You are right. Too hard is subjective. I just don’t think Capcom games have incredibly hard execution.
Well, my preference is to have significant difficulty so that people can choose how much time to invest and have something to show for it. Making everything easier across the board…? Yeah no thanks.
Oh, you’re not a top player:eek:? Then you calling me clueless is pretty inconsequential (just like your opinion on SFxT). Thanks.
What if you were designing a game and had an idea for a gameplay mechanic but you couldn’t find any way to implement it other than through some input that would be considered difficult by post-2009 fighting game standards? Would you scrap the mechanic?
Is a mechanic that’s applied with simple inputs considered to have too high an execution barrier if despite it’s easy physical portion it creates a large possibility space in which it can be applied? Why isn’t anyone considering the timeframe of parsing decisions in a game when deciding if something’s too difficult to execute?
Thanks, that was exactly my point.
Is there a legion of regular chess players who look down on speed chess players because they find the “tedium” of training to be able to parse a chess game as fast as possible to be unnecessary and extraneous to the Real Game?
that distinction does not exist in chess. a regular player can also play speed chess. I had met a guy who participated in tourneys and he was good in both.
I’m amazed that some people still believe that nobody wants to practice, when the reality is that people have issues with which set of skills they’re forced to practice in order to excel.
How do the majority of practical combos in SF4 start? With jabs/shorts that go into strings of links into specials (and fadc into ultra when you can). How does the average block/pressure string go in SF4? A couple of jabs/shorts maybe followed by the same normals from combos that are reasonably safe on block (into specials that you can fadc to make safe no less). Attacks that hit from even the slighest advantage are now how you go into big damage, but only if you can time a series of ‘hard’ links (ones without any system like a buffer window) into the same complex motions used to either make a move safe or to continue the combo. It’s a big, dumb series of hit-confirms that double as block pressure. That alone changes the way the game is played (which is troubling to many already), and it requires players to spend hours to make viable. The skillset being emphasized here the player’s ability to re-enact rehearsed movements, not his/her ability to adapt to an opponent.
I’m glad you corrected my misconceptions. By the way I met a guy who plays in fighting game tournaments and he can play games with low execution requirements as well as high, he says it’s all just pressing buttons anyway.
did you switch sides or something? 
Or are you saying that was a bad thing …
is easily confused
Somebody is literally trying to tell me it doesn’t take more mental agility to play speed chess than regular chess.
Aside from the execution barrier it doesn’t really take any extra mental agility to play two matches of Street Fighter at the same time.
the thing is, by the time I met him he was bored of chess and wanted to do something else and stop playing! he was one of the good local players. having chess ingrained in your brain can have those consquences…
pressing buttons…best thing to sum things up.
I.e., “fighting games require too much execution grinding before you can play the real game” is a ridiculous conceit because all the really good players got that good mostly by playing the game a lot, viz. with other people. This would indicate that there aren’t any fighting games that are so hard you can’t learn to play them just by playing.
But also, all competitive games at some point require grinding something, even if it means just grinding out a fuckton of games.
I also don’t build cars, yet I can tell when a car is a hunk of junk. Similarly I’ve never been to Venus, though I know about its atmosphere.
Well said, and great user name. Double good.
Unfortunately at some point things changed some, and are only somewhat starting to change back.
Your definition of ‘grinding’ is really wide though, I’m pretty sure that most people wouldn’t include ‘playing other people in an arcade’ under that definition 99% of the time.
The whole point is that you improved by playing the game not by repetitive rote practice (ie grinding)
Why do people keep saying that the only thing people can invest work/time/effort into in a fighting game is execution practise?? Are fighting games really that dumb?
This is a such an obvious straw man yet people keep wheeling it out every time someone questions execution in fighting games.
I enjoy doing things that take significant physical dexterity such as Tennis and MVC2.
You know that part where I always ask for specific examples? For what game is the second boldface statement untrue?
Re: grinding, people talk about “grinding out matchups” and such all the time.
But here’s an example anyway: imagine you’re playing back when people didn’t widely know how to do a dragon punch. But hey, you’re putting your time in at this game and one day you discover that something like f, d, df, f gives you this sweet uppercut that owns jump attacks! Well that’s pretty cool, but you still have to go practice it a lot, i.e., input the motion many times, i.e., it’s repetitive, i.e., rote practice, i.e., grinding, before you can do it on demand (and also discover the actual command is only f, d, df), as it were.
Which, if we admit that’s okay, and we call it “not really grinding because you’re also, you know, playing the real game” then fighting games actually don’t require all that much grinding, in general, to get to what we like to call “the real game,” because we’ve also said (you’ve also said) that there are very few examples of things that are “too hard,” viz., “too much work in the way of the ‘real game,’” which is actually what our stated “low execution design philosophy” seeks to do, in other words, induce the lowest possible barrier to execution, specifically, so far as it enables a speedy introduction to “the real game.”
So if it’s true that 1.) that’s not really grinding and 2.) we don’t really need to actually grind to learn the “real game,” then practice mode and any amount of practice mode-ing you do is A.) entirely optional and B.) simply a shortcut that even further reduces necessary grinding, because I can just boot up p.mode and do 100 uppercuts in a row until I’m perfect at it and not waste time grinding that particular little execution quirk, here and there, one at a time, when I’m playing actual games against real people, and therefore I am spending more time playing “the real game;” so p.mode and grinding execution in it is actually awesome and conducive to playing the real game sooner, and anyway the best way to get better at the “real game” game is still to just play the fucking game all the time, so mission accomplished.
Because there isn’t a whole, I dunno, sect or whatever of people posting about how “strategy is dumb and I don’t want to do it,” or what have you.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say execution is more important.
A strategy is only as good as the person that can execute it.
Also if your strategy isn’t working, and you can’t go with the flow, then you’re boned.