All this talk has me thankful 30th Anniversary is a reality. If any of my homies want to play some old school SF, all I gotta do is turn it on. It’s really nice having so much available in a single game.
Would be nice to see a Capcom Vs SNK compilation in the future. I regret never getting into those games competitively even though I played them a lot.
I so would have gotten 30th is A2 was online.
That killed the entire game for me.
I thought all the games were online?
I’ve mostly just been waiting for a sale.
Only Super Turbo, Hyper Fighting, Alpha 3, and Third Strike are online.
Is it just base ST or HDR too?
Just base.
That’s why the best way to analyze games is just discuss the worst and best of them so that the later games would find inspiration to the best from it’s predecessor and avoid their worst or find a workaround to previous mistakes. Rather than pitting the game as a whole to another game.
Never happens because what ends up happening is the worst subset of players scream the loudest and get the strongest things about the best games, taken out:
Mvc2 = we hate invincible assists… mvc3 did away with invincible assists outside of Hagar who took damage to them.
ST = we hate being thrown all the fucking time later streetfighters would all have 2 button throws and tech windows the size of a freight train and reduced throw damage and reduced throw range and techs doing zero damage.
Sf3 = we hate getting hit by one normal and losing half our lifebar
Later games have damage severely reduced.
Sf4 = we hate jabs and fadc and vortex and divekicks, option selects and 1 frame links
Sf5 would nerf jabs with more pushback, lowered horizontal range, fadc would be completely gone, vortex is now pretty much impossible because quickris doesn’t allow for ambiguous crossups, divekicks are almost totally negative on block, option selects have largely been done away with and one frame links now have a huge buffer window.
Most of the sf5 changes that I mentioned I actually think are good for the game.
But that wasn’t it. Other complaints were:
Combos do to much damage, I don’t like dying so fast.
Anti airs are too good, why should my opponent be able to stop my one jump with his one button…
Ground attacks have too much range, why should my opponent be able to just attack me relentlessly.
Cancels don’t require commitment, why should my opponent just be able to autopilot his cancels and do good damage on hit and push me away on block… cancels are broken because they are always good and never bad.
Backdashshouldnr be invincible, why should my opponent get an invincible move just because he pressed back twice
Etc etc.
The thing is, no one agrees on what one game does right versus what it does wrong. Lots of people complain about ST’s throw loops and overall throw cheese… but lots of people like that about the game. They realize that a throw loop forces the opponent to play their best neutral becaus one mistake could be the game. They then realize that sinc their opponent has to play their best neutral, there are a lot of things that the opponent simply will not do. This makes the game more strategic in concept and not so volatile. If you have better neutral than your opponent you win. If you can break your opponents neutral… you win.
At least as far as numbers go. It’s a fun thing to play against because it always feels like there is progression. There is always a way to make your game better, fine tune the positioning in a matchup, p,ay more lame in this position, play more risky in that position etc etc
The throw tech window is about 10 frames.
You must be talking about some tiny trucks. Like, Tonka.
Cancels are not all safe. Some are, but those don’t lead to much. You can’t level the complaint that cancels are too safe, then turn around and say it’s an issue that hits don’t lead to anything.
Unless you want a cMP to wall bounce.
In broad strokes I agree though. All the games do different things write and wrong which be more or less up people’s ally.
Except that UNIST thing which is perfect apparently?
Sfv and dbfz suffer from terrible normals by design which is the big thing i dont like about the current games. Like super dashes would be fine if normals would just stuff it more often. Why do all my hitboxes have to be engulfed by hurtboxes lol.
Sf5 would be fine if there was more ways to control the crazy and the “disrespect” with smart choices that didn’t require gdl like knowledge of the frame data, guesses, or just player reactions for the most basic of aggressive offense
10 frames in a game where the fastest attacks are 3 frames is pretty damn big. As an example, in sc2 Ivy’s command grabs are 5 frame techs and the fastest attacks in that game are 10 frames outside of one move that hits in 7 frames. And in that game I know people that break those command grabs like it’s their fucking job.
In sf5 the tech window is 6 frames iirc and the throw startup is 5 frames for an 11 frame tech window unless the throw is performed meaty, which isn’t a common occurrence outside of corner oki situations.
If you take into account that 95% or more of throws will be directly proceeded by a dash or a blocked jumpin or a jab tick, then the “throw situation” is closer to around 20-30 frames and can be covered with various option select coverages like fuzzy walking and delayed tech.
As far as cancels being safe I mean to say “safe cancels” sorry 
Not bad.
But let’s get down to business.
When’s the one character that really matters ?
I still don’t think we can have very complex alts, it’s one thing to change a character’s hair but given how their models are created I don’t think it’s possible unless they’re willing to invest double the resources on a single character
If neutral made games fun then people would play Ryu mirrors…oh wait they do. Sentinel mirrors wouldn’t be so interesting etc etc etc.
Navigating the midscreen is where both players can make the most amount of gameplay decisions. When you weaken the players ability to effectively play it, you invariably turn the game into a clusterquack. So if you’re game can’t successfully create a meaningful experience playing midscreen, one where the person preventing the other from progressing and the aggressor both feel like they have good tools to their job, then basically your game is ass.
Almost all of the games held in high regard have some hilarious bullshit to them. But ultimately the exchanges happening midscreen lead to a rewarding and compelling play experience. Which in turn is why SF5 is fucking shit. Because being midscreen in that game is about as fun as watching DBF pressure. The midscreen game is so shitty that it took Sagat’s release for a lot of people to start having fun.
Suddenly you have a character where the midscreen navigation and control make for a compelling game and people are shocked that it was something missing in 5. Well no fucking shit.
In sf5 you aren’t seeing a lot of high level ryu mirrors.
In other streetfighters you see them not because ryu is the god of neutral… he isn’t. He rarely has the games best neutral he’s been in. The reason why you see lots of ryu mirrors is because he’s a popular character. He’s a popular character because he’s the flagship character and he’s designed to be the most all around character in the game. Correlation does not equal causation.
People claim to love neutral, but then they play characters like bison and rashid… fighting game players as a whole have never as far as I’m aware had enough self awareness to realize what they actually like about fighting games. But it’s funny that the most complained about games seem to also be the most loved.
Perhaps sf5 will break that tradition… idk. Maybe.
Also in most games, ryu has powerful linear answers to most things. That’s exactly what I’m advocating for.
People want to feel strong and ryu makes peop,e feel strong in most games because he’s all around enough to not get this or that abused against him. He’s got an obvious tool for everything. This would be the same for sf5 if they hadn’t fucked his cr.mk
Neutral isn’t interesting, breaking it by doing damage to the opponent is.
We basically agree, though you seem to be holding onto the notion that neutral in itself is interesting. But hitting your opponent isn’t neutral. Neutral is just moving around and whiffing stuff, or moving around and not pressing buttons. As soon as someone blocks something or gets hit… it’s not neutral anymore.
He said he wants to main Menat.
What is a neutral.
A miserable little pile of buttons.
That Castlevania reference though.
Dime makes it sound like no character plays a neutralgame, outside of a very few.
The definition I know of neutral is a neutral position both characters have, without either of them beeing knocked down and outside of close range.
But I had a lot of definitions of neutral heard in SF.
Most of them made me cry.
Actually I looked into BB Glossary again:
