How much would "One More Patch" mean?

[John Grizzly]

You and the competitive community are in the minority. Casual players (You know the millions of people who are buying up NRS games keeping them in business) want completely new stuff. This is why the NRS business model has been so successful from a profitability stand point. What's the competitive injustice community? 5000 people? I'd bet it's probably way less than that, but compare that 5000 to the millions of copies that NRS sold for the game. Likewise with MK9. The unfortunate truth is these games are a passion and a business for these guys, and they have to balance both. Capcoms business model works for them because the street fighter series is big in Japan, they can count on decent sales numbers on every refresh.

So you don't think casual fans would be into spending say....$20 bucks a year after release for a few new characters, stages and balancing (not that casuals would even notice, really)? I'm willing to bet if a DLC for MK9 was released isn 2012 or 2013 that included Tremor, Frost, Tanya and Fujin it would have sold really well.

Honestly, though...I assume NRS knows what they're doing. MK9 sold more than any game ever, and that's mostly because of casuals. I doubt they really care all that much about how tournament viable the game is. Regardless, I do believe that updates/new content to existing games would sell well with casuals, too.

Just give me MKX so these discussions can end (for at least a month after release until they start again).

 

[juicepouch]

I just wish there is an answer for every matchup but there really isn't. I can't do anything against lex or bane, especially bane. If I score a knock down on lex before his armor and death traps go up, at least I have an oki game where he has to decide if he wants to risk a wake up. Bane just wakes up all day with no fucks given and I can't punish anything he does. I hate that there are some characters that don't even abide by the laws of the game lol. Too much easy mode with armor and safe wake-up attacks and not enough careful design imho. I love the game and I love when the matchup is fairly even, because it gives you an idea of how it could be, but then when you see a crazy bad matchup it makes you want to play something else. Let's hope mkx has fewer gimmicks

I can't stand fighting Bane or Lex as a Grundy, either. It's like they do everything Grundy does but better all the time

 

[Tony at Home]

I think you're oversimplifying what it takes to play these characters competently.

I'm not saying they're not hard to use. I'm not saying that they're OP either. I'm not saying the players who use them aren't skilled, and I'm not calling anyone a fraud.

But fighting games are made with good balance and gameplay in mind, because that leads to good sales.

DLC characters are made with being top tier in mind, because that's what leads to good DLC sales.

These two things just so happen to be in conflict with each other.

 

[juicepouch]

So you don't think casual fans would be into spending say....$20 bucks a year after release for a few new characters, stages and balancing (not that casuals would even notice, really)? I'm willing to bet if a DLC for MK9 was released isn 2012 or 2013 that included Tremor, Frost, Tanya and Fujin it would have sold really well.

Honestly, though...I assume NRS knows what they're doing. MK9 sold more than any game ever, and that's mostly because of casuals. I doubt they really care all that much about how tournament viable the game is. Regardless, I do believe that updates/new content to existing games would sell well with casuals, too.

Just give me MKX so these discussions can end (for at least a month after release until they start again).

I don't think casual fans would be more interested in super ultra mk9 than they were in IGAU in terms of sales

This is anecdotal evidence but all of my friends quit MK9 before the DLC came out, they saw the Freddy Krueger trailer, thought it was cool, and then immediately went back to not caring at all. Same with IGAU, I have about 10 friends who bought the game, they all played it for maybe a month or two, and they were gone. Even the ones who loved MMH (we're big DC fans) didn't care enough to come back because of him.

I think that new players are definitely drawn in just by the appeal of a whole new game more so than patching one they already gave up on

 

[Rude]

I'm not saying they're not hard to use. I'm not saying that they're OP either. I'm not saying the players who use them aren't skilled, and I'm not calling anyone a fraud.

But fighting games are made with good balance and gameplay in mind, because that leads to good sales.

DLC characters are made with being top tier in mind, because that's what leads to good DLC sales.

These two things just so happen to be in conflict with each other.

Who wants to pay money for shitty characters?

And by "Top tier," can we be HONEST and say Zod, Batgirl, and MMH?

Lobo and Scorpion are not top tier.

In MK9, Rain and Skarlet were not top tier. Only Kenshi and Freddy was. Let's call a spade a spade and not say ALL DLC are purposefully top tier.

 

[Rude]

I think that part of the problem this community has is that we let the perception of something dominate the reality.

Take MK9, for example. It's been said that a lot of people quit because of Kabal and Kenshi.

I ask you: How many people were playing Kabal at such a level as to 7-3/8-2 the cast?

I can think of: REO, Perfect Legend, CD Jr., Cat, SoonK, and Lulzlou? Am I forgetting anyone?

The number is even smaller for Kenshi: Pig of the Hut and Blind Man, unless there are a few others I'm missing.

That is a very small percentage when looking at the community as a whole. The chances of your average player even running int0 these people in tournament aren't extremely high. Why would people quit over characters with such small representation?

The same is true for Injustice. How many people play MMH and Batgirl at the highest level? How many High level General Zod mains can you find if you try? It's not like just anyone picks up these characters and wins tournaments with them. If they did, Floe would have won MLG, right?

So why are we taking The Prophet of Doom route with Injustice and its balance?

I think there is this idea that starts when people say, "This character is broken," or "you can't win." Other people, people of average or lesser skill see this and immediately feel as though they will never overcome the match-up. I've been guilty of this myself. Whether this is a matter of a lack of confidence or other issue is up for debate, but we all start parroting the same opinion until everyone is saying, "This character is broken" and "you can't win." We discount that in any match, at any time, anything can happen.

 

[Tony at Home]

Who wants to pay money for shitty characters?

Nobody wants to pay for shitty characters, and that's my point. It's natural for NRS to design the characters to be top tier, because no one wants to pay for a character that sucks.

I'm not saying NRS isn't making a good business decision by designing their DLC characters with fewer balance considerations than Vanilla characters, I'm just saying it's unfortunate they have to.

And by "Top tier," can we be HONEST and say Zod, Batgirl, and MMH?

Yes, we can. If 50% of all DLC characters are top tier, that's pretty goddam indicative of a pattern. Compare the percentage of DLC characters that are top tier to the percentage of non-dlc characters that are top tier, and tell me that vanilla characters and DLC characters are given the same balance considerations.

Also, it's hard to look at Zatanna and say NRS wasn't in any way at least TRYING to make her top tier. She just didn't end up that way.

Lobo and Scorpion are not top tier.

Scorpion was released completely broken (-1 flipkick lol). Yeah, they nerfed him to the Netherrealm, but not until pretty much everyone had already bought him.

In MK9, Rain and Skarlet were not top tier. Only Kenshi and Freddy was. Let's call a spade a spade and not say ALL DLC are purposefully top tier.

Rain and Skarlet weren't purposely top tier. They were accidentally-not top tier. At least for Skarlet- it's hard to look at her design and come to the conclusion NRS wasn't at least trying to make her ridiculously good. It's just that they can't always know in the end how good that character will end up being.

And given how ridiculous 50% of the other DLC characters were (Kenshi and Freddy) it's pretty hard to make the argument that NRS didn't have "make them top tier" in mind when designing DLC.

 

[Tony at Home]

I think that part of the problem this community has is that we let the perception of something dominate the reality.

Take MK9, for example. It's been said that a lot of people quit because of Kabal and Kenshi.

I ask you: How many people were playing Kabal at such a level as to 7-3/8-2 the cast?

I can think of: REO, Perfect Legend, CD Jr., Cat, SoonK, and Lulzlou? Am I forgetting anyone?

The number is even smaller for Kenshi: Pig of the Hut and Blind Man, unless there are a few others I'm missing.

That is a very small percentage when looking at the community as a whole. The chances of your average player even running int0 these people in tournament aren't extremely high. Why would people quit over characters with such small representation?

If the only reason the game isn't broken, is there aren't yet enough skilled players to show how broken it is- it's still a broken game, people just don't know it yet.

There's a quote from Mike Z (designer of Skullgirls) arguing why fighting game devs should give the players frame data, hitbox data, etc- responding to protests from some devs that giving the players this data will allow them to find exploits and broken stuff very fast, thus shortening the lifespan of the game.

"if you're game is a broken piece of crap when players eventually figure it out, it's a broken piece of crap to begin with whether they are aware of that or not"

 

[Rude]

Nobody wants to pay for shitty characters, and that's my point. It's natural for NRS to design the characters to be top tier, because no one wants to pay for a character that sucks.

I'm not saying NRS isn't making a good business decision by designing their DLC characters with fewer balance considerations than Vanilla characters, I'm just saying it's unfortunate they have to.



Yes, we can. If 50% of all DLC characters are top tier, that's pretty goddam indicative of a pattern. Compare the percentage of DLC characters that are top tier to the percentage of non-dlc characters that are top tier, and tell me that vanilla characters and DLC characters are given the same balance considerations.

Also, it's hard to look at Zatanna and say NRS wasn't in any way at least TRYING to make her top tier. She just didn't end up that way.



Scorpion was released completely broken (-1 flipkick lol). Yeah, they nerfed him to the Netherrealm, but not until pretty much everyone had already bought him.



Rain and Skarlet weren't purposely top tier. They were accidentally-not top tier. At least for Skarlet- it's hard to look at her design and come to the conclusion NRS wasn't at least trying to make her ridiculously good. It's just that they can't always know in the end how good that character will end up being.

And given how ridiculous 50% of the other DLC characters were (Kenshi and Freddy) it's pretty hard to make the argument that NRS didn't have "make them top tier" in mind when designing DLC.

50% doesn't suggest a bias toward making characters top tier. That's half. Which means half are not.

I'm sorry, but I don't think NRS goes out of their way to make game-breaking characters. I think that some concepts are stronger than others, but all DLC SHOULD be good.

 

[Rude]

If the only reason the game isn't broken, is there aren't yet enough skilled players to show how broken it is- it's still a broken game, people just don't know it yet.

There's a quote from Mike Z (designer of Skullgirls) arguing why fighting game devs should give the players frame data, hitbox data, etc- responding to protests from some devs that giving the players this data will allow them to find exploits and broken stuff very fast, thus shortening the lifespan of the game.

"if you're game is a broken piece of crap when players eventually figure it out, it's a broken piece of crap to begin with whether they are aware of that or not"

I'm not disputing Injustice being unbalanced - it is. What I am saying is that people should play it anyway, but because the most subtle effects of balance won't be experienced by your average player.

Basically: If you enjoy it, play it.
Don't let common perceptions and pressure from the community to dissuade your passion for a thing.

 

[WakeUp DP]

Can't move on. Walk speed too slow

I've been on my way since the demo and still half way....

 

[TomlulsBrady]

People are simply trying to shine light on what the problems is.

Everybody was aware about injustice movement the day the demo dropped, and its been aconstant compliant in every era of game life since than. My point is inj is over a year old and that talking point is boring because its never going to change, its paulo vision.

 

[RNLDRGN]

On the surface, it seems like one more patch would bridge the gap between the extremely competitive players who are playing to win (no pun intended) and players who have grown weary of the game because their favorite characters get destroyed by the god tiers.

What if the NRS developers announced tomorrow morning with a message as follows:

Injustice Gods Among Us: Patch 1.0whatever

MMH
(whatever nerf to teleport)
(whatever nerf to orbs)
(whatever nerf to forcepush)
(etc.)

Aquaman
(whatever nerf to anything fish and chips related)
(whatever nerf to his trait)

Batgirl
(whatever nerf to corner damage)
(whatever nerf to anything vortex related)

*insert nerfs to Bane here that would give 16bit a cry of joy*

*insert nerfs to Zod here that would make M2Dave call for 16bit's job*

*insert buffs to shitters here*

*insert walkspeed buff here*

-Would this bring Injustice back to 128 man brackets?
-Would the other side of the NRS community rise and support Injustice in a positive light, because NRS would (hypothetically) show us that they "support their games past a year?"

Keep in mind, I have no insider information. I am not using my psychic powers to predict this crazy request from NRS. I'm just a regular dude who wants to spark conversation.

Most of all, could this hypothetical, fantasy dream of a patch bridge the gap of us "not being able to play two games at the same time?" Upon MKX's release, would this patch that should imbue a sigh of relief to players that dislike certain aspects of this game (walkspeed, Aquaman, etc.) keep us supporting Injustice?

TLDR: How much would we actually support Injustice if "One More Patch" ever happens? What would tourney numbers look like?

I think a patch along these lines would help a ton. If this game was even MORE balanced (I think it's already decently balanced) we would regain all of the marginal players--then we would regain some of the even more borderline players once they hear that NRS is still supporting this game and it is VERY balanced.

However, I'd make sure the balance patch was very minor. Small nerfs to S Tiers and small buffs to C/D tiers. Something along the lines:

MMH:
-Builds slightly less meter.
-Regular orbs less + on block.
-Slight increase to trait cooldown.

Aquaman:
-Trident rush less chip, less meter build.
-Very small increase to trait cooldown.

Batgirl:
-Bolo does less blockstun.
-Add a couple of startup frames to either her low or overhead starter.
-Cut down her corner damage to 46%-48% range, 54% is excessive.

Random tiny buffs to Shazam's teleport, Joker's trait, Scorpion's damage, etc.

Slight buff to walkspeed.

Smaller damage to OTG interactables (if possible).

Characters are less grab-invincible while doing attacks.

Game becomes ridiculously balanced. Seriously. They did a great job with the last patch, I just think the top 2-3 need small nerfs and the bottom 2-3 need small buffs. Everything else can probably be adapted to.

 

[Tony at Home]

50% doesn't suggest a bias toward making characters top tier. That's half. Which means half are not.

I'm sorry, but I don't think NRS goes out of their way to make game-breaking characters. I think that some concepts are stronger than others, but all DLC SHOULD be good.

It does actually.

*social statistics major powers activate!*

If I'm using a measure such as gamma or phi to test if a pattern is occurring, I don't just use the percentage of DLC characters who are top tier in a vacuum, that percentage is graded based on the relative percentage of other all samples.

Basically, I would be doing what is called PRE or "Proportional Error reduction" that is "How many fewer mistakes do we make if we take a pattern into account?" If we make a certain amount of fewer mistakes or more, based on a given alpha level, we can assume the pattern holds based on that Alpha level (a traditional Alpha level is .05, meaning "with 95 % certainty")

So let's say we have a top 10 list.

IF we assume that a DLC character has a EQUAL chance of being top 10 as a non-dlc character, we will have the following top 10 (also, we will be using the status of the DLC characters AT THEIR RELEASE because this is when most are bought):

24 starting characters
6 dlc characters (scorpion, lobo, zatanna, martian, batgirl, zod)

Easy division here. There are 4 times as many starting characters as DLC, hence we can expect 4 times as many vanilla characters as DLC characters in the top 10.

Expected percent for vanilla: 80% top 10 occupation
Expected percent for DLC: 20 % top 10 occupation

Given Scorpion (on release), Martian, Batgirl, Zod are top tier:

Given percent for vanilla: 60% top 10 occupation
Given percent for DLC: 40% top 10 occupation

The only thing preventing me from turning this into a decisive PRE measure, is the small size of the sample. Even if I included the MK characters, I would be about 30 character samples short of getting a good gamma.


HOWEVER assuming the next game follows the same pattern as Injustice for the top 10 measure I listed above. I would conclusively get a gamma that refutes the negative hypothesis at a .05 alpha level, and could say with 95% certainty the following:

"DLC characters are more likely to be top tier then non-DLC characters by virtue of them being DLC rather than vanilla"

So balls in NRS's court on this one. If they release another game with DLC characters as far above the roster as they are now, I can litterally, mathematically prove my point (with 95% certainty due to alpha level)

 

[bloodsport]

too little too late is what it would mean

 

[Red Reaper]

If Grundy had less death matchups, I would play more often.

If Grundy had it any easier, I wouldn't play as often.

 

[Error]

Who wants to pay money for shitty characters?

And by "Top tier," can we be HONEST and say Zod, Batgirl, and MMH?

Lobo and Scorpion are not top tier.

In MK9, Rain and Skarlet were not top tier. Only Kenshi and Freddy was. Let's call a spade a spade and not say ALL DLC are purposefully top tier.

Skarlet was broken tier when she was released, and I remember that the universal walk speed nerf greatly affected Rain who was potentially high tier.

 

[Tony at Home]

Also, because I forgot to mention, the lambda level of my previous calculation is .5 (only applies to the Injustice, didn't count MK)

This indicates an EXTREMELY strong relationship.

HOWEVER, because the sample size is so small, it fails the chi square test (lambda is a PRE measure, chi-square is a significance measure, you need both to make a statistical statement), hence I can't state the relationship as a fact.

If they were to release separate games with the roster size of Injustice 3 or 4 times, I'd have a big enough sample size (90 or 120), then I would get a chi-square level that let's me say with certainty that there is a 95% chance DLC characters are designed to be better than Vanilla characters on purpose.

 

[Zoidberg747]

So superman and back adam weren't top tier pre patch? What am I missing here?

I must have misread what you wrote. I thought you meant the same characters have been dominating since the beginning, but I see you just mean the top tiers. I find that kind of redundant since the top tiers almost always do better in any fighting game, but I digress. My bad for misunderstanding.

 

[Rickyraws]

killer frost too, such an uninteresting and severely limited playstyle, martian is rewarding and has tons of options, he simply needs to be rid of that ghastly overhead teleport and he can become a pure spacing character, atleast his design is interesting. doomsday is cookie cutter and the most formulaic retarded non spacing oriented character ever created, aquaman doesn't do anything with water and his trait his the dumbest idea ever (made of water so he's slippery!!! durr), green lantern can summon anything in the universe and his best move is a leg and all he does are rockets, flash should be hit and run, not hit once and die, and batgirl is simply a vortex oculd have any gadget in the batcave to have fun with, she could be like injustice vega or gen and be all over the map being a little bitch, or she could not be in the game at all. and SCORPION is self explanatory

I agree with that. Killer Frost, good as she is, has seen less growth than other characters through the year due to her design. Though I feel Doomsday is a great design for a fighting game. He's an in your face character with an advancing special that can go through projectiles. He deals low damage, but can deal a lot of it quick. If you try to back up from him in the mid range game, you'll back yourself into the corner, where he excels most. He's got a trait that increases his bullying playstyle, and a dash that puts him right back in your grill even if he doesn't use his advancing special. He's an in your face character that can really get in your face. While players may play him brain dead, I think design wise, that's pretty damn awesome.

 

[THTB]

I'm seriously going to wonder what happens when some of the same situations pop up with MKX, like really powerful top tiers JUST LIKE THE PAST 2 GAMES, or people having problems with mobility.

 

[CCVengeance]

Personal view incoming:
Personally speaking my biggest gripe with Injustice is not balance or its poor design. Third Strike is probabpy my favorite fighter and it had both of these problems (The m3chanic and design of the game itself conspired against poor Remy). I have lots of fun with the game, I guess, but I cannot help be cynical about it because I think its mediocre or decent at best. I Honestly hope, envision, that MKX can be better in both balance, which I just stated is something that cannot bw helped, and design. Overall speed and fixes to interactables is a step in the right direction but with the need to potenciallybbalance 3 versions of 3 dozen characters we may b3 heading towards that same direction.

Back to Injustice, one more patch can only help the current community. A patch is not gonna bring hundreds ofmplayers that either dropped the game or ignored it in the first place. Essentially, the game will always have balance issues and even in the chance they get a balance rhat makes people jizz the guys who dont play wont play becuase of the overall design in the gam3 which I agree is seemly faulty or in a sense unappeling.

 

[Eldriken]

I agree with that. Killer Frost, good as she is, has seen less growth than other characters through the year due to her design. Though I feel Doomsday is a great design for a fighting game. He's an in your face character with an advancing special that can go through projectiles. He deals low damage, but can deal a lot of it quick. If you try to back up from him in the mid range game, you'll back yourself into the corner, where he excels most. He's got a trait that increases his bullying playstyle, and a dash that puts him right back in your grill even if he doesn't use his advancing special. He's an in your face character that can really get in your face. While players may play him brain dead, I think design wise, that's pretty damn awesome.

I loooooove you.

 

[deg222]

Nerf MMH, Aquaman, and Batgirl so I can play Zatanna full time

Oh and make Zatanna's MB mutli kick do the same chip as Aquaman's trident rush

 

[shaowebb]

It'd be good to restir interest but it'd honestly take a "super edition" to rekindle 128 man brackets and such IMO. Best to just go in on MKX if you were in charge at NRS and plan for a full content sequel later down the line than to push further at something that did well enough.