I just wish they'd get rid of Chun Li's little flip from down forward light kick. I have yet to find a use for it, and I accidentally throw it out way too often.
but sometimes it is neat because it knocks someone into the air. . .
I just wish they'd get rid of Chun Li's little flip from down forward light kick. I have yet to find a use for it, and I accidentally throw it out way too often.
but sometimes it is neat because it knocks someone into the air. . .
yeah i don't get it either.
I really hope SSF4 makes it an anti-air or something at least, because damn I hate that move.
reducing button count would most certainly help people who don't want to invest in an arcade stick. Playing SF4 on a stock pad is pretty bad. The core SF series won't ever leave the 6 button layout, too much nostalgia and fundamental part of SF in general.
Making it easier to do moves / combos would certainly make SF more inviting to new / novice players.
Oh I've had this discussion with friends and internet folk alike for years.
I personally don't see the need to have 6 buttons when most characters competitively only have 2 or 3 useful normals in a certain situation. The issue of course is that we have Smash bros showing how simplified controls can easily work in a fighting game.
BB, Marvel and TvC also use a reduced button layout. SF4 makes it worse since there is additional commands using multiple buttons at once (Throw, Focus, EX's, Ultras and Taunts).
The problem in the execution vs strategy debate in fighting games is the end result is very harsh. In RTS or even FPS games, lack of execution (or rather being slower) won't typically result in a huge punish. In SF4 (and fighting games in general) 1 mistake can be an extreme killer. Miss a link, Eat ULTRA! Off by 1 frame, EAT ULTRA. In RTS games you may lose an extra unit or 2 or deal less damage but the the game isn't likely to swing as hard for a small lapse in execution.
Also SF4 is also stupid with the DP shortcut. Miss input can often result in your characters DP move which is typically terribly unsafe resulting in significant punishes. Yes cleaner execution can fix these problems but the game could be alot smarter about what you intended vs what you input vs what it "detected".
Had this discussion on SRK and a mostly agreeing result is that combos should be easier to do, but if not timed properly would result in less damage. (The discussion was about combo execution and 1Framers not just special moves)
So much wrong with the paragraph I put in bold. If you have poor execution in a competitive FPS you will lose every time, probably with a negative score. If you can't keep at least your macro up in an RTS then you will lose every game, probably before you get a chance to do anything. Dropping combos is barely even comparable.
I will agree that SF series probably has too many buttons, but I don't think that's a barrier, just a flaw. If you want to use VF as an example then you have half the buttons and x10 the movelist. I'm also all for combos being simpler to execute in most cases, and that's why I play more 3D fighters than 2D now -- there are more moves to think about, but the execution is very simple (this helps me a lot since I have no way of practising on my own but still like to go to tourneys on a regular basis). The notable exception is Tekken, which I still do not like, but that's just a matter of it being based squarely around doing long and boring juggles over and over again. But I also know that people who like Tekken like it because of the long juggles, so whatever.
Tekken is just insane in the amount of moves. Something like 120+ moves/char depending on location and what move you did before or whatever.
I was debating whether or not to pick up tekken and try to get into it (as I'm looking for another fighting game to try out), and this pushed me firmly into no longer being interested. Thank you.
Honestly, while Tekken has a lot of moves, they're mostly canned combos. And in reality, compared to VF and SC, it probably has the smallest amount of useful and used moves for each character, especially when put into the context of how the game works. It's more about learning the important juggles.
Tekken is just insane in the amount of moves. Something like 120+ moves/char depending on location and what move you did before or whatever.
I was debating whether or not to pick up tekken and try to get into it (as I'm looking for another fighting game to try out), and this pushed me firmly into no longer being interested. Thank you.
Actually, as an inexperienced fighting game player, I find Tekken to be quite natural. There's a shit ton of moves, but most of them are pretty much exactly what you'd expect when inputting the commands, and shift based on the situation in a way that makes sense. Personally, it really helps me that they have a button for each limb.
Tekken is a LOT of fun - just don't play tourney level players right away. They make it very unfun. I am actually kind of OK at Tekken, but I don't have nearly the passion for it that I do for SF4.
i don't think fighting games would suffer from simpler inputs
i also don't think street fighter needs as many attacks as it has
how many useless normals and specials do characters have? ideally, there wouldn't be any. Many characters have normals you just won't use, or even specials (psycho crusher, for example). Street Fighter has six normal attacks. That's a lot, and I'd say it could be trimmed and lose nothing.
Look at Blazblue: three normals and a Drive button.
Alright, I need to respond to this.
It might only have 3 attack buttons and one drive button, but they amount to alot more moves not accounting specials. One button is assigned at least 3 different attacks on the ground, with the C button usually having 4 to account for a sweeping move. In the air C moves usually have 2 versions too. While for SF4 it's normally just a neutral, jump and down move with one or two moves that require forward+attack button. Though SF4 does take into account neutral jump moves.
Just as a general question, is the Hardest AI worth a damn as practice?
I ask because although I'm getting the occasional victory online, 90% of the time I'm getting either slaughtered or losing by a moderate margin. I know that Rose isn't the toughest character, but I'm acutely aware it's my lack of skill holding me back rather than my choice in character.
For that matter, I've heard that a fair few of the Hard Trials are ridiculous, but if I'm going to main a character would it be worthwhile to practice the Normal Trials until I can do them without any serious struggle?
I'd say having no trouble doing the normal trials would be a good goal to shoot for, except for some people's normal trial 5, which has some nice 1-frame links sprinkled in.
Just as a general question, is the Hardest AI worth a damn as practice?
I ask because although I'm getting the occasional victory online, 90% of the time I'm getting either slaughtered or losing by a moderate margin. I know that Rose isn't the toughest character, but I'm acutely aware it's my lack of skill holding me back rather than my choice in character.
For that matter, I've heard that a fair few of the Hard Trials are ridiculous, but if I'm going to main a character would it be worthwhile to practice the Normal Trials until I can do them without any serious struggle?
Hardest AI is just more aggressive, not exactly more challenging.
SF4 doesn't really have that many moves per character, but it's true that often many of them end up being rather useless. However, that's more capcoms fault than something intrinsic to the number of moves each character has. As a counter example, some characters in VF4 have around a hundred moves (or at least it certainly feels that way) and while not all of them are useful, and some are quite situational, a lot of them are quite important.
Of course the barrier into getting into VF4 is also huge.
it's entirely possible to make hundreds of moves, every one of them useful in a different way.
it is not necessary or even better, and it's certainly worse for entry barrier and casual play. some people like that, and they certainly have their heart's desire in 3d fighters.
i think you could make a much more accessible game that is just as deep as, say, SF4, and in many of the same ways.
I've been seeing a lot more new faces at my Singles tournament lately - if any of you are in the Seattle area feel free to show up on Saturday nights - I usually update this thread on SRK with any new info:
Usually a 5$ buy-in for the Singles tourney that runs from around 8PM until 10-12 depending on turnout and how many setups we actually end up having. Good atmosphere at a bar with cheap drinks (I think it's 4$ beer and 6$ you call its).
We also turn it over to casuals as soon as the tournament matches are over. AT 10:30PM Tournament Wars matches start, which is at the moment a 3v3 league, next season will be SSF4 and be two man teams.
I've been seeing a lot more new faces at my Singles tournament lately - if any of you are in the Seattle area feel free to show up on Saturday nights - I usually update this thread on SRK with any new info:
Usually a 5$ buy-in for the Singles tourney that runs from around 8PM until 10-12 depending on turnout and how many setups we actually end up having. Good atmosphere at a bar with cheap drinks (I think it's 4$ beer and 6$ you call its).
We also turn it over to casuals as soon as the tournament matches are over. AT 10:30PM Tournament Wars matches start, which is at the moment a 3v3 league, next season will be SSF4 and be two man teams.
SF4 ain't that deep. It's a pretty basic fighting system apart from the focus attack system.
edit: which is pretty deep. The FA system that is.
i would disagree. there are many deeper fighting games, but that doesn't mean SF4 is not deep; it's got layers of psychology, decision making, strategy, etc. it's not as complex as games like SFA3, by a long shot.
I'm really not a fighting game vet, in fact SF4 is the first fighting I've ever really gotten into. However, to me it seems like SF4 is as simple as it gets (besides, say, Smash Bros) in terms of game mechanics. I really wouldn't WANT it any simpler.
I appreciate that a certain level of execution is required for combos. When I watch high level play, I like to OOO and AHHH and the crazy links that happen. Hell, every single time I pull off Bison's c.LP, s.LP, c.MK xx Scissors combo (a not-so-difficult link) I get HUGE satisfaction.
I would hate for this game to turn into dial-a-combo like Mortal Kombat.
Discussing Smash Bros on this forum can only lead to disaster.
Seriously though, SF4 is pretty "simple". There isn't much that you really need to learn, but it's still difficult to perform certain combos and setups.
Discussing Smash Bros on this forum can only lead to disaster.
Seriously though, SF4 is pretty "simple". There isn't much that you really need to learn, but it's still difficult to perform certain combos and setups.
Go is pretty simple too. It's also one of the deepest games ever made.
SF4 has its failings, but it's not shallow by any means.
Yeah, mistaking simple for shallow is definitely a mistake. Complexity and depth are really two different things. Monopoly is more complex than Go, but you'd have to be off your nut to say that it's deeper.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Yeah, mistaking simple for shallow is definitely a mistake. Complexity and depth are really two different things. Monopoly is more complex than Go, but you'd have to be off your nut to say that it's deeper.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Dhalslim. Bison. C. Viper. Cammy. Sweet saku~chan if you're not afraid to waste some meter.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Akuma is always the right answer for any question.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Akuma is always the right answer for any question.
Akuma is always a great answer on paper...well, because he is about as resilient as a piece of paper.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Akuma is always the right answer for any question.
Akuma is pretty much correct, since the insta-teleport prevents any sort of zoning.
Next answers would probably be Dhalsim, Bison, and Gen because they all have pretty unstoppable escape options. (Well, Gen does until SSF4 comes out, anyway)
Poor Gen, your safe wakeup game is going to die a horrible death pretty soon, and I will be saddened.
Won an SF4 tournament over the weekend. It felt good.
Best part about tournaments though? Three new people all within 30 minutes who would like to host casuals at their house.
In person competition 4tw, lolz, roflcopter, <(^.^)>.
Grats Aumni. It wasn't the one in Danbury CT was it? I was tempted to make the trip out, but decided to see Avatar that afternoon instead (due to crap-ish weather outside). Also, no 360 stick.
thepassenger on
PSN: ohvermie <- ADD ME FOR STREET FIGHTING ACTION!
Why do I consistantly fall for Ryu's crossover jab-jab-jab-fireball when I should be hitting him with an upward ball, electrocuting him, or fadc-ing backwards?
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
I started out in SF4 similarly, wanting to use Honda until encountering gratuitous fireball spam. I switched to Balrog. Headbutt / TAP straight through fireballs, and all the EX rush punches can absorb 1-hit regular fireballs. Rush punches / TAP cover a lot of ground quickly too. He's not immune to being zoned, but has a much easier time going through gaps and punishing mistakes.
Posts
but sometimes it is neat because it knocks someone into the air. . .
yeah i don't get it either.
I really hope SSF4 makes it an anti-air or something at least, because damn I hate that move.
Making it easier to do moves / combos would certainly make SF more inviting to new / novice players.
So much wrong with the paragraph I put in bold. If you have poor execution in a competitive FPS you will lose every time, probably with a negative score. If you can't keep at least your macro up in an RTS then you will lose every game, probably before you get a chance to do anything. Dropping combos is barely even comparable.
I will agree that SF series probably has too many buttons, but I don't think that's a barrier, just a flaw. If you want to use VF as an example then you have half the buttons and x10 the movelist. I'm also all for combos being simpler to execute in most cases, and that's why I play more 3D fighters than 2D now -- there are more moves to think about, but the execution is very simple (this helps me a lot since I have no way of practising on my own but still like to go to tourneys on a regular basis). The notable exception is Tekken, which I still do not like, but that's just a matter of it being based squarely around doing long and boring juggles over and over again. But I also know that people who like Tekken like it because of the long juggles, so whatever.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
I was debating whether or not to pick up tekken and try to get into it (as I'm looking for another fighting game to try out), and this pushed me firmly into no longer being interested.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Actually, as an inexperienced fighting game player, I find Tekken to be quite natural. There's a shit ton of moves, but most of them are pretty much exactly what you'd expect when inputting the commands, and shift based on the situation in a way that makes sense. Personally, it really helps me that they have a button for each limb.
Alright, I need to respond to this.
It might only have 3 attack buttons and one drive button, but they amount to alot more moves not accounting specials. One button is assigned at least 3 different attacks on the ground, with the C button usually having 4 to account for a sweeping move. In the air C moves usually have 2 versions too. While for SF4 it's normally just a neutral, jump and down move with one or two moves that require forward+attack button. Though SF4 does take into account neutral jump moves.
I ask because although I'm getting the occasional victory online, 90% of the time I'm getting either slaughtered or losing by a moderate margin. I know that Rose isn't the toughest character, but I'm acutely aware it's my lack of skill holding me back rather than my choice in character.
For that matter, I've heard that a fair few of the Hard Trials are ridiculous, but if I'm going to main a character would it be worthwhile to practice the Normal Trials until I can do them without any serious struggle?
Hardest AI is just more aggressive, not exactly more challenging.
The Raid
Humans are different and playing against the AI will just lead to you learning setups and such that don't actually work against real people.
They did. Super Street Fighter II HDR misses us.
edit: which is pretty deep. The FA system that is.
Best part about tournaments though? Three new people all within 30 minutes who would like to host casuals at their house.
In person competition 4tw, lolz, roflcopter, <(^.^)>.
http://www.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=215559
Usually a 5$ buy-in for the Singles tourney that runs from around 8PM until 10-12 depending on turnout and how many setups we actually end up having. Good atmosphere at a bar with cheap drinks (I think it's 4$ beer and 6$ you call its).
We also turn it over to casuals as soon as the tournament matches are over. AT 10:30PM Tournament Wars matches start, which is at the moment a 3v3 league, next season will be SSF4 and be two man teams.
http://www.tournamentwars.com/
Shameless plug over.
Good work Aumni - I don't think I've played you yet now that I think about it.
Grats Aumni!
Do you play on PC at all? 360 is in microsoft's hands atm.
i would disagree. there are many deeper fighting games, but that doesn't mean SF4 is not deep; it's got layers of psychology, decision making, strategy, etc. it's not as complex as games like SFA3, by a long shot.
I appreciate that a certain level of execution is required for combos. When I watch high level play, I like to OOO and AHHH and the crazy links that happen. Hell, every single time I pull off Bison's c.LP, s.LP, c.MK xx Scissors combo (a not-so-difficult link) I get HUGE satisfaction.
I would hate for this game to turn into dial-a-combo like Mortal Kombat.
You're an edge camper, aren't you?
:evil:
heh, you don't have to camp edges to get fancy in Smash. Especially since jumping after them often works better.
Seriously though, SF4 is pretty "simple". There isn't much that you really need to learn, but it's still difficult to perform certain combos and setups.
SF 4 is far more complex than those.
Go is pretty simple too. It's also one of the deepest games ever made.
SF4 has its failings, but it's not shallow by any means.
Nope. I just like to float around with Zelda and shoot arrows and fireballs and teleport and kick people really really hard with her big toe.
In a more SF4 related note I still can't settle on a character. I think I'm tired of playing characters in 2D fighters that can be zoned very easily (say, Tager in BB). I liked E. Honda initially but having to fight Sagat with him is enough to make me want to give up the character. Who is really good at not being zoned in SF4?
Dhalslim. Bison. C. Viper. Cammy. Sweet saku~chan if you're not afraid to waste some meter.
Akuma is always the right answer for any question.
Akuma is always a great answer on paper...well, because he is about as resilient as a piece of paper.
he's also good at not being pressured or trapped in the corner
this is balanced by the fact that if you do get him, he is made of wet paper
edit: heyoooooo
Akuma is pretty much correct, since the insta-teleport prevents any sort of zoning.
Next answers would probably be Dhalsim, Bison, and Gen because they all have pretty unstoppable escape options. (Well, Gen does until SSF4 comes out, anyway)
Poor Gen, your safe wakeup game is going to die a horrible death pretty soon, and I will be saddened.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Why am I so terrible?