On February 13 2009 22:05 CharlieMurphy wrote: lololol why is killer instinct in there at all ? C-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c -ombo breaker
Also I guarantee 90% of the people who voted this doesn't apply to:
if you have played 3 or more of these games and you play them to a good standard using advanced moves from the competitive scene
PS- you left out a bunch of fighting games that lots of people argue to be the best like GG and all those new 5000 hit combo games where you have tons of HP.
PS- Tekken is a joke, too much broken shit in the game like king's easy (what was it 10 hit?) death combo, or even easier is the throw combo. what a joke.
btw my vote goes to SF 3rd strike. or SF Alpha 3.
Do you know what throwbreaks or parries are...? Because the things you listed as "broken" in Tekken are actually a joke. If you tried 10 hit "death combos" or throw chains on any player worth his salt, you will get destroyed horrible.
On February 13 2009 21:34 GinNtoniC wrote: I've actually only played Tekken Tag (old) and Tekken 5 to any real degree. Soul Calibur on some stupid, summer-night LANs, so that doesn't count. Not gonna put a vote in for that reason, but I'll swear on that it's definately not Tekken. I know, I know, you need to be good enough to have a valid opinion, but I've actually put enough time into it to pull of a champion rank on hard with 2 characters (Baek and Asuka) and played a few good nights of tournaments with semi-nerdy friends. One thing's been constant though; if my gf or some random non-nerd guy shows up, picks a fast fighter and goes apeshit with the controller, he/she still pulls off enough wins to make the entire room go.... "geh -.-"
Wait a minute, you're honestly trying to validate your expertise in the game by stating you can beat the computer on hard with two characters and can beat some friends? Yet you admit to losing to "a fast fighter"? I'm not even sure what qualifies as a "fast fighter" to you but Tekken Tag wasn't dominated by the fighters with the fastest frame speeds for sure. (Mishmas ruled that game)
This
Also Williams are top tier too. 10 strings are so easy to reverse, block, counter, parry you name it. King's multi-throws have escape but you need good timing and to know what's coming after what what. A fast fighter in tekken is considered having a 8-frame jab, good movement(speedy backdash, wide sidestep), moves that makes your char travel a good distance fast, like crouch dash, wave dash, etc.), fast precanned combos with mixups like nina's, ling's.
On February 14 2009 00:45 petzergling wrote: you're a fuckin idiot bro, either that or a troll
You come into a 5 page thread, ignore all discussion to autovote for your game, and call someone who disagrees with your completely unsubstantiated opinion a troll. :[
Yeah man read every other post in this thread, when you play a game of a certain type competitively you (in general, not speaking to everyone) usually stick to that 1 game because 1. It is the game you play and you know more about its competitive aspect then any other game 2. You believe it is the best game of the type to play.
Look at SC players and their opinions on other RTS, sure some like others but most laugh at other RTS games. I'm sure if you go to a WC3 forum or DoW2 they will be laughing about starcraft and the bad graphics and difficult interface.
The point I'm trying to get across is that everyone has their game, and nobody has enough knowledge of all types of games to be able to justify which games have more skill involved. This was the humor I was trying to bring out in posting "ssb autovote". I realized this and thought of this thread more of a popularity contest for whatever game they play. I play somewhat competitive SSB and I believe it to be a highly in depth game, moreso then any other game I've played. Not only did I post my vote, but I added in something about ssb that it is a deep game, and people who don't believe so simply are like that because they havn't gotten into the deep competitive play of it. I didn't try to argue that it is better then any other game or that another game is "less" competitive, I just was pointing the fact that, although against contrary opinion, SSB is a deep game. Just like starcraft 95% of the people who play it only have played the campaign or a few games online, 95% of people would say its just another RTS. 95% of SSB community is total noobs(probably even higher). I think the fact alone that it is #2 voted highest skill fighting game on the most popular forum of the most competitively played game of all time says something.
Seeing someone respond to my post about playing SSB with an arguement trying to explain why my opinion was wrong(lol) frustrated me because I believed that it was common sense that there is no "highest skilled fighter" and many people play their game and have their own opinions. To see someone as ignorant as to post something like that just boggles my mind.
On February 14 2009 01:46 petzergling wrote: edit: easier to learn? I'm sure after a week I could be better then you at tekken having never played it before in my life. You'll never be better then me at ssb and I'm complete garbage compared to most competitive players
i believe ssbm is harder than tekken tbh but that doesnt mean tekken takes a day to master.. that comment is ridiculous
this is referred to as counter-trolling. see below quote
In the end, however, ssb is a beat em up and doesn't require nearly as much skill as 'true' fighter games.
I'm not even sure what people are including as part of "skill". It can include anything from understanding of character matchups to mechanical ability of executing attacks/movement/combos to reaction speed to reading your opponent.
My biggest qualm with Smash is that my favorite character is Mewtwo. =\ My second problem with it is that, there is a good amount of technical skills but the balance is /horrible/. You have 3 characters in the ffaaarrr top (Fox, Falco, Marth), then Shiek, Peach, Jiggly, Falcon with wide advantages over the rest of the cast.
Also @ Stambe, yeah I didn't mention how Wiliams, Changs are all competitive since even explaining why would be a waste of time to people who think that ten hits and "fast" characters are what composes the broken tier. Williams, changs, Law (debatable) are good but IMO not near the mishmas in TTT. Nina got buffed in T4, mishmas got nerfed there, Steve was broken tier, Law got buffed. T5 obviously changed things, Anna got buffed in juggles, Law, Steve, Nina were nerfed, etc etc. I haven't followed Tekken since tag really simply because I couldn't keep up with the new techs and Kazuya/anna was my favorite team so one was non existant in T4, the other got mauled for balance. As for throw chains, short ones are ok because good players like to hide their button presses so it's harder to predict.
i've played most of these games except KI, and i've put quite a lot of effort into most of them. Tekken , by far, is the most challenging to master among all of them (for me).
it's not the moves and the juggles really, though both arguably have one of the longest character move list of any game. it is basically mastering the rhythm ,the timing, those additional skills you need to master other than the move set (e.g. parrying, chicken, the different dashes, cancels, ss, throw escape, even wall proximity etc.) all of it adds more psychology to the game.
Well that argument about ssbm's lack of character balance or moves doesnt really make much sense imo. In SF3rd strike most top players only use 3-5 characters and chun-li is widely considered the best. Yet that doesnt make it any worse of a game or any easier to play.
Although SF and GG are both extremely technically difficult, the advanced concepts and the diversity of SSBM, as well as its complex and free flowing combo system, is unparralleled imo.
There are very few people in this thread who are qualified to criticize Tekken at all, lol @ 10-strings and chain throws being brought up as evidence of "omg this be broken." If you're gonna bash Tekken, say something like "walls and/or rage do too much damage" or "lol T4 Jin JFLS" or "lol T5.0 Steve EVERYTHING" or... you know, something that shows you can at least pretend to know someone else who knows what they're talking about.
And of course nobody brings up how important movement is and how much work it takes to learn how to move well in Tekken (and to learn how to stop movement), but then again how many people in this thread were gonna bring up movement as a skill in any game beyond "omg Melee has wavedashes omg." Tekken movement makes Smash movement look like a joke and movement is like the one thing I think Smash does better than the average real fighting game.
As for the "hundreds of moves" vs. "you only use 10 outside of combos," both are inaccurate but the "you only use 10 moves" is closer to reality.
Not to mention throws and some stuff that you don't necessarily have to use a lot of (ex. b+1 into CDS stuff), and I left out a bunch of stuff 'cuz I got lazy. Not really "10 moves" as it is closer to at least 25-30ish moves that you will use pretty often, but nowhere near "100 moves" either. BUT it's not like it's hard to do something like f+4. I LEARNED THAT MOVE, SKILLS.
Still, most people in this thread really shouldn't be talking about Tekken.
Back to practicing Korean backdash and ESS on stick and being grateful that there are no 8F jabs in T6 to ruin my Hwoarang's day.
On February 14 2009 03:20 KissBlade wrote: Also @ Stambe, yeah I didn't mention how Wiliams, Changs are all competitive since even explaining why would be a waste of time to people who think that ten hits and "fast" characters are what composes the broken tier. Williams, changs, Law (debatable) are good but IMO not near the mishmas in TTT. Nina got buffed in T4, mishmas got nerfed there, Steve was broken tier, Law got buffed. T5 obviously changed things, Anna got buffed in juggles, Law, Steve, Nina were nerfed, etc etc.
Weren't kickboxers and Ogres up there also, I forget TTT stuff. Nina was too good in T5.0... then Namco wised up and was like "wtf why did we make her that braindead" so she ended up not-so-great in 5.1, then good-but-not-too-good by DR. Same with Steve except he was top tier till DR, but still really good so shrug.
tbh if you play Tag, you could probably do pretty okay in T5 and onward, it's not that different once you learn a few new moves/juggles. Movement feels a bit different I guess, but it's the same idea.
On February 14 2009 05:03 Piy wrote: Well that argument about ssbm's lack of character balance or moves doesnt really make much sense imo. In SF3rd strike most top players only use 3-5 characters and chun-li is widely considered the best. Yet that doesnt make it any worse of a game or any easier to play.
Although SF and GG are both extremely technically difficult, the advanced concepts and the diversity of SSBM, as well as its complex and free flowing combo system, is unparralleled imo.
And at the people saying Tekken...LOL...
The balance actually does make 3s a worse game. No one likes watching Chun Li ever. If you play mid/low tier you won't like playing against her(Or a decent Yun). Its the garbage aspect of a nearly perfect game really.
I have to giggle a little that you are shitting on Tekken yet calling the combo system in Smash unparalleled. Hrm. I wont pretend I know shit about Smash brothers but I would be interested in hearing how the combo system in that game has depth.
On February 14 2009 03:04 Myrmidon wrote: I'm not even sure what people are including as part of "skill". It can include anything from understanding of character matchups to mechanical ability of executing attacks/movement/combos to reaction speed to reading your opponent.
Exactly. Different games also require REALLY different skill sets. I mean in general all the games require some match up knowledge but some are really movement based(Marvel), some are more about executing a solid strategy(Street Fighter 2/4) because you are limited in movement so there are only so many viable options in a given situation.. 3rd strike is kind of in between with a game system that really becomes a focus(Parry) for players to not be repetitive.
In the summer I was away for 6 weeks and there I could learn tekken with some good people. It was DR and I chose Dragunov because he's a russian spy/super agent and looks like a zombie & doesn't talk. whatever
and I watched lot of matchvids and I used like 10 moves and was doing well (25% win percentage ) against these guys who were quite good in Poland
reg moves and launchers ff 2 + feint into throw df 2 qcf 2 ws 2 4 , 3 d 12 b2, 1, 3 bd 3 + feint into throw qcf 4 uf 4
On February 14 2009 06:16 freelander wrote: In the summer I was away for 6 weeks and there I could learn tekken with some good people. It was DR and I chose Dragunov because he's a russian spy/super agent and looks like a zombie & doesn't talk. whatever
and I watched lot of matchvids and I used like 10 moves and was doing well (25% win percentage ) against these guys who were quite good in Poland
well Dragunov is a pretty terrible character in DR for a reason =p
On February 14 2009 05:03 Piy wrote: Well that argument about ssbm's lack of character balance or moves doesnt really make much sense imo. In SF3rd strike most top players only use 3-5 characters and chun-li is widely considered the best. Yet that doesnt make it any worse of a game or any easier to play.
Although SF and GG are both extremely technically difficult, the advanced concepts and the diversity of SSBM, as well as its complex and free flowing combo system, is unparralleled imo.
And at the people saying Tekken...LOL...
The balance actually does make 3s a worse game. No one likes watching Chun Li ever. If you play mid/low tier you won't like playing against her(Or a decent Yun). Its the garbage aspect of a nearly perfect game really.
I have to giggle a little that you are shitting on Tekken yet calling the combo system in Smash unparalleled. Hrm. I wont pretend I know shit about Smash brothers but I would be interested in hearing how the combo system in that game has depth.
Wait are you saying 3s is worse ? Just the fact that any character can parry and block equally is almost balance enough that the low tier characters in a skilled players hands doesn't even matter.
Of course anyone coming to a tourney is going to pick the top tier guys just because they win money. I'm sure many of them are very solid with low/mid tier characters they just don't want to risk it. Look at Kuroda for example, he plays Q and Sean and Akuma.
On February 14 2009 05:03 Piy wrote: Well that argument about ssbm's lack of character balance or moves doesnt really make much sense imo. In SF3rd strike most top players only use 3-5 characters and chun-li is widely considered the best. Yet that doesnt make it any worse of a game or any easier to play.
Although SF and GG are both extremely technically difficult, the advanced concepts and the diversity of SSBM, as well as its complex and free flowing combo system, is unparralleled imo.
And at the people saying Tekken...LOL...
The balance actually does make 3s a worse game. No one likes watching Chun Li ever. If you play mid/low tier you won't like playing against her(Or a decent Yun). Its the garbage aspect of a nearly perfect game really.
I have to giggle a little that you are shitting on Tekken yet calling the combo system in Smash unparalleled. Hrm. I wont pretend I know shit about Smash brothers but I would be interested in hearing how the combo system in that game has depth.
Wait are you saying 3s is worse ? Just the fact that any character can parry and block equally is almost balance enough that the low tier characters in a skilled players hands doesn't even matter.
Of course anyone coming to a tourney is going to pick the top tier guys just because they win money. I'm sure many of them are very solid with low/mid tier characters they just don't want to risk it. Look at Kuroda for example, he plays Q and Sean and Akuma.
Kuroda thinks Akuma should be ranked higher than he is though =p
On February 13 2009 20:13 Scooter wrote: Dunno, but I feel that America has stronger technical skills than Japan. Looking at Marvel, which may be the most technically difficult game (learning every possible combo with each team is a task only the best are up to). Another reason is that the Japanese players just aren't as interested in Smash and Marvel as the States, which might be obvious considering how big the tournaments are in both the countries.
guess who invented like 90% of the mechanical basis for modern Marvel play oh right Japan did that in XvSF and then stopped caring.
If you have seen any of the stuff that the Japanese players who came to Evo did, it's pretty clear their issues with Marvel have nothing to do with technical stuff at all.
When team USA went to Japan for that old invitational, the report about Marvel was "they don't play the game much so they aren't very good, but dang their combos are crazy."
Incidentally a major theme from the reports from that trip- "Japan's execution is a billion times better than America's."
On February 14 2009 05:03 Piy wrote: Well that argument about ssbm's lack of character balance or moves doesnt really make much sense imo. In SF3rd strike most top players only use 3-5 characters and chun-li is widely considered the best. Yet that doesnt make it any worse of a game or any easier to play.
Although SF and GG are both extremely technically difficult, the advanced concepts and the diversity of SSBM, as well as its complex and free flowing combo system, is unparralleled imo.
And at the people saying Tekken...LOL...
The balance actually does make 3s a worse game. No one likes watching Chun Li ever. If you play mid/low tier you won't like playing against her(Or a decent Yun). Its the garbage aspect of a nearly perfect game really.
I have to giggle a little that you are shitting on Tekken yet calling the combo system in Smash unparalleled. Hrm. I wont pretend I know shit about Smash brothers but I would be interested in hearing how the combo system in that game has depth.
Wait are you saying 3s is worse ? Just the fact that any character can parry and block equally is almost balance enough that the low tier characters in a skilled players hands doesn't even matter.
Of course anyone coming to a tourney is going to pick the top tier guys just because they win money. I'm sure many of them are very solid with low/mid tier characters they just don't want to risk it. Look at Kuroda for example, he plays Q and Sean and Akuma.
Kuroda thinks Akuma should be ranked higher than he is though =p
Akuma is pretty fierce with brutal rushdowns. Imo the problem is that he has both low HP and low stun meter. If it was one or the other I would probably agree with Kuroda. If they ever make SF3:4th they should get rid of his easy stun imo.
EPT
and it delivers a HUGE amount of fun :D
