• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Fighting Games Weekly | May 18-24 | Forget it Jake, it's Capcom Town

BakedYams

Slayer of Combofiends
Jun 10, 2013
11,077
0
0
Don't fear the Gamma

I hate Hulk with a passion lol, I know the matchup extremely well, hell I'm even confident to face against KBR in a match but at the 99 second mark, I fear for my life with Wolverine.

He just has too many options in that position.

1) Cr.L at start of round (weak option as it loses other faster normals but someone doing a late up back can get caught by it if he tries to out meta himself)
2) st.H option select with ground grab (beats some normals with armor and also gets the ground throw although ground throw is basically his weakest option so he always does it just outside that range)
3) j.H option select air throw (very dangerous, both options lead to dead character)
4) Dash up cross over j.S (the move crosses up if he dashes in front, he uses assist to cover himself)
5) Ground command throw (hard read if he thinks you are going to just take the ground throw)
6) Anti air command throw (if he thinks you are going to jump and tech the air throw)
7) Anti-air Gamma Charge (double armor against faster normals characters, leads to ground bounce)
8) Forward double Gamma Charge (catches people on the back air dash like Morrigan)
9) Gamma Crush (beats every option because it's fully invincible but it's a waste of 1 bar and is unsafe if you miss it)
10) Do one of the 9 options above, XFC out of it to try to make another hard read on the opponent (maximum bet 1% type gambit that can potentially win you or lose the game. You have probably seen these "random" early round XFC by KBR that you think "oh look Marvel is so random" but he's operating on next level yomi betting his options on the play)

This is all in combination with Haggar coming out so say you tech the air throw, you might be caught mashing the tech and then get hit by Lariat.

Sometimes he might mix it up with double Gamma Charge forward covered by Drones. He puts you in a bad situation.

Against shorter characters his dash can actually go to the other side and he might do a gimmick cross up with an assist.

His final option that makes Shuma very strong with Hulk is that with a ground throw he can call Mystic Ray and if he knows the person is taking the ground throw he can call both out and pick up after a ground throw using Mystic Ray OTG pick up.

This is what my nightmares are made out of.

Also, QisTopTier just talks shit about any game he sucks at. He is free as a bird at Marvel and Smash

yo damn...
 

K.Sabot

Member
May 7, 2009
22,305
0
0
Oklahoma
why would anyone get good at a game they hate

edit: except to pulverise their friends at it until they admit that the game they're playing sucks (i've done this)
 

Karsticles

Member
Oct 25, 2010
44,326
0
0
Florida
www.youtube.com
Killer Instinct is also the exception to the linear path of combo progression.
I actually recognized this during my post, but I didn't write it down because I don't have a strong understanding of the system. Basically, I know that there are manual combos and autocombos, but I don't know what the differences are there. Mostly, I just dont know how manual combos work, and the rules surrounding them. While I really, really do not like the combo breaker system, it is still an improvement over traditional fighting games.

I mentioned this a month ago, but I would really like a system where you build a Burst bar for every hit you take, and you build it at a rate where you can burst every combo at some point. Then there is added depth with continual burst baits between players. Not an ideal system, but it would be a fun experiment. Perfect for Marvel, really.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
At the start of a Marvel round, Morrigan using her command grab is a part of a theoretical depth calculation, but not an effective depth calculation.
Yeah but all the examples I gave of Hulk are effective/real examples of what he can do at high level. The only exceptions are the XF and Gamma Crush options but even the XF option has been done to good effect in rare situations (ie. KBR).


I actually recognized this during my post, but I didn't write it down because I don't have a strong understanding of the system. Basically, I know that there are manual combos and autocombos, but I don't know what the differences are there. Mostly, I just dont know how manual combos work, and the rules surrounding them. While I really, really do not like the combo breaker system, it is still an improvement over traditional fighting games.
The basic principle behind them are the following:

*You can break combos by pressing L, M, H strengths depending upon what they pressed. If you use wrong button to break or if you mistime it then you are locked out and during the locked out phase the opponent is free to wail on your with the full combo without fear of getting combo broken. So you generally don't attempt a combo break unless you have a hard read on the opponent's combo.

*Light attacks are harder to counter but do low damage. So combos involving a bunch of lights are safer from combo breakers but do less damage. Opposite for Heavy attacks...easier to break but do more damage. So you have to design your combos with this in mind and mix them up appropriately.

*Auto combo (ie Auto Double) you can think of like chains that are easy link into your combos but those are the parts in a combo that are the easiest to break. On the other end are manuals which are like links in SF, those are harder to break but of course are harder to perform.

*There are things called Counter Breaker which are the hypest thing in KI IMO. Basically you perform an easy to break combo on purpose and on the part where a traditional auto combo is you do a Counter Breaker. If the opponent tries to break you at the spot that you inputted a Counter Breaker... then you get a free combo and the opponent is locked out from breaking combos. However, if you make the wrong read with the Counter Breaker... then the opponent gets a combo on you instead! This is basically a high risk/high reward system that you can equate to a burst bait in other games.


So there's a whole meta involved in combo execution and combo breaking. It's a system that basically makes it so that the person with the better reads will almost always win.
 

BakedYams

Slayer of Combofiends
Jun 10, 2013
11,077
0
0
People love doing things they hate, its so they can transfer that satsu no hadou into their game and crush their friends lol
 

JeTmAn81

Member
Jul 3, 2008
9,931
169
1,340
I love Hulk but you definitely can't play him braindead against a good player. I also mind fighting him way less since I started maining Zero. Talk about options...
 

BakedYams

Slayer of Combofiends
Jun 10, 2013
11,077
0
0
I love Hulk but you definitely can't play him braindead against a good player. I also mind fighting him way less since I started maining Zero. Talk about options...

Lightning too stronk, pizza slicer too stronk, charge projectile too stronk, many options...

CEO trailer shown tonight here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfA4Lpt1hcc

CEO Gaming ‏@CEOGaming 46s
to be continued... As the trailer says. Smash has something big coming to #CEO2015. Next Trailer.
https://twitter.com/CEOGaming/status/602645746446282752

Big N gonna be there? I know their doing the documentary for the golden age of smash with all the new players and what not... First viewing on the first episode?

EDIT:

HOLY SHIT SFV IS PLAYABLE THERE?! IM SO GLAD I SIGNED UP NOW!!!

Edit 2:

Holy hell, CEO is gonna be so fucking hype, my body is not ready
 

DunpealD

Member
Apr 28, 2008
2,075
0
0
Watching Combo Breaker now brings to mind a question I've had for a while now. In SFIV, what's the point of dizzy? Seems to me like it's just a "win more" mechanic.

Strictly speaking about SFIV, It's a balancing mechanic that supports pressure play. In SFIV the stun doesn't subside as long as you get hit or block attacks. Like when Ryu manages to get in on Dhalsim. Obviously the unblockable shenanigans weren't supposed to be there which made a character like Cammy pretty strong in AE.

I actually recognized this during my post, but I didn't write it down because I don't have a strong understanding of the system. Basically, I know that there are manual combos and autocombos, but I don't know what the differences are there. Mostly, I just dont know how manual combos work, and the rules surrounding them. While I really, really do not like the combo breaker system, it is still an improvement over traditional fighting games.

Manuals are links, so depending on the advantage on hit you will have to guess up to 1:3 + counter breaker if you want to break. Autos you can react to since they are two hits, especially the strong one but still applies the 1:3 + counter breaker at any time without frame data restrictions unlike manuals.
 

Seyavesh

Member
Aug 14, 2013
4,625
1
0
re combo depth/skullgirls:
there's an issue i have with skullgirls in regards to the reset game being the center of it that i don't think is that alien in regards to why folks hold a dislike for the game- it's that there is no mental cooldown period for the person who has been hit- it's really draining to have to focus hard 100% of the time the combo is going after they've been hit (especially after having to do that during the opponent's pressure)

i think this kind of thing combined with a slower pace is really rough for folks

as a contrast since it's like the only game i really play with any skill:
marvel 3's is generally a high-focus game in neutral- you need quick reactions and quick decision making until you get hit. when you get hit like karst said, you can go braindead for like a straight 30s or so barring guessing a TAC direction. marvel 3 skews on the mega fucked long side but it's downtime where the person losing is allowed to consider the situation as a whole and begin formulating plans given potential outcomes of the next high-focus situation (incoming mixup)

even without the long as fuck combo, for incoming mixups there is a delay for incoming so the losing player can take a quick breather before they have to try to react to the setup being presented to them

like, marvel 2 i guess would be example presented that probably gets a fantastic mix of the high-focus and breather situations. xrd too maybe but im not skilled enough/havent talked w folks enough to really make that judgement. there is a high pace to the game and combos aren't fuckoff long but also not so short/malleable for canned insanely strong reset situations so the defending/losing player gets their time to breathe while still also knowing at what general time to look for a reset

idk if i worded any of this in a way that makes sense ill go over it after i sleep like 20 hours and then probably regret it
 

fader

Member
Oct 19, 2012
7,530
0
485
Lightning too stronk, pizza slicer too stronk, charge projectile too stronk, many options...



Big N gonna be there? I know their doing the documentary for the golden age of smash with all the new players and what not... First viewing on the first episode?

EDIT:

HOLY SHIT SFV IS PLAYABLE THERE?! IM SO GLAD I SIGNED UP NOW!!!

Edit 2:

Holy hell, CEO is gonna be so fucking hype, my body is not ready

you going to CEO!?... I definitely gotta go...

Marvel 3 would have a godlike reset game if combo damage wasn't so high on average and characters didn't have air actions after dropping from a combo.

Actually Marvel 3 would be the best game of all time with some choice changes.

I can't stand Marvel 3 and I agree
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
Marvel 3 would have a godlike reset game if combo damage wasn't so high on average and characters didn't have air actions after dropping from a combo.

Actually Marvel 3 would be the best game of all time with some choice changes.
 

PBalfredo

Member
Feb 2, 2008
6,818
2
1,040
In theory, it's another balancing mechanic. Usually characters who have to eat a lot of hits (grapplers, for example) have high stun thresholds so that they don't get stunned as easily.

Likewise, characters who have really good keep away/mobility or do major damage have low stun thresholds to counter their advantages.

People can argue about whether it works well...but, in THEORY it's another meter to manage and another strategy you can use to win a fight. Go for damage? Or go for stun, which might lead to EVER MORE damage? Some characters are better at the former...others are better at the latter.

It's like guard meter.

Are there typically moves that will do shit for damage but contribute lots for dizzy? If so, I can kinda see what they're going for, though as others are saying, it seems something that tends to just work as "win more" in execution. Especially what you're saying about dizzy thresholds, which sounds like how one would try to balance dizzy if its a given. But since mobility characters typically have less HP than average (especially if they also have the Capcom female tax on top of it), lower dizzy threshold is probably too much when their opponent is already getting in there.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
Are there typically moves that will do shit for damage but contribute lots for dizzy? If so, I can kinda see what they're going for, though as others are saying, it seems something that tends to just work as "win more" in execution. Especially what you're saying about dizzy thresholds, which sounds like how one would try to balance dizzy if its a given. But since mobility characters typically have less HP than average (especially if they also have the Capcom female tax on top of it), lower dizzy threshold is probably too much when their opponent is already getting in there.
There are certainly some moves in SF4 that do more stun than normal (as in proportionally to their damage). Zangief's headbutt move is one of them.
 

Jazz-ism

Banned
Jun 25, 2013
970
0
0
Round starts.

All I said was that Smash was better and deeper. I explained why I think it is better, and why I think it is deeper.
.

Juice I understood what he was getting at and i agree. In fact, the example you wrote up is a good reason why kof is imo one of the most underrated titles of this gen and why sf4 is shallow.I wanted him to explain how this theoreticallyrics makes smash the best game tho..

karat...your initial post contained no explanation. Please stop insisting that it did.

your followup however did expand on your mindset, which is highly theoretical but nonetheless interesting. I like your perspective on options and control and how those reflect on the apparent depth of a title.

there are some questionable trains of thought here, though. First of all, I don't like how you say combos inherently reduce depth. I can understand how you would say that based on your definition of depth, as it would obviously reduce the number of options a player has at that time (both offensively and defensively). However you are ignoring the other intangibles combos bring to a game (combos also inherently raise the stakes on how neutral is conducted and the payoffs/risks involved, which adds more than it takes away to "depth") as well as the decisionmaking in combo routes (should I reset air throw hard knockdown etc), and finally, the execution factor. I don't see how you can place such a high degree of value on control at a given moment while ignoring the other intangibles present. Your perspective seems unbalanced...

you make a good point with DI. that is something unique to smash that does add a layer of depth to the games movement. You do indeed have a degree of control over your character at all times. This is a point heavily emphasized in Smash ( imo smash has always been movement heavy). However, I think you are wrong to say that the degree of movementl you have in Smash is somehow more refined than movement in Marvel kof or arcsys games. Plenty of characters have good control over their air momentum in a comparable way. It is kind of unreasonable to say "smash lets me always be in control best game ggpo" when there are plenty of other titles that a) give you options while you are being hit in some way (esp in arc sys games where burst usage is a huge mindgame) b) have many more options and systems that give the user a high degree of control and decisionmaking power.
 

zlatko

Banned
Dec 17, 2009
17,685
0
0
I'd honestly say that Smash is movement first, everything else you specified afterwards ztlako. If you have good movement (i.e. you know how to stay as limber as possible and don't use high committal actions [smash attacks everywhere, lots of time shielding] until you know they're best for you), you can pretty much improv a lot of gameplay off that and knowing your own character. For someone wholly new to the series, it might be a bit rough and I wouldn't know how to organize myself to teach them, but for someone coming from any sort of fighting game (or platformers even), there are concepts that should translate well enough.

Thank you for this.

I'm committed to bettering in Smash.

I'll have to find my character and go from there.

A lot of the cast is amazing too which makes it hard out the gate.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
I think execution is moving more into the territory of complexity than depth as defined in Karst's post.

Having one frame links in your game makes your game harder to play but it doesn't really give it more depth. It's just another barrier you have to over come when getting good at the game.
 

ViewtifulJC

Banned
Oct 14, 2010
66,814
1
0
Beaumont, TX
www.neogaf.com
I think execution is moving more into the territory of complexity than depth as defined in Karst's post.

Having one frame links in your game makes your game harder to play but it doesn't really give it more depth. It's just another barrier you have to over come when getting good at the game.

Got me wondering about SF5. Trailers got a lot of combos, lotta hitpause. Won't really know until we get our hands on it, but you think they might be trying to making combos a bit easier? If they going with an increased emphasis on juggles, air combos, and OTGs as the trailers have shown, they probably not gonna have you plinking BnBs and shit.
 

Jazz-ism

Banned
Jun 25, 2013
970
0
0
I think execution is moving more into the territory of complexity than depth.

Having one frame links in your game makes your game harder to play but it doesn't really give it more depth. It's just another barrier you have to over come when getting good at the game.

You can't ignore that having some execution barrier, regardless of what you categorize it, adds to the game and adds something players must consider.

I didn't even bring up tekken, which admittedly takes away player control during a combo, but the decisionmaking the attacker has to make during his combo (bound and arena positioning) as well as okizeme, and in turn the decision the defender must make from that position....tekken is so good for that moment and I don't see how "but smash has DI" is somehow good enough to say the control you have in Smash gives it more "depth" than any of these other titles I have mentioned...

Kof has four types of jumps and lots of chars have momentum control but it doesn't have DI...sorry no depth?
 

BakedYams

Slayer of Combofiends
Jun 10, 2013
11,077
0
0
you going to CEO!?... I definitely gotta go...

lol hit me up, we'll play marvel.

Marvel 3 would have a godlike reset game if combo damage wasn't so high on average and characters didn't have air actions after dropping from a combo.

Actually Marvel 3 would be the best game of all time with some choice changes.

just change damage from medium to low and remove tacs. greatest game ever.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
You can't ignore that having some execution barrier, regardless of what you categorize it, adds to the game and adds something players must consider.
Yeah... combos do add to the game. What we are debating is if they add depth or complexity. I think difficult to execute combos add to a game's complexity, not necessarily its depth.
 

mbpm1

Member
Dec 13, 2013
19,314
0
0
you know, i'm curious guys

what do you feel so far is your best moment or match you had when you were playing a fighting game?

getting a perfect against this guy from when i first started is still up there for me. i still have a long way to go, but damn that felt great

Back when i was still trash and using Sagat I beat a Rose by careful zoning and predictions.

A fucking Rose. Without random jumpins or bs. I felt like a god after that.
 

Jazz-ism

Banned
Jun 25, 2013
970
0
0
Yeah... combos do add to the game. What we are debating is if they add depth or complexity. I think difficult to execute combos add to a game's complexity, not necessarily its depth.

My point was I think they add to depth but intangibly.
Difficulty of the combo is complexity obviously but what a character can do on a given touch is something that I have to take into account at all times, to me that adds to depth
 

Seyavesh

Member
Aug 14, 2013
4,625
1
0
just change damage from medium to low and remove tacs. greatest game ever.

congratulations you just rendered the entire bottom two thirds of the cast unplayable and cemented even more the top positions of morrigan and zero

that game unfortunately has issues in so many areas that no flat 'one thing' approach will really fix it. which is why it's such a shame when you can grasp how it's on the cusp of greatness despite all of these problems crippling the game in rather horrific manners
 

Jazz-ism

Banned
Jun 25, 2013
970
0
0
congratulations you just rendered the entire bottom two thirds of the cast unplayable and cemented even more the top positions of morrigan and zero

that game unfortunately has issues in so many areas that no flat 'one thing' approach will really fix it. which is why it's such a shame when you can grasp how it's on the cusp of greatness despite all of these problems crippling the game in rather horrific manners

Yea thats the worst thing about marvel 3 to me. It is so close to being a 10 more years type of game but ultimately company politics prevail. Some initial design choices were just plain terrible but it persists in its fun factor despite those...
 

Dahbomb

Member
Jan 18, 2006
70,947
6
0
33
Yeah straight up just removing TACs (without providing an alternate) and just reducing the damage on average would further increase the tier gap in the game. Right now a ton of mid tiers are highly competitive and consistently make top 8s at big tournaments (or even win it) because of high damage... reducing overall damage would just make it even tougher for them. Imagine if Haggar had to hit Zero twice to kill him...

A character like Zero would just dominate even further if say you reduced overall damage by 20%. Why? Because he can still kill every character in one hit even if you reduced overall damage by 20%. Where as someone like Haggar would be hit much harder by that nerf because he does JUST enough damage to kill most of the time and quite a few times he can't kill with one hit so reducing overall damage would make sure that he will not have TOD capability yet Zero will retain this ability.


The real fix to damage in the game is to go in and fix characters that have 20% or higher damage scaling on normals and specials. There are only 4 characters in the game that have more than 25% scaling and they are Zero, Viper, Hulk and Shuma. And guess what... all of them have solo TODs, with assists they have easy mode TODs. After that you have to fix the characters with the looping combos like Zero, Vergil, Spider Man and Strange. After that you fix the outliers like Dr Doom (high scaling on normals) and Wolverine (high base damage, Fatal Claw does too much damage). This fix actually makes the damage balanced competitive based on tools because a character like Zero will do low damage because of low base damage and low scaling (as opposed to low base damage and very high scaling which he currently has).
 

Jazz-ism

Banned
Jun 25, 2013
970
0
0
how old are you man?I admit i was immature and stupid for saying something like that but that you feel the need to bring that back up is just fucking despicable. fuck off.

Good gooooood my son....you can grow now


that anger in your heart....it is good boy

 
May 14, 2008
16,143
0
0
Thank you for this.

I'm committed to bettering in Smash.

I'll have to find my character and go from there.

A lot of the cast is amazing too which makes it hard out the gate.

I just got a Wii U and Smash also, so if you want to spar or something before Splatoon releases I'm down
 

Karsticles

Member
Oct 25, 2010
44,326
0
0
Florida
www.youtube.com
Juice I understood what he was getting at and i agree. In fact, the example you wrote up is a good reason why kof is imo one of the most underrated titles of this gen and why sf4 is shallow.I wanted him to explain how this theoreticallyrics makes smash the best game tho..

karat...your initial post contained no explanation. Please stop insisting that it did.
Just so we are clear, I was referring to my second post as having an explanation. I know my first one was just an unsubstantiated opinion. The one you are responding to now is my third post.

your followup however did expand on your mindset, which is highly theoretical but nonetheless interesting. I like your perspective on options and control and how those reflect on the apparent depth of a title.

there are some questionable trains of thought here, though. First of all, I don't like how you say combos inherently reduce depth. I can understand how you would say that based on your definition of depth, as it would obviously reduce the number of options a player has at that time (both offensively and defensively). However you are ignoring the other intangibles combos bring to a game (combos also inherently raise the stakes on how neutral is conducted and the payoffs/risks involved, which adds more than it takes away to "depth") as well as the decisionmaking in combo routes (should I reset air throw hard knockdown etc), and finally, the execution factor. I don't see how you can place such a high degree of value on control at a given moment while ignoring the other intangibles present. Your perspective seems unbalanced...
I don't have it fully thought out, but there is more to a game than complexity and depth. Combos add to the execution aspect, which can come at a cost to depth. People like fighting games partially for their execution requirements, and combos are a manifestation of that preference.

Compare fighters to MOBAs. MOBAs have no combos. At most, you have stun moves, and EVERYONE hates being stunned. I actually wonder if people might like fighting games more if you took out combos, because then you would focus on the neutral, which is enjoyable for everyone. Combos are only fun for the person performing them. Wouldn't it be better if fighting games were more like MOBA battles where both players are completely free to act all the time?

I have no clue how that is even possible, but it is an idea, haha.

you make a good point with DI. that is something unique to smash that does add a layer of depth to the games movement. You do indeed have a degree of control over your character at all times. This is a point heavily emphasized in Smash ( imo smash has always been movement heavy). However, I think you are wrong to say that the degree of movementl you have in Smash is somehow more refined than movement in Marvel kof or arcsys games. Plenty of characters have good control over their air momentum in a comparable way. It is kind of unreasonable to say "smash lets me always be in control best game ggpo" when there are plenty of other titles that a) give you options while you are being hit in some way (esp in arc sys games where burst usage is a huge mindgame) b) have many more options and systems that give the user a high degree of control and decisionmaking power.
The point is that Smash gives you a ton of control in every single second of aerial movement. In other fighters, you pick a direction and then commit to it. Even in Marvel, outside of flight mode, you pick a direction and then commit to it. You never fully commit in Smash. Every frame is a new decision to make in regards to your spacing. Even if the game has double air dashes like Xrd, that cant be as deep as continual frame control.

I think execution is moving more into the territory of complexity than depth as defined in Karst's post.

Having one frame links in your game makes your game harder to play but it doesn't really give it more depth. It's just another barrier you have to over come when getting good at the game.
Right. I think good game design maximizes depth while minimizing complexity. ASW is notoriously bad at this. Deep, but way too complex.

Links are more about difficulty, and I think difficulty is separate from complexity and depth. I am generally in favor of low executional difficulty being a viable competitive option, and all basic game mechanics should be low difficulty (2x button push > double tap).

Yeah... combos do add to the game. What we are debating is if they add depth or complexity. I think difficult to execute combos add to a game's complexity, not necessarily its depth.
They undoubtedly add to complexity, because they are an additional system to learn. If they are done well, they can add to depth as well by giving new options to characters. Example: I jab with Mewtwo at high %. I can decide to go into the jab chain for damage, go for a grab, or try for Disable, which leads to a kill. The offer option is just straight damage. The second is guaranteed, but leads to a good setup that could kill. The third is not guaranteed, but definitely kills. This is the thought process behind a 2-hit combo in Smash, and it presents its own kind and degree of depth.

Adding stricter execution requirements can never add to depth. It can only reduce depth, as players shy away from options out of fear of failure.