when it was announced it was removed from ultimate. Everyone is happy X Factor got nerfed and I’m sure everyone would have been even happier if it was nerfed much more or even set as optional and by default was off.
Wolverine and phoenix nerfs were very welcomed, along with haggar and tron assists.
My point is that while I by no means think all of the things that got nerfed should have been banned in MvC3, the community clearly is happy when some changes are made and can universally agree that some aspects of the game just had to go. I don’t wish to nor do I think I can change the FGC’s thinking on removing things from games, and really what you said makes sense - the FGC follows a set of rules and would rather not play a game with stupid mechanics then change the game to be playable. And maybe this is for the better, and forces companies to make good games and put care into them (unless your name is Capcom and anything you release gets played now a days).
But that’s my viewpoint on it, and if I had some magical control over the global mvc3 scene as soon as I heard about what X-Factor does I would have removed it from competitive play as its clearly there to cater to the casual crowd and sell more discs.
I see where you’re coming from and respect your viewpoints, I see how you arrived at them and find your conclusions to be sound even if I do not personally share them. I’m only talking formally because it’s bleeding over from this historical methodology paper I’m writing for class and I can’t stop myself fffffffffffffffffffffffff.
Because our community isn’t run by a bunch of scrubs, like the Smash community is.
DHC Glitch had the unfortunate effect of causing team composition to, often times, be forced around characters who could take advantage of it. Nonetheless, Capcom didn’t get rid of it because the type of knee jerk reactions that would have wanted it gone are the same shared by the “casual crowd” that you claim to not want to cater to. This was also the case with XFactor; what top players wanted it removed from the game? I didn’t hear very many clamoring for its removal. It was the bad players who wanted it to go, because they wanted to play a game where they didn’t have to think about dealing with it. As the game evolved, the use of XF changed from a pure comeback mechanic to an offensive tool, which often got rid of the opponent’s ability to use it. The game had a chance to change on its own because it was allowed to, and the fact that it did shows its depth as a competitive fighter.
If you want to change a game, then make one, and change it however you want to change it. Until that happens, we play the games, and the companies make them.
Fayetteville, NC
close to Jack Britt/Hope Mills.
If you need specifics, then PM me
I see, sorry thought you were in Charlotte.
Had a lot of fun at the tourney. Good matches to all the people I played. Very big thanks to the stream setup. watching my matches has shown me where I’m at in the game better than any results I have gotten. It really does help the players and the scene, so again thank you.
Watching back my matches I didn’t hear any of the things you guys were talking about in regards to my matches, so w/e. I want to tag team the mic with Jon at the next tourney haha! Too bad I probably can’t make ReSe. Working every Sat + Sun not too good.