Ultra Street Fighter 4 Discussion Thread

raah!

Oh, silly me

ogiekeaney

So who are the best european players you have played on xbpx live?

here are a few players who have beasted me (off the top of my head)

imstilldadaddy
phenomanallnuri
violent alioune
starnab
jaynines
ferdi guller
geom inside

Doctor DooM

Geom modinside is definitely not European, just fyi.

ogiekeaney

you're right/ i used to play him alot and thought he was from engalnd

Fergus_

Alioune, V-Ryu, Skatan, Ferdi, imstilldadaddy, Fuma, and some others

Dreddybajs

FlowchartFergus

ogiekeaney

canada cup ssf4 starting soon. lets go europe

http://www.twitch.tv/canadacup

mackg

ogiekeaney wrote: »

canada cup ssf4 starting soon. lets go europe

http://www.twitch.tv/canadacup

you bastard, I'm meant to be doing college work and then I see this.

Doctor DooM

Easy to miss, but this is in this weeks SFxT blog (which I assume no one could be bothered reading as it's about the alt cstumes, and rightly so):


By the way, I’ve been thinking about releasing a character change log for the soon-to-be-released SSFIV AE Ver. 2012 on November 30th

fake_roogle

boxer vs gief - know your footsies, don't get stuffed by st. mp, don't get knocked down, cr. hp jump-ins, punish lariat recovery, hope you guess on the right side of a U2 mixup if he chooses it

GorySnake

Good read

http://shoryuken.com/2011/11/25/5-reasons-why-you-shouldn%E2%80%99t-worry-about-balance/

Doctor DooM

Ugh, really disagree with the redudcto ad absurdum argument used there.

Comparing a modern fighting game to SF1 or Pong isn't a valid one for me.

No one wants a completely balanced game, it'd be totally homogenised but no fun, however the opposite is also no fun either.

The example I always give is Daigo vs Tokido from the last Evo. Yun vs Akuma. Look how little hype there is at the end when Daigo beasts him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9ohnM69JQ0

You can't tell me this is in any way a good thing for fighting games. A balance is needed for balance.

GorySnake

There's a lot of things to take in consideration here. Firstly, AE is a difficult example of imbalance to use in my opinion considering how stupid the character changes were from Super, it looks like they weren't even aiming for balance. As for the video, when it comes to AE before the game was even out here nearly everybody had already adopted this **** Yun attitude. It was Daigo playing as Yun and everybody always cheers against Daigo, he was against Tokido, a fan favourite, and it just wasn't a good match because Tokido got owned. Now compare it to this video, another video of Daigo's Yun at Evo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB9ciusfMXg

If we're looking at the "hype" at the end of the video, the crowd were a lot more positive. Not exactly jumping out of the seats cheering since it was Daigo + Yun that won but still showing their appreciation for a good match.

As for the article, it's not saying balance = boring, imbalance = fun, it's saying that people are taking balance as a factor of a good/bad game way too seriously and that people are too quick to call for nerfs and buffs

Doctor DooM

GorySnake wrote: »

There's a lot of things to take in consideration here. Firstly, AE is a difficult example of imbalance to use in my opinion considering how stupid the character changes were from Super, it looks like they weren't even aiming for balance. As for the video, when it comes to AE before the game was even out here nearly everybody had already adopted this **** Yun attitude. It was Daigo playing as Yun and everybody always cheers against Daigo, he was against Tokido, a fan favourite, and it just wasn't a good match because Tokido got owned. Now compare it to this video, another video of Daigo's Yun at Evo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB9ciusfMXg

If we're looking at the "hype" at the end of the video, the crowd were a lot more positive. Not exactly jumping out of the seats cheering since it was Daigo + Yun that won but still showing their appreciation for a good match.

As for the article, it's not saying balance = boring, imbalance = fun, it's saying that people are taking balance as a factor of a good/bad game way too seriously and that people are too quick to call for nerfs and buffs

I was more annoyed with the silly argument by absurd comparision rather than what you're saying.

I concur with a lot of the article actually, I particularly disliked the speed with which Marvel was rebalanced (Sentinel especially). MK9 is the worst offender though.

I do think balance is important though, and my point was comparing it to SF1 is a ridiculous argument and almost irrelevant in this discussion (SF1 is almost unplayable even in 1p.)

The Hound

Cant wait for 2012 so I can complain about Seth... and Hakan

Doctor DooM

The Hound wrote: »

Cant wait for 2012 so I can complain about Seth... and Hakan

Just a few weeks now


Did I hear Akuma can fireball off a demon flip now?

stev0knev022

The Hound wrote: »

Cant wait for 2012 so I can complain about Seth... and Hakan

Nothing stopping u from complaining about seth now.

GorySnake

The Turkish Beast cannot be stopped

Owwmykneecap

SRK is even more ****ing annoying now, these new scribes are SRK's equivalent of the AE patch.

Mechanics not balance determine if a game is fun.

Balance comes a way's after that.

Case in point: Ryu mirror matches ARE balanced. Yet they can be fun and entertaining, in AE they are still balanced but due to the changes of Ryu's mechanics, they are less interesting.

Doctor DooM

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

SRK is even more ****ing annoying now, these new scribes are SRK's equivalent of the AE patch.

Mechanics not balance determine if a game is fun.

Balance comes a way's after that.

Case in point: Ryu mirror matches ARE balanced. Yet they can be fun and entertaining, in AE they are still balanced but due to the changes of Ryu's mechanics, they are less interesting.

This is what I mean, it's poor writing to get to a point I don't necessarily disagree with.

Sairus

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Case in point: Ryu mirror matches ARE balanced. Yet they can be fun and entertaining, in AE they are still balanced but due to the changes of Ryu's mechanics, they are less interesting.

God damn that is a ****ing fantastic counter to 'perfectly balanced games can't be fun'.

Good show.

I am in the Ropedrink category on this. I can't see why balance would ruin anything. I also don't think unbalance ruins things, if it's not too severe.

Of course, if I was given then choice between a perfectly balanced, varied game or an unbalanced one I'd take the former every time.

Azza

Bad mechanics and bad balance = I'm not going spend any time playing this game.

Good mechanics and bad balance = I'll play this game until balance issues start annoying me. Keep it in reserve as a purely for fun casual game.

Bad mechanics and good balance = I'm not going spend any time playing this game.

Good mechanics and good balance = Jackpot, this is a game I can play alot and for a long while.

albel nox

I don't know amazing amounts about a lot of this stuff but i just wanna throw this out even tho i am more of a casual player.


I am not sure i agree with the logic of ryu mirror matches being balanced. While yes it is balanced, isn't that only because your being the same weight on each end of the weighting scale? Doesn't that logic not count of every mirror match? I usually find mirrors more interesting because of this as the only thing to tip the scales are the abilities of the person to overcome the tactics and abilities of the other.

I honestly think it is next to impossible to make a game that is completely balance without lobotomizing it somewhat. But what is balance anyway? Is it where every match up is 5/5 and it is only determined by skill? If so then i think it is very hard to make a balanced game IMO.

I also think that these "balance updates" or whatever aren't ever gonna balance out a game or honestly make it more balanced as it previously was as there is some many characters with neffs and buffs it feels like they are changing so many variables that they can never truly say that is it balanced or more balanced.

As far as i think, don't people want good solid plays? Rather than some character/moves or whatever doing most of the work? I guess all they can do it tone down as much BS as possible without leaving things stale and leaving characters flavorful and work as intended. There will usually always be something that rises to the top but lets up hope there is a large layer right underneath it.

Okay i don't know if any of that made any sense to anyone or is even relevant. As i mentioned earlier you guys are alot more experienced with this stuff and i don't wanna step on any toes.

Azza

albel nox wrote:

I am not sure i agree with the logic of ryu mirror matches being balanced. While yes it is balanced, isn't that only because your being the same weight on each end of the weighting scale? Doesn't that logic not count of every mirror match? I usually find mirrors more interesting because of this as the only thing to tip the scales are the abilities of the person to overcome the tactics and abilities of the other.

Yeah, all mirror matches are considered 5:5. It comes down to player skill and experience of the match up.

abel nox wrote:

I honestly think it is next to impossible to make a game that is completely balance without lobotomizing it somewhat. But what is balance anyway? Is it where every match up is 5/5 and it is only determined by skill? If so then i think it is very hard to make a balanced game IMO.

Yeah I would agree. The more variables (or in SF's case the more characters there are) the harder it is to balance the game.

abel nox wrote:

I also think that these "balance updates" or whatever aren't ever gonna balance out a game or honestly make it more balanced as it previously was as there is some many characters with neffs and buffs it feels like they are changing so many variables that they can never truly say that is it balanced or more balanced.

No there is a clear consensus that Super was more balanced than either Vanilla or AE.

albel nox

Azza wrote: »

No there is a clear consensus that Super was more balanced than either Vanilla or AE.

Ah ok, thanks. Well then i guess what they changed from vanilla to super was closer to the target than from super to AE

Now to develop the "Balanced fighting game equation!".


This may be the last you hear of me...

K.O.Kiki

I thought we all agreed that SSFIVAE Yun-Yun is 7:3 to the Yun who scores the first knockdown? :pac:

GorySnake

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Case in point: Ryu mirror matches ARE balanced. Yet they can be fun and entertaining, in AE they are still balanced but due to the changes of Ryu's mechanics, they are less interesting.

You cant really use a mirror match in an example when talking about balance in a whole game. You could have a balanced game of 39 characters all playing exactly like Ryu or an imbalanced game with the same number of characters but with a single top tier character and it would be the same thing.

Dreddybajs

I can't believe I'm even replying to this but agreed with Gory. How you can possibly respond to an article about balance with an anecdote about how a mirror match is more entertaining to watch in one version over another just astounds me.

Ramza

@_@

Doctor DooM

Dreddybajs wrote: »

I can't believe I'm even replying to this but agreed with Gory. How you can possibly respond to an article about balance with an anecdote about how a mirror match is more entertaining to watch in one version over another just astounds me.

Because he's making the (valid) point that the article is poorly written and the writer himself brings up the mirror match thing (comparing a modern fighting game to SF1)?

Further I consider the point to be extremely valid as he's using the mirror match anecdote to point out that mechanics count as much if not more than balancing.