I mean, I get what you're saying tho. But then use that perspective in this situation:
Apparently, REO has been bodying everyone with shazam. Is shazam top 5?
Mr Aquaman, who is the Ares of the world, was bodying people with PRE PATCH Ares. Did that make Ares top 5?
Same thing with Revolver and his sexy lexy.
Get my point?
That shows 2 things: REO, Mr Aquaman and Revolver are good players using unknown characters. The fact that they are good + the fact that no one knows the matchup = people getting bodied for free. Which doesn't mean Shazam is top tier but means Shazam has things going for him that not a lot of people know about.
Which is why taking tiers seriously weeks after a big patch or 5 months after game release is pretty silly. Considering the fact that we barely know anything about half the cast. We are only pretending we know characters based on our online and offline experience. But LBSH we don't know shit. The only thing we think we can call with confidence is the top 10 characters in the game based on the popularity of characters, who the top players choose to main and the tourney results.
But the only way to know for sure if Ares or Lex is bottom, mid or top 10 is if a top player mains him and gets him to tournaments to fight against other top players. With both players at equal skill and both players knowing the matchup. And it takes a lot of time to get to that point. Usually around a year or two. But even then the more obscure and underused characters are still relatively unexplored.
SSF4 has been out for 5 years and we still barely see Deejay vs Dudley or Oni vs Juri. So who knows how those matchups truly go. The best players use characters they are familiar with or characters that are proven to be top and have all the tech already fleshed out. So there is no way to know for sure how Hakan would do in a tournament for example if Infiltration only uses him as counter pick in favorable matchups.
Some people use tourney results to determine which character is top or bottom but that's also flawed. If Ares never gets top 8, it doesn't necessarily mean he isn't top 10. It could just mean he loses really badly to 2-3 of the most popular characters aka the flavors of the month. And if Bane makes top 8 it also doesn't mean he is top 10. It could mean he just does well vs some top tier characters but loses badly to lower tier/unpopular characters. In which case Bane would be a bottom 15 character that is tourney viable.
The reality of fighting games is that the top tier character that has 20 advantage matchups but loses to Black Adam and Supes is probably less viable than a lot of mid tier characters and maybe even a few bottom tier characters.
Not to mention that top tiers are only top tiers in the right hands. And the best player in the world could really suck with the best character in the game because he doesn't have the right mindset/personality to fit that character's playstyle. Sub-Zero was the right character for Tom Brady. Balrog is the right character for PR Rog. Ryu is the right character for Daigo. Yoshimitsu is the right character for JustFrameJames. etc. These players make their main look like top 5 characters even if they are mid or lower. They all have tried stronger characters (Raiden, Fei Long, Yun etc.) but in the end they realized they couldn't transfer character and player personality. So maining a top 5 lame character when you're impatient, like taking risks and making crazy reads is like trying to play sports when you're really just a fat nerd.
Which is why tiers and matchup charts don't really matter in the end. Because everyone should only play the character they like and that is right for them.
Which is also why tierlist discussions should never be treated as anything more than a bunch of self-deluded players talking out of their asses. All tier list talk is just for fun and to stimulate a numb community.
The important thing is that we are aware of it and stop getting butt hurt because X player didn't put X character in the tier range that they rightfully deserve according to us and our superior empiric experience.
