Dan sucking is part of the joke though…
If he weren’t shit, the joke would just be that he’s a parody of AoF.
balance and uniqueness are not direct opposites of each other.
uniqueness comes in how a character plays/their options in the game’s fighting system/etc.
a game can have a cast of balanced but unique characters (XvSF, the top+god tier of MvC2)
i think a better question would be would you rather have a game of 10 characters where 9 are all broken in the game’s system, but they are counters to each other at the same time while also completely dominating the 10th character or a game where all 10 characters are 5-5 matchups?
I’m part of the ‘not related’ crowd.
I mean real talk, when it comes down to defining balance - you can shout ‘Game X’ has a cast of 50 characters, but only 16 are played because the others are poo poo and you can say ‘Game Y’ has a cast of 12 characters and all are playable’, but when you look at it, there is more 'character depth in Game X, despite being - by percentage - more unbalanced.
The goal should be to have a mid to end game with as many options as possible. Period. Uniquness breaks balance and creates it. Look at UMvC3…if there was no team element, the game would devolve QUICKLY to Vergil vs Vergil matches or something like that, but because of the team element, there is balance because of the uniqueness teams bring. A character with a great assist who is crappy on point can counter pick and shut down what looks like a good team on the other side. It’s just kind of hard to prefer one to the other. Taking it at pure face value - being unique usually leads itself to a longer shelf life so its easy to claim it is of higher importance…but I admit thats simply on the surface.
- :bluu:
Balance= Global balance.
Uniqueness= Local imbalance.
And you need both.
I get how you can compare 3S Chun to Gallon since they’re both highly ranked characters that are easy to use, but Yun?
Chun isn’t even comparable to Gallon, that character is on a whole nother level of scrubby easy shit.
fun fact: 99% of 3s Chuns I play against have horrible spacing and are really easy to kill with any of my side characters. like any other character in that game, if your fundamentals suck you are going to get blown up.
Son, i won matches with gallon by jumping up with mk and hk. That was the first time i ever picked him
I seriously think they programmed him with their fucking buttcheeks. I just pick q-bee against him though. Just crazy random match.
In all honesty those characters were comparisons within their respective games
Chun was clearly designed to be really good, but why is sean designed to be so ass in that game
Ono admitted what he did with yun so i don’t even have to touch on that
Lillith, Anakris, and jedah are in the same game with Sasquatch and Gallon…
That’s a non-argument. The same thing making the match-up 6-4 could be making other match-ups 9-1. It could be keeping a low tier character from viability. It’s impossible to make that call without more information. I also don’t accept “it’s hard to make the game perfect so there’s no point trying to make it as good as possible” as an argument.
I wasn’t trying to say we shouldn’t try to make the game as perfect as possible, I’m just saying that this specific hypothetical two-character example is unrealistic and our attempts to debate which option is better won’t ever resolve. Unless we start theorizing about full games and look closely at every consequence of a change this debate will just be a lot of opinions and “what ifs”
Can someone agree to my first post to at least balance out the disagree. It literally makes no sense since I was asking a freakin question to discuss. I never asserted my own stance to agree or disagree on. But given that, I shall now do so.
I’m cool with a 6-4 matchup. It’s more fun having uniqueness than losing even a little bit of it to make the match 5-5. Even in a 6-4 all it means is that someone is the slight underdog. It’s still nearly a 50/50 matchup, and being a slight underdog can cause matchups to be more exciting. So I’m all for keeping the uniqueness so long as matchups don’t get worse than 6/4… or maybe 6.5/3.5
Edit: Ultimately I guess the best thing would be to somehow buff one of the unique moves in a way so that it maintains its uniqueness but now causes the match to become closer to 5/5 or at least 5.5/4.5
This raises a new question in my eyes that I will now post in a new thread.
About this whole uniqueness vs balance, i have yet to see a game where every character feels the same outside SF1.
No seriously, even capcom who are terrible at balancing their games, they have never made the characters “similar” to each other when balancing them, not even the shoto clones who despite sharing a lot of stuff they always end being different to each other.
From the very moment that the characters have a different set of normals and specials, no matter how much you try they wouldn’t be similar at all, even when they have a common goal (zoning, running away, rush down) they will achieve it on a different way just because they have a different moveset, properties, etc.
Ryu and Ken in WW weren’t all that dissimilar, no?
I mean… It wasn’t until CE that they played very differently.
I have seen a game where 2 characters feel waaayyyy too similar. It is called smash. I hate how similar Captain Falcon and Ganondorf are. They are both completely awesome characters and deserve to be completely uniques (they can still have a few similar moves I guess). But right now Ganondorf is too much of a slow clone of Captain Falcon. Ganondorf needs more unique moves like his SPARTAAAA kick.
Feeling similar and being the same character are very different things.
I mean, IIRC, Ryu and Ken in WW are the same character - though I could be wrong about this. I think it wasn’t until CE when their specials had different properties, making your choice of specials and oki games completely different.
In EVERY Street Fighter, Ryu and Ken feel similar, but in no way are they the same character. Especially when you get into Super Turbo and beyond.
Hell, Sagat feels similar to Ryu and Ken, and he’s still completely unique to them.
It makes me laugh when people say we have enough “shotos”… when if they had any idea how to play shotos, they’d know they’re all different. Does Tekken have enough Mishima’s? Because you know… they’re all played the same way…
Chess is essentially a 1 character fighting game and the only way you can achieve 5/5’s across the board unless you were to just get super lucky with the homogenization of the characters.
White was considered OP for a long time though I think.
I think that even by then there where some differences on frame data, but don’t quote me on that.
Funny thing, on SF1 both Ryu and Ken had differences on their specials, though i think that they were just cosmetic.
Checks is not “balanced”, iirc the balance is between 5.5:4.5 in favor of the whites (Though this is balanced out by making both players play in both sides.). We even have books dedicated only to play the game as the Blacks 
That’s a hint. You’ve made 2 or 3 threads in the past few days. Some of them got derailed, especially the EVO 2013 one. Chill on making threads for a while.
People are disagreeing that this thread should have been made and this topic discussed.
I really don’t see the point in discussing this too, since you’re never going to have perfect balance in any fighting game and it’s not like we have a choice in making a game like that other than making all the characters the exact same.