I agree with FMjaguar but you’re assuming about my post still. This is a subjective argument. If you want proof of a game that is stupid imbalanced against the majority of it’s cast-- that has enough reasons NOT to be changed-- Marvel 2. I’m saying that the way the game is now, the 3s players wanted that, and that’s what they got. It wasn’t an adherence to change it was a request that was met. In fact it wasn’t even a request, it was a gift as 3s players stuck in arcades all day because they didn’t have a home console version except on PS2 that they could play religiously.
No, I personally would not want Sirlin to re balance 3s, but would I want a re balanced version? Absolutely. Would the majority of 3s players want a rebalanced version over a straight arcade port with online functionality? Probably not.
As a programmer when we say something is ‘broken’ what we mean is that the program doesn’t work in the way it was intended or doesn’t fulfill the function it was programmed to do. Imagine if you downloaded itunes and there was a bug in it which stopped you using the music playback feature; itunes would essentially be ‘broken’ because there’s a bug stopping you from doing what it was designed to do.
Video games are essentially programs designed for people to have fun with them. However imagine there was a bug in super Mario bros stopping him from jumping. The game is designed around the fact that Mario can jump and most of the challenges in the game consists of him jumping from point A to point B. This is essentially an unplayable game thus ‘broken’.
Fighting game balance maybe a similar case. A game if contains 8 characters but only 2 of them is actually playable due to the rest of the cast being incomplete then that game is broken. Whether the game is unplayable and unfun is subjective because granted you’re still able to actually play it but I’m sure we can see eye to eye on the game not being what’s intended to be.
I’m kind of done with this thread btw. Probably best not to quote or respond to me at this point. I’m not going to be able to get back to you until my post is buried on a page you won’t be able to find.
You know the context of this whole argument is 3S fans are not fond of people who have completely lost the respect of the community tell them what they should like or what they should want.
When then made in the vein of “Poison” especially considering the source you do nothing but raise the hackles of anyone considering them self a fan of said game.
If true progress was intended or a appeal to the sense’s of said target audience from a “Professional” was desired then to disparage the notion that the fan’s know what they want and imply he has some kind of higher awareness when his own products are anything but and are as fill with swiss cheese like holes and subject to the same high/low on the power scale cast.
David Sirlin has proven to not be a go to guy when trust is placed in his hands, but i do hope one day he has another crack as something viable as anyone with a love of FG’s is a welcome addition.
He read a review and the part that said “do we risk splintering the community of a 10+ year old game rebalancing it or leave it arcade perfect” gets him boiling.
He takes it out of context (meaning he doesn’t acknowledge the game is old, the playerbase is small, that the game is suppose to be arcade perfect) and says that that is our mindset.
Our mindset = we want the old game to arcade perfect but to him our mindset = we hate change to anything, don’t fix shit.
He misrepresented the Third Strike community horribly and if you think only Third Strike players misread or misunderstood the point of the article, check the comments on his site. Now anyone who reads that article will think that’s the Third Strike community, even though we’re playing other games that do get updates and balance changes and even advocate them.
I really don’t see how you read the article and not see Third Strike is a terrible example to use there. He’s pissed off that we wanted arcade Third Strike and pissed off that enough that wanting this 10+ year old game on PSN/360 unchanged made him write an article about how not asking for a balance patch for it so that the “two characters” don’t dominate the rest makes us antiprogress and antibalance and “damaging to gaming”.
Lolllll this thread is hilarious , not rebalancing an 10+ yr old is considered ‘‘anti progress’’ , loool . Wtf is all this talk about progress anyway ,LMFAO , these are fighting GAMES , not the evolution of human society we’re talking about . HAHAHA
thnx for all the laughs guys , especially specs …ur special .
I just want to play the Third Strike I remember. Like every fucking body that bought OE. The balance of the game is irrelevant. Nobody was waiting for OE to show up at major tournaments so they can run Yun/Chun for some cash. The majority of the people playing the game aren’t accomplished enough to bring out Yun/Chun’s brokeness relative to the rest of the cast, anyways. Top tier play is where the distinction is most pronounced.
Just because I want to play a game for nostalgic purposes, strictly for fun, does not make me (or others like me [the 1up reviewer being put on blast, the 3S fanbase, the OE devs/Capcom]) Anti-Progress for supporting it. SFIV tried to emulate SFII, hijacking SFIII’s parry system along the way, and threw on a cartoon costume and called it a day. Would you say SFIV is an anti-progress game? It doesn’t bring any new mechanics to fighting games. No radical change. The wheel was not reinvented.
When it’s all said and done, it’s a rerelease of a game; calling it anti-progress is redundant as hell.
As so many others have said, just make a new sprite based game. Don’t try to change a dead man’s suit, goddamn.
It isn’t a shot at Third Strike, it is an example of imbalance and the insane reasoning that goes behind leaving it as is. You’re also assuming more about that quote than he ever did, too. He doesn’t say that it is a bad thing that they rereleased the game as a direct port, but he does say that being opposed to a rebalance is a bad thing. The real kicker is that you’re an idiot if, from that, you somehow draw that his logic is only applied to Third Strike. I don’t know how I can word it any clearer.