Sigh. Once again I said I wasn’t going to go into much detail in this thread because the amounts of ignorance are so high. I’m going to try and make this a summary as much as I possibly can. But a vast majority of the territory we’re covering is like…basic premise of how 2-D fighters are played. If you don’t understand some of this then short of drawing you a primer of the past 15 years, I’m really not sure how to make you understand.
But let’s start with Everdred:
You basically answered your post for me. The reason characters like Remy and 12 aren’t in serious contention is because the aspects they’re designed to take advantage of are completely out of play in the game. That’s not entirely fair as 12 wouldn’t be a good character in any version of SF ever, that’s just bad character design. But when you’re fighting for position, what good does it do when
a) The position you’re in is not advantageous in terms of damage dealing potential
b) They don’t have to cede that position at all because of parry
This is the fundamental problem I’ve been talking about and you basically agree.
Also if you think a Remy trap and any kind of ST style trap are even close to the same thing, please watch the B4 ST tape. There are numerous examples of Ryu or Sagat vs. Balrog when they fight him even at the expense of damage/better combos to earn a position and then slaughter him with very little he can do. Remy can do nothing anywhere’s near that because of how dominating the parry is.
BillyKane:
You can’t possibly be serious. I mean…just wow. Other than low forward qcf+p x3, the characters have almost nothing in common. I don’t think you thought this through at all.
Now for ElCarpeto:
"“I thought you were going to do this but you did that” in general is the only mind game there is. Every game is about knowing what your opponent’s character can do, then knowing what your opponent does, knowing his habits, knowing what you can fool him with and then kicking his ass from there."
no. No. NO.
Please read what I posted. You don’t even know what mind games are. That’s only marginally acceptable as a mind game (and the lowest possible level) and for you to think that’s all there is to it? Just…no. This is exactly what I’m talking about. You don’t even know what this term means and you’re trying to argue about it? Just wow.
“Sounds almost like “I thought this would happen, but it didn’t”. Be it barging into your sweet range, getting your opponent in a situation where you can mix up timing for a Denjin without them reversaling on you or just good old fashioned baiting an unsafe move that they were SURE would connect; it’s the same thing. You make it sound like there’s some high level mind game, that will always work on certain people, and never on others, but that would be silly.”
No. It’s NOT the same thing. In fact these different levels of mind games are not even in the same family. Baiting out something with a certain series of actions/inactions changes depending upon the depth of the setup. People overuse a chess analogy but it’s relevant here. In chess you can make a move to make them make a move to make this happen and that happen, then you gain an advantage, be it a piece or position or whatever. But that’s many moves in advance. Older 2-D fighting games like ST had multi levelled setups much like this. 3s has nothing even remotely close to that because the parry dumbs it down. You can’t have multi levelled setups because the parry will be there at any point in a defensive sequence. And not only is it an option, it’s very often the BEST option. I find it really disappointing that you don’t understand this.
“That’s daft. It’s all about executives rubbing themselves with huge sacks of cash. They’re not prima-donnas who think “Well! If they’re not going to UNDERSTAND OUR PAIN WE PUT INTO THIS GAME then we won’t make it!” They wonder if people will buy it, and buying something does not preclude understanding it.”
No. There isn’t an audience for 2-D fighting anymore simply because even the people who would be most likely to buy it (people here) don’t understand the principles of the genre and what makes the games tick. Like we’ve discovered through this 100+ post thread, even the most basic element of 2-D fighting “mind games” is something that almost nobody here understands on anything more than an elementary level. If you can’t understand the difference between sophisticated mind games and basic ones, how are you going to understand what makes a good fighting game? How are you going to want to play a different game if you don’t understand what makes it tick? A lot of people will never play another 2-D SF style game because they think “it’s all the same” as before. The minor differences in mind games and what’s possible are what give each game their individual flavor. If the players aren’t sophisticated enough to understand and differentiate different mind games, then there is no purpose to making another game.
As we’ve seen by this thread, even people who claim to be serious fans of SF no longer seem capable of understanding the mental aspect behind the game. That is why this genre of fighting is dead.
–Jay Snyder
Viscant@aol.com
