I could definitely ask this in the fighting games thread I know, but I just want a nice clean answer from guys who KNOW what they are talking about! (Ie 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 etc). My friend Willis was adamant that SSBM is the pro-est game around and I wasn't so sure but didn't really want to argue cos I don't know the facts.
ps any game in the series counts, I just want a general idea.
ps can we keep trolling to a minimum here cos I know this is going to inspire vehement defenses. Can people try not to change other people's opinions, and just give THEIR opinion in the poll? *please*
Poll: Which 1v1 Fighter series is more pro? (Vote): Super Smash Brothers (Vote): Virtua Fighter (Vote): Street Fighter (Vote): Guilty Gear (Vote): Tekken (Vote): Marvel vs Capcom (Vote): Soul Calibur (Vote): Mortal Kombat (Vote): Killer Instinct (Vote): Other
On January 30 2009 02:58 H wrote: I look upon this topic with great amusement.
As for my opinion, I didn't vote. I don't believe there is a way to definitively prove one fighter requires more skill than another.
Its also going to be heavily biased towards games that people have played more, since you're not likely to vote for something you haven't played. For example, Street Fighter and Super Smash Bros. have probably been played by a much larger group of people than Guilty Gear or Killer Instinct.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
On January 30 2009 03:25 TheYango wrote: Its also going to be heavily biased towards games that people have played more, since you're not likely to vote for something you haven't played. For example, Street Fighter and Super Smash Bros. have probably been played by a much larger group of people than Guilty Gear or Killer Instinct.
Not to mention that the different versions of the games are not listed. 3S for instance has very different mechanics to ST.
On January 30 2009 03:25 TheYango wrote: Its also going to be heavily biased towards games that people have played more, since you're not likely to vote for something you haven't played. For example, Street Fighter and Super Smash Bros. have probably been played by a much larger group of people than Guilty Gear or Killer Instinct.
Not to mention that the different versions of the games are not listed. 3S for instance has very different mechanics to ST.
I did address both of those issues in op. I asked that only people who have played 3 or more of the games, and who know advanced techs and the pro scene. That's all I can really do, without having a really really really complicated poll, which is not the point of this thread
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
u don't know diego perry? man.
i mean.. man. how can u not know diego perry? he's a mexican living in japan playing street fighter for a living.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
u don't know diego perry? man.
i mean.. man. how can u not know diego perry? he's a mexican living in japan playing street fighter for a living.
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
I look upon this post with great amusement.
His gamer tag is ' Daigo ' and the word is ' Parry ' as in a block and return.
check fighting game match vids topic ok thanks bye.
What....? What are you even trying to say. His name is Daigo......There is no street fighter player named ' Diego Perry ' I have a hard time believing anyone could be this dumb....
Like do you know what the definition of a parry is...? That's what's going on in the video.
Ok, a bit more specific: this page will leave no doubts (if anybody still has any) that there was just plain sarcasm. Check responses to " t3r.sAnkAri" post. Posting the Daigo parry and explaining what is going on to someone who pays attention to fighting games is like coming to TL and making a post on cool moves by a guy called Boxer and explaining what is micro. In brief, Fighting games have a scene on it's own. Who would have known.
First page is all sorts of fail and win, I can't tell what to make of it.
Grouping games by series is tough with some games having such high variance (marvel 1 and 2, ST and 3S and SF4...). I think Guilty Gear requires the highest combination of execution and thought, but for non Japanese gamers, SF4, ST, 3S, and Marvel 2 definitely take the cake in terms of competitiveness.
Diego Umejuarez Perry must be related to Valle FOR SHO!
On January 30 2009 04:07 Scooter wrote: I think Guilty Gear requires the highest combination of execution and thought, but for non Japanese gamers, SF4, ST, 3S, and Marvel 2 definitely take the cake in terms of competitiveness.
I'm tempted to agree on the count of GG (#R if I had to pick) but I still don't feel comfortable making a declaration like "Guilty Gear takes more skill than Street Fighter".
On January 30 2009 03:11 H wrote: wow is that the Diego Perry guy?!
On January 30 2009 03:12 SayaSP wrote: umejuarez?
Hahaha, gold.
As for the poll... Marvel vs Capcom 2 has combos that are so difficult to consistently perform that even top players almost never use them (like Storm's tri jump lk lk hk infinite), so by that measuring stick you could claim it the hardest. But it's combo system is extremely beginner friendly (all normals chain into each other) and forgiving of screwups, so in practicality it definitely is not.
As far as SSBM being the most skilled / "pro-est," I'd say no because of how relatively lax the game is on execution.
This is all assuming that by most skilled you mean it in the same way as Flash & Jaedong being more skilled than Boxer.
If you're referring to the depth of competition, that's almost impossible to judge save for obvious examples of games lacking depth (Dead or Alive games, MK since UMK3, SSBB, etc).
AIthough I guess you could say Super Turbo is the most skilled since it's been played at a tournament level the longest by that definition.
This definitely would have been better just asking the fighting games thread (I think this thread may have been what sent Ack into self-imposed exile)
having reached competitive mediocrity in all those games (except smash melee, i never learned how to combo and take advantage of l-cancels, i was only good at wavedashing flawlessly =D), i'd have to say virtua fighter.
the game is incredibly well designed and almost everything links together in a grand flow chart, where each move is thoughtfully designed and balanced against every other. you're always pressing buttons and constantly thinking even though it may look like nothing much is happening.
most other fighting games, the characters have one or two dominant strategies and everything revolves around that. vf forces you to learn multiple tactics to deal with every situation, against every character.
that's not to say other fighting games suck though. actually SF: HD / ST is my game of choice.
I am actually quite decent at ssb64, I practice with the #1 player sometimes. One glaring mistake is death.. Combos (0 percent to deaths), gimps, special techniques, mindgames..
The thing I love about the original ssb64, however, is that all characters have rape abilities and that all of them, except arguably 1 or 2 chars, are very viable in tournament play.
I'd say the Street Fighter games, though, take a little bit more skill (esp 3rd strike). I've heard from other people that Guilty Gear is also very skill-based, just that a lot of people haven't heard of it including me.
Killer Instinct, sorry that game does not equate with skill (snes version)
On January 30 2009 06:15 kainzero wrote: having reached competitive mediocrity in all those games (except smash melee, i never learned how to combo and take advantage of l-cancels, i was only good at wavedashing flawlessly =D), i'd have to say virtua fighter.
the game is incredibly well designed and almost everything links together in a grand flow chart, where each move is thoughtfully designed and balanced against every other. you're always pressing buttons and constantly thinking even though it may look like nothing much is happening.
most other fighting games, the characters have one or two dominant strategies and everything revolves around that. vf forces you to learn multiple tactics to deal with every situation, against every character.
that's not to say other fighting games suck though. actually SF: HD / ST is my game of choice.
THANKS for this post. Moar of this plz guys.
And I know it's lame to group the games into series but I don't want to get into fucking arguments about 'WHY DIDN'T YOU PUT SF4, 3S IS MUCH MORE PRO' and I didn't want to have a poll with 40 options. So I just want you to pick the series which has the most pro game in it, and discount the rest.
And btw quite a lot of ppl I know often say virtua fighter too, and that it's just too hard to even get started in so it's best to just go with SF4 or SSBM. My friends all play ssbm but ill get us onto playing sf4. We all have always loved soul calibur because it's kind of the antithesis to pro gaming, it's so easy that a normal person can just pick it up and be relatively competitive...It's just really interesting to see the poll results even if half the people complain about it ^^
Has anyone here even played Virtua Fighter? It's so dependent on closed and open feet position, weight, frames. I enjoy Killer Instinct and Smash Brothers more, but Virtua Fighter is the most skill fighting game. It's the least button smashing game out there.
On January 30 2009 08:31 blabber wrote: how about asking this on a forum that's actually about fighting games?
Care to link me to a good one? I go to TL cos it's a relatively good website with a relatively good group of ppl.
well I'm not a fighting game aficionado so I don't really know that much about fighting game forums, but I think this is a decent one http://forums.shoryuken.com/
only reason I know it is cause Tasteless mentioned it in a cast, lol
I mean just look at the poll results. Smash is winning, for pete's sake, hahah
On January 30 2009 06:15 kainzero wrote: having reached competitive mediocrity in all those games (except smash melee, i never learned how to combo and take advantage of l-cancels, i was only good at wavedashing flawlessly =D), i'd have to say virtua fighter.
the game is incredibly well designed and almost everything links together in a grand flow chart, where each move is thoughtfully designed and balanced against every other. you're always pressing buttons and constantly thinking even though it may look like nothing much is happening.
most other fighting games, the characters have one or two dominant strategies and everything revolves around that. vf forces you to learn multiple tactics to deal with every situation, against every character.
that's not to say other fighting games suck though. actually SF: HD / ST is my game of choice.
THANKS for this post. Moar of this plz guys.
And I know it's lame to group the games into series but I don't want to get into fucking arguments about 'WHY DIDN'T YOU PUT SF4, 3S IS MUCH MORE PRO' and I didn't want to have a poll with 40 options. So I just want you to pick the series which has the most pro game in it, and discount the rest.
And btw quite a lot of ppl I know often say virtua fighter too, and that it's just too hard to even get started in so it's best to just go with SF4 or SSBM. My friends all play ssbm but ill get us onto playing sf4. We all have always loved soul calibur because it's kind of the antithesis to pro gaming, it's so easy that a normal person can just pick it up and be relatively competitive...It's just really interesting to see the poll results even if half the people complain about it ^^
I disagree about soul calibur. Its very easy to pick up yes.....but vs better players who know what they are doing its incredibly difficult to win at all. You will get Parried(sp) and abused with the high low high low sideswip shit to death.
Smash is intense, though brawl dumbed it down quite a bit. I personally like more freeform games where you don't simply have to have the better combo, but actually significantly outplay your opponent. It's too bad the metagame isn't as high as it once was, and noobs can get lucky and hit you when you trip, or step on your head randomly and send you down to the ground...
This thread really makes me want to play Virtua Fighter :x After the disappointment I had with Soul Cal 3 I swore off 3d fighters forever, but if people are comparing it to Guilty Gear it must be intense. Also, when it comes to skill and competitive-ness I feel Smash bros 64 and Melee outshine Brawl by a longshot. It's not even the fact that there's no wave dashing, shffling, or lack of gamebreaking ATs in Brawl, it's that the game is so damn imbalanced. Metaknight is SS tier and Snake is S tier and the rest of the cast ranges down so far. Metaknight wins a vast majority of tournaments with Snake and the rest of the cast fighting for scraps. Even with other games with glaring imbalances (ogawa things Eddie should get his own tier in Guilty Gear), even all mid-tier teams can win Super Battle Opera.
Seeing pro Smash 64 is sex though, Isai's double jump canceled meteor spam with Ness is siiiick. That guy has to break a controller like every week... seriously.
Although I've only played Soul Calibur 2 and SSBM competitively (and got mediocore at the new MKs), I feel that SSBM is definitely up there in "skill." To me, it feels really unique as you don't really have a health bar, instead, you have a percentage meter, and it's not uncommon for some to die with 30%, and have others survive to 150%. So you don't have any time to really relax and think, "Oh I'm up 2 rounds on him, and he's almost dead, so I can just play safe," as you can die at pretty much anytime. Aggression is rewarded. Also, the margin for error on a lot of things is pretty ridiculously small. Furthermore, good use of the stages is really important, and banning/counterpicking is a small game of its own.
Soul Calibur (which in no way represents the 3D fighting genre), kind of feels like that linear, "memorize this combo and win" game that no one likes. Yes, it may require 3 weeks of practice, but doing the same few things over and over doesn't seem very skillful to me.
In the days of melee I would have voted smash but Brawl is the least skilled game I've ever played so i cant say that anymore. Im hoping the new street fighter is going to be awesome.
Here's a better (more specific) question: which fighting game has the highest execution requirements? i.e. things like doing combos, using "bugs" (wave-dashing, kara-throwing, roll-cancelling, etc.), and so on.
From my limited experience, I would say:
SSBM - very high. Marvel vs Capcom 2 - probably very high?
Tatsunoko vs Capcom - looks like it could be quite high, e.g. Morrigan's "A+B+C [B] up" instant overhead.
Arcana Heart - low to very high, depending on character. BlazBlue - low to high, depending on character. SF3:3s - low to high, depending on character. SSB Brawl - low to mid / high, depending on character?
Obviously this is different from "most skill", because there are many other skills common to fighting games besides having good execution.
By the way, I don't think I've ever played a fighting game that boiled down to "learn this combo and win". (I've never played MvC2, though! )
Also, I will never learn SSBM or MvC2 because of their very high execution requirements. I enjoy having good execution to some extent, but it's definitely not the most enjoyable part of fighting games for me. I'd rather pick up a game where I can practice hardcore for a few days and have 90% of my character's execution down, so that I can compete in the more mental aspects of the game.
Another benefit of having lower execution requirements is that it's easier to introduce new players to the game (especially if they've played other FGs before). I don't think anyone wants to play a game where they lose solely because of differences in execution: it's just not fun.
Marvel vs. Capcom 2. Most people see it as a game where whoever mashes the most buttons the fastest wins, but that's not the case. Due to the fast pace, the skill it takes to master the timing and precision of executing combos in actual games are ridiculous. Example: Why do you think Justin Wong is so good at every game he plays? It's because hes so good at MvC2, when he plays other games he has already mastered the timing and execution of commands to the millisecond due to his experience in MvC2.
Lol, justin wong isn't ridiculous at every game he plays because he is a master at mvc2. He just has raw talent in the form of gaming, that is why he is able to excel at Mario Kart DS the first time he goes to a tournament for it and why he won a Wii from that box stacking game after he was done demolishing everyone at T9.
And as for mvc2 being the hardest game, yes it requires very good reaction and it is fast paced but just because the combos are longer doesn't mean it requires more skill in execution. Pulling off consecutive kara palms is more difficult than most combos in mvc2. I would vote for 3S since skill to me is beyond just mastering timings and execution. I would say that playing someone who has such game presence that having him just crouch one character length away from you has you hesitating to attack since he will likely punish you hard in 3S is more impressive than someone who can combo you all day in mvc2.
Holy shit I might get flamed for this, but it has to be said. Those of you who are blindly voting smash, it's pretty obvious that many smash players play smash exclusively and no other fighting games. Looking at the roster for Evo and other multi-platform tournaments is evidence enough. Players who play smash will almost always play just smash compared to other fighters, where one player may sign up for Marvel as well as 3S. So please, if smash is your only game, your opinion as to whether it is the biggest skill 1v1 fighter game might not be informed.
That said, like what everyone else said, there's no such thing as being the biggest skill 1v1 fighter game. All of them have their perks but really even if you do play multiple games voting for one is a mistake.
On January 30 2009 14:56 DBunny wrote: Lol, justin wong isn't ridiculous at every game he plays because he is a master at mvc2. He just has raw talent in the form of gaming, that is why he is able to excel at Mario Kart DS the first time he goes to a tournament for it and why he won a Wii from that box stacking game after he was done demolishing everyone at T9.
And as for mvc2 being the hardest game, yes it requires very good reaction and it is fast paced but just because the combos are longer doesn't mean it requires more skill in execution. Pulling off consecutive kara palms is more difficult than most combos in mvc2. I would vote for 3S since skill to me is beyond just mastering timings and execution. I would say that playing someone who has such game presence that having him just crouch one character length away from you has you hesitating to attack since he will likely punish you hard in 3S is more impressive than someone who can combo you all day in mvc2.
Very true, I've played 3rd strike for a little over a year and still can't kara for my life. But the point I was making is in a transitional aspect. The reaction speed required in MvC2 is a lot higher than other games, which makes for a smaller margin of error, and vice versa. IMO, MvC2 requires the most skill, 3rd strike comes in a close second.
on the other hand, majority of people who play traditional fighters don't play smash. so it goes hand in hand, really. it's kinda sad that they didn't take SSBM seriously because it didn't play like a traditional fighter and required so many limiting options (3-4-5 stock, certain levels turned off, no items). but once you get deep into it, it's crazy. learning different combos for different characters, different fall speeds, how to properly edge guard, all while flawlessly L-cancelling and wavedashing, it's difficult technically. and then after you learn that, you gotta apply it.
VF is good but it gets really boring if you can't find anyone to play. imagine Starcraft but with no battle.net, just modem play, that's what's been killing the scene. it just doesn't have a good player base and VFDC doesn't seem as cool as SRK / Dustloop / TZ, etc. that, and the fact that it looks boring. in soul calibur, a brutal looking move can take off like, 5 damage but damn, it looks like it hurts. and there's no random explosions like tekken.
hahah if this thread were on srk it'd be locked by 3 replies. guaranteed.
The question is kinda flawed since every fighting game emphasizes different skills... that said, the game that probably is the most demanding overall would probably be MvC2. VF4:Evo/FT is another possibility, for similar reasons- need for good yomi, movement, spacing, defense, intelligent offense, execution... in a game where there really aren't any gimmicks left to exploit, and where execution is HARD but putting yourself in a position to do the craziest stuff is harder, and keeping the other guy from getting into that kind of position against you is even harder... and all of this in a fast paced game, where one guy can ride momentum to a fast win before you even know what happened.
3S doesn't even come close.
On January 30 2009 17:21 IrrasO wrote: it's pretty obvious that melee is the greatest 1v1 fighter. you know you guys like the wombo combo video.
that makes no sense, how can it be obvious that Melee is the best 1v1 fighter when the WOMBO COMBO is 2v1 combo that only happens when you have a major advantage in a 2v2 match. THAT AIN'T FALCO
kainzero: You can't really reverse the argument of "Smash players don't play other fighting games" to say "fighting game players don't play Smash" because the point is many fighting game players play MORE THAN ONE fighting game. If you were to say "most fighting game players only play one game" then you'd have a solid point. I've played like 10+ fighting games competitively/in tournaments, which I think would give me a lot more insight into fighting games without needing to add Melee to my list of "games I would bother entering a tournament for."
On January 30 2009 18:16 MCMcEmcee wrote: The question is kinda flawed since every fighting game emphasizes different skills... that said, the game that probably is the most demanding overall would probably be MvC2. VF4:Evo/FT is another possibility, for similar reasons- need for good yomi, movement, spacing, defense, intelligent offense, execution... in a game where there really aren't any gimmicks left to exploit, and where execution is HARD but putting yourself in a position to do the craziest stuff is harder, and keeping the other guy from getting into that kind of position against you is even harder... and all of this in a fast paced game, where one guy can ride momentum to a fast win before you even know what happened.
On January 30 2009 17:21 IrrasO wrote: it's pretty obvious that melee is the greatest 1v1 fighter. you know you guys like the wombo combo video.
that makes no sense, how can it be obvious that Melee is the best 1v1 fighter when the WOMBO COMBO is 2v1 combo that only happens when you have a major advantage in a 2v2 match. THAT AIN'T FALCO
kainzero: You can't really reverse the argument of "Smash players don't play other fighting games" to say "fighting game players don't play Smash" because the point is many fighting game players play MORE THAN ONE fighting game. If you were to say "most fighting game players only play one game" then you'd have a solid point. I've played like 10+ fighting games competitively/in tournaments, which I think would give me a lot more insight into fighting games without needing to add Melee to my list of "games I would bother entering a tournament for."
the good thing about smash is that it works as both a 1v1 and 2v2 game. i would have said that it's so obvious that melee is the best and make a reference to something like the mango combo or zelgadis special, but i doubt more than just a handful of the people on teamliquid knows what that is. however, having chill talk about the wombo combo on his teamliquid attack stream, i would assume that everyone has heard and loves that.
considering the competition out there for the melee scene, and the fact that only the top three get paid, i doubt you would ever choose to "bother entering" a melee tourney. without a doubt, you'd get wrecked. no johns.
On January 30 2009 22:08 IrrasO wrote: considering the competition out there for the melee scene, and the fact that only the top three get paid, i doubt you would ever choose to "bother entering" a melee tourney. without a doubt, you'd get wrecked. no johns.
heaps of people enter tournaments they have no chance in hell at winning. just look at the WCGs, starleagues, etc, etc. estro and ace are never going to win the proleague, should they call it quits and disband?
On January 30 2009 18:16 MCMcEmcee wrote: kainzero: You can't really reverse the argument of "Smash players don't play other fighting games" to say "fighting game players don't play Smash" because the point is many fighting game players play MORE THAN ONE fighting game. If you were to say "most fighting game players only play one game" then you'd have a solid point. I've played like 10+ fighting games competitively/in tournaments, which I think would give me a lot more insight into fighting games without needing to add Melee to my list of "games I would bother entering a tournament for."
i've bounced around with all the different scenes, soul calibur, tekken, 3s, cvs2, gg, blah blah blah
i'm still surprised at how they treat other games. in general you'll find a lot of people who can't bring or identify skills in from one game to the other. some people think soul calibur is a memorization, combo-heavy game when it's really a game of outpoking and mixups. some people think high level in 3S is parrying everything (which certainly never happens). and these aren't scrubs at their respective games, these are decent mid-level players.
you guys all know that virtua fighter 4 is proven to be the most skillfull fighter and that is why they use it for most pro comps, cept for doa4. which is good but less skilled than virtua fighter 4
Standing Dash/Instant Stand =========================== f, f or b, b Dashes can be guard-cancelled. They are also useful to make your character instantly stand; to do any attacks that need to be started from the "FS" position from a "FC" position, simply buffer in the dash right before doing the command. Dashes can be cancelled with anything.
Crouch Dash =========== (abbreviated CD) d/f, d, D/F or d/b, d, D/B(the "d" part is optional; d/f, N, D/F or d/b, N, D/B also works) A dash where the character is considered crouching and ends crouching. 3 major pluses to CDing in VF4 are that backwards CDing is possible, CDs can now be done in the crouching position, and that CDing is much easier; you don't need to hold the 2nd diagonal input to get a CD; 2 directional taps will be fine. Learning to execute your "FC" moves by first doing a CD and then immediately buffering the move enables you to execute the moves faster than actually holding down to fully crouch; crucial for Akira, since he has excellant FC moves. In addition, CDing can be useful for ducking high attacks while advancing/retreating. CDs can be cancelling into almost anything(much like the dash).
Run === f, F If you are farther than 3/4 of a dash, holding the 2nd forward will cause your character to run until you let go of the F, or press guard. No more running away anymore in VF4.
8-Way Walk ========== (abbreviated ARM for All Range Movement) B/F, then hold joystick in any direction If you hold back/forward, your character will begin to inch forward/backward. If you hold the joystick in any direction, your character will walk in that direction, so now it is possible to walk in/out of the screen for positioning; possible mind games can result from this, and then MC dodging their attack.
Escaping Throws =============== To escape a standing frontal throw: tap (last directional input of opponent's throw)+P+G in no more than 10 frames after the throw connects To escape a low frontal/side throw: tap (last directional input of opponent's throw)+P+K+G in no more than 10 frames after the throw connects To escape a standing side throw: tap (left/right, depending on which side the opponent is throwing you)+P+G in no more than 10 frames after the throw connects Learn option select to make escaping throws much easier, especially since in VF4 it is much easier to counter with a throw now.
Guard Canceling =============== G during move initiation Why you should use this is best taught by example; you want to do a punch, then an elbow; if you tried P,f+P, the computer would think you were going for the PP combo as Akira. So you'd have to delay some time before doing the elbow, which could cost you. But now, you can do P,G,f+P all in one smooth motion and you won't have to worry about this anymore.
Guard Buffering =============== Hold G while inputting commands, release G for the last command Another example why to use this; you want to do Akira's super dashing elbow, however you know the command is f,f,f+P; anyone who's looking carefully will see Akira twitch forward, and be ready for this. By holding G, tapping f,f, releasing G, then doing f+P, the opponent will only see you guard, then come right out with a super dashing elbow, thus, your moves are harder to read.
Hop === u,hold P or u,hold K (the up direction can be any up direction) There is no more high jumping in VF. Hopping is still risky though, so don't go for it a lot.
Dodge ===== (abbreviated E for evade, MC E for an evade done during an attack, or MC dodge) u(or d),N (any up or down direction will be fine) No more Korean Step maneuvers, the normal dodge's distance, execution, speed, and recovery are all toned down, plus the opponent tracks you during the E. Useful for positioning though(with discretion). The dodge is still useful though; by executing it like a reversal(right when an attack's about to hit) ie MC dodge, you'll get the VF3 dodge with a special sound effect, which has much better speed and distance(and then you'll get a good chance to punish your opponent while he/she is recovering from their attack). Dodges can be cancelled into forward CDs and some attacks. However opponents can be thrown out of a dodge.
Getting up ========== Once knocked down, -tap P to stand up faster -tap u to kip up -tap u+G to side-roll into the screen -tap d+G to side-roll out of the screen -tap b+G to back-roll -tap K or d+K repeatedly during any of that to execute a rising kick or sweep Rollers are vulnerable to low/mid attacks during the roll. Kippers are slightly vulnerable to anything that would hit a standing opponent just as they are almost fully recovered. Both are vulnerable to ground attacks, given that the attack has enough hit detection and is in the proper range to tag the rising opponent. If an attack does more than 20 pts and hits at the exact same time as the rising attack, it can beat it out. If you're more interested about Akira's rising attacks, look up GLC's general FAQ.
To get up just when you touch the ground -tap P+K+G just as you touch the ground to immediately kip(abbreviated QR as a quick rise) -tap d+P+K+G just as you touch the ground to immediately side-roll out of the screen(abbreviated TR as a tech roll) -tap u+P+K+G just as you touch the ground to immediately side-roll into the screen(abbreviated TR as a tech roll) QR/TR reduces damage that can be dealt in combos and throws. Throws that give out some of their damage when the opponent touches the ground can be QR/TR'd to reduce damage. Attacks that hit OTB(on the bounce) can be QR/TR'd to avoid getting hit by them. QR/TRing every knockdown isn't the end-all solution though; some attacks are circular middle/low levelled attacks that can hit opponents who QR/TR when their opponents recover too soon. In addition, sometimes those middle attacks can cause backstaggers or back-turned crumbles. uk-guy's notes on QR/TRing: "It is possible to TR/QR and take damage or no damage depending on timing. Some moves (usally certain grabs) will allow you to QR/TR but to do the 'just break fall' you have to time a TR/QR just as you hit the ground to take NO FURTHER damage. If you do not time QR/TR on the exact frame of ground hit you will still QR/TR, but you may still take a little damage."
Just look at escaping throws... We're talking here about the game that runs at a whooping 60fps...
3s is requires great skill, yes, but if you're going to base it all because of the Daigo parry, you better think twice. Even your average arcade players can do the daigo parry, basically you're missing out what makes that parry great.
Other players have done pretty much the same thing, youtube Pyrolee vs AFM for instance as well as Hayao and Umezono (full parry to Gigas >_>)
Although I'm a little biased, I'd have to say MvC2 (or third strike). MvC2 has a really steep learning curve, and you can't stick to learning just BnBs. Just because you can AHVBx3 doesn't mean you're gdlk with Cable. Just because you can ROM doesn't mean you're gdlk with magneto. You can't really pull off some random wake-up super and expect to get away with it. It also moves at an unbelivably fast pace (throw in the bunch of crap people can easily put in the screen) which requires insane reflexes to effectively block and survive. Metagames come in the form of resets or even team choice/placement.
With regards to balance, before you churn out "God and top tiers rule the game" take a moment to consider that the game consists of 3 characters with assists. Its balance is more focused on the team rather than the individual characters. Given that most Gods and tops complement each other really well, any decent low-tier player can bring a good fight with a good team and assist (DHC based + a strong AAA for example. See VDO, Vegita-X, Mike Z, Joe Zaza, Justin K, Justin Wong)
3s IMO has the best metagame. but that's just me.
Anyone who thinks you can combo to death/shoot to death/blah blah blah in Marvel really doesn't know how to play the game.
Edit: Just to add.
Combo system being beginner friendly doesn't matter when talking about the amount of skill required to play at the highest level. Every game has n00b-friendly combos.
example: generic mid range poke or close fierce punch > random special move
c.mk > hadou c.mk > Shoryu c.mk > tatsu close C (2 hits) > burning knuckle close C far C > rekkax3
soul calibur and tekken are the most pro-oriented games With a game like ssbm being so well ranked, its no wonder this poll turned on a popularity one, instead of a more technical one. No offense to ssbm players, its a wonderfull game, but the level of ramdomness on it completely trash its competitive aspect.
I think saying Super Smash Brothers is too general since Melee (in my opinion, and those of many others) has a much higher ceiling than Brawl. Melee is the only game I've played competitively out of those, but I can vouch that it is a much deeper game than some people realize. There is a lot of technical skill to characters like Fox that require you to execute actions within a few frames of each other to play well, but even if you are the most technical player in the world, you can't succeed in the game. A good example of this are the Japanese, who are more technically oriented (much like Koreans are more mechanically oriented in starcraft), but every time they play us, we win convincingly. The game revolves around good spacing and using mind games to an even higher degree than games like street fighter.
On February 13 2009 15:37 nevake wrote: I think saying Super Smash Brothers is too general since Melee (in my opinion, and those of many others) has a much higher ceiling than Brawl. Melee is the only game I've played competitively out of those, but I can vouch that it is a much deeper game than some people realize. There is a lot of technical skill to characters like Fox that require you to execute actions within a few frames of each other to play well, but even if you are the most technical player in the world, you can't succeed in the game. A good example of this are the Japanese, who are more technically oriented (much like Koreans are more mechanically oriented in starcraft), but every time they play us, we win convincingly. The game revolves around good spacing and using mind games to an even higher degree than games like street fighter.
For real.
I used to compete in Melee too, but brawl is just horrible. Imo Melee is the hardest one, since like you said, it's alot about mindgames, spacing, combos made on the spot (well, for those that rely on combos..), and so on. I dont agree with the Japanese being more technical tho. As far as I can remember most of their players relied alot on mindgames, Masashi, Aniki to name a few. The only really technical guy I remember from Japan is Bombsoldier.
Anyway...
I think Street Fighter is the second hardest one, and any other game with already made comboes is a distant 3rd.
On February 13 2009 15:37 nevake wrote: I think saying Super Smash Brothers is too general since Melee (in my opinion, and those of many others) has a much higher ceiling than Brawl. Melee is the only game I've played competitively out of those, but I can vouch that it is a much deeper game than some people realize. There is a lot of technical skill to characters like Fox that require you to execute actions within a few frames of each other to play well, but even if you are the most technical player in the world, you can't succeed in the game. A good example of this are the Japanese, who are more technically oriented (much like Koreans are more mechanically oriented in starcraft), but every time they play us, we win convincingly. The game revolves around good spacing and using mind games to an even higher degree than games like street fighter.
many of the fighting game vets here have pretty heavy experience with the smash series. Honestly, the skill required to master Fox is not far off from learning how to perfect Yun in 3S or learning Mag's Rom Infinite in Marvel or learning I-no in Guilty Gear. In fact, learning Fox's most advanced of the advanced techniques doesn't even come close to playing a consistent I-no what with having to abuse force roman canceling, which is a shit ton more impressive than learning how to shine wave dash with Fox.
As for spacing, in Melee learning how to play a decent air game and attacking with Marth (who I felt had the most emphasis on spacing) can't even be compared to learning how to zone and control space in a game like Super Turbo. Comparing the mind games between the Smash bros series and Street Fighter is pointless too. Playing Fox, the only mind games I played were random wave dashes, guessing tech direction/dodges, and random dash dancing. Directional mix-ups are about all that goes into it while you also have grab games in generic 3d fighters or high-low mixup in 2d fighters. You could even argue that there's more mind games in Brawl since there's way more emphasis on DI games and guessing tech rolls and slips counts for way more. While Melee may have a huge skill ceiling, saying it's higher than every other fighter is short sighted.
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.
p.s. Play more than just one game competitively before you try to speak for them. It's just as bad as when the Warcraft III players march into TL or when TL spams up WCReplays. Uninformed arguments waste everyone's time.
Tekken really is the most complex fighting game i've seen or played, especially Tekken Tag Tournament. But seems like everyone have different opinion. Mastering just one char from tekken(and i mean really mastering it) may take you more than an year if you play competitive, and some fighters are so fucking hard, you may never learn them properly.
On February 13 2009 20:40 stambe wrote: Tekken really is the most complex fighting game i've seen or played, especially Tekken Tag Tournament. But seems like everyone have different opinion. Mastering just one char from tekken(and i mean really mastering it) may take you more than an year if you play competitive, and some fighters are so fucking hard, you may never learn them properly.
okay if you think this, watch this match
tekken is really not that deep and definitely, that the learning period is >1 year, that is not rare in more serious games
On February 13 2009 20:40 stambe wrote: Tekken really is the most complex fighting game i've seen or played, especially Tekken Tag Tournament. But seems like everyone have different opinion. Mastering just one char from tekken(and i mean really mastering it) may take you more than an year if you play competitive, and some fighters are so fucking hard, you may never learn them properly.
tekken is really not that deep and definitely, that the learning period is >1 year, that is not rare in more serious games
Another reason why i like tekken is it resembles real fighting more than any other game, with real moves names like kings and paul. It's way clearer to see everything even to a player who never played the game before. Newer fighting games really have a lot of "special effects" that makes harder to see everything. By the way what's name of the game you gave as an example? Haven't seen it before.
On February 13 2009 20:40 stambe wrote: Tekken really is the most complex fighting game i've seen or played, especially Tekken Tag Tournament. But seems like everyone have different opinion. Mastering just one char from tekken(and i mean really mastering it) may take you more than an year if you play competitive, and some fighters are so fucking hard, you may never learn them properly.
tekken is really not that deep and definitely, that the learning period is >1 year, that is not rare in more serious games
Another reason why i like tekken is it resembles real fighting more than any other game, with real moves names like kings and paul. It's way clearer to see everything even to a player who never played the game before. Newer fighting games really have a lot of "special effects" that makes harder to see everything. By the way what's name of the game you gave as an example? Haven't seen it before.
virtua fighter is more like real fight than tekken imo.
well, in tekken everyone is like a superhuman with the strength of a mammut like a bitch slap for nina makes the opponent flying backward and stuff
it's clearer to see stuff in tekken, that's right, because really there is just one thing at a time what you have to look at.
this game is called Guilty Gear XX, an older installment, Reload, not the current one which is called Accent Core. In this match, the best very best player of the best character plays with the very best player of a weaker character. The character on the left can summon a monster to the ground, in essence making the game 2v1 for a while, while the other character with the scythe can summon invisible traps on the stage.
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 -.-"
A friend of mine's actually played international tournaments in Smash Bros and done really well. Watched him play live twice and the flow of the game seems to be much more in the players' hands than in Tekken for example. A hard game, but still not a lot of random stuff, that's more or less out of your control.
So, silent vote for Smash Bros I guess - tho I won't vote in your official poll.
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.
How in the hell could any Super Smash Brothers be even considered? Besides wave dashing and all that crap, the moves are straight forward, right and a, etc. All the other games have much, much deeper move lists
On February 13 2009 23:00 petzergling wrote: ssb autovote
really its deep though, calling ssb a beat em up is like calling starcraft sim city
No dude. It isn't. SSB (with all its complications, etc) really only has 4 special moves (B, upB, sideB, downB) and a bunch of basic attacks. Games like Tekken have hundreds of moves over many different characters that require more than just a [left joystick][click b]. There's a reason why its easier to learn every single move of every character in SSB then it is to learn a single character in Tekken.
Calling ssb a beat em up is more like calling starcraft an RTS. At its base it is what it is. Its that extra skill level that makes the game more. In the end, however, ssb is a beat em up and doesn't require nearly as much skill as 'true' fighter games.
On February 13 2009 23:00 petzergling wrote: ssb autovote
really its deep though, calling ssb a beat em up is like calling starcraft sim city
No dude. It isn't. SSB (with all its complications, etc) really only has 4 special moves (B, upB, sideB, downB) and a bunch of basic attacks. Games like Tekken have hundreds of moves over many different characters that require more than just a [left joystick][click b]. There's a reason why its easier to learn every single move of every character in SSB then it is to learn a single character in Tekken.
Calling ssb a beat em up is more like calling starcraft an RTS. At its base it is what it is. Its that extra skill level that makes the game more. In the end, however, ssb is a beat em up and doesn't require nearly as much skill as 'true' fighter games.
in tekken, you don't use more than the 10 most useful moves of your character outside of combos
I dunno, for most starcraft players I feel MvC2 will speak in its micro/macro levels (assists/combos/3 character choice <-> resource management/unit micro/army composition). Granted theres not much suspense compared to SF and Tekken where players try to fake out the opponent into eating a half-life or full-life combo.
Actually when watched the vids the 1st thing that struck me was apm xD. Forgive the annoying Storm runaway toward the end.
Guilty Gear and SF3 seem to fit more into the "1v1 fighting game" genre (not like the annoying assists in mvc2) and timing (read:mashing) seems to be less forgiving and thus a higher minimum skill level required. just my 2c.
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.
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)
On February 13 2009 23:00 petzergling wrote: ssb autovote
really its deep though, calling ssb a beat em up is like calling starcraft sim city
No dude. It isn't. SSB (with all its complications, etc) really only has 4 special moves (B, upB, sideB, downB) and a bunch of basic attacks. Games like Tekken have hundreds of moves over many different characters that require more than just a [left joystick][click b]. There's a reason why its easier to learn every single move of every character in SSB then it is to learn a single character in Tekken.
Calling ssb a beat em up is more like calling starcraft an RTS. At its base it is what it is. Its that extra skill level that makes the game more. In the end, however, ssb is a beat em up and doesn't require nearly as much skill as 'true' fighter games.
you're a fuckin idiot bro, either that or a troll
the whole "i dont play a game competitively but I'm going to make arguements based on when I played it one time at my friends house" is fucking old dude
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
.[/QUOTE] 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 [/QUOTE]
i believe ssbm is harder than tekken tbh but that doesnt mean tekken takes a day to master.. that comment is ridiculous
On February 13 2009 23:00 petzergling wrote: ssb autovote
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. :[
On another note, this thread brought a lot of fg fans into the light, where have yall been in the thread we've got going?
That thread will endlessly masturbate to GG if more people don't come to represent other games.
Edit: Of all marvel videos to post, the classic duc vs sanford? ahvb x 5 and running out the clock? =p
I'd post some marvel, but the game is incomprehensible until you've played it, at which point it becomes laughably simple.
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. :[
On another note, this thread brought a lot of fg fans into the light, where have yall been in the thread we've got going?
That thread will endlessly masturbate to GG if more people don't come to represent other games.
Edit: Of all marvel videos to post, the classic duc vs sanford? ahvb x 5 and running out the clock? =p
I'd post some marvel, but the game is incomprehensible until you've played it, at which point it becomes laughably simple.
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.
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.
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.
if my defense/patience/execution was as good as Kuroda then Akuma probably would seem a lot better than if I was a random dude who isn't a top Japanese 3S player
I am currently playing Dissida: Final Fantasy on my psp. This game is really intense in terms of tactic, skill and reaction timing.
There's actually a pretty huge scene for it right now even though its not even released outside Japan. Though some characters seems to be kinda underpowered now, there's people coming up with new ways to play each character. So in the end i suppose it can be pretty balanced.
And come on, who doesn't like seeing their favourite final fantasy character kick some serious asses.
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."
well put MC3, glad at least one person in this thread read my post.
The skill set that Japanese players and Americans focus on seems so different though. I dunno how much you can take him at his word, but JWong in his interview noted that he felt his reflexes were stronger than Nuki's (I think that's who he said...) when he played against him at Evo. I guess the stereotype is that Japanese players are robots.
Did any of the people who voted Smash read my posts? If so, I welcome any constructive arguments like MC3's because right now, I'm more inclined than ever to think that Smash players are blindly voting and not even participating in the discussion. Just blindly pointing out the perks in Smash while simply stating, "yeah, the mind games are definitely better than in Street Fighter or Tekken" is extremely vague and unconvincing.
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."
well put MC3, glad at least one person in this thread read my post.
The skill set that Japanese players and Americans focus on seems so different though. I dunno how much you can take him at his word, but JWong in his interview noted that he felt his reflexes were stronger than Nuki's (I think that's who he said...) when he played against him at Evo. I guess the stereotype is that Japanese players are robots.
Did any of the people who voted Smash read my posts? If so, I welcome any constructive arguments like MC3's because right now, I'm more inclined than ever to think that Smash players are blindly voting and not even participating in the discussion. Just blindly pointing out the perks in Smash while simply stating, "yeah, the mind games are definitely better than in Street Fighter or Tekken" is extremely vague and unconvincing.
I think that's just Justin though, lol. Justin is pretty unique as fighting game players go in a lot of respects- not to say that nobody can be as good as him or whatever, but his reflexes ARE really good and he approaches games really intelligently.
As for the whole "Japanese are robots, Americans/westerners/whatever play more creative" argument, it's pretty similar to the "Koreans are all mechanics, foreigners play strategically" argument for SC.
Wow people don't seem to give VF enough credit. Personally I would have to say that VF series requires the most skill in multiple areas while still maintaining balance and mechanical solidity, although I am myself more of a SF player.
On February 14 2009 09:01 Scooter wrote: Did any of the people who voted Smash read my posts? If so, I welcome any constructive arguments like MC3's because right now, I'm more inclined than ever to think that Smash players are blindly voting and not even participating in the discussion. Just blindly pointing out the perks in Smash while simply stating, "yeah, the mind games are definitely better than in Street Fighter or Tekken" is extremely vague and unconvincing.
If any of that type of discussion was going on, it'd belong in the official thread anyway. This thread's sole purpose is fanboy nonsense lol
In regards to mahhvel, if you watch the rare japanese players that use a halfway decent team, the execution is much much better than any american counterpart. Mitsu's Iron Man is 100% consistent in his combos and is constantly canceling moves to make them safe. J360's Iron Man, on the other hand, is pure RTSD resets.
Only us player whose execution seems to be pretty on point is yipes And chris schmidt at OSB3. To use the marvel terminology, he played MSP that whole tournament with "no boomerangs." (magneto's 896 p projectile from the air that comes out if you fuck up a tri jump).
Um.. tekken 1 and 2 WAS broken... tekken 3 made it competitive, TTT made it VERY Competitive, T4 was blah (super safe steve and jin's unblockable, tracking, fast mid JFLS) T5DR is also competitive (I won't even count 5.0, 5.1 was decent) and from the looks of things, T6 (and T6:BR) looks to be promising.
Not exactly the best example to use T2 for your argument...
As for realism, VF > tekken. Tekken has fighting animals for crying out loud... and how is the juggle system "realistic" T_T
VF, as I've heard many top players say, is highly technical but I don't know much about it so X_X
As for marvel, the "Fake out suspense" stuff you can find are commonly present with Magneto players trying to hit their resets.
See: the new "Seasons Beatings III" footage zachdms posted on youtube along with some select videos of Yipes (IFCyipes) using MSP
If you want a good MvC2 series to watch, look for Clockwork vs Duc Jr. moneymatch series on youtube.
As for Alpha 3, I admit, its pretty great, Xenozip's tutorial explains some of its advanced tactics really well and it was a hit for both the US scene and Jap scene.
Hell, if we're going for SF alpha games, SFA2 is underrated.
From what i can gather, no one actually plays VF. Even the people who claim to play it don't really play it.
As for the whole "Japanese are robots, Americans/westerners/whatever play more creative" argument, it's pretty similar to the "Koreans are all mechanics, foreigners play strategically" argument for SC.
when i used to play/follow tekken, it was the koreans who played safe/robotic, the japanese who played with the parlor tricks, with the westerners falling somewhere in the middle, but overall behind.
Out of curiosity (since I follow Tekken from a casual-competitive standpoint) who's owning it up at T6 these days?
In short: are qudans, Nin, Knee etc etc still alive? =O
EDIT: Just to follow-up. Yeah, wong said his reaction time was faster than nuki's (Said it in a gootecks podcast I believe, about how he can see nuki whiff something, s.fierce I think... not really sure, and punish)
Nin was a trooper. when namco nerfed steve from god tier to garbage in 5.1 by taking away everything he had that was good, nin was the only steve player that stuck around, and still managed to somehow to kick ass.
On February 15 2009 00:12 myrmidon2537 wrote: Out of curiosity (since I follow Tekken from a casual-competitive standpoint) who's owning it up at T6 these days?
In short: are qudans, Nin, Knee etc etc still alive? =O
EDIT: Just to follow-up. Yeah, wong said his reaction time was faster than nuki's (Said it in a gootecks podcast I believe, about how he can see nuki whiff something, s.fierce I think... not really sure, and punish)
As far as I can tell, Qudans is gone and replaced by his apprentice, aka 2nd Qudans lol. Nin is still chugging along, he was in a team for SBO quals last year (forget how well he did, lol). Knee is in the military, sad. But MDJ is back from the military and more or less back in form, so that's something.
Holeman, Help Me!, Rain, Soyongdori, etc. still around, still owning it up. Forget what happened to Leedy, maybe he's still around?
In Japan, 2nd Mainstreet Ryu, Takeyama, Taizo are still around IIRC... think I've seen some T6 matches with Shou in 'em as well. Nidaime MS Ryu is so sick lol.
The top Japanese have more or less caught up with Korea by... more or less playing more like the Koreans. Movement, spacing, execution is all up there... execution might even be better?
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.
The universal systems in 3s are really what makes it imbalanced. If u took out parrying things are "balanced" on paper. But look at Chun for instance: She has no real anti air, optimally everyone should be able to jump in on her. But parrying lets her just parry a jumpin and counter hit, she is so fast she can just walk up for throw/c.mk as you hit the ground. You end up actually jumping at chun li with a parry and trying to hit her on the ground, but she has so much frame advantage on all her moves that u cant really do anything. I'm oversimplifying the situation but parrying essentially limits the tools of a lot of the cast.
I play Oro as u know.. So look at what his options are at farthest poke range vs the shotos(Which is just at the edge/outside of low forward and i think same range as c.roundhouse). Ken can simply stick out low forward and wait for it to hit, I have 3 options - try to get close, this is tough because once I get within range of his low forward I have no moves that have frame advantage until I get close enough to use the knee(close s.mk), I believe my own c.mk won't beat c.roundhouse because it hits really quick, just happens to have a lot of recovery. So at furthest range I can throw out s.mp, s.mk or s.hp. s.hp is extremely slow, if they do anything but low poke it leaves me very open so its in the realm of "random occasional counter to low pokes." s.mk has the most range and comes out about as fast as shoto c.mk. Generally it beats it out at the right range, hard to measure exactly though but its a bread and butter poke. s.mp comes out faster and is slightly shorter range I think(Maybe the same) so if im a bit inside the opponents range I can use it to beat their move if I hit a button first. Useful after things that have frame advantage.... OR WOULD BE
All this shit is moot because I literally cant do anything vs a very good Ken in the poke game. They know that at that range all I can do is stick out standing moves, move in closer or jump. I end up having to throw fireballs from outside their range and charging meter until I can EX palm to create a situation where I can get very close. But if I actually am pressured and have to stick out a poke, they always know the attack will be high. I can try to counter hit things from well outside of their range and thats useful occasionally but since I can't do a super off my c.mk I am at a disadvantage in that realm. instead I have to wait for them to make moves and capitalize. Its totally fine with me in a casual sense and I beat some of the best Kens Ive played at least a few games out of a set. Maybe I'm just not thinking out all the scenarios and I'm far from amazing at 3rd strike, but as a game of execution.. Any gameplan I have leaves me far more open than their ability to parry or counter poke into super. Ken never really has to jump if he doesnt want to. Akuma and Ryu are a little different because they don't have all the tools Ken has but generally I consider vs Shotos a difficult matchup for Oro and Chun Li is VERY difficult.
To sum it up a little better without all the anecdotal shit: Some characters can capitalize on parries a lot more than others. So yeah, 3s is hurt for me because some characters have inherent advantages via the systems available.
Well... in most games, some characters really can capitalize more on the system.
Tiers and all that...
3s is still more of a the metagame than tiering.. I mean... look at Kuroda, as compared to Marvel which, although it does have a good metagame, is a little bit more reliant on tiering. Sure VDO and Wong can own everything up with their crazy low-tiers, but when the money is down, Wong will slide back to Matrix while VDO (well.. he remains the same..)
Of course the ideal situation is a good metagame with balanced characters... but basically the closest thing you can get with that is a fighting game with only 1 character.. mirror mode.
Unless its that one MK game (Deception I think?) that had 1P/2P imbalance (wtf)
On February 16 2009 10:51 myrmidon2537 wrote: Well... in most games, some characters really can capitalize more on the system.
Tiers and all that...
3s is still more of a the metagame than tiering.. I mean... look at Kuroda, as compared to Marvel which, although it does have a good metagame, is a little bit more reliant on tiering. Sure VDO and Wong can own everything up with their crazy low-tiers, but when the money is down, Wong will slide back to Matrix while VDO (well.. he remains the same..)
Of course the ideal situation is a good metagame with balanced characters... but basically the closest thing you can get with that is a fighting game with only 1 character.. mirror mode.
Unless its that one MK game (Deception I think?) that had 1P/2P imbalance (wtf)
wait wht team does VDO use and wht is team Matrix? storm/sent/cykes? i dont know or follow Marvel team/players that much other than i know wht santrax and msp is
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.
It is typical smash player fanboy-ism. The fact that he thinks SSBM balance is like 3s leads me to suspect he's never touched 3s in his life. Try playing a Mewtwo versus Marth, it is IMPOSSIBLE. Meanwhile if you take the bottem tier of 3s against Chun, Ken, Yun, you can at least play your game without feeling like you're amputated the whole time. Not to mention as the quote states here, poor balance is a strike /against/ 3s.
How many blanket advanced concepts can you name in Smash? Shuffle, Wavedash, and Meteor cancel then what...? I picked up all of that in a few days. It is hardly "unparralleled".
Free flowing combo system? Smash combo systems works off the /same/ dynamics as every other fighter worth it's salt. Different characters have different juggle properties (like *gasp* many other fighters), and DI isn't much different than other juggle defense systems.
Smash is a good game but wow it's fanboys are the worst.
BTW, mortal Kombat bashing aside, UMK3 is actually a pretty deep game.
Hey, give the Piy credit for at least making an legitimate argument, that's better than 4/5ths of the posts in this thread. He makes a helluvalot better point than posts like
On February 16 2009 11:26 TaP.Nuada wrote: IMO there needs to be a distinction between Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl.
Melee is 10x harder to be good at than Brawl. Brawl was dumbed down for the newbies and a lot of advanced techniques were removed from the game.
I would vote for Super Smash Brother's Melee, but not Brawl.
On February 15 2009 21:39 Racenilatr wrote: super smash bros defniitly
just go to prove that many people blindly vote without realizing that they are failing to compare it to any other games. I'm not shitting on Smash, I loved all three installments, but its fan base is just unbelievable. Comparing the quality of posts from Smashboards and Teamliquid or Shoryuken is just the tip of the iceberg.
Also Piy, I would hardly call Melee's combo system free flowing and superior to every other fighting games. Yes, it is unique but it does not make it better. The staple of combos or shffl'ed aerials are akin to Fuerte's HP loop in SFIV; abusing a system mechanic to loop simple attacks. There's all sorts of mechanics you can abuse in every fighting game to make your combos smooth and sexy like triangle jumping in MvC2. Comparing the balance in the games is impossible too. Although the gap in the tier range is higher in Melee than in 3rd Strike, the tier list is much, MUCH larger.
However, I wouldn't say that the tiers in 3rd Strike or Guilty Gear or what have you are as clearly cut as it is in melee. Watching players like Kuroda argue that Akuma might be the best character and completely outplaying the best players with Q is just one example. Also stating Chun > rest being widely accepted is a bit of an overstatement, especially since many 3s tournaments are done team style, where having Yuns and Yangs to snipe chun is common. Even if it was that simple, it doesn't even seem to make that much of an impact. Look at the list of players that made it to SBO, there was a MASSIVE number of Dudley players, a character accepted to be outside of the top tier.
I don't see why so many players give Smash flack, I see it as a fighting game. However it's worse when Smash players blindly believe that it is the one and only fighting game worth their time (I was like that for a while, sadly). The combo system is a lot like many fighting games. DI works a lot like teching in GG, where the longer a combo goes (or damage goes up in Smash) the combos shorten but become more dangerous. Characters like Marth and Dr. Mario play a lot like Slayer while Sheik plays like Sol (in my opinion). You could even argue that Fox plays like Lilica. Point is, there's both sides to the argument and many smash players would do well to try out some more 2D fighters before passing them off as inferior.
On February 16 2009 12:29 Scooter wrote: Hey, give the Piy credit for at least making an legitimate argument, that's better than 4/5ths of the posts in this thread. He makes a helluvalot better point than posts like
On February 15 2009 21:39 Racenilatr wrote: super smash bros defniitly
just go to prove that many people blindly vote without realizing that they are failing to compare it to any other games. I'm not shitting on Smash, I loved all three installments, but its fan base is just unbelievable. Comparing the quality of posts from Smashboards and Teamliquid or Shoryuken is just the tip of the iceberg.
Also Piy, I would hardly call Melee's combo system free flowing and superior to every other fighting games. Yes, it is unique but it does not make it better. The staple of combos or shffl'ed aerials are akin to Fuerte's HP loop in SFIV; abusing a system mechanic to loop simple attacks. There's all sorts of mechanics you can abuse in every fighting game to make your combos smooth and sexy like triangle jumping in MvC2. Comparing the balance in the games is impossible too. Although the gap in the tier range is higher in Melee than in 3rd Strike, the tier list is much, MUCH larger.
However, I wouldn't say that the tiers in 3rd Strike or Guilty Gear or what have you are as clearly cut as it is in melee. Watching players like Kuroda argue that Akuma might be the best character and completely outplaying the best players with Q is just one example. Also stating Chun > rest being widely accepted is a bit of an overstatement, especially since many 3s tournaments are done team style, where having Yuns and Yangs to snipe chun is common. Even if it was that simple, it doesn't even seem to make that much of an impact. Look at the list of players that made it to SBO, there was a MASSIVE number of Dudley players, a character accepted to be outside of the top tier.
I don't see why so many players give Smash flack, I see it as a fighting game. However it's worse when Smash players blindly believe that it is the one and only fighting game worth their time (I was like that for a while, sadly). The combo system is a lot like many fighting games. DI works a lot like teching in GG, where the longer a combo goes (or damage goes up in Smash) the combos shorten but become more dangerous. Characters like Marth and Dr. Mario play a lot like Slayer while Sheik plays like Sol (in my opinion). You could even argue that Fox plays like Lilica. Point is, there's both sides to the argument and many smash players would do well to try out some more 2D fighters before passing them off as inferior.
I like how you assume we're blindly believing smash is the #1 fighting game without comparing to any others when we give no reason for you believe this.
On February 16 2009 11:26 TaP.Nuada wrote: IMO there needs to be a distinction between Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl.
Melee is 10x harder to be good at than Brawl. Brawl was dumbed down for the newbies and a lot of advanced techniques were removed from the game.
I would vote for Super Smash Brother's Melee, but not Brawl.
Everyone already established that ideally that the poll should be separated and you (at least the 3rd time in the thread) claimed that Melee, being superior to Brawl, would clearly be the option to vote for given the choice. However, you failed to compare it to any game other than Brawl. Street Fighter 2, 3, and 4 are far, far more different from each other than Brawl is from Melee. So what makes you think that there should be a distinction between Melee and Brawl specifically rather than every game on the list? This topic has been beaten to death already in the thread you touching on the topic again rubbed me the wrong way. I know at this point I'm being a douche but this thread really needs to be closed because it started as a flame bait topic and not much has changed.
Well I apologize. My only intention was to point out that I'd prefer a separation between the two, as I think one is worthy of being an option, while the other isn't.
I have little experience with other fighter games because I was rather attracted to melee and didn't really try to play anything else at a competitive level, so I didn't really want to talk about things I wasn't at least some-what knowledgeable of.
Although for me, arcade style fighters are really hard to play. I just feel awkward with the controls as it's not easy for me to find specific buttons in a flash, though this is probably from lack of experience
On February 16 2009 13:16 TaP.Nuada wrote: Well I apologize. My only intention was to point out that I'd prefer a separation between the two, as I think one is worthy of being an option, while the other isn't.
I have little experience with other fighter games because I was rather attracted to melee and didn't really try to play anything else at a competitive level, so I didn't really want to talk about things I wasn't at least some-what knowledgeable of.
Although for me, arcade style fighters are really hard to play. I just feel awkward with the controls as it's not easy for me to find specific buttons in a flash, though this is probably from lack of experience
What're you apologizing for? You had a good point. I think Melee probably should've been the only option on the list, too. The amount of bull shit in Brawl is just sick. It's not even the lack of wavedash and other ATs that bugs me (though that really did tick me off early on), it's just that the game is the most unbalanced junk ever. Metaknight and the SS tier? Garbo. It's amazing that the best players still won at Evo.
Buuuut, if you liked Melee there's other games you'd probably be good at too. Learning how to play Magneto in Marvel is a lot like Fox, with ROM infinites in place of wave dash and assists in place of down throw combos. You can't really say how good the games are compared to each other, but I think the Marvel community is a lot more funner and mature (in a prison gang sort of way) than the Smash guys. Then again, most of this has to do with who you can play with.
its funny, cuz i loved smash 64 (DK straight out pimp and Ness blink) and brawl (wariooooo) but hated melee the most. Sure i had fun wd-ing with iceclimbers and such, but i played too many peaches and started hating the game haha.
I do think tekken is harder to master though. I remember practicing the wavedash for the mishimas in TTT into the electric uppercut thingie was hard as hell. Lei also had his super keep away game of constant b3~4 or b~43 (i forget which), which i thought was funny.
edit: I LOVED it when noobs did the 10-strings in tekken. Its funny when you block their whole thing resulting in practically a 2 second hitstun on their part, and follow up with a simple launcher that took away 40% or more of their life. I've always hated it when people tried to play fighting games and tried to use the *cheapest* move on other beginners without bothering learning the basics. This guy kept trying to to do paul's deathfist on me and I kept reversing it over and over again, and he was like "WTF I THOUGHT IT WAS UNBLOCKABLE!"
On February 16 2009 13:16 TaP.Nuada wrote: Well I apologize. My only intention was to point out that I'd prefer a separation between the two, as I think one is worthy of being an option, while the other isn't.
I have little experience with other fighter games because I was rather attracted to melee and didn't really try to play anything else at a competitive level, so I didn't really want to talk about things I wasn't at least some-what knowledgeable of.
Although for me, arcade style fighters are really hard to play. I just feel awkward with the controls as it's not easy for me to find specific buttons in a flash, though this is probably from lack of experience
What're you apologizing for? You had a good point. I think Melee probably should've been the only option on the list, too. The amount of bull shit in Brawl is just sick. It's not even the lack of wavedash and other ATs that bugs me (though that really did tick me off early on), it's just that the game is the most unbalanced junk ever. Metaknight and the SS tier? Garbo. It's amazing that the best players still won at Evo.
Buuuut, if you liked Melee there's other games you'd probably be good at too. Learning how to play Magneto in Marvel is a lot like Fox, with ROM infinites in place of wave dash and assists in place of down throw combos. You can't really say how good the games are compared to each other, but I think the Marvel community is a lot more funner and mature (in a prison gang sort of way) than the Smash guys. Then again, most of this has to do with who you can play with.
I like playing Marth/Falco mainly. Link/Zelda/Dr. Mario/Samus I play just for fun.
Is a good character recommendation possible based on that? If I can find a way to play without much trouble I'll give it a shot.
My fingers aren't ultra fast either. ie. I can't do the PTP (perfect tornado press) with mario on normal speed in melee, and it's EXTREMELY difficult for me to repeatedly shine cancel with falco/fox (though I haven't given this one much practice)
On February 16 2009 13:38 kdog3683 wrote: Smashbros MELEE (not brawl or 64) ftw
I'm super fanboy, i don't even bother reading posts, smash is just #1. every other game sucks. Esp brawl. Worst creation.
I agree! Brawl is such a crappy competitive game -- it's more of party game. Way too lenient on mistakes, tripping adds randomness unnecessarily, and way too slow paced. Watching pros play Brawl is a borefest -- nothing compared to watching pros play Melee.
I look upon your post with great amusement, but maybe your sarcasm detector is broken. It was a joke just like how "Sirloin" is for David Sirlin.
And why throw out that overhyped video again? Because its an absolute waste to say "HEY LOOK! 3s requires MAD SKILLZ" using that video. Do you know the background of that video? Why its so hyped? Just so you know, its not because its an OMG PARRY SUPER COMEBACK, but because Daigo did it on EVO, a big tournament.
Oh and did you know that Daigo was playing with Justin wong that whole time? Have you even seen the whole match? (Not just round 2, I mean the WHOLE set)
and have you even heard of other epic parries? Hell, I'm more impressed with impromptu parries since the important thing there is to land the first parry and get into the rhythm, any above average 3s player can do that.
On February 17 2009 21:49 myrmidon2537 wrote: I look upon your post with great amusement, but maybe your sarcasm detector is broken. It was a joke just like how "Sirloin" is for David Sirlin.
And why throw out that overhyped video again? Because its an absolute waste to say "HEY LOOK! 3s requires MAD SKILLZ" using that video. Do you know the background of that video? Why its so hyped? Just so you know, its not because its an OMG PARRY SUPER COMEBACK, but because Daigo did it on EVO, a big tournament.
Oh and did you know that Daigo was playing with Justin wong that whole time? Have you even seen the whole match? (Not just round 2, I mean the WHOLE set)
and have you even heard of other epic parries? Hell, I'm more impressed with impromptu parries since the important thing there is to land the first parry and get into the rhythm, any above average 3s player can do that.
But that's just Kuroda messing with random scrubs =O Ever since the japs started to red parry everything that mattered (Like the scary consistency kuroda red parries the last hit of a blocked akuma SA1 in his training matches with Ino...) I don't think anyone can really ever touch them at 3s.
EDIT: I mean, I guess it was only a matter of time before people stopped throwing Ken target combos / c.short jab short / Yun target combos and thinking that they're safe.
On February 17 2009 21:49 myrmidon2537 wrote: I look upon your post with great amusement, but maybe your sarcasm detector is broken. It was a joke just like how "Sirloin" is for David Sirlin.
And why throw out that overhyped video again? Because its an absolute waste to say "HEY LOOK! 3s requires MAD SKILLZ" using that video. Do you know the background of that video? Why its so hyped? Just so you know, its not because its an OMG PARRY SUPER COMEBACK, but because Daigo did it on EVO, a big tournament.
Oh and did you know that Daigo was playing with Justin wong that whole time? Have you even seen the whole match? (Not just round 2, I mean the WHOLE set)
and have you even heard of other epic parries? Hell, I'm more impressed with impromptu parries since the important thing there is to land the first parry and get into the rhythm, any above average 3s player can do that.
EPT
)
