Parrying: Good or Bad?

This is the huge problem with threads like this. Parry defenders are basically in this to the death and completely unable to grasp the concepts being discussed. A lot of this has to do with 2-D history. I find that the most fervent parry defenders are the people who either weren’t around during the heyday of 2-D fighting or were never really upper level enough to understand the depth. The reason that 2-D fighting was such a successful genre is because it’s something that seems simple on the surface and everyone can understand and learn the basics in a few minutes, but it takes a long time to truly master the intricacies. How am I supposed to argue this if people not only don’t understand the advanced part of the game…but actually refuse to acknowledge it’s existence! It would be funny if it weren’t tragic.
Anyways, before we go any further, I want people to answer these questions. Agree or disagree.

  1. Parry reduces the variety of character types available in a game.
  2. Parry reduces the level of mind games.
  3. Parry is a good thing for game balance. Use examples from NG, 2i, 3s and CvS2 all P groove.
  4. Parry is safer than previous ways to break traps (reversals, laying down, rolling)

Answer these honestly. If you come to the correct answers and still think that parry is a good thing then I have no idea what to tell you.

Now to ElCarpeto, the man who cannot read:
“Getting a little personal here, aren’t we? Just because not everyone is subscribing to your own personal description of mind games, which amusingly you refuse to describe beyond generalisiations of “THEY’RE BIGGER! AND… AND… AND… MAGIC THAT ONLY OLD PEOPLE CAN DO! … GET OFF MY LAWN!”, doesn’t mean you can pms and call me stupid. Mind games at all levels are important, high-level mindgames exist in 3s and retard-level mindgames like getting dp-ed while attempting to pressure a waking opponent exist in everything. Live with it.”

Once again you’ve failed at reading. This is becoming a common occurence. I wonder if you just aren’t understanding or are just trying to be stupid. Oh well.
You want an example of different layers of mind games that other games have that 3s can’t because of the parry? All right. Let’s say we’re playing ST. Blanka vs. Vega (ironically, both of these characters couldn’t exist in 3s anyways), both characters have charged meter. Blanka has a small lead, about 10%. There are about 30 seconds left in the match. Let’s say in this situation, Blanka is walking forward and Vega reacts to that with jab roll. Blanka blocks and this pushes him about 3/4 screen from the corner. Vega does low jab xx KKK. If Blanka jumps forward or walks forward I do super and he’s about 80/20 going to eat it and most of the 20 he’s going to eat claw swipe. If he hops back, I do super to the far wall to break his charge and he’s about 85/15 to eat the super and again most of the 15 he’s going to eat claw swipe. If you do ball, I have a charge built up and will flip kick combo you. If he sits still, I can slide and push him back towards the corner in which case I’m going to corner guard him and he really has little shot at the match from this position since all my throw ticks are now in play and his reversal (blanka ball) becomes unsafe.
Now, I wrote this scenario carefully. There is a very critical mistake Blanka made in this scenario. Do you see what it was? What could he have done in this situation to avoid a very very bad position? Failing that and this played out the way it did anyways, what is your move?

This is an example of a multi-layered mind game. I did a move (jab roll) to set up a scenario many moves in advance taking into account all factors including position, time, health, meter to hopefully set up a scenario where I’d have a good chance to win the fight. Now in a situation with parry, none of this is available because Blanka could parry the low jab. If you know Vega’s character design, the only high move that could reach Blanka from that position after a claw roll is a low claw poke or stand fierce. You could “guess” low and react block to high (and even if your reactions are awful and you get hit, you’re still slightly leading). A multi-level game involving position is basically useless due to the parry (and this is presuming you didn’t parry the jab claw roll in the first place).

I like how you consider 3s mindgames “deep” when we’ve already concretely established that they can go no further than “I thought you were gonna do this but you did that and I was surprised”. Green Eggs and Ham for the Nobel Prize in Literature, eh?

“Point taken to an extent, but the pedestal you place parrying on is ill built. The sheer risk of a parry alot of the time makes it smarter to just fucking block, though the number of mid level players who think they have to try and parry everything is alarming. Parry -> damage does not decide entire matches for a start. No 100% damage combos here. And as long as that’s the case and the chance of fucking up is high, fishing for random parries is risky and self defeating.”

Please explain how attempting to parry is riskier than a previous avoidance option. Most of the time trying to parry is actually almost zero risk, especially when you buffer them into fast moves that combo into heavy damage like CvS2 Cammy/Kyo/Yamazaki/Sagat. Interestingly enough, those are 4 of the about 7 characters that would completely dominate a game like that were it all P groove. Imagine that!

"Clearly we don’t disagree on the fact that they’re dying because they don’t sell, which makes me wonder about your passion for argument.

But you’re saying that at the same time that people think that all fighting games are the same, while lambasting people for enjoying something different.

So saying “SF is dead because you like parrying” is an argument on the level of “Daddy drinks because you cry.” "

God no. Please for the love of God, start to read!
This genre is dead because even the fans of the genre have become unable to differentiate the different levels of mindgames and thus have little need for new games since they never actually get to experience them. Or in your case, completely denying that they even exist at all! For example, why buy a Ferrari if you’re only going to drive to the market for milk. In your case, you’re completely denying that a car can go over 15 mph, so your Geo Metro is good enough. You can like your Geo all you want, just don’t claim that it can match the Ferrari in performance, when anyone with a brain can see the inferiorities.

An example of this is CFJ, the last “majro” Capcom 2-D fighting game made. How many people actually explored that game? How many people actually figured out who dominated that game and why? Not very many. People played it for a couple weeks, saw a couple of week 1 videos and instantly claimed that Jedah broke the game and that it was “all the same as we’d seen before”.
Why make any more 2-D fighting games if even the “true fans” aren’t going to take the time to understand it and play it. When even these hardcore fans don’t understand that it’s NOT the same thing they’d seen before. If you aren’t going to take the time to digest the differences (or in your case even acknowledge them) then the genre really is dead because in everyone’s made up minds, there’s nothing new to see.

The fact that you can’t even understand this is depressing. Answer the 4 questions I wrote above anyways just for my amusement, then please try to defend parry in light of your answers.

–Jay Snyder
Viscant@aol.com

whats the point of replying when any second some mod will come and lock it.

this is what he came at me with…

“getting someone to hit my opponent over the head with a steel chair doesnt belittle or weaken a strategy. if the strategy was all that to begin with, getting someone to hit my opponent over the head with a steel chair shouldnt abolish it.”

what do u expect me to say to this? the comments i’ve said so far dont eliminate what anyone’s said i’m just trying to say that parrying makes strategies and tactics harder to set up. the same stuff u had in sf2 is there it just takes more effort now. which i personally enjoy. i’m trying my best to respond to ppl’s statements honestly and say my piece on behalf of myself as a 3s player who uses a character that MUST use projectiles heavily inorder to win. wouldnt my input be benificial in this arguement?

if its my vantage point u dont agree with, step into my shoes and play the characters i mentioned the way i suggested. its not impossible to win using distance fighting in 3s. the fact its so hard to set up and to have it work makes the accomplishment that much more of a reward (win OR lose).

yes attack me ziggy, anyone else wants a shot at me i’m really just a bum on a computer, your all arguing with a bum on a computer! see i can insult myself as well.

i never said anything about parrying balancing the game. it just makes everything harder to establish (which is good). i like the tier structure in 3s, its not a line from best to worst its a web just like st. but unlike st parrying lets the character step out of there tier and work past what limitations they face during that individual fight. in st, u get 2 elite players using honda vs a shoto and the fight will go the same way EVERY time.

Ooh, ooh I wanna play;
1 - I disagree. It just makes characters based on normals instead of specials. That and their movement style. (fast folk vs slow, reach games, etc.)
2 - Disagree, UNTIL parry is perfected there is always a risk vs reward situation with tapping forward and eating it.
3 - N/A - I’ve only played 3s and 2I, so in those 2 games I say it makes people like Hugo not just lose to people with projectiles, specifically Ibuki who without a parry could ground me. But that is not to say w/o parry Hugo’d be dead in that situation with a well timed knockdown/poke to mess up her positioning.
4 - True - IF you know the timing of the parry. Again it’s the risk vs reward scenario where I could parry into SA the trap, or you could throw something else in to screw over my timing and I eat it all.

Viscant; use quote man, that’s too much undifferentiated text for me to look at.

^This won me over.

Not neccesarily true. Is it Neccesary or Necesary?..wait those are both wrong…fuck it I don’t know or care.

I get the argument that there is no OG sagat or Dalhsim style of character but IMO thank god. Tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger nods off tiger tiger tiger tiger K.O No thanks.

And in a way, Remy is the OG Sagat of 3s…Albeit, the EXTREMELY hard to use version of O.Sagat who also happens to be super weak and has no stun bar.

But 3s has IMO the most diverse cast of styles to use, albeit some are much weaker than others.

Completely wrong. I would say it increases them 10 fold. Now you have another option besides block and your opponent can’t abuse the same retarded shit (Tiger shots x1,000 and simple traps you see coming a mile away but can’t do anything about come to mind).

I’m on the fence on this one. I’d have to know tiers in ST and other games to make comparions.

Well, parry is pretty risky any way you slice it. And most people can only parry fireballs or on wakeup, or in obvious situations, and even then your taking a 50/50 chance. Good players will try to bait parries, which goes back to another mind game you have to worry about. Even then it’s not guarenteed.

Parrying a super is mostly skill - once you catch the first hit of the parry (would to be baited, unless they went for super on wakeup or something stupid), and once you get the first hit, you just gotta know 1-1-1-1-1 those parry timings, and they vary. Plus MOST players fuck that up , high level players fuck up a hell of alot less but they still fuck up from time to time.

And reversals, laying down, and rolling come into play in 3s so I’m not sure what ur getting at here.

This is why I don’t even bother trying with SRK anymore. Why should I bother posting when you aren’t listening or even READING.

On question 1) this quote says it all
"Not neccesarily true. Is it Neccesary or Necesary?..wait those are both wrong…fuck it I don’t know or care.

I get the argument that there is no OG sagat or Dalhsim style of character but IMO thank god."

So you’re saying that there are more character types, yet you freely admit that 2-D archetypes aren’t in and you provide NO substitutes for these. Or for Vega-style poking characters. Or for Rolento style aggression characters. Or for Honda style defensive characters.

Question 2 comes up and…another piece of brilliance:
“Completely wrong. I would say it increases them 10 fold. Now you have another option besides block and your opponent can’t abuse the same retarded shit (Tiger shots x1,000 and simple traps you see coming a mile away but can’t do anything about come to mind).”

You failed. See by denying the important piece of mindgames (POSITIONING) you put yourself into a position that you “can’t do anything about” and then claim that it’s broken. Brilliant. You also missed how 3s has nothing even remotely close to mutli-levelled mind games because parry can defeat anything on that level. You still have not answered how 3s has mind games deeper than the lower primate level of “I thought he would do this, but he did that and boy was I surprised!” Is anyone even reading?

On question three if you answer ANYTHING BUT “NG, 2i are the most broken games Capcom has ever made from a balance perspective” and CvS2 all P being horrible (all Cammy all the time) and 3s having a very rigid top tier…well, you failed again.

And for question 4, laying down and rolling AREN’T EVEN IN 3s. ParryAll, are you just TRYING to be obstinate or are you just not paying attnention?
But for parry being less risky, just answer this. How is it less risky if when you miss, you aren’t nearly as vulnerable. You miss a roll, you’re on the ground. You miss a DP, you’re flying out there helpless. You miss laying down, you’re just flat there saying “please hit me”. You miss a parry…you tap forward/down and if they chose to defeat your guess by doing nothing…YOU LOSE NOTHING.
Why is this so hard for parry fans to understand?!

Anyways, I’m just about done with this thread. The total and complete unwillingness for you people to even think this through on a rational level is sickening. What’s even worse is the complete ignorance of 2-D roots, not understanding what made the older games tick. But I shouldn’t be too surprised; they go hand in hand after all.

–Jay Snyder
Viscant@aol.com

Viscant drops some metro-science on the haters.

Honest question, I’m serious.

Can’t you reduce almost all mind games to that level?

READ
THE
POSTS
PLEASE

Jesus fucking christ, this isn’t even funny anymore. Seriously, does playing 3s cause brain damage? Cause I thought it was the vodka and whore hunting I did in TJ, but posts like these are making me think that playing 3s is actually the cause.

–Jay Snyder
Viscant@aol.com

Lets all take advises from ppl who doesnt really know the game or actually play the game really well… like going to ur first period math class but ur substitute somehow turns out to be a music teacher… wtf?

Didn’t Viscant actually place in 3s tournaments?

“I thought he was going to use his super but he pushed me in the corner, and boy was I surprised.” :confused: I read your posts, I still honestly don’t see how most mind games aren’t some form of “I thought he was going to do this, but he did that, so I did this”

I think too many people here mistake the average player back in the “hayday” for a hardcore player. I know in my experience you had people who definately were, and quite a few but I would think there were just as many, or more that played casually than hardcore, and that’s the market that has moved on, leaving the small hardcore market.

You know, the ones who’d argue over the viability of a parry in a particular fighting game.

Parries were fun, for me, and for many people I play with who wouldn’t be able to tell you the number of frames in a certain attack, and so on.

I think Capcom was merely trying to make a game that was easier for people to jump into, by making parries. They needn’t worry about the hardcore audience, you all bought the game anyway, the casual gamers are the ones who have moved on.

So I think parries were good because they were a fun change, and really, if I’m sitting up playing with all my friends, regardless of playing level, fun is all I’m shooting for. I’m still able to have heated matches, where mind games are apparent, and even though I’m not able to pull of some of the more advanced stuff, I still have a great time with it.

So my two cents would be parries were good, because for the casual gamer they were fun. It may entirely ruin the game for people like Viscant, but there are a bunch of people who like it (even some of the “higher level” players.)

Also I think Viscant should take chill pills until he ODs, but that’s just me. (Really, having a cordial conversation is not a concept beyond you, I’m sure, and you’ll realize in most courses of life it’s hard to get people to agree with you when you insult them, even if you’re right.)

I agree with Viscant fully.

Basically, all he’s saying is people can’t grasp the idea of how mind games are in 2D games which is why the genre is dead/dying, whatever. He goes on to explain.

BASIC Mind games should be if he does this, but does something else, OMG im suprised. Those are BASIC.

When he says multilevel, all he’s saying is that in order to understand how they work and why they work is because you need to take into account anything that can happen in a given situation. It no longer becomes he does this but then did that. It then becomes he CAN do this and I CAN do this based on position/life/etc BECAUSE of given situation based on the setups of the players with X and Y characters. There should be no suprise. You should be able to understand a given situation for the characters that you use and the situations that you setup. You should NOT be suprised.

I have a weird feeling im forgetting something though.
Viscant, please correct me if i’m missing something.

I could have a cordial conversation but I honestly don’t feel like it right now. It’s one thing to debate back and forth with someone and they make a point then you counter, then they counter then it goes on until an understanding is reached.

However in this case, I’m making a point. Zero effort is made to refute that point, zero evidence is presented to show that the point is invalid. However they re-iterate their original ignorance and don’t even bother to read what I’ve written, then somehow claim their original point was correct.

This is why I hate this argument and didn’t want to get involved in the first place. The complete and total lack of willingness to even read what I’d written just pisses me off.

Like I said I’m basically done with this post unless something piques my interest or someone actually bothers with a well thought out response not “OMG NO UR WRONG IT IS DEEP CAUSE YOU DON"T LOSE TO TIGER ALL DAY”. Like I said a couple posts ago, if you don’t get it, you just don’t at this point. It’s not your fault, you just weren’t around for the older games and don’t really understand what makes 2-D fighting games tick. I don’t need to be told that you weren’t around for those games, through your posts you’re telling me yourselves.

–Jay Snyder
Viscant@aol.com

That is what happens initially, but the point is this. The one ‘wrong guess’ (your first sentence) is only the beginning of a layered web of guessing games. After that exchange, you are now in a different situation and there is a new set of guessing games that can be applied. If that hadn’t happened, it would be another different set of guessing games.

With parry, it ends immediately…you parry and punish, or they call you on it and super cancel, or you guess wrong and get hit with a combo or they do nothing and nothing happens. It’s a very controlled and flat guessing game.

Time out. I don’t even play 3s and I’m drunk as fukc, but I’m commenting anyway. Why am I reading this thread whil drinking? Because I can.

There’s a HUGE glaring error in most of the people who are for parries, and I have to address it. THERE IS NO RISK IN PERFORMING A PARRY. I repeat for those who missed it. THERE IS NO RISK IN PERFORMING A PARRY. There is no risk in performing the move, the risk is in the execution. When people discuss the risk of performing a dragon punch what do they say? “You might miss and then you’re vulnerable on the way down.” No one ever says “You might do a fireball by mistake.” The reward for a parry GREATLY outweighs the risk because the RISK is in the execution, not the move itself. Just about any move when missed will cause you to get fucked up, so saying that the possibility of missing a parry balances it is retarded. That’s the first thing to understand.

The second thing is that increased options does not mean better mindgames. Parry is like giving every boxer a gun. Sure you can jab, jab, cross, uppercut but why do that when 90% of your problems can be avoided by learning to pull the tirgger?

Because most mindgames come down to option select and parry limits that. Using Viscants example of Vega and Blanka in ST, Vega has placed Blanka in a position where his viable options are extremely limited. Blanka has been forced into a position that limits his arsenal. Parry reduces this because parry is ALWAYS an option (outside of glitches). There is no option select when there’s no way to remove the most powerful and universal tool.

I agree with everything Viscant but I wanted to add something;

Yes it’s nice when the situation plays as such, but how often does that happen? Never in high matches. And why? Because high level players know this. And it’s also the reason Parry is limited to a guaranteed-parry basis in high matches.

What usually happens in intermediate level is;

  • go for high parry they hit low
  • go for low parry they hit high
  • go for parry they throw
  • go for parry they UOH
  • go for parry they wait, hit high
  • go for parry they wait, hit low
  • go for parry they wait, kara-throw

And so on and so forth. However, in high level matches this is the not the case; you would most definitely block to be certain and tech any throw attempts where your opponent is close enough.

Exactly.

Must you insult people who aren’t even being agressive and shout “YOU CAN’T READ!?!?!”? I have read it and I disagreed with you, and honestly, I think that by not just flaming you, I might have earned the right to be treated with just a smidgen of dignity. And at some points it seems a little clear that you haven’t even read what I said.

Honestly, from someone with a reputation like yours I expected better. Grow the fuck up.

Anyway, now that I’ve got that off my chest (cos I’d have to before admitting this).

Perhaps you’re right. I need to think this through further, you’ve given me a great deal to think about; though I still think saying that there are no high level mind games in 3S is rather extreme.

I see your point. The reaction to CFJ was most disappointing, especially since people were countering Jedah fairly hard in week two.

Hell, I seem to remember people were citing a tournament at Acho as evidence of how broken Jedah was, and a Jedah player didn’t even WIN the fucking thing. Whether the game had real potential or not (And I doubt we’ll ever even KNOW now, unless it makes some kind of underground comeback) it should have gotten a better chance than it did.

Ah well, people are probably going to have to like something on first sight sometime, and THEN they’ll play it to death. Just keep your fingers crossed, eh?