d3v
SRK
Sinestro's for everyone, since that would mean that the game had a sort of "meta-balance" and, more importantly, archetypes are strong.
The thing is, certain archetypes are always guaranteed to both dominate certain others while be weak to others. Trying to chase 5:5's across the board results in alot of uniqueness taken out (since it is uniqueness in the first place that leads to imbalance). To quote Seth Killian.
I mean, yes the character loyalists will complain, but at the same time that kind of mentality is, well "scrubby" in the academic sense of applying an arbitrary rule (i.e. no throws, spamming is cheap or in this case, pick only one character). In any case, historically speaking, character loyalism is mostly a recent thing. During the "good old days", most people had 2 or 3 characters that they "mained" and would rotate around depending on their opponents. Even in Japanese, character locked tournaments, players would simply choose a character based on who they thought most other players would be using (i.e. Daigo Umehara using both Ryu and Boxer in Super Turbo).
Also, the other benefit of having true "meta-balance" is that top tiers are rarely as dominant as compared to games that do not have this. Again, let's look at that perennial example of "meta-balance", Super Turbo (or Super SFII Turbo for you non SF players). Even a character like O. Sagat, long considered to be the best character in the game, loses out to some other characters. In exchange for having some truly dominating matchups, he also loses out to characters like Claw, Boxer and Dhalsim. At the same time, you get a bottom tier characters like Cammy, who fares well against a high tiered character like Dhalsim.
The thing is, certain archetypes are always guaranteed to both dominate certain others while be weak to others. Trying to chase 5:5's across the board results in alot of uniqueness taken out (since it is uniqueness in the first place that leads to imbalance). To quote Seth Killian.
Ideally then, everyone, aside from being a strong representative of their playstyle (or because of it), both has a pool of good match ups and bad match ups.
I mean, yes the character loyalists will complain, but at the same time that kind of mentality is, well "scrubby" in the academic sense of applying an arbitrary rule (i.e. no throws, spamming is cheap or in this case, pick only one character). In any case, historically speaking, character loyalism is mostly a recent thing. During the "good old days", most people had 2 or 3 characters that they "mained" and would rotate around depending on their opponents. Even in Japanese, character locked tournaments, players would simply choose a character based on who they thought most other players would be using (i.e. Daigo Umehara using both Ryu and Boxer in Super Turbo).
Also, the other benefit of having true "meta-balance" is that top tiers are rarely as dominant as compared to games that do not have this. Again, let's look at that perennial example of "meta-balance", Super Turbo (or Super SFII Turbo for you non SF players). Even a character like O. Sagat, long considered to be the best character in the game, loses out to some other characters. In exchange for having some truly dominating matchups, he also loses out to characters like Claw, Boxer and Dhalsim. At the same time, you get a bottom tier characters like Cammy, who fares well against a high tiered character like Dhalsim.
. Yeah thanks haha Sinestro's a badass in general i actually had no idea who he was before this game came out and now he's my favorite DC villain 
Injustice: training wheels among us
