Yeah, can’t forget about outliers either… guys like ricki and Justin that may someday get there shit together and take care of their sticking points that keep them from getting higher.
Justin literally doesn’t give a fuck he’s just coasting til marvel.
He gets like 8 viewers on his echofox mandated streaming time(they all have to stream), and most of the time he’s doing that its just watching other people fight in a lounge.
Don’t really have much faith in Justin anymore TBH. Justin’s only chance to get on top again is to be the best Cammy in the world. Optimized Karin is obviously far out of his reach and gives Punk much more reward than his Karin gets. Good thing Chun Li is bad enough that he doesn’t have to worry about flubbing her up also.
Ricki is more versatile in the types of characters she plays so I feel she can come back into form at least.
Yeah that is half the problem currently is if you played one of the characters that got destroyed it will take you some time to get back up to speed.
It’s also why the nerfing sprees need to stop if Capcom wants to make an E-Sports game work.
What happened to Poongko Kolin at NCR? I saw him beat Justin on stream then nothing, anyone got some match footage?
Yeah. That’s why in eSports/TV/money making competition you gotta go to the good stuff to protect yourself. You can’t count on companies and meta always shifts to certain types of characters. Money is on the line now can’t be lolligagging with Vampire Savior Anakaris and Jedah just cuz you like them and stuff.
When he said the game was more about commitment, I thought he just meant taking out stuff like vortex or option selects or dumb “just do it” moves, which I thought was a great idea. I now realize the full extent of that statement, which is where neutral consists of “committing” (i.e. guessing) to whether you think they’ll jump/dash/CC button, and then countering appropriately (and getting put in a bad position if you guessed wrong). If the game designers think about commitment this way, they probably see being able to react to a dash with a button while at the same time also reacting to a jump with a DP as a “reaction OS”, and therefore should be eliminated. Personally I think this takes the concept of commitment too far; I think if you made dashes and jumps a couple frames slower you would still have “commitment” in footsies (as LoyalSol said, all neutral gets to guessing games eventually). It would just take a bit more intelligence to do well in footsies because people would have to think more about things like spacing and more nuanced options.
I respect the view that reading the opponent is the most interesting aspect of fighting games (that’s probably the second most interesting thing to me), but I personally find myself wanting more than only that in a game. I want to feel like I’m playing a game of chess with aspects of rps mixed in, rather than simply rps. I was under the impression that at the highest levels older sf titles were like this (even super turbo), but I didn’t start playing until sf4, and I ended up dropping sf4 due to other reasons (e.g. disliking the emphasis on option selects).
Yup that’s main issue is that if a company goes on a nerfing spree you effectively have to throw away all the experience you have with a character if you want to win. The problem is, that’s also bad for viewers because some of the most hype an interesting stuff comes from having a deep understanding of a character. I mean that’s when you start getting stuff like this
The crazy “OMG DID HE JUST DO THAT!” moments come from being able to consistently practice a character.
Too many fighting games get called “RPS” so really most fighting games are more involved neutrally and psychologically than RPS.
I never devalue any match I play in any fighter to “that was a good game of RPS we played” . Especially when all of them have consistent players with varied strategies.
Whats funny is that some of the better games had significantly less “commitment” than SF5 does.
Its also funny how much fighting games are more about using tools that dont commit you to anything rather than the other way around.
Pretty sure that saying fighting games are about “commitment” is gonna be as big a meme as saying they are like chess.
That’s why Fantasy Strike is releasing. To prove that fighting games really are nothing more than a high caliber chess game.
on the flip side every FG has at least some “RPS” elements
so I never understood the argument that you need to simplify the game to make it more read-based, since good reads will serve you well in just about any game.
Agreed. I didn’t mean to say sfv is rps, it obviously isn’t. You have to know frame data, combos, general character knowledge, setups, execution, etc. 95%+ players don’t know all these things and will always lose to top players. However, at the highest levels of play, both players know all of these things. They know all their options and the opponent’s options at any given moment. When playing at that level, all of those other things I mentioned are a given. So when you’re playing the game against someone else at that level you start to feel what a game is like at it’s core. It’s this “feeling” that I’m saying in sfv feels closer to something like rps (but is not rps; you obviously have many more options at any given moment) than something like chess (which I mean as something with a lot more depth/strategy). I’m not sure what other games actually felt like at the highest levels, since I didn’t play them at a high level. Hope that made sense.
Yes and no. Third Strike for instance technically had a ton of “safe stuff”, but that was in a game where the parry existed and could make almost anything unsafe if it was obvious. Which encouraged smart play since auto-pilot stuff would easily get eaten alive by some of the better players.
It’s not that things are safe that’s the issue. It’s that the things that give you a massive reward are safe while things that give you little reward aren’t. In most good games I can think of the risk/reward is usually pretty well balanced.
It’s about rewarding smart play and punishing bad play. In SF5 the problem is bad play can be very rewarding.
- long post, relevant to gameplay theory in SF5 if interested and also relevant if you miss that controlled style. Bolded the parts that I want to talk about.
I had an epiphany a few nights ago on the shitter (where most of my thinking is done). I was reading an old poker book I had (I used to play poker quite decently and always see similarities to fighting games - skill with luck) and I flicked to the Phil Helmuth section. If you know poker you probably know Phil, but to cut the details short, he is one of the most successful poker players of all time and made his mark playing a particular style, playing not just tight, but what I think he referred to as super tight. The basis of is that he would only play hands when he felt that he was far and away the better chance of winning, not just slightly. He would avoid marginal hands and even fold semi decent hands (in the eyes of regular or aggressive players) but when he did have a decent hand he would play it super aggressively. He could use the style to also bluff because playing so few hands also meant his opponents would perceive him as only playing strong hands (which would allow the bluff to appear like a strong hand). In short Phil Hellmuths style was to take the risk and luck elements out of poker as much as he could whilst also using his style to manipulate opponents. I started to see a lot of similarities in SF5 here, bad odds, bad gambles, risk reward skewed across the roster, many people continually playing marginal hands for big loses.
Over the past few days I’ve been working on a play style that sort of mirrors Hellmuths poker style and not only have I been enjoying the game a little more, I’ve been winning against better opponents and not cracking in moments I would usually lose to. The basis of it is, in order to make the game not as hectic, you have to play supertight, wait and calmly control your space against a hectic opponent. The temptation is in this game is (I’ve fallen into this trap many times before) he’s playing hectic, so I have to play hectic to match his style so lets rock. This is not the right answer and why the game feels “random”. I feel this is just a bad strategy and it makes reacting to dashes and jumps twice as hard. If there are now two of you flying around the screen with dashes and buttons you are both leaving too much to chance and in the case you are playing against a character like Balrog (or one of the better characters) your odds are even worse, you are basically playing bad or marginal poker hands continually - a losing strategy.
The basics of how I’ve adjusted (I could probably write three pages on this) is that if you weigh up the risk of what you are doing and the risk of what can happen then play accordingly it’s actually better to play quite defensively and quiet then hit the aggression hard when you get an opening. A single poke at mid range can possibly net me 70 damage vs a CC return of 200, Not good - keep these to a minimum and preferably after a -3 or -4 button and do you even have the reach? That’s a very important point too, calculate what just happened and how far the opponent is standing, is it even worth a button? A defensive throw tech at mid screen will leave you open to a possible crush counter or shimmy, but taking the throw will reset the situation back to neutral almost 90% of the time for a loss of maybe only 120 damage. Again, the solution is to just take the mid screen throw the majority of the time, why bother teching and leaving yourself open to a CC and a KD? Once you start not pushing buttons (the opposite of what generally happens in SF5) and not being pre-emptive your reactions go up a level and now your AA and dash reactions are on point because you’re not concentrating on anything else, but you will be taking the bigger chances when they come along (bad dash, bad jump in, random EX move)
The same applies to wake up, it’s far too risky to use a reversal most of the time since your loss is a 300 combo and another knockdown meaty weighed up against 140 damage? Maybe less. Bad hand. This again, like the supertight style does though allow your own Dp’s and jump ins a higher chance of working when you do fire because the opponent feels that you are not taking the bait on wake up, playing quiet, taking throws, blocking and that time you do take a risk it has a much higher chance of success. Blocking is good and we are not blocking enough in this game, we want to “take our turn” dump that thought and only take your turn when it’s obvious you can. Stealing turns will get you killed.
Meter is another big one. If Urien or Balrog or Guile has EX meter, you must respect that, again - supertight. You know that random is coming, so do you want to be pressing buttons or do you want to let them burn it? The difference between winning and losing or even losing momentum can simply be blocking an EX move or even blocking for seven seconds more than you usually would.
I could go on explaining multiple situations, but if you do enjoy that controlled type of play like I do, try this supertight style. Note though that you don’t move back and crouch block, or even overly defend a lot, you can still use forward movement to keep your space, but you just play a quiet, calculated, counter attack style and when you get a knock down or a chance you play it aggressively. Moving backwards too, just walk back out of the pressure, don’t sit there and wait, walking back under pressure is powerful and I think why a lot of pro’s get tagged by midscreen lows because generally the low threat is not dangerous unless a character has a super stocked.
A lot of this is old school fundamentals, but just have a think about what risks you are putting out for what reward and start to tweak your game based on the odds. You can’t obviously apply this on all characters because if you do play a top tier character chances are you are on the flip side of the supertight style, your character might allow you to play the opposite style, super loose, these characters do exist and it’s important to not get drawn into bad bets.
I dunno, probably a bit of a ramble, but I felt like writing this down. Feel like writing something positive for once and it feels like there’s only so many times we can complain before we have to quit or find solutions.
>it’s another I don’t like SFV at high levels but because I’m a Capcuck I’ll still pay attention to it in hopes that it will be a game I’ll eventually love even though deep down inside I know Capcom isn’t gonna get their shit together and I’ll have to suffer for 5 more years while still patiently waiting for DLC episode
Sigh you niggas sometimes I swear
This is exactly how I feel. Previous fighting games…l and I mean like basically all of them, aren’t based on commitment, they are based on making YOUR OPPONENT commit.
Commit to jumping or blocking, or doing a reversal or being in a bad place.
Sf5 as a game just gives this up for free. If you attack in this game, no matter what it is, from a jab used to try and check a dash or a medium used as a placed move, you are committing to something. Your jab can be CC, your medium can be jumped or CC, your decision to do nothing can be dashed in on, your decision to concentrate on dashes can be jumped in on. Your medium one hit confirm pushes you out of throw range, your upclose jab pushes you out of throw range and only combos into a medium on CH. Your upclose -2 moves have little pushback making them easier to pressure on block. Your upclose + normals push further away on block making pressure harder. Your only ways to get in with priority and plus is via meter.
Everything is committal, which is hard to get ones head around when you’ve been playing non committal fighters for over 20 years.
I can dig it for the upclose offense and frame trapping stuff, if more characters had buttons that served as tick throw lead ins without moving forward, but the committal aspect to neutral is imho one of the biggest mistakes made in fighting game design ever. I agree with highlandfireball that it is by intention, I just don’t agree that it’s implementation is correct.
Even v trigger pop… which a lot of people complain about being free, requires you to use your v pop as a guess if you are just throwing out buttons. Guess wrong and you lose at least 200 potential damage, maybe more. So even they require commitment since you rarely get the guess twice in one round.
It’s that aspect that I dislike about the game the most, as well as how few options there are in the game that are actually strong without some form of downside.
Probably the strongest " no downside" move in the game is Mikas v trigger. Luckily she usually only gets it once a round.
I dunno which of the above 3 posts you’re responding to, but Highland’s post is just about how to play SFV better
I think the poker analogy is super interesting. I’ve been trying to learn poker myself over the past few months and was surprised how much the mental game felt similar to the mental game in FGs.
The argument being made is that if the game is about option-selects, game knowledge, dexterity and reactions you don’t need to read anything. You can just cover almost every option of the opponent with OS, put them in vortexes that they can’t escape unless they specifically practice that setup, react to the few times they do something weird and worst case scenario fall back on doing more damage per opportunity by having way more 1-frame links in your muscle memory.
The description is a bit extreme but I’ve heard everything there from various people and I even believe some of it myself.
Also I found this in kappa. Discuss.
http://imgur.com/a/YVP7t
Yeah, just I don’t really see how SFV is too much less depthening than a lot of other games out there. Especially since the later cast is becoming more complicated and setup/resource heavy.
SF is SF. The closest sport I would relate it to is Tennis without as much physicality, but it’s still it’s own thing.