No, its stupid. It makes the games less enjoyable. People don’t like to spend hours and hours practicing combos over and over. Some people don’t have that time to spend, and those people have are being denied entry into the game by an artificial barrier. People like developing strategies, and if they have to spend 4 hours a day just to get some stupid link combos down that any decent strategy is based off of, you’ll find less people playing, and less competition.
If you can’t work on your execution then spend your time on working your setups to create your opportunities. You gotta train somehow to win right? It’s like you’re expecting people to just hop on and win without having put any effort. It’s a simple strategy even in life, you can’t know everything, so specialize in one field and be the best at it.
Its not an artificial barrier. Its called learning the game. If you suck, you gotta practice and this is just basic fact.
To play basketball, you gotta learn how to dribble with both hands, shoot\layup, triple threat, pass. There are a wide variety of skills you need to learn before you actually start playing properly. OR you can go the “mental retard” way and just turn basketball into semi football. No dribbling, just run around and shoot when you want. Because no one has the time to practice dribbling or shooting or layups or practice passing right?
so if something is too hard, we should dumb it down for the rest of the people that can’t keep up because there aren’t enough people to play? I want to play good people who know the game, not casual gamers who just play because the game is easy to learn.
Then insert random sport analogies here because it applies across the board and not only just in sports but in life. If you have a hard time passing a class, you don’t ask the teacher to make it easier for you to pass. You study and go into class well informed about the material you’re reviewing to understand what you’re being taught in class that much better. I don’t see how people can’t make this association.
Execution is a neccessity to a game and it has to be difficult. By making execution easy, you’re not drawing a line between high level execution and high level strategy because everyone will have the same high level execution. Fighters would be based on all strategy and @ that point, you might as well play chess.
Ignoring the fact that chess is turn-based and fighting games are not which would still be a fundamental difference regardless of execution, is it really inconceivable to you that there could be more than one type of game that is rich in strategy and downplays execution? Is chess the only option?
It’s pretty funny that you bring up chess, too, because that game is probably harder to master than any other which pretty much contradicts all your predictions of what doom would befall us if we removed difficult execution from fighters.
So say it takes someone a week to perfectly execute a link combo, practicing 4 hours a day.
Someone else who doesn’t have that kind of time may take a month, practicing only 1 hour a day.
Does it really matter? Do you have to be a pro as fast as possible? If you’re really dedicated to the game and really want to learn, you’ll stick with it. Even if you want to practice 4 hours a day, but can’t, you’ll settle for 1h/day because it’s worth it to you.
*ObZ
I question where you even play fighting games. What has always made them good is that anyone could play, not a select few.
I’ve played and beaten tons of people based solely on the fact that they can’t super correctly, and its boring. Beating people because they can’t do the moves correctly is mindless. Its not any fun. I don’t want to draw any line between low level and high level execution, because I don’t get any satisfaction out of beating someone who missed that crucial super because they don’t have 4 hours every night to spend at home by themselves practicing SF. If you want less competition because not everyone is willing to dedicate as much time practicing execution, who is the real pussy? You.
You too. You want less competition. If there was a fighting game that required 40 hours a week of practice, do you think that is reasonable too?
Anything worth doing well is worth practicing.
Fighting games are games of skill, and any skill requires dedicated practice to master. Look at DDR. Do you think people can do both pads on insane difficulty their first couple tries? Obviously not. But does that mean DDR should be nerfed because not everyone can do that? No, because DDR is still enjoyable to those who don’t practice as much.
Same with fighters. If you’re content with just playing at your local arcade and beating scrubs, then you don’t need to practice. If you want to play competitively against people who love the game as much as you do, you’ll need to practice, and practice alot.
Here’s an analogy: Lots of people would like to be a doctor when they grow up. Obviously, not everyone can. You have to dedicate hours upon hours to study for top grades, do community work and get good references, all just to be accepted into med school. Once you’re in, it becomes even more intense. But all those hours paid off. The reward in the end is incredibly self-satisfying. Again, not everyone is going to be a docter without serious work, and not everyone is going to be a pro without serious practice.
And I don’t want less competition, I want better competition. It’s like an arms race. If your opponents get better, you have to step up your game and become better as well. Fighting games naturally breed this kind of dedication.
I don’t know. Maybe people are lazier than I thought. No one seems to want to work for anything anymore.
*ObZ
Yes it is called training mode for a reason, you train in it. Now perhaps I didnt get the copy of whatever retard dictionary you’re using but I have yet to see a definition of training which equates to “grinding out execution timing”. Training encompasses more than just rote execution of moves. Though as you seem to equate execution with depth and manliness with manual manipulation (no double entendre intended I assure you) I image this line of argument is pointless.
Perhaps you would care to engage with some of the various counter-points people have made to your arguments as opposed to spouting out sad attempts at pithy wisdom?
So your argument against practicing is that you play too many noobs who don’t care to practice? No one wants less competition but a game shouldn’t have to be overtly simplified just so people like you can play better players. Being good at anything requires practice even games with little or no execution. You think everyone who plays chess has an equal chance of winning because there is little execution? The person who practices and plays more always has the advantage in any game.
i think we may as well give up arguing with these guys now. rather than actually responding to the points made, theyre continuing to spout completely irrelevant platitudes like “if you want to be good at execution you have to practice” as if that isnt fucking obvious already. its pretty clear this isn’t getting anywhere.
no… time /= skill in competitive games
In a thread full of wildly useless analogies this was the one that amused me the most. By your analogy your arguing that barriers to entry are a good thing and that a world in which the majority of the populace were able to offer superior medical care to one another is a bad one, charming.
Barriers to entry are almost universally a bad idea and their implementation only serves the interests of a dominant minority or an elitist hierarchy.
Please re-iterate everyone of your major points in clear fashion so we know exactly what they are, because your side of the argument is spouting off just as much irrelevant crap.
-
Fighting games are more interesting when they’re a test of strategic skill rather than execution.
-
Execution, when both players are not equally good at it, dilutes and downplays the importance of strategic interactions, thus making the game less interesting.
-
Removing difficult execution from games does not negatively impact strategic depth.
-
While adding nothing of interest to the game, difficult execution does present an unnecessary barrier to entry for players that may be perfectly strategically capable but lack skill in execution.
What, so you’re going to let any punk ass kid get into med school?
If that happened your “superior medical care” would go to shit. There’s a difference between unfounded or irrational barriers of entry, and basic standards. Would you let a high school drop of perform brain surgery on you? Your argument shocks me especially when doctors serve first and foremost the rest of the population, not themselves.
Anyways, off topic. But I see your point in relation to fighting games. Unnecessary barriers let less people play a game.
But I would argue that even if you don’t have perfect execution of high level strategies, the game can still be playable and enjoyable.
*ObZ
I’m done after this, but I have to say every fucking analogy I’ve read counter to my argument has been the definition of weak.
Yes, but you have to practice people, and thats what makes it fun. You don’t sit around practicing pushing pieces back and forth by yourself for hours.
Playing DDR competitively doesn’t change based on your opponents actions. The entire reason its fun is just beating what the computer throws at you. DDR competitively would be like seeing who can get the highest score on SF single player.
Fighting games are a game, not a profession. Becoming a doctor is not competitive. If there was a game to become a doctor, it would be a single player RPG.
You guys are so out of touch it boggles the mind. There was even a comparison between good FG players and military special forces. Do you see the huge fucking disconnect there? This is a fucking game! You can’t tell me you want more competition if you think everyone has to make it past some artificial barrier first. Chess is great because you don’t have to sit around shuffling pieces by yourself for hours. Your practice is exclusively based on how other people play. Do you really feel so great about yourself because you had the time to spend hours upon hours sitting in training mode, and the people at your level do too? I don’t. I want as many people to enjoy the game as possible, and people don’t enjoy sitting in training mode. But hey, if you want to feel like being a good fighting game player is like being a doctor of a member of the special forces, feel free.
The barriers to entry to medical school are coherent with what is required of medical school students and, furthermore, doctors, though. Requiring players to first surpass the execution barrier in order to be able to compete on an equal level at the STRATEGY part of the game is like requiring medical school applicants to high jump seven feet before they’re allowed in.
And what about people who have perfect execution, but can’t think of strategy? Does that mean you have to strip a game of all but the most basic of game mechanics so that it’s more accesible? So now we have a game with one button auto combos and jumping and blocking. Whee.
Fighting games require both skill sets. You have to improve upon both if you want to perform.
*ObZ
Like polarity said, the most interesting part for me is the strategic and tactical aspect of this type of game. However, while I would agree that it is in fact more important than execution, I do think there should be SOME degree of execution involved that requires lots of practice regardless of which fighter we are talking about, in that sense I am not entirely against execution. I mean, I think the interesting thing about fighters is that the definion of skill IN a fighter is a blend of a chess like strategic mentality while also being good seasoned enough to consitently use advanced techniques. It’s true that the mindgame aspect is more important, but I think execution demands have to and always should be there, at least on a marginal level.
Most fighters get it right when it comes to this though, because people who don’t enjoy hard execution can always pick an easier character to use that fits their needs and allows them to compete (Chun-Li as opposed to Yun, Anna or Ganryu as opposed to Devil Jin, the list goes on and on). Ultimately I just say, go with whatever character fits your needs, if you don’t like to have to constantly work on your execution, than pick a character who is more straightforward in this aspect.
People who play multiple fighters would be better off going with easier characters, because time needs to be invested in all the other fighters you play and you just won’t have time to work on anything besides your mindgames/setups and your basic execution. Heihachi is my main in tekken, but Im considering dropping him now that Im going back to some of the 2D fighters and really trying to take them seriously, I just won’t have time to constantly work on him to the point where I can keep myself in top shape as far as the execution is concerned. The hardest thing about it though is that even when you master your advanced execution in these games or chararacters, you have to keep practicing it beyond that point or you might lose your ability to do it as consistently. Mindgames on the other hand stay etched in your memory, it’s very very difficult to forget strategies and better yet, often when people take a break from practicing or playing fighters, they can come back and find that they have reached a new level of creativity as far as their strategy and mindgames are concerned, it’s constantly developing in your conscious and subconscious even when your not playing. In the end you just go with what feels right to you, I think that’s part of the reason there’s different characters you can select from.
In the end though, I still think that being able to consistently DO advanced, difficult techniques in ANY situation regardless of pressure will always be and always should be an important aspect of any fighter. Those who don’t feel secure in their ability to perform should go for a simpler character.
Not even close. Execution would be more like being able to perform well on tests, do well in interviews. Strategy would be time management between class, work, volunteering and leisure.
You’re making a straw man of my arguments here :arazz:.
One more thing: Doesn’t learning strategy take hours of practice too? Watching match vids, reading faqs and guides, then actually training yourself to perform those strategies in a real situation and not just in training mode?
*ObZ