What's new

NRS has never made a bad game

SaltShaker

In Zoning We Trust
That's not what I'm saying though, of course I can understand all of that. I did misspeak a little when I said MKX is better than Injustice because the roster is more balanced. The point I was trying to make is that, let's say MKX had the exact same qualities that you just described for Injustice, but someone said Injustice is a good game and MKX is an ok or bad game because it has a run button and the interactables are blockable. What they're saying is that they just don't enjoy MKX for its few differences from Injustice, but comparing the objective qualities of the two games like balance, content, netcode, character variation, etc. the games are both good. I can understand why people prefer MK9 over MKX, but considering how terrible the balance was, which is a factually bad quality that hinders the gameplay, it is not reasonable to say MK9 is a better game than MKX. I don't know about Injustice because I never played it or followed its scene, but as far as MKX and MK9 go, you simply cannot say MK9 is a better game.
So you're basically saying MKX is unarguably better than MK9 then? Mechanics and physics wise you still cannot state this as an "objective fact" because you're stating your preferences of modified mechanics as a fact. MKX may be a more polished game than MK9 or other things of that nature because there's no meter gain glitch, 1p advantage, etc, but the gameplay cannot factually be better because gameplay perspective is an opinion.

I can make the statements of "MKX being an overdosed offensively orientated game, with near non existent AA's, safe fast half screen advancing normals, near cast wide 50/50 starters with many being safe, corner of death, Jip's that hit you 3/4 of the screen away, + on block pressure and looping cancel block pressure being the norm, useless block breakers, lacking WU game, severe lack of defensive options in general, viable Chip damage pressure that can take 25%+ health for two bars while blocking or combo'd you for letting go by multiple cast members, and keeping interactables makes MKX inferior to MK9". One can say if MK9 was on the FGC circuit they would play the "better game" but MKX is on the circuit right now. Like how Tekken 5DR is better than all Tekken's after even though it's older. T5 DR may not be as polished as later Tekkens, but it was the GOAT Tekken by most who played it. Some people would likely prefer "MK9 HD" for new gen over MKX because of gameplay mechanics.

Your only response to such a statement can be "you're wrong because in MKX [insert]", but that would be you literally arguing your subjective opinion about the game mechanics just like the person's subjective opinion you'd be discussing it with.
 

dribirut

BLAK FELOW
Predator will get worse because he also thrives on block pressure in the Hish Qu Ten variation if I'm not mistaken. So does Takeda, and so does Quan with his MB rune. And don't want to deal with his hard to blockables? Block break the first one so you don't have to block the second one. Summoner needs to be nerfed anyways. 1 bar block breakers would improve the game's balance and fun levels far more than they would to hurt it, and it's a very simple change. Tremor, Tanya, Predator, Tremor, DF Liu Kang, A List Johnny, Takeda, Shinnok, etc. all become more balanced instantly with this change. It also nerfs grabs since grabbing your opponent gives them a ton of meter which can then be used to block break, so pressure characters like Lao will no longer be grabbing as often because they know they're giving them free meter to get out of their pressure. 1 bar block breakers also make comebacks much more do-able and they will also help matches last longer which people have complained about. It's obviously a necessary change for this game.
Hqt does not thrive off block pressure at all though. And takeda ronin which imo is by far his best does not Either. Althiugh i do agree block pressure is annoying.. I really do get what youre saying but imo you will just make one dumb thing worse and make the other dumb thing (50/50s) stronger. This would be a huge buff to quan and predator in particular
 
So you're basically saying MKX is unarguably better than MK9 then? Mechanics and physics wise you still cannot state this as an "objective fact" because you're stating your preferences of modified mechanics as a fact. MKX may be a more polished game than MK9 or other things of that nature because there's no meter gain glitch, 1p advantage, etc, but the gameplay cannot factually be better because gameplay perspective is an opinion.

I can make the statements of "MKX being an overdosed offensively orientated game, with near non existent AA's, safe fast half screen advancing normals, near cast wide 50/50 starters with many being safe, corner of death, Jip's that hit you 3/4 of the screen away, + on block pressure and looping cancel block pressure being the norm, useless block breakers, lacking WU game, severe lack of defensive options in general, viable Chip damage pressure that can take 25%+ health for two bars while blocking or combo'd you for letting go by multiple cast members, and keeping interactables makes MKX inferior to MK9". One can say if MK9 was on the FGC circuit they would play the "better game" but MKX is on the circuit right now. Like how Tekken 5DR is better than all Tekken's after even though it's older. T5 DR may not be as polished as later Tekkens, but it was the GOAT Tekken by most who played it. Some people would likely prefer "MK9 HD" for new gen over MKX because of gameplay mechanics.

Your only response to such a statement can be "you're wrong because in MKX [insert]", but that would be you literally arguing your subjective opinion about the game mechanics just like the person's subjective opinion you'd be discussing it with.
Those are all rational reasons why someone would not like MKX, but others may not mind those things so much. They're not objectively bad things about MKX. Yes, anti-airing with normals in this game is very hard, but that could be partially attributed to the game design choice that armored anti-airing specials should be the go-to anti-airing tools. Yeah there are lots of 50/50s and crazy dirt, but because everyone has it, people may feel it's fine, just a different design choice. Basically, arguments can be made why those things don't make MKX a bad game or a worse game than Injustice or another game without those issues. One could say they don't like MKX because it has this this and this, and someone else could say they like MKX because it has those exact same things, or they at least don't look at it as something that hurts the game's quality so much.

But when it comes to game balance, netcode, content, and things like that, they can't really be argued with. If someone said MK9 was a bad game because it had terrible game balance, no one could say in response that they think MK9 is a good game because of that very same terrible balance. If we're talking about a fighting game's overall quality, yes, in my and your opinion it shouldn't be based around guessing games and block pressure, but regardless of opinion, we know for a fact that a game's character balance can be objectively bad, as can the netcode, as can its stability in terms of bugs and glitches. These are objectively bad qualities that can't be argued with while a game's design in terms of its mechanics CAN be argued with to be good or bad. That's the difference. Therefore someone could make the argument that MK9 is worse than MKX because it has more objectively bad qualities than MKX does even if MKX has more subjectively bad qualities than MK9 does in their opinion.
 
Last edited:
Hqt does not thrive off block pressure at all though. And takeda ronin which imo is by far his best does not Either. Althiugh i do agree block pressure is annoying.. I really do get what youre saying but imo you will just make one dumb thing worse and make the other dumb thing (50/50s) stronger. This would be a huge buff to quan and predator in particular
Doesn't he though with those laser cancel mixups? And doesn't Ronin Takeda as well with his block pressure mixups? Will he call back the swords or won't he? Will he do this string or that string? Will he delay this string or will he not delay this string? Or maybe he'll grab? It's the same thing. It might buff them but it will at least nerf them equally, so they'll either stay top tier or get dropped lower, it's hard to say. If the former though, then they would just need to be nerfed; that's not an argument why block breakers shouldn't be a bar.
 

virtiqaL

Noob
It was only matter of time before this turned into another "Let's talk about what we don't like about MKX" thread.

We need to make an official "MKX Sucks" thread and keep it all in there.
 

Somea2V

Thread Referee
The game really didn't cater for it well though given the horrific movement speed
The game having "terrible" movement speed would actually make spacing and footsies that much more important. Please, continue to dismantle your own talking points. We kind of expect it now.
 

Slips

Feared by dragons. Desired by virgins.
You cannot claim on one hand that the "objective qualities" of a game make it better, while on the other hand claim that the qualities that one would state make the other game better are "a preference". All that shows is that you are trying to pass off your bias opinion as fact.

For example, I think Injustice is a far superior game than MKX. Why? Gameplay mechanics, the same argument you are using to call MKX an "objectively superior game". To me, Injustice is "superior" not just because it was twice as fun, but because-

-AA's were stronger
-back to block is better
-there were MUCH better defense options
-MUCH better zoning
-gameplay strategies and tactics were much more diverse, the game was a lot more balanced in terms of effective playstyles
-much less reliant on 50/50's and +on block pressure
-Wake up game was much better
-Corner game was much more balanced
-Much less armor made the neutral stronger and smarter
-Block breakers were MUCH more viable
-Game speed was more in tune with the FGC, as in you could have both fast paced and slow paced matches. Time outs happened occasionally at all levels of play.
-Less corner carrying combos across the cast added more midscreen fights and made the corner feel more like a reward than a "almost every round" occurrence.
-etc

I can list all of those in game mechanics as clear reasons why Injustice is significantly better than MKX. Those are the reasons why I think Injustice was, and is a better game, significantly better. If you say "no it isn't" then you cannot "objectively and factually" prove why my "preferring" those mechanics over the ones in MKX is wrong due to MKX being "objectively superior" because I can just as easily say Injustice was objectively superior but people "prefer" Mortal Kombat.


I want to go over these.

-AA's were stronger - Seems the same to me. Characters have good AA in Injustice but some jump attacks were very strong when spaced right. Deathstroke j3, Green Arrow j3, Harley and Batgirl j2, Catwoman j2, Joker j3, Lex j3, WoWo j2. This trend continues in MKX.

-back to block is better - That's pure preference

-there were MUCH better defense options - I don't know about 'MUCH'. The defensive options are the same; backdash, armor, poke, push block. I think backdash is toned down in MKX from Injustice since it requires stamina, you don't always have armor, some characters don't have quick pokes and push block is obviously better in Injustice. I would argue though MKX has the delayed get up system to offset that.

-MUCH better zoning - Agreed

-gameplay strategies and tactics were much more diverse, the game was a lot more balanced in terms of effective playstyles - More diverse yes. Balanced no.

-much less reliant on 50/50's and +on block pressure - What? Injustice is nothing but 50/50's with the exception of throws and Aquaman Trident Rush. There isn't block pressure because that's not part of the game design outside of Batman and maybe Doomsday.

-Wake up game was much better - Debatable and character dependent from game to game. Tell that to Catwoman, Raven, Aquaman, and Batman

-Corner game was much more balanced - Uh I think you're forgetting about Bane, Doomsday, WoWo, Batgirl, and Superman corner ridiculousness

-Much less armor made the neutral stronger and smarter - Really? Cause Doomsday and Killer Frost neutral was honest? Some characters had silly b3~mb moves like Aquaman, Catwoman, Superman Sinestro, ect.

-Block breakers were MUCH more viable - Agreed

-Game speed was more in tune with the FGC, as in you could have both fast paced and slow paced matches. Time outs happened occasionally at all levels of play - As someone who was working at NRS at the time, all you ever heard about is how incredibly slow-paced the game was. Now all of a sudden it was in tune with the FGC? Amazing how that opinion has drastically changed.

-Less corner carrying combos across the cast added more midscreen fights and made the corner feel more like a reward than a "almost every round" occurrence. - Agreed.

So out of all of your gripes about why you like Injustice better than MKX I can probably only give in to about 4 or 5 of them. The rest are your personal preference.
 
Last edited:

dribirut

BLAK FELOW
I would do This to balance:

Universally buff d2

Make stages a loooooot wider..

Make block breakers one bar and drain one bar of stamina with slower recovery as well

Alllow to njp cancel out of run

And give more recovery frames on whiffed air normals upon landing
 

Wigy

There it is...
The game having "terrible" movement speed would actually make spacing and footsies that much more important. Please, continue to dismantle your own talking points. We kind of expect it now.
Lol what? Slow walk speed and lack of dash cancels made for bad potential footsies. You can't just state your opinion as fact and say im stupid because my opinion doesn't fall in line with yours. Terrible non existant footsies was a common complaint for this game. The lack of movement speed meant pokes were primarily used after a blockstring or as a mixup when you're already in somebody face.

Mk9 cd jr tyrant jax mirror, find me one game with footsies that level.

Please, i dare you.
 
I would do This to balance:

Universally buff d2

Make stages a loooooot wider..

Make block breakers one bar and drain one bar of stamina with slower recovery as well

Alllow to njp cancel out of run

And give more recovery frames on whiffed air normals upon landing
Making stages wider would not work because some characters' balance are entirely based around being able to get their opponent in the corner like GM Sub Zero. There's nothing wrong with it being easy to get your opponent into the corner as long as there's a good way to get out. With 1 bar block breakers added to all the options we have now, there would definitely be enough ways get out of the corner. Besides, making stages wider couldn't and wouldn't be done anyway. But I like your idea on giving whiffed air normals more recovery. As for the rest, I don't know, I'd have to see some good arguments presented for them.
 

SaltShaker

In Zoning We Trust
I want to go over these.

-AA's were stronger - Seems the same to me. Characters have good AA in Injustice but some jump attacks were very strong when spaced right. Deathstroke j3, Green Arrow j3, Harley and Batgirl j2, Catwoman j2, Joker j3, Lex j3, WoWo j2. This trend continues in MKX.

-back to block is better - That's pure preference

-there were MUCH better defense options - I don't know about 'MUCH'. The defensive options are the same; backdash, armor, poke, push block. I think backdash is toned down in MKX from Injustice since it requires stamina, you don't always have armor, some characters don't have quick pokes and push block is obviously better in Injustice. I would argue though MKX has the delayed get up system to offset that.

-MUCH better zoning - Agreed

-gameplay strategies and tactics were much more diverse, the game was a lot more balanced in terms of effective playstyles - More diverse yes. Balanced no.

-much less reliant on 50/50's and +on block pressure - What? Injustice is nothing but 50/50's with the exception of throws and Aquaman Trident Rush. There isn't block pressure because that's not part of the game design outside of Batman and maybe Doomsday.

-Wake up game was much better - Debatable and character dependent from game to game. Tell that to Catwoman, Raven, Aquaman, and Batman

-Corner game was much more balanced - Uh I think you're forgetting about Bane, Doomsday, WoWo, Batgirl, and Superman corner ridiculousness

-Much less armor made the neutral stronger and smarter - Really? Cause Doomsday and Killer Frost neutral was honest? Some characters had silly b3~mb moves like Aquaman, Catwoman, Superman Sinestro, ect.

-Block breakers were MUCH more viable - Agreed

-Game speed was more in tune with the FGC, as in you could have both fast paced and slow paced matches. Time outs happened occasionally at all levels of play - As someone who was working at NRS at the time, all you ever heard about is how incredibly slow-paced the game was. Now all of a sudden it was in tune with the FGC? Amazing how that opinion has drastically changed.

-Less corner carrying combos across the cast added more midscreen fights and made the corner feel more like a reward than a "almost every round" occurrence. - Agreed.

So out of all of your gripes about why you like Injustice better than MKX I can probably only give in to about 4 or 5 of them. The rest are your personal preference.
I'm gonna get back to you later tonight. Posting this reply so I can remind myself when I check back lol.
 

SaltShaker

In Zoning We Trust
Had to get my B-List Cage kicked in for a bit but I'm back home now lol.

I want to go over these.

-AA's were stronger - Seems the same to me. Characters have good AA in Injustice but some jump attacks were very strong when spaced right. Deathstroke j3, Green Arrow j3, Harley and Batgirl j2, Catwoman j2, Joker j3, Lex j3, WoWo j2. This trend continues in MKX.

-back to block is better - That's pure preference

-there were MUCH better defense options - I don't know about 'MUCH'. The defensive options are the same; backdash, armor, poke, push block. I think backdash is toned down in MKX from Injustice since it requires stamina, you don't always have armor, some characters don't have quick pokes and push block is obviously better in Injustice. I would argue though MKX has the delayed get up system to offset that.

-MUCH better zoning - Agreed

-gameplay strategies and tactics were much more diverse, the game was a lot more balanced in terms of effective playstyles - More diverse yes. Balanced no.

-much less reliant on 50/50's and +on block pressure - What? Injustice is nothing but 50/50's with the exception of throws and Aquaman Trident Rush. There isn't block pressure because that's not part of the game design outside of Batman and maybe Doomsday.

-Wake up game was much better - Debatable and character dependent from game to game. Tell that to Catwoman, Raven, Aquaman, and Batman

-Corner game was much more balanced - Uh I think you're forgetting about Bane, Doomsday, WoWo, Batgirl, and Superman corner ridiculousness

-Much less armor made the neutral stronger and smarter - Really? Cause Doomsday and Killer Frost neutral was honest? Some characters had silly b3~mb moves like Aquaman, Catwoman, Superman Sinestro, ect.

-Block breakers were MUCH more viable - Agreed

-Game speed was more in tune with the FGC, as in you could have both fast paced and slow paced matches. Time outs happened occasionally at all levels of play - As someone who was working at NRS at the time, all you ever heard about is how incredibly slow-paced the game was. Now all of a sudden it was in tune with the FGC? Amazing how that opinion has drastically changed.

-Less corner carrying combos across the cast added more midscreen fights and made the corner feel more like a reward than a "almost every round" occurrence. - Agreed.

So out of all of your gripes about why you like Injustice better than MKX I can probably only give in to about 4 or 5 of them. The rest are your personal preference.
Not gonna mention the points you agreed on for obvious reasons.

-I would say AA's were stronger mainly because you were getting cast wide full combos on reaction with them. Both games have some stupid air normals, like the ones you listed in Injustice vs the Kotal/Lao/Sonya etc Ji's of MKX. A huge difference between the two games was that in Injustice D2's could consistently combo many ji's on reaction, where as in MKX you have to block many Ji's in that "jump distance" or you can get clean and consistent D2's but they give 14% damage instead. So you're best bets AA'ing in MKX is "risky normal that leads to combo or 14% D2" unless you have EX Spin or such, and in Injustice it's "D2 when at proper range for full combo and block when at bad ranges" unless you have EX Raven Lift or such. You don't really "fear" jumping in MKX for the most part, but I played Injustice with Dula and Coach Steve a week ago and within a few games I barely jumped lol. I forgot what that fear of jumping felt like.

-This I agree. Personally I wish MK would get rid of the block button since I'm so used to back blocking in most fighters, but I agree this is pure preference. I can picture someone who plays 90% MK over a long period of time hating back to block so it's purely subjective.

-I guess I would say much better defensive options because of the offensive tools characters have. As in, where guys like Liu have looping block string +pressure, Cage with his cancel +pressure, Erron/QC/etc style 50/50 starters that end + on block, accompanied with the usual MK style of chip damage, faster pace, etc, the defensive options weren't equally beefed up to compensate. They were left "as is" or worse, which in turn creates a bigger gap between offense and defense. In Injustice some character like Flash had insane offense, but then someone like Aquaman had insane defense. Backdashes are only good on some characters and require half a bar of stamina, and like you already said pokes and block breaker were better. I miss the old block breaker more than anything in the game. Having the regular combo break back, delayed WU's, and blockable interactables (though some of them helped you throw them repeatedly for defense) are better defensive tools in MKX, but it doesn't offset the inferiority of defensive tools as a whole in comparison to Injustice and what you had to face.

-This one I have a hard time with. I also agree that it was more diverse, but less balanced. Though I'm of the stance that will accept less balance for more diversity. Give me a Top 8 cast of "All Everything" MMH, "Pressure" Flash/Batgirl/Bane, "Defense/Zoning" Sinestro/Aquaman/Zod" and well rounded Superman with some decent mid tiers and I don't mind having a few useless Cyborg/Arrow/Joker characters at the bottom. The diversity of playstyles available outweighs the level of balance in the game as long as the game isn't imbalanced.

-Yea MK's on block pressure is clear design. It works for MK but not sure it would have for Inj. Most people didn't have Batgirl/Frost-esque 50/50's standing in front of you like "will I do B2 or B3". The F3 was so slow and reactable that it was fair. Stuff like crossup 50/50's are more of a fighting game in general mechanic so I don't mean those types of mixups, or Bane making you guess between low or CMD Grab, but stuff like string starting 50/50's among so many cast members isn't. I remember many complaints about Injustice having too many 50/50's compared to MK9, but then they amplified it in MKX and no one remembers the original complaints. Someone put a list together in a thread a while back that had all but like 4 characters in the entire game had at least one variation capable of combo starting 50/50's in the neutral. Part of the reason the comeback factor is so big in this game. Unless I'm remembering wrong, I don't think half of the cast had strings that started OH and Low, let alone 90% of the roster. I guess it can be argued as a good thing, but I would argue that less simplistic ways to start a combo when facing each other makes the game better overall.

-Kind of true. I main'd Raven the entire Inj run, and the most difficult thing I experienced was WU's. But I was at least able to make a risky option at times. In MKX if you have no meter you're forced to hold godly chip against some characters or a 50/50. If you have bad WUs the same applies. If I'm Raven with no meter I can block a string or mixup and get my turn, or not block it and get hit. In MKX if I have sucky WU's or no meter I can block a string but lose 10-15% health before I have an option, block a 50/50 string that can be made + by some characters, or get hit into combos. It's like falling off the roof of a house or a building.

-I'll take this one back. Injustice had an equally ridiculous corner game. You're right.

-i wrote out a pretty long section here only to realize towards the end reading what I wrote that you are right. Armor is actually better utilized and more strategic in MKX than in Injustice. Once I was writing it out I realized MKX did the best out of the three games in the armor department. Only wish they would maybe scale WU damage on armor'd WU's but other than that it's as well done as possible. The normals on the other hand should never have turned into long ranged fast advancing safe strings like D'Vorah's F1, Cassie B1, Kotal, Jin, Jax, etc that pretty much have minimal to no risk and high rewards.

-That's funny but you're right. I remember plenty of people saying the game was "too slow". I was one of the few that felt it was better that way and I even defended the non Lex walk speed but was on an island. I can't argue this point to much because I'm probably in the minority still, and I have no idea how they possibly could "slow" the game down given its mechanics so I'm willing to accept this for what it is.


Also, always good discussion when we talk games. Helps bridge the gap between the games and I always come away with something after.
 

SaltShaker

In Zoning We Trust
Those are all rational reasons why someone would not like MKX, but others may not mind those things so much. They're not objectively bad things about MKX. Yes, anti-airing with normals in this game is very hard, but that could be partially attributed to the game design choice that armored anti-airing specials should be the go-to anti-airing tools. Yeah there are lots of 50/50s and crazy dirt, but because everyone has it, people may feel it's fine, just a different design choice. Basically, arguments can be made why those things don't make MKX a bad game or a worse game than Injustice or another game without those issues. One could say they don't like MKX because it has this this and this, and someone else could say they like MKX because it has those exact same things, or they at least don't look at it as something that hurts the game's quality so much.

But when it comes to game balance, netcode, content, and things like that, they can't really be argued with. If someone said MK9 was a bad game because it had terrible game balance, no one could say in response that they think MK9 is a good game because of that very same terrible balance. If we're talking about a fighting game's overall quality, yes, in my and your opinion it shouldn't be based around guessing games and block pressure, but regardless of opinion, we know for a fact that a game's character balance can be objectively bad, as can the netcode, as can its stability in terms of bugs and glitches. These are objectively bad qualities that can't be argued with while a game's design in terms of its mechanics CAN be argued with to be good or bad. That's the difference. Therefore someone could make the argument that MK9 is worse than MKX because it has more objectively bad qualities than MKX does even if MKX has more subjectively bad qualities than MK9 does in their opinion.
Agree with the 1st paragraph.

The 2nd somewhat. Something like "which game is more balanced" is clearly MKX, but something like say "which has better zoning" is clearly MK9. So if I'm a player who prefers to play a game with strong zoning it would be a factor in thinking which game is better. It may be a "fact" that MK9 has better zoning, but that "fact" cannot prove that better zoning in MK9 makes it a better game because people's opinion of a "better game" will always be subjective. If you ask me how much I paid for MKX I can prove it. If you ask if I watched WWE PPV last night I can prove it. If I tell you MKX is better than MK9 and Inj you cannot "prove" it, you can at best explain the reasons why you "think" it is the best game. You can list many reasons like no meter glitch, variation system, smoother more polished game, etc, but that still cannot define the game as "objectively factually" better when you're rating "fun factor". The only way it could be objectively better is if every single attribute of the entire game was a complete upgrade over MK9, but some are and some aren't. More are than aren't. If 10 things are better in MKX, and 5 things are better in MK9, it wouldn't be proof because it's still player dependent. Another person with a different perspective could prefer one or two elements of MK9 so much that it would outweigh the entire game of MKX in their eyes. Then they can say "how can it be better without [insert] which was the best thing in a NRS game to date?" and it would be impossible to "prove" that wrong.
 
MKX is a better game than Injustice and MK9 if only for the fact that it's much more balanced. The main problem with the game (50/50s and block pressure being overpowered) would be easily solved by making block breakers 1 bar. You'd probably go from saying it's ok to agreeing that it's the best NRS game yet.
that wouldn't solve anything, nobody uses block breaker
 
Agree with the 1st paragraph.

The 2nd somewhat. Something like "which game is more balanced" is clearly MKX, but something like say "which has better zoning" is clearly MK9. So if I'm a player who prefers to play a game with strong zoning it would be a factor in thinking which game is better. It may be a "fact" that MK9 has better zoning, but that "fact" cannot prove that better zoning in MK9 makes it a better game because people's opinion of a "better game" will always be subjective. If you ask me how much I paid for MKX I can prove it. If you ask if I watched WWE PPV last night I can prove it. If I tell you MKX is better than MK9 and Inj you cannot "prove" it, you can at best explain the reasons why you "think" it is the best game. You can list many reasons like no meter glitch, variation system, smoother more polished game, etc, but that still cannot define the game as "objectively factually" better when you're rating "fun factor". The only way it could be objectively better is if every single attribute of the entire game was a complete upgrade over MK9, but some are and some aren't. More are than aren't. If 10 things are better in MKX, and 5 things are better in MK9, it wouldn't be proof because it's still player dependent. Another person with a different perspective could prefer one or two elements of MK9 so much that it would outweigh the entire game of MKX in their eyes. Then they can say "how can it be better without [insert] which was the best thing in a NRS game to date?" and it would be impossible to "prove" that wrong.
That's the gist of what I'm saying. I didn't mean to say that MKX is objectively better than Injustice or MK9. What I meant was that due to MKX having far better balance, which is an objectively good quality in the game that MK9 and Injustice didn't have, it is hard to argue that MK9 and Injustice are better games from a factual, unbiased standpoint. If MKX had much better netcode than IGAU and MK9, it would be easier to make this point since that's an extra objectively good quality that it would have on its side. If someone prefers MK9 or Injustice to MKX because of their game design then I understand, but saying MKX is bad while saying the other 2 are good despite how objectively bad they were in terms of balance and arguably other areas is just too much of a stretch in my opinion.
 

SaltShaker

In Zoning We Trust
That's the gist of what I'm saying. I didn't mean to say that MKX is objectively better than Injustice or MK9. What I meant was that due to MKX having far better balance, which is an objectively good quality in the game that MK9 and Injustice didn't have, it is hard to argue that MK9 and Injustice are better games from a factual, unbiased standpoint. If MKX had much better netcode than IGAU and MK9, it would be easier to make this point since that's an extra objectively good quality that it would have on its side. If someone prefers MK9 or Injustice to MKX because of their game design then I understand, but saying MKX is bad while saying the other 2 are good despite how objectively bad they were in terms of balance and arguably other areas is just too much of a stretch in my opinion.
Ah I see what you are saying now. I can agree with this. I know someone said it recently but most of the people who call it "bad" likely play mostly online. I've given it my own fair share of criticism but the game overall is really, really good offline. I wouldn't say it's the clear cut best game because I think it's debatable with Injustice, but I do think MKX is a clear step up from MK9 as an overall game.
 
I don t understand why people say you can t anti air on reaction I anti air on reaction online and I m not even a great player and I can get 32% off my anti airs with one bar
 

shezy

Noob
I agree with you brother what a fuck is so special about kung lao anyway and I hate the fucking character, again he is a top tier in MKX