As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Soul Calibur Four, Star Wars Characters-You don't have to play as them!

1373840424352

Posts

  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    I like that. "We don't really have a desire to get good at the game, so we're perfectly happy to accept online services that would have been considered a joke in 1993."

    The point is not that online play is impossible. The point is that online play is being done so, so wrong, and since console gamers are pretty much a captive market who have no problem with their ignorance, that'll never change.

    Excuse me, but wtf are you talking about? Are you really saying that the online offering of a game that hasn't come out yet sucks? Do you have some insider knowledge of how it plays? Of the hardware driving the backend? The bandwidth devoted, the way the code deals with latency, etc?
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive?

    If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say to have a little fun. :P

    Houn on
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Houn wrote: »
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive?

    If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say to have a little fun. :P
    lex-luthor-wrong1.jpg
    But really that's a good answer.

    Bama on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive?

    If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say to have a little fun. :P
    lex-luthor-wrong1.jpg
    But really that's a good answer.

    I lol'd. :lol:

    But, yeah, some of us don't really care if we win or lose a game. It's the playing that we enjoy; not the recap screen at the end of the match.

    Houn on
  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero The new film by Quentin Koopantino Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    I like that. "We don't really have a desire to get good at the game, so we're perfectly happy to accept online services that would have been considered a joke in 1993."

    So what you're saying is the game needs more... baud.

    AbsoluteZero on
    cs6f034fsffl.jpg
  • FreddyDFreddyD Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Houn wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    I like that. "We don't really have a desire to get good at the game, so we're perfectly happy to accept online services that would have been considered a joke in 1993."

    The point is not that online play is impossible. The point is that online play is being done so, so wrong, and since console gamers are pretty much a captive market who have no problem with their ignorance, that'll never change.

    Excuse me, but wtf are you talking about? Are you really saying that the online offering of a game that hasn't come out yet sucks? Do you have some insider knowledge of how it plays? Of the hardware driving the backend? The bandwidth devoted, the way the code deals with latency, etc?
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive?
    If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say to have a little fun. :P
    A lot of retailers broke the street date, and I've been hearing about 1-2 second input delay when you play people who live more than 300 miles away. I guess they could always release a patch at some point.

    FreddyD on
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Houn wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    I like that. "We don't really have a desire to get good at the game, so we're perfectly happy to accept online services that would have been considered a joke in 1993."

    The point is not that online play is impossible. The point is that online play is being done so, so wrong, and since console gamers are pretty much a captive market who have no problem with their ignorance, that'll never change.

    Excuse me, but wtf are you talking about? Are you really saying that the online offering of a game that hasn't come out yet sucks? Do you have some insider knowledge of how it plays? Of the hardware driving the backend? The bandwidth devoted, the way the code deals with latency, etc?
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive?

    If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say to have a little fun. :P

    First, I'm talking about console online play in general (I do have early info on SC4's online play, but that's irrelevant to my point). No amount of fancy netcode or hardware will counter basic physical distances. You play someone on another continent and you're going to have 100+ ping, that's just the way it is. It's the way console gamers are so blase about that, though, that bothers me. I see the stories all the time, somebody playing VF5 thinks he's having a tight game against someone in Japan. It's possible, in a way, but it's not playing the game at any level near where it's meant to be played.

    And your second point is something else entirely. You're playing a competitive game, something where you can get good, or at least better, with practise and deliberate action, but you choose to just hit buttons in a semi-random order over and over against someone who's doing pretty much the same thing, then after the match you both declare that it was a "Good game," and "Hard fought." Just, why? And it'll be even worse when you start adding in random packet loss and general lag. I understand there are pretty colours and flashy animations to look at, but there are simpler, less involving games that'll do the same thing for you.

    I can understand that people don't want to spend hours and hours memorizing each move, even though that's kind of what you do in fighting games, but I could never imagine playing a game and never trying, even a little bit, to get better at it.

    Edit: For the record, I don't play to win. I play to have fun. But I have more fun when I have some idea of what I'm doing and what's being done to me. Possibly that's just me, but I think most people would enjoy technical games more if they had some idea of their workings, it just follows. Spend an hour to learn the game, it's not that hard.

    And it's criminally easy to beat people who have no idea what they're doing in most fighting games. The difference between a newbie and a scrub (the worst kind of scum and villainy in the fighting game universe) is the intentional use of a few moves, and maybe some blocking. And scrubs destroy newbies.

    I don't want to come across as some enemy of fun. I'll be perfectly happy to play any and all of you when I get the chance, and I'll be even more happy to help any of you who'd like to step their game up enough so that they can do most things on purpose.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    There's some distance between total noobdom and frame-perfect escapes.

    edit: To be fair, I have always been dismissive of online play for fighters. I think it certainly could work, but not in the way that fighters like the VF series are designed. That has more to do with personal preference than "OMG why are you people enjoying something?" though.

    Bama on
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    All of the anime guest characters are identical to specific series proper characters in movelists.

    ...and why is that a big deal? I mean, there's a lot of fucking characters here, who cares if the bonus characters (that I was not even aware of until now) are just model swaps?

    Were you expecting that Namco had a bunch more unique characters they just never bothered to announce?

    I was merely stating it as a fact, since you asked. I don't really care. Sure, it's kind of weak that really Hilde is the only new character but she's awesome enough even on her own.

    Isn't the chick with the huge tits and the katana new? And the weird gothloli girl?

    I don't remember them from SC3.

    You're going to have to narrow it down some more. Specifically which chick with huge tits and a katana, and which gothic lolita, are you talking about?

    Amy was in Soul Calibur 3.
    Ashlotte was not. She's new to 4.

    Setsuka was in Soul Calibur 3. Althought the bustline seems to have been... emphasized, lately.

    Heh, yeah, I didn't realize there were more characters like that than just one.

    I thought Setsuka, Amy and Ashlotte were all new, because I don't remember them from SC3, but I guess I just didn't play it enough.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    There's some distance between total noobdom and frame-perfect escapes.

    edit: To be fair, I have always been dismissive of online play for fighters. I think it certainly could work, but not in the way that fighters like the VF series are designed. That has more to do with personal preference than "OMG why are you people enjoying something?" though.

    I only have the "Why are you enjoying this?" attitude in the same way I have for people who listen to top 40s music and just love the hell out of it. I mean, sure, you can do that, but c'mon! There's so much that's so much better. Really, I'd love to play console games online, it's just that every time I try and do that I feel like I'm being insulted by the devs.

    The reasons might even be a little more selfish. Even though it's obvious that online play will bring a lot of new players to the community, the way things are right now I don't see the crossover rate between new players and serious (or even semi-serious) competitors being more than a trickle, at best. Especially since the game as a VS Special online where people can just use their leveled up and customized characters for easy wins without ever having to know what they're doing.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    First, I'm talking about console online play in general (I do have early info on SC4's online play, but that's irrelevant to my point). No amount of fancy netcode or hardware will counter basic physical distances. You play someone on another continent and you're going to have 100+ ping, that's just the way it is. It's the way console gamers are so blase about that, though, that bothers me. I see the stories all the time, somebody playing VF5 thinks he's having a tight game against someone in Japan. It's possible, in a way, but it's not playing the game at any level near where it's meant to be played.

    Your point is silly, because none of these technical hurdles are specific to consoles. So... why exactly are you arguing this as a negative against consoles?
    And your second point is something else entirely. You're playing a competitive game, something where you can get good, or at least better, with practise and deliberate action, but you choose to just hit buttons in a semi-random order over and over against someone who's doing pretty much the same thing, then after the match you both declare that it was a "Good game," and "Hard fought."

    As said, there's a huge distance between "competitive" and "noob", with all kinds of skill levels in between. Just because I don't give a shit about winning doesn't mean I just mash buttons. Casual gamers still play to win; they're simply the ones who are still smiling when they don't. :P

    Houn on
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    Bama wrote: »
    There's some distance between total noobdom and frame-perfect escapes.

    edit: To be fair, I have always been dismissive of online play for fighters. I think it certainly could work, but not in the way that fighters like the VF series are designed. That has more to do with personal preference than "OMG why are you people enjoying something?" though.

    I only have the "Why are you enjoying this?" attitude in the same way I have for people who listen to top 40s music and just love the hell out of it. I mean, sure, you can do that, but c'mon! There's so much that's so much better. Really, I'd love to play console games online, it's just that every time I try and do that I feel like I'm being insulted by the devs.

    The reasons might even be a little more selfish. Even though it's obvious that online play will bring a lot of new players to the community, the way things are right now I don't see the crossover rate between new players and serious (or even semi-serious) competitors being more than a trickle, at best. Especially since the game as a VS Special online where people can just use their leveled up and customized characters for easy wins without ever having to know what they're doing.
    I don't really get your claim that online play is bad for all console games. Stuff from Project Gotham 2 to Uno works just fine. I don't notice any worse performance in Halo than I do in TF2. Sure, sometimes you get a bad host but that happens everywhere.

    Also, so what if you don't get new competitors through online play? Would you somehow get more if there wasn't online play?

    Bama on
  • RoxtarRoxtar Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I hear tell rumor that Vader would eventually be available as DLC in the 360 version but Yoda would not be available as DLC in the PS3 version. This might just be some PS3 fanboy bullshit, but does anybody know anything legitimate about this rumor?
    Huh? Do you mean the opposite? Meh, anyways I believe it was stated in some magazine that both would be downloadable for the other system as DLC in the near future so its really a moot point. In fact supposedly the other character is already in their opposite systems they just arent playable yet. Other rumors include Kratos being PS3 exclusive downloadable, 360 having better framerate than ps3, and 360 having laggy control inputs as compared to the ps3. I believe those last 3 are pure crap though so whatever.

    Roxtar on
  • RivulentRivulent Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Roxtar wrote: »
    I hear tell rumor that Vader would eventually be available as DLC in the 360 version but Yoda would not be available as DLC in the PS3 version. This might just be some PS3 fanboy bullshit, but does anybody know anything legitimate about this rumor?
    Huh? Do you mean the opposite? Meh, anyways I believe it was stated in some magazine that both would be downloadable for the other system as DLC in the near future so its really a moot point. In fact supposedly the other character is already in their opposite systems they just arent playable yet. Other rumors include Kratos being PS3 exclusive downloadable, 360 having better framerate than ps3, and 360 having laggy control inputs as compared to the ps3. I believe those last 3 are pure crap though so whatever.

    I heard that both opposites were unlockable if you had a force unleashed save on your harddrive. But I heard this from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from a blog from another guy.

    Rivulent on
  • KlykaKlyka DO you have any SPARE BATTERIES?Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I usually play fighting games inside my dreams,cause it's directly in my brain and so there is less lag involved.


    Honestly,fighting game threads are terrible because they always devolve into a crazy fight between hardcore fighting game players and rather normal players, tearing everything down with talk about "lag" and "input lag" and "tiers" and "scum and villainy of the fighting game community".

    Guys,just beat the shit out of Yoda/Darth Vader/Some tits and ass.

    And have fun in whatever way you like.

    Klyka on
    SC2 EU ID Klyka.110
    lTDyp.jpg
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Rivulent wrote: »
    Roxtar wrote: »
    I hear tell rumor that Vader would eventually be available as DLC in the 360 version but Yoda would not be available as DLC in the PS3 version. This might just be some PS3 fanboy bullshit, but does anybody know anything legitimate about this rumor?
    Huh? Do you mean the opposite? Meh, anyways I believe it was stated in some magazine that both would be downloadable for the other system as DLC in the near future so its really a moot point. In fact supposedly the other character is already in their opposite systems they just arent playable yet. Other rumors include Kratos being PS3 exclusive downloadable, 360 having better framerate than ps3, and 360 having laggy control inputs as compared to the ps3. I believe those last 3 are pure crap though so whatever.

    I heard that both opposites were unlockable if you had a force unleashed save on your harddrive. But I heard this from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from a blog from another guy.

    That'd be pretty strange. I seriously doubt that's the case. It's far more likely that both characters are on both discs and will be available for "download" soon.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Houn wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    First, I'm talking about console online play in general (I do have early info on SC4's online play, but that's irrelevant to my point). No amount of fancy netcode or hardware will counter basic physical distances. You play someone on another continent and you're going to have 100+ ping, that's just the way it is. It's the way console gamers are so blase about that, though, that bothers me. I see the stories all the time, somebody playing VF5 thinks he's having a tight game against someone in Japan. It's possible, in a way, but it's not playing the game at any level near where it's meant to be played.

    Your point is silly, because none of these technical hurdles are specific to consoles. So... why exactly are you arguing this as a negative against consoles?
    And your second point is something else entirely. You're playing a competitive game, something where you can get good, or at least better, with practise and deliberate action, but you choose to just hit buttons in a semi-random order over and over against someone who's doing pretty much the same thing, then after the match you both declare that it was a "Good game," and "Hard fought."

    As said, there's a huge distance between "competitive" and "noob", with all kinds of skill levels in between. Just because I don't give a shit about winning doesn't mean I just mash buttons. Casual gamers still play to win; they're simply the ones who are still smiling when they don't. :P

    While not specific to consoles, the attitude toward them are. I've been playing competitive and not-so-competitive online games for a long, long time and certain things are just known. There are no NA vs Europe Quake tournaments, at least not in the same way as one might expect. It's a simple matter of PC gamers usually having a better grasp of their online situation.

    And that's not a direct shot at console gamers, a group I do often count myself a part of, but more to the developers. When I play a PC game I know where the servers are, I know what my ping is, I know what my average packet loss is, if I want to I can even learn how my connection is being routed. When I play console games I get anywhere from 3 to 5 coloured bars that really don't mean anything specific.

    The distance between a "newb" and a "pro" is vast, but the difference between someone who's punishing his controller in an attempt to get his character to "do that move that wins" and someone who's got a clue isn't that wide. You can be good enough and getting better without having to study frame data. Many really good players only care about frame data in an abstract sense; the point is only to find when you're at a disadvantage and what you can do to punish blocked or whiffed moves, not to calculate the absolute best response in every circumstance.

    And I know there will be new players through online play. The one advantage it might give is that might give better players a chance to personally mentor new players who actually care. On the other hand, back in the days of arcades, if you sucked you got trounced and lost your money, so you either got better or you stopped playing (at least if you were smart). With this new online play, well first it's a lot harder to actually identify how you're sucking, but beyond that there's always the option to just not play better players, or, even worse, to stick to VS Special, where you can use your lvl 99 custom character who has the Unblockable Sword of Maiming, or whatever, and just win like that.

    I think there will be new players introduced to the more competitive communities, but I don't think they'll be a whole lot more than there were in any of the previous releases.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    The distance between a "newb" and a "pro" is vast, but the difference between someone who's punishing his controller in an attempt to get his character to "do that move that wins" and someone who's got a clue isn't that wide. You can be good enough and getting better without having to study frame data. Many really good players only care about frame data in an abstract sense; the point is only to find when you're at a disadvantage and what you can do to punish blocked or whiffed moves, not to calculate the absolute best response in every circumstance.
    And now we're back to discussing how this distance is impossible to traverse in online play. Even ifsome things don't work, you can still try new and more effective tactics.
    Page- wrote: »
    I think there will be new players introduced to the more competitive communities, but I don't think they'll be a whole lot more than there were in any of the previous releases.
    So?

    Bama on
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    The distance between a "newb" and a "pro" is vast, but the difference between someone who's punishing his controller in an attempt to get his character to "do that move that wins" and someone who's got a clue isn't that wide. You can be good enough and getting better without having to study frame data. Many really good players only care about frame data in an abstract sense; the point is only to find when you're at a disadvantage and what you can do to punish blocked or whiffed moves, not to calculate the absolute best response in every circumstance.
    And now we're back to discussing how this distance is impossible to traverse in online play. Even ifsome things don't work, you can still try new and more effective tactics.
    Page- wrote: »
    I think there will be new players introduced to the more competitive communities, but I don't think they'll be a whole lot more than there were in any of the previous releases.
    So?

    You're first point I don't get. Everyone starts out as a newbie, nobody would ever dispute that. I was a terrible player when I first started. I've never claimed that it's impossible for a new player to become a good player, and I never would. But I think online play makes it both harder to get better and easier to stay worse.

    That last paragraph is a point in and of itself. There's nothing more to it. If you want more context then I suppose it's addressing, in an obtuse way, my other points. There's less and less of an impetus to get better at the game, it's all about equipment gathering time-sinks now. This comes at the same time as people complain that they don't want to spend hours and hours learning a fighting game's system and memorizing moves. But they're overjoyed when told that there's an endless amount of crap to unlock by trudging through survival dungeons, or that they can level characters up and equip them with fancy stat-boosting gear for online play. Well, which is it? Both are time sinks, but only one will help you in the long run.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • ExarchExarch Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I think the basic idea is that in console gaming you have less direct control over which host server you are playing on, and therefore your lag.

    I don't personally count frames in fighters, but I do subconciously notice lag, and get frustrated because "I hit the button when I was supposed to" but nothing happend.

    Exarch on
    No gods or kings, only man.
    LoL: BunyipAristocrat
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I was addressing this:
    Page- wrote: »
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive? And how can you be at least a little competitive if it's basically impossible for you to do certain things?

    I guess my other point is that the online play does nothing to detract from the part of the game you are interested in. You might as well complain about the story not making sense.

    Bama on
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Exarch wrote: »
    I think the basic idea is that in console gaming you have less direct control over which host server you are playing on, and therefore your lag.

    I don't personally count frames in fighters, but I do subconciously notice lag, and get frustrated because "I hit the button when I was supposed to" but nothing happend.

    True...but think is...overall this is simply technological limitations more than anything. Overall, I'd say I prefer the inclusion of online play as to not having it at all, even if like you said it can be frustrating at times.

    Dragkonias on
  • ExarchExarch Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Yeah I totally agree. Better to have it than not, even if it's not really a good forum for competitive play.

    Exarch on
    No gods or kings, only man.
    LoL: BunyipAristocrat
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    tbloxham on
    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    I was addressing this:
    Page- wrote: »
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive? And how can you be at least a little competitive if it's basically impossible for you to do certain things?

    I guess my other point is that the online play does nothing to detract from the part of the game you are interested in. You might as well complain about the story not making sense.

    It may seem so, but the more Namco panders the more I have a reason to be worried.

    Namco will be patching the game for balance reasons. Fact is, there are moves that will be brutal in online play, but perfectly manageable offline, setups and combos that work offline but won't work online, characters that seem broken online but aren't offline. If Namco starts patching for online play, then that's a problem for me, since I'll be playing mostly offline.

    That, and XBL, in my experience, is the worst online community possible. I'm not really looking forward to experiencing that every time I log on for a game of SC4.

    Somewhat funny story, I first tried playing VF5 online a few months back. Now, I don't really like VF, and I'm only good enough at the game to know what's going on and what to do. So, I start with the random match service (which is a truly terrible feature) and get matched up against this guy. We go at it for a while, but mid-way through the second round I realize he's a complete and total scrub, but has a lot more experience with online play than I do. So I change up my tactics and start to play a safer punishment game. I destroyed him. Whatever. So, I hit the match mode again and we get matched up again, this time I don't even feel like giving him the time of day, since he's talking a little bit of shit. I beat him 3 rounds straight with only 1 move and a grab. So what does the guy do? He logs one of those XBL complaints and lowers my rating, saying that I wasn't playing fair or some nonsense like that.

    Now, I'm orders of magnitude better at SC than I am at VF. And I'm not looking forward to being called names and complained about just because I don't really care to address scrubs on their own terms. If you want to suck balls then I'm going to beat you with 1 move until you finally block it (or block at all), then I'm going to beat you with 2 moves, and so on and so on. Either you're going to get the message and try and play better, or you're going to bitch and whine, and maybe lower my rating, too. Good times.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    All cut-scenes are in-engine. Not even the intro is prerendered, which is disappointing. There were in-engine endings in SC3, and there are more in SC4. Only the bonus characters have static, hand drawn endings now.

    There are boatloads of unlockables. You even have to unlock many of the story characters.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    I don't think the SC series has ever done anything fancy for finishing story mode, so I'd be surprised if they did now.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    Bama wrote: »
    I was addressing this:
    Page- wrote: »
    What's the point of playing online if you don't plan on being at least a little competitive? And how can you be at least a little competitive if it's basically impossible for you to do certain things?

    I guess my other point is that the online play does nothing to detract from the part of the game you are interested in. You might as well complain about the story not making sense.

    It may seem so, but the more Namco panders the more I have a reason to be worried.

    Namco will be patching the game for balance reasons. Fact is, there are moves that will be brutal in online play, but perfectly manageable offline, setups and combos that work offline but won't work online, characters that seem broken online but aren't offline. If Namco starts patching for online play, then that's a problem for me, since I'll be playing mostly offline.

    That, and XBL, in my experience, is the worst online community possible. I'm not really looking forward to experiencing that every time I log on for a game of SC4.

    Somewhat funny story, I first tried playing VF5 online a few months back. Now, I don't really like VF, and I'm only good enough at the game to know what's going on and what to do. So, I start with the random match service (which is a truly terrible feature) and get matched up against this guy. We go at it for a while, but mid-way through the second round I realize he's a complete and total scrub, but has a lot more experience with online play than I do. So I change up my tactics and start to play a safer punishment game. I destroyed him. Whatever. So, I hit the match mode again and we get matched up again, this time I don't even feel like giving him the time of day, since he's talking a little bit of shit. I beat him 3 rounds straight with only 1 move and a grab. So what does the guy do? He logs one of those XBL complaints and lowers my rating, saying that I wasn't playing fair or some nonsense like that.

    Now, I'm orders of magnitude better at SC than I am at VF. And I'm not looking forward to being called names and complained about just because I don't really care to address scrubs on their own terms. If you want to suck balls then I'm going to beat you with 1 move until you finally block it (or block at all), then I'm going to beat you with 2 moves, and so on and so on. Either you're going to get the message and try and play better, or you're going to bitch and whine, and maybe lower my rating, too. Good times.
    Man, I don't even know what your complaint is anymore. You think online play is necessarily terrible, but you want to play anyway?

    Bama on
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    You're generalizing a little much there. I love online play. I play 95% of my games online. And I have a great time with it. But those are PC games. My complaints are all directed at the services and features of console online play, not online play as whole.

    And all my subsequent posts don't contradict my original points. They're just other examples and ideas.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    I don't think the SC series has ever done anything fancy for finishing story mode, so I'd be surprised if they did now.

    And it's dissapointed me every time it happened, still it seems I won't be disappointing since there are some in engine cutscenes and unlockables to get. I just hate it when you win, it rolls the credits and you get nothing. Somehow I always feel I deserve some kind of 'prize', I don't know why fighting games bring that out in me, I just really enjoy getting them :)

    tbloxham on
    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    All cut-scenes are in-engine. Not even the intro is prerendered, which is disappointing. There were in-engine endings in SC3, and there are more in SC4. Only the bonus characters have static, hand drawn endings now.

    There are boatloads of unlockables. You even have to unlock many of the story characters.

    Hurrah! Prizes and so forth :)

    tbloxham on
    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Rivulent wrote: »
    Roxtar wrote: »
    I hear tell rumor that Vader would eventually be available as DLC in the 360 version but Yoda would not be available as DLC in the PS3 version. This might just be some PS3 fanboy bullshit, but does anybody know anything legitimate about this rumor?
    Huh? Do you mean the opposite? Meh, anyways I believe it was stated in some magazine that both would be downloadable for the other system as DLC in the near future so its really a moot point. In fact supposedly the other character is already in their opposite systems they just arent playable yet. Other rumors include Kratos being PS3 exclusive downloadable, 360 having better framerate than ps3, and 360 having laggy control inputs as compared to the ps3. I believe those last 3 are pure crap though so whatever.

    I heard that both opposites were unlockable if you had a force unleashed save on your harddrive. But I heard this from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from a blog from another guy.

    That'd be pretty strange. I seriously doubt that's the case. It's far more likely that both characters are on both discs and will be available for "download" soon.
    Well I can't wait to actually have these questions answered because I honestly need a way of picking which system to get it on. Oh the troubles to have when you buy every console.. :winky:

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this has some nice pre-rendered (or in engine, since it's pretty exceptional now) cut scenes when you finish the single player mode? I'm always dissapointed when the final boss of the story gets beaten in a game and you don't get a "Hurrah, I won, and this is what I'm going to do!" cut scene.

    Or at least some cool unlockable stuff for winning?

    All cut-scenes are in-engine. Not even the intro is prerendered, which is disappointing. There were in-engine endings in SC3, and there are more in SC4. Only the bonus characters have static, hand drawn endings now.

    There are boatloads of unlockables. You even have to unlock many of the story characters.

    The intro in Soul Calibur was in-game, and was better for it.
    Astaroth brushing his "hair" back like a dainty woman. :D

    Shadowfire on
    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Rivulent wrote: »
    Roxtar wrote: »
    I hear tell rumor that Vader would eventually be available as DLC in the 360 version but Yoda would not be available as DLC in the PS3 version. This might just be some PS3 fanboy bullshit, but does anybody know anything legitimate about this rumor?
    Huh? Do you mean the opposite? Meh, anyways I believe it was stated in some magazine that both would be downloadable for the other system as DLC in the near future so its really a moot point. In fact supposedly the other character is already in their opposite systems they just arent playable yet. Other rumors include Kratos being PS3 exclusive downloadable, 360 having better framerate than ps3, and 360 having laggy control inputs as compared to the ps3. I believe those last 3 are pure crap though so whatever.

    I heard that both opposites were unlockable if you had a force unleashed save on your harddrive. But I heard this from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from a blog from another guy.

    That'd be pretty strange. I seriously doubt that's the case. It's far more likely that both characters are on both discs and will be available for "download" soon.
    Well I can't wait to actually have these questions answered because I honestly need a way of picking which system to get it on. Oh the troubles to have when you buy every console.. :winky:

    You should have taken my hint and looked back a few pages. Vader and Yoda are confirmed 100% to be cross-console, whether they're on the disk or not is up for debate. They can't be Force Unleashed unlocks since they've been seen and nobody has The Force Unleashed.

    As for how the games play, that's your own decision. PS3 has an install that will almost eliminate all loading. The 360 will eventually have the option to install games, which will probably do the same thing. The PS3 has been reported by some to have a few framerate hickups, but nothing too bad, and it might be possible to fix it with a patch.

    Truly, the main thing to consider would be which controller you prefer, or if you have some old PS2 sticks laying around it's far easier to get a good PS2 to PS3 adaptor than it is to get a PS2 to 360 adaptor.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Here's a live stream of somebody playing SC4: http://www.justin.tv/mezy456. Watch it while it's hot.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • RWangsRWangs Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    Bama wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    The distance between a "newb" and a "pro" is vast, but the difference between someone who's punishing his controller in an attempt to get his character to "do that move that wins" and someone who's got a clue isn't that wide. You can be good enough and getting better without having to study frame data. Many really good players only care about frame data in an abstract sense; the point is only to find when you're at a disadvantage and what you can do to punish blocked or whiffed moves, not to calculate the absolute best response in every circumstance.
    And now we're back to discussing how this distance is impossible to traverse in online play. Even ifsome things don't work, you can still try new and more effective tactics.
    Page- wrote: »
    I think there will be new players introduced to the more competitive communities, but I don't think they'll be a whole lot more than there were in any of the previous releases.
    So?

    You're first point I don't get. Everyone starts out as a newbie, nobody would ever dispute that. I was a terrible player when I first started. I've never claimed that it's impossible for a new player to become a good player, and I never would. But I think online play makes it both harder to get better and easier to stay worse.

    That last paragraph is a point in and of itself. There's nothing more to it. If you want more context then I suppose it's addressing, in an obtuse way, my other points. There's less and less of an impetus to get better at the game, it's all about equipment gathering time-sinks now. This comes at the same time as people complain that they don't want to spend hours and hours learning a fighting game's system and memorizing moves. But they're overjoyed when told that there's an endless amount of crap to unlock by trudging through survival dungeons, or that they can level characters up and equip them with fancy stat-boosting gear for online play. Well, which is it? Both are time sinks, but only one will help you in the long run.

    Help you with the important life-saving skill that is playing a fighting game? What you're arguing is pretty silly. Some people like obsessing long hours just to get mildly better at a skill-based game, while others prefer playing few hours to get a new shiny piece of clothing. Both are valid reasons to play if it's something that the person enjoys because that's just what games are, fun time-sinks.

    RWangs on
    PS3 tag/ MGO ID : Terasozin
    41.png
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    RWangs wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    Bama wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    The distance between a "newb" and a "pro" is vast, but the difference between someone who's punishing his controller in an attempt to get his character to "do that move that wins" and someone who's got a clue isn't that wide. You can be good enough and getting better without having to study frame data. Many really good players only care about frame data in an abstract sense; the point is only to find when you're at a disadvantage and what you can do to punish blocked or whiffed moves, not to calculate the absolute best response in every circumstance.
    And now we're back to discussing how this distance is impossible to traverse in online play. Even ifsome things don't work, you can still try new and more effective tactics.
    Page- wrote: »
    I think there will be new players introduced to the more competitive communities, but I don't think they'll be a whole lot more than there were in any of the previous releases.
    So?

    You're first point I don't get. Everyone starts out as a newbie, nobody would ever dispute that. I was a terrible player when I first started. I've never claimed that it's impossible for a new player to become a good player, and I never would. But I think online play makes it both harder to get better and easier to stay worse.

    That last paragraph is a point in and of itself. There's nothing more to it. If you want more context then I suppose it's addressing, in an obtuse way, my other points. There's less and less of an impetus to get better at the game, it's all about equipment gathering time-sinks now. This comes at the same time as people complain that they don't want to spend hours and hours learning a fighting game's system and memorizing moves. But they're overjoyed when told that there's an endless amount of crap to unlock by trudging through survival dungeons, or that they can level characters up and equip them with fancy stat-boosting gear for online play. Well, which is it? Both are time sinks, but only one will help you in the long run.

    Help you with the important life-saving skill that is playing a fighting game? What you're arguing is pretty silly. Some people like obsessing long hours just to get mildly better at a skill-based game, while others prefer playing few hours to get a new shiny piece of clothing. Both are valid reasons to play if it's something that the person enjoys because that's just what games are, fun time-sinks.

    That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    Here's a live stream of somebody playing SC4: http://www.justin.tv/mezy456. Watch it while it's hot.

    Wow, the Apprentice is much cooler than I expected.

    Vincent Grayson on
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.
    So the point isn't to have fun with friends? Have you ever gone bowling?

    Bama on
  • RWangsRWangs Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Page- wrote: »
    That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.

    You mean that the argument that people play games for fun is invalidated by your definition of what a fighting game is?

    I remember owning Killer Instinct on the gameboy (Ew, I know, but I enjoyed it back then!) when I was like ten or something and despite not playing against a single real person, I still enjoyed the hell out of the game. I agree with the argument that online play is just becoming a standard in console games (and now console fighting games) and developers need to implement it to stay competitive. There's a difference between the hardcore players and the the Joe Shmoes who just want to pit Vader and Yoda against one another from across the state.

    As another example, a few college friends and I played Smash Bros in residence with each other during the entire second semester of University. Being 3 hours away from each other all summer, we decided to play online. Now the game lags like a bitch and really somewhat takes away from the competitive side of the game, but it was still great to completely ass-rape that Game and Watch-whoring friend of mine once we got used to the lag. It was a different game, but it was still a great social experience.

    RWangs on
    PS3 tag/ MGO ID : Terasozin
    41.png
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    RWangs wrote: »
    Page- wrote: »
    That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.

    You mean that the argument that people play games for fun is invalidated by your definition of what a fighting game is?

    I remember owning Killer Instinct on the gameboy (Ew, I know, but I enjoyed it back then!) when I was like ten or something and despite not playing against a single real person, I still enjoyed the hell out of the game. I agree with the argument that online play is just becoming a standard in console games (and now console fighting games) and developers need to implement it to stay competitive. There's a difference between the hardcore players and the the Joe Shmoes who just want to pit Vader and Yoda against one another from across the state.

    As another example, a few college friends and I played Smash Bros in residence with each other during the entire second semester of University. Being 3 hours away from each other all summer, we decided to play online. Now the game lags like a bitch and really somewhat takes away from the competitive side of the game, but it was still great to completely ass-rape that Game and Watch-whoring friend of mine once we got used to the lag. It was a different game, but it was still a great social experience.

    Yeah, that's great, but that wasn't what I was talking about.

    You were addressing my point about time-sinks, and that's what I responded to. Not online play. And almost anything can be fun if you do it with friends. I've gone bowling, and I'm not very good at it, but I go bowling to be with the other people bowling, and to check out which old arcade machines they have. But I don't go bowling regularly, and if I did then I would make an effort to get better at it. There's a big difference between playing a game once or twice with your friends and owning a copy of the game and playing it long enough to unlock everything.

    Page- on
    Competitive Gaming and Writing Blog Updated in October: "Song (and Story) of the Day"
    Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
    stream
This discussion has been closed.