Naw. It means you’re gonna have to either do a BETTER combo, DHC into another Hyper, or Burn XF. You’re gonna have to expend one of your valuable resources or crank up your combos a notch to OTK.
Makes sense to me.
So how many of us have actually tried this? Are there any matches online to see this in action? Is there a sub-culture around this (unlikely)? Where can I *see *the theories and presumptions of this thread put to practice?
(I won’t be able to try until later this week)
See my problem with the damage is exactly from watching pros play. Often time (or so it feels like) the person to land the first hit wins. Now nerfing damage because some twit on the net finds the matches boring holds very little water. I hope.
the whole game was designed with the purpose of a high damage output.
If you change the damage, then it would mean a complete change to the whole cast which means that it will become another game.
So the question in reality is
do you enjoy this game the way it is, or would you want it to become another game?
I prefer the former
If they do take out damage, than they need to make it so that good players can still kill in one combo. MvC3, for better or for worse, has a touch of death legacy to live up to.
Actually, fuck it. If they lower the damage, then they need to take out infinite prevention, and bring back double snaps and guard breaks while you’re at it.
I don’t think that damage is that much of an issue or rather I don’t think reducing it would solve the problems that people think it would solve. I would say wait for the next version of the game and see if the individual issues with too much damage have been addressed (X-Factor, DHC trick, Taskmaster, Magneto, etc.) before screwing with the actual game settings and trying to build a consensus about that.
Fanatiq vs Megaman DS vids on their MvC3 Crack channel. I believe they play on lowest or lower damage.
The damage I dont think is really the problem. People talk of TOD combos being a pain but the ONLY REASON TOD bothers people is because of the simplicity of TOD combos. So you see it ALL THE TIME from people. a.b.c.S.b.b.S.otg assist.b.b.super (—this isnt a TOD but its an AFD combo, Almost Fuckin Dead) Add funky hit boxes and it gets ridiculous. This is mahhveelll baybeee but uhh…a different type.
I’m very curious to say the least. I definitely think it’s something the community should at least experiment with before writing it off. I always look at the whole argument of “if it’s broken now then it will always be broken and we as a community should never attempt change” as rather absolutist and things should be taken on a case to case basis.
Nah balance X-Factor/Meter building would be a better answer, but if Capcom were smart they would buff some of the characters that have terrible X-factor buffs like Hulk. They would nerf the character that shouldn’t have a TOD like Phoenix/Wovlerine in the future releases.
Does anybody remember MSH vs SF?
That had low damage…
Yeah, I didn’t think anybody remembered that shitty fighter…
Cept you can still OHKO in the lowest damage setting in MvC3, so I wouldn’t really qualify it as low damage. It just takes a bit more than herpderp abcsbbcs otg super>DHC
Because it had low damage. Gotcha.
It was partially that. It had such low damage that the entire game felt like nobody could do anything to win. It was just a slow paced, boring ass fighting game. Rather than balance XvSF’s problems in a good way, they just toned down everybody’s ability to both combo and do damage.
Something that bothers me is the modern critical analysis culture applied to older games, like any of us gave a damn when we fed them quarters way back when. I simply did not recall somebody standing there saying, “This doesn’t address XvSF’s problems. And the damage is low and boring. Etc.” We simply played games we liked or moved on, none of this small time Roger Ebert shit. No offense to you, Scogz, it’s just something that grew on me like a rash and I needed to voice this. It was simply a different era.
Anyway, MSHvSF *was *the most forgettable entry in the series. And sadly, unlike MvC2 being a patch job, MSHvSF seemed like a legit attempt at moving gameplay forward. The message was… mixed.
You speak as though I’m NOT of that generation you reference. I am from that generation, getting into fighters back in the day. Are you just simply looking at my join date? I’m a 2k3 member (Hadoken King / M1x4H). I’ve been here a long time, and the negativity towards MSHvSF was always there. It came out, and people still played XSF, so when MvC came out, the switch happened. I don’t recall anybody ever on the MSHvSF cabinet at Chinatown. I do remember people commenting that the game isn’t as fun as XSF. It made for a very bland and boring game.
As for a “modern” look, quite honestly, I really fucking hate the newer games. They’re bullshit in comparison, and 90% of the new players out there want to be spoon fed tactics and strategies. What happened to the days of putting $10 in quarters into a cabinet at the pizza hut before you can get that first dragon punch off? Fuck that.
The whole point of this thread is a way to, I assume, “balance” the fighter out. NOW THAT, is a cry for help from a modern perspective. Not making a post-critique on a forgotten game that came out 14 years ago.
I don’t judge by join date, take solace in that you’re not dealing with an asshole like that.* I* recall MSHvSF had traffic where I was at. We liked it, it was fun.
I’m okay with the newer FG games. Would I make similar design choices? Probably not, but I enjoy the modern games, and at the very least agree with the intentions. What happened to the days of putting 10$ in coins in machines? Training mode happened. I can’t say this is a bad thing, because I know I wasted more money in FGs back then than now - even with 60$ standard pricing and DLC. Still miss arcades, though.
Back in the day we would have been stuck with MvC3 as is for at least a year. Consumers and developers both went off path, hopefully somewhere in the middle we could meet but that probably won’t ever happen. Until we all die out anyway, which would actually benefit Capcom in the long run. Conservative types eventually fade away; the wise ones embrace progression just enough to maintain their own views through evolution. This has been Seth’s position (imo).
the game needs to raise damage, raise chip
It should just be Paper Rock Scissors: The Fighting
I definitely recall MvSF getting attention for a few weeks, months even, but then other games overshadowed it.
Anyway,
my overall comment was that a game that’s TOO balanced typically doesn’t fare well in the crowds I’m used to.
GGAC, Virtua Fighter, and Vampire Savior are very balanced games for what they are, but their popularity in the States never saw the popularity of MvC2, which is probably the most unbalanced competitive fighter in the last 20 years. Likewise, CvS2, 3S, and ST are pretty unbalanced compared to those other three, but I feel that’s what makes them fun. On a casual level, balance typically doesn’t matter anyway. On a competitive level, it depends on who’s competing. No matter what, you’re going to get the crybabies who want “balance”, but in all actuality, they want their low-tier character to get buff and everybody else to get nerfed. Then you get the people that come up with low tiers and make magic happen, like VDO and Bodler.
Balance is something that’s over-discussed, in my honest opinion.