Dev usually balance games by making everyone equally suck at the same time.
Casual see this and say “everyone sucks…rawr boring”.
Hardcore pros say"I can will with anyone. Yay multiple legit play styles."
Guess where the big money is? Casuals that like brokenness or hardcore gamers that can skill their way through imbalance ?
So I guess its a fine line.
Why do all the characters have to be exactly balanced when you can take that time and make them truly unique and fun?
In some cases, when they’re implemented right, subsystems can actually help balance the game a bit and help certain characters deal with things they might not otherwise be able to. Imagine KoF without GCR, Guilty Gear without the airdashes or Dead Angle, or even SF3 without parries. They don’t balance the game on their own, but they help a little bit.
True ( Only the first part, I disagree about MVC2) , but people also need to drop the notion that Balance = Fun and the “Only reason I’m losing is because this game is unbalanced” mindset.
It’s not that balancing a game is bad but the rate the games are being balanced is bad for the metagame. Patching fighting games the way you would LOL simply does not work for fighting games. Changing an attack’s startup by one frame could open up a one frame link which could in turn potentially open up an infinite. Of course developers are more inclined to nerf than buff but I’m giving an example. You shat on MVC2 but it’s the perfect shining example of why rebalancing a game ever month is a horrible idea. Look at how Xian won Evo with Gen. Gen didn’t need a buff to be competitively viable, he just needed to be explored.
Capcoms’s patch the game every year or so plan > Shitty F2P patch on instinct plan