If Yun was truly broken there would be no discussion.
…
Fighting games have a lot of unique stigmas that plague it compared to other games. Among them is that even casual players think things are “broken” (usually it’s just their buddy mashing some move that they can’t get past) and they’re quick to dismiss the entire game instead of doing some research into ways to beat it. They’re quick to dismiss the game, because that’s the easy way out… the hard way (which usually leads to the truth) requires a lot of work they aren’t willing to put in.
As for how to combat these stigmas… your guess is as good as mine. “This game is broken and therefore not fun!” is just one of many problems that uniquely relate to fighting games that you just kinda have to “get” in order to move past it. I’m not sure there’s a standard answer to this problem… the people who want to play fighters will, and they’ll realize after a bit that it’s actually not really a problem. Everyone else won’t.
(Another problem with fighters is the lack of immediate depth of strategy… in every other multiplayer game, the objective is both clear and it’s easy to achieve. In fighters, the objective is clear (hit the opponent a bunch), but achieving it is very hard, as there are hundreds of little details that are all equally important to achieving this goal, such as spacing, special move inputs, the importance of certain normals, etc… as a result, everyone new to the game just mashes and misses out on 99% of the depth of the game. I can’t really think of any other genre like it… with games like FPSes, even if you’re not a top player, you can see strategy, such as more powerful guns, good spots on the map, shooting for the head is better than not, throw grenades to get around cover, etc. It’s incredibly rare to see a new player implement any reasonable non-mashing strategy in a fighting game.)
That’s the kind of input I find really helpful as a new guy… Helps me formulate a way to keep at it and let the garbage not get in. Staying motivated seems key.
also unbalanced does not equate to broken in fighting games
unbalanced is what may or may not define the most current tier list
broken means that something-usually a character , isnt working as intended. broken characters usually come with true unblockables, infinite combos, or situations that cant be escaped. they usually operate outside of the rest of the games design parameters, or have such overwhelming advantages that playing against this character with any other is futile
as far as i can tell yun yang and fei dont have matches that are truly un-winnable, and they dont have more than a handful of matches where they have a heavy 7-3 advantage.
they may have a bunch of matches with advantages, but calling them broken seems like hyperbole
Yes I’d gladly take a Yun mirror over a Guile or Honda. At least stuff happens.
I was pointing to the thought that such Guile/Honda mirrors weren’t exactly that common in Super because you could just as easily pick someone else with an even matchup without making it a boring mirror.
In this game, I’ve yet to see soft counters to Yun, whereas I don’t see the same problems with Yang or Fei. Fei being pretty much the same and a strong character is good. Yang has a great set of tools whilst looking very strong but still beatable. Yun… better divekick (not really needed), safe EX lunge (bleh- just throw it out there almost), Genei Jin almost guaranteed once per match because of his crazy meter gain.
I only mention it because spectators will get salty if it’s Yun mirrors all day. There are few reasons not to pick Yun.
AE is fun still… I’m hopeful to see some interesting tech at EVO.
Why the hell do people talk about ST like it was a safe place and you could get knocked down without dying. Sf4 is a thousand times more forgiving than ST for a knockdown
I understand what you’re saying, but there are a fair number of reasons not to pick Yun (imo), primarily if you feel his style doesn’t match your own. Yun is also a new character who doesn’t get everything for free… lots of people would rather learn the Yun matchup with their old character (especially if it’s reasonable), as opposed to learning 39 matches with Yun.
Also, you can bet that because Yun is “so powerful”, everyone will be coming to EVO with a strategy against Yun. Your Yun will have to be better than the rest to survive. It’s actually somewhat of a disadvantage to play a character that everyone will be working hard to defeat unless you’re one of the best yourself!
Read my post responding to this exact point. SF4 more forgiving my ass.
Quit being a baby. In sf4 if you lose from one single knockdown you probably had like 5 chances between that knockdown and dying. In st it can literally be 1 knockdown no chances because there are actual loops and damage is way higher. In sf4 if you die from “one” knockdown your defense is some kindergarten shit
you must have never played an elite viper, abel or akuma.
yeah the damage isnt garaunteed, but all it takes is a few wrong guesses on some characters
not picking a side in your ST argument, but you can have defense well above kindergarten shit, and still guess wrong
5 chances on average, but I’m talking about vortex characters specifically. Abel can kill you with a mashed out EX TT and two oki mix ups if he has ultra. Guessing right in the mix up situation hardly counts as skillful defense, nor does it take much skill relative to something like footsies. It’s braindead as hell, that’s what I’m getting at here. I used to play the shit out of Abel and Akuma until I got bored at how dumb and easy it is to kill even the best players with Oki bullshit.
I actually prefer AE over Super. The balancing in AE is god awful compared to super but I believe some odd time ago, Ono stated that this game was going to be unbalanced purposely. In every previous SF, there was always a very strong, small group of characters. I believe he wanted to bring back that feel. Furthermore, as far as I can remember, the Japanese was always put in high regards when it comes to fighting games in general. It is believed their average of quality players is better than ours and they’re the ones taking a good chunk of the tournies.
America has proved a lot of times that just because Japan received a game long before we did, that we still held high standings. Until AE was released, we’ve been playing Super a lot. That being said, there isn’t much of a learning curve between AE and Super. On top of that, Supers current patch should have the same effect for the existing characters, meaning Makoto will still be as strong as she is in AE, and several nerfs will still exist. Maybe I’m off because I haven’t touched Super since AE was released, and it’s more than likely that someone will clarify that assumption on my behalf.
I believe in the end, AE will still be at the majors that advertised it because to go back on their word now would be sheisty. I understand where you’re coming from, but it seems you’re just QQ’ing about the 4 new characters or Yun in particular. The only way we’re gonna evolve as a community is to figure this out head on. Yun is strong but he’s not as broken as most players put it. 3S Yun players scare me more than AE Yun players.
I’d LOVE to see you easily beat “even the best players” with your Akuma. Wonder why only 1 player in the whole world is actually winning consistently with akuma and Abel basically never won a major.
lol nrs cant fix anything for shit if they wanted. If nrs would patch this game guy,rufus and an other random char would have suddenly infinites.
So many people that don’t have a clue what they’re talking about in here :sad:
LOL @ SF4 being less forgiving than ST. SRK always makes me laugh when people try to speak intelligently on games they never really played. In ST you DIE from a knockdown. You die in 8 seconds if you let a guy jump in on you without anti-airing. SF4 is nowhere close to that level.
Abel oki wasn’t that good. Against a large percentage of the cast, his oki carried a large risk, and just as easily as he could do ambiguous roll-> low Fierce -> Ultra, he could get DP, FADC -> ultra thrown right back at him. Also, if you knocked Abel down, with damn near anybody, you can realistically take 40-50% for that before Abel resets the match, if you know what the fuck you’re doing. Abel is a footsie based character, and you shouldn’t be letting him knock you down anyway, though.
As for the overall argument, SSF4 was way more balanced, but I like AE better. Vanilla was ass. Not even gonna talk about that bullshit game.
SSF4 was very good for a number of reasons… actually, before I start that part… why the fuck do people say SSF4 was defensive and turtly? That game was alive for a year, and over that time period, I saw Rufus, Abel, Akuma, Cammy, Fei, Viper, Adon, and other offensive characters doing just fine. I saw those characters actually WINNING tournaments, way more than I saw Honda or Guile winning tournaments. Not to mention, the SF4 engine is geared towards offense anyway. There are so many situations that lend themselves to EXTREMELY safe offense, if you decide to learn how to use your tools. Problem is that most people don’t know how to play offense (this is true in almost any SF game, that’s why the only ones that are deemed “offensive” by most people are the ones in which the game’s engine severely limits defense), so they say offense sucks. SF4 is so lenient with inputs that option selecting is easy as hell in so many spots, and that lends itself towards offense. Period. Yeah… there are defensive option selects too, but outside of OST (which good SF4 offense is designed to blow up), these are few and far between.
Anyway, SSF4 was good because it was balanced in terms of characters, and in terms of play style. You could play that game a number of ways, and find success. It was good.
AE seems to be more of a throwback to the last generation of Capcom games, in terms of the competitive philosophy (at least at this stage in the game), and if you look at it through that scope, it’s very enjoyable.
Let me explain. 3S, MvC2, and CvS2 all saw long periods of competitive play. They were great competitive games. All of those games are very top-heavy. Sure… you CAN win in CvS2 and 3S without going top-tier (well, in CvS2, you generally need at least ONE top tier character on your team to be truly competitive, but a team with only one top character on it, isn’t really a top tier team, in my eyes), but still, the top tiers in all three of those games are very pronounced.
People that didn’t like those games, often brought up the fact that they weren’t balanced all that well, as an argument against their worth. I have always disagreed with the premise behind that argument. When you’re talking about competitive play, you have to judge the game based on what actually happens in competition. When judging MvC2 as a competitive game, the fact that you can’t use Hayato doesn’t matter. Erase him from your mind. He doesn’t exists. Look at the way MSS interacts with Santhrax. Look at how Clockw0rk interacts with Scrub… look at how MSP interacts with Row… Matrix with Combofiend… THAT’s the game. Is THAT a good game, yes or no? That’s the only concern when judging MvC2 as a competitive game, because that’s all the game is competitively.
Balance is a dumb metric. Who gives a shit how large of a percentage of the cast I can use? Characters are just avatars for the possibilities the game engine allows. So you can’t use Captain America in MvC2… that doesn’t matter, because Cable has basically everything Captain America does, plus more, so if you look at CapAm for what he is, an avatar which alllows you to throw a projectile, do an uppercut, and run around slowly trying to land hits, well, you can just pick Cable, and get all of that in much more effective form, plus more.
I digress though… My point is this… SSF4, with it’s 20 or so characters was a good game. As for AE… forget Hakan… forget Dudley… forget Abel (which most of you wanted to do anyway, from what I recall)… Is the game that AE’s 10 or so characters allow you to play, a good competitive game? Yes or no? I think it’s a better game than SSF4, at least at this point.
Also, let’s not forget the game has only been out for six months. I know that feels like forever in this update-every-ten-months time we’re in now, but as somebody that played CvS2 for 8 years, I’m not ready to say AE is done evolving after only 6 months. Let this bitch breathe (© Hov).
tl;dr- Ignore the characters that don’t matter. Play good characters, and judge the game based on that.
I like Yang as a character, Yang is fun in AE, with plenty of options, I like AE.
This.
I used to play Ryu, but I could tell that simply the fact that EVERYBODY knew the matchup so well made it tough for me. I switched to Akuma, and within days my game improved, likely because people didn’t know how to counter it.
If you play Yun, people will know your tricks.
I feel that AE should be the main game; it is an international game and we should always play the newest reiteration, no matter how bad your characters get. Competitively speaking, almost very character has a fighting chance in AE. The twins are not broken. Sure, I believed the CEO and ReveLAtions being AE 3 days after release was bullshit, but now I feel that the game has progresses enough so that people had enough time to figure out the match up!
Sure, as a game I like Super because of its balance. But I feel that we should always play with the moat recent version, especially when it is similar and almost every character is playable anyway; in example, Rose got top 16 at CEO; a character that was presumed to be one of the worst characters in the game 
This is one of the things I liked best about Super. People complained about charge characters at first but we rarely saw these characters winning tournaments or really making an impact. I can’t even really name one character that was really dominating in tournaments.
Aside from the tournament scene, I felt like every character had potential to be dangerous. When you get high level, of course the nuances of the tiers start to matter, but at a competitive casual level I think the majority of the characters were viable. Mostly, I agree with the statement below…
Agreed, and this is one of the reasons why I really liked Super.
AE seems to be more of a throwback to the last generation of Capcom games, in terms of the competitive philosophy (at least at this stage in the game), and if you look at it through that scope, it’s very enjoyable.
MvC2 and CvS2 also had the advantage of being team games. Even if only a percentage of the cast was useable, the team dynamic made things varied and interesting. In MvC2, two mid-tier characters could combine their power to make a top tier team (team Clockw0rk), or have a high-tier assist (CapCom), and the way MSS worked was very different from MSP and so on. In CvS2, the Groove system also helped to change things up - Cammy/Blanka/Sagat in C was a different beast from CBS in A, N, or even K. Also, roll-cancel helped a lot more characters move up and be viable.
The ride for 3S was interesting. It went from lukewarm reception to revival and now with a very loyal and dedicated fanbase (many of whom stuck with the game from the beginning). Correct me if I’m wrong though, but I recall shortly before SF4 was announced, the 3S scene was starting to get a bit stale. I even remember people talking about banning Yun/Chun/Ken in tournaments and messing around with system direction to try and make the game more interesting. I don’t think these ideas went anywhere, but I do remember a lot of “bored of the big 3” sentiment.
In a game like SF4, with no team dynamic and no grooves to change the way a character plays or the options they have, having a very small and runaway top tier can be dangerous and lead to the game getting stale. While I understand and agree that high-level MvC2 is awesome despite the limited character selection, I don’t think that high-level AE that revolves around a handful of characters will be nearly as good or effective. I watched the Daigo vs Mago finals at Revelations…and was bored. I really hope this isn’t the future of AE.
What concerns me about the top in AE is the characters being too good. If we have a 30 character game, yet only 6-7 of those characters are viable and the game they play is good, that can be fine…but in a 30+ character game, with 3 characters or so dominating I don’t think that’s good for the overall life of the game.
Hopefully I’m wrong and the Big 3 in AE turn out to be not so scary, but so far the vibe I’m getting from them is CvS1 Nakoruru/T4 Jin level, and that’s kinda scary.
Another thing to consider I guess - what’s better for the community? A game that’s balanced or a game that’s more competitive? I don’t think this community can survive on the competitive, hardcore crowd alone. Even if we decided that AE’s 10 characters were more “fun” than Super’s 20 characters, if people as a whole got tired of getting divekicked/rekka’d to death and just dropped the game, we’d end up back where we were 4 years ago - a dwindling player base.
Look at it this way - let’s say I’m a casual player, and maybe I go see Captain America in theaters and on a whim I decide to DL MvC2 off the network. I put together a CapAm/Spider-Man/Iron Man team because I like the movies and head online, and promptly get my ass stomped in by Cable/Sent/Storm. I can understand losing to a better player, sure. But if it becomes apparent that the characters I picked have little to no chance against the top guys, and that if I ever want to win a match I have to pick those guys and learn all the strategies and techniques and what not, I’m probably just going to stop playing. It’s way over my head and no longer worth it.
This is the path we went down, and while the hardcore loved the insane technical nuances of the game, the not-so-hardcore moved on to play Call of Duty. You may think “Well, good riddance to the scrubs!” but the simple fact is we need the casual player to stay alive.
Again, I liked Super because of the balance and the wide variety of play. A casual player could take their Hakan/Dudley/Abel to tournaments or online and sure, they’d get beat by better players and bad matchups, but the game was wide open enough so that they could still find ways to enjoy themselves.
If AE is a throwback to the last generation of Capcom games…games that became so technical that only the truly hardcore could keep up with them…is that a good thing? I don’t think so. The casual competitive player that we need to stick around and continue supporting the community, instead of “dealing with it” and switching to a top tier player and learning all the little technical details of the game, is probably just going to quit playing. SF4 brought a lot of new players in, but if we do how we did in the past we’re just going to keep losing players, and we’ll end up playing AE for 10 years because there was nothing else to play. In this aspect, I thought Super did a MUCH better job of making for a game that both the competitive hardcore and the casual competitive, and even just the casual players could play and enjoy.
good points. i agree that it could be bad for the community as a whole if the top 3 in AE turned out as strong as the top 3 in 3s
but i dont know that yun/yang/fei are going to turn out being 'that" good, that every tournament devolves into variations of yun/yang/fei mirrors
honestly i think everyone is in panic mode at the moment
That is not a true casual player. What you’re describing is a person who wishes to enter the competitive arena but hasn’t come to grips with the effort that goes along with it.
This is how a casual player who has Call of Duty on the side views the twins:
[FONT=Georgia]Yun and Yang return from Street Fighter III, and they’re both speedy characters that are a blast to play as. Aesthetically, they look like the exact same character model with different hair (also, one is a rollerblader while the other is a skateboarder). Unlike Oni and Evil Ryu, these two don’t immediately resemble anyone else’s fighting style. They’re unique and quick, and are my favorite additions to Arcade Edition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia]http://www.gameinformer.com/games/super_street_fighter_iv_arcade_edition/b/xbox360/archive/2011/06/06/review.aspx[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia]The Captain America example doesn’t work for you. If so many people are interested in playing Captain America, for the sake of him being Captain America, then Capcom can balance him like Yun. He can be the strongest character and people won’t care about nerfing Cable to hell because there is no Cable movie. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia][SIZE=12px][FONT=Helvetica]“A casual player could take their Hakan/Dudley/Abel to tournaments or online and sure, they’d get beat by better players and bad matchups, but the game was wide open enough so that they could still find ways to enjoy themselves.”[/FONT][/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Georgia]I don’t see why you can’t easily do this in AE. Just like Super.[/FONT]