“I can’t respond to the argument posed, so accuse of trolling and report someone”
I’m absolutely trying my best to make a real point here. Respond to the arguments or ignore me, seems pretty simple.
Don’t try to get the mods to just get rid of arguments you don’t like.
Edit: Per below, I’m not supposed to keep responding to things like that, so we’ll have to wait 'till next time.
What you’re doing si basic fuckign trolling. Cosntantly changing the argument, blantantly ignoring anything presented that goes against you, constantly using your opinion as fact, back pedaling and changing what you said to try and make yourself sound right.
And you’ll notice I’ve never been like “Report Specs” or report anyone else that’s been on the oppisite side of the argument.
this is the best thread
IMO It completely depends on the game. Certain games reward patience and legit strategy rather than execution, and vice-versa. Not to mention execution is something you can learn with time and a good tutorial, while strategizing is more of a talent. Just my opinion.
Replay value is replay value. It’s not MVC2’s fault the game offer so much depth that it doesn’t need to use MK9’s single player content to drag you in. Execution or grinding is getting tone down nowadays, so i don’t see why this is a issue. Whining about training mode is pointless when Game Reviewers are forcing FG companies to put singe player content beyond training mode.
I don’t see any quotes, all I know is that MVC2 has so many stuff that you can find it you learn new things about the game due to it’s depth.
Don’t they always tell beginners to get their combos down first? Although I guess at the same time if you make good and informed guesses you get hits.
I liked this just because it brought up board games. I like both but I’m fanatical about some ameritrash (descent, arkham horror). Props to you!
OT: descent. 2nd ed is rad. Way more solid and more fun for the overlord.
Sent from my Radar 4G using Board Express
D2e, from what little I know of it, seems too simple. Course that’s unfair as 1e has lots of expansions to play around with, but still.
This is terribly off subject…
In amount of rules, yes, D2e is very slender compared to D1e. As far as gameplay dynamics, D2e offers a far deeper experience with more strategic options. Characters are more diverse, the Overlord has difficult decisions other than “how should I kite with my sorcerers?”, and the scenarios are more than just groups of critters scattered around a few rooms. I own every Descent product and my group completed multiple campaigns, and we unanimously decided that we would never play D1e again after giving D2e a shot.
…but we should take this to PM or a more appropriate thread.
Betrayal At House ont he Hill is the dpest Ameritrash game ever made.
Gosh, xes, I know people who do this kind of thing, and *regularly *get videos or commentaries on their new discoveries. Including the previously hinted at kind-of-mind-shattering-to-trolls “how to beat the Gambit and Ruby Heart runaway glitch” (private data, but probably the most stunning thing in a while).
It’s cool that you don’t want to try to be that person, but I can confirm that there are people that **do **this and are still finding stuff.
I find a lot of minor stuff. Maybe it was known, maybe it wasn’t. Doesn’t matter to me. I plateaued years ago because I wasn’t willing to camp in training mode to improve my execution.
I have no idea what your point is. Betrayal At the House on the Hill is pretty excellent.
Betrayal is so dope I’ve been working on a Tabletop campaign Mutants & Masterminds or BESM based, can’t decide based off of it.
Finally got a chance to play a good amount of P4U, yeah the motions are really simple but everything else about the game is pretty tough. Do wish the game was maybe six buttons ro something because the number of Macros are ridiculous and kind of counter intuitive.
So happy there’s no chicken blocking.
Didn’t have time to read all 20 pages, but that has never stopped me from dropping my 2 cents 
I’m sick of people thinking things “should be” this way or that. The best universe is one where there is a variety of different things being explored.
It’s good to have games that are heavy on execution (I just wont play them ), and I’d like to see some games that are zero-execution as well. (Turn based fighting game?). And everything in between. Heck, in one game, let’s have a variety of characters and modes that are execution heavy or strategy heavy, execution light or strategy light, etc.
Execution can be fun. In a game like Devil May Cry 3, every combo becomes a little minigame where you try to do a variety of cool things, difficult things, different things, etc. That’s why training mode can be fun in FGs too.
However, strategy is much more interesting to THINK about. (inherently, execution is not as interesting to think about since it’s less of a mental thing. Apart from designing new viable combos and stuff.)
That “turn based fighting game” example I mentioned, is a fascinating topic for me. If we remove every aspect of execution from a FG, including reaction speed, and make a game that still works, how much strategy is left? And what additional strategy stuff do we need to put in there to make it competitively viable purely from strategy?
You barely tried to look around. There is already a turned based fighting game, Toribash.
Yomi exists, too.
Butbut, for the folks who love their execution:
Why do you say lowering the execution barrier is “dumbing the game down”? Sure, there are bad ways to do it, but as long as the game remains deep surely it is a good idea to make new players go “Oh, cool, I can do all these cool things” and actually able to play the game instead of banging their heads against the wall? That means people more easily hooked and thus passionate. More passionate people => more people with a drive to get better. Helps everyone. Often when I read posts from execution-loving people I get the feeling that the game must be hard to even play for it to be worthwhile at all. Why so?
Of course, you love your execution-heavy gameplay where others hate them. But given that you’re in the minority, would a solution where there are just as competitive but execution-heavy characters you can play? I know I get no extra power by playing my complicated pet deck in Magic, but it’s strong enough to compete and a style I love, so why not play it myself and let the other person play the straightforward monored aggro deck or whatever. Fair game, both get what they like, bigger playerbase. Think Gen/Ibuki vs. Ryu in SF4, for example. Or is excluding others a key part of it for some reason?
I’ve seen it before, but I didnt know it was turn-based. Looking at it again, I can’t find any multiplayer vids for it, so I am unable to evaluate how strategic it actually is.
So putting that aside, I’m more interested in a turn-based exploration of traditional 2D FG mechanics as we know it. What needs to be different from normal 2D FG mechanics to make a turn-based game work properly?
(Eg. Blocking, throws, overheads, mixups all fundamentally rely on the concept of limited reaction speed, which doesnt exist in turn based. How do we substitute for these very important mechanics?)
There is no way you’re going to make it work not matter what you do it is going to be Rock Paper Scissors.
Edit
You have no idea what that word actually means so stop using it.