No one is shunning variations. In any tournament ft3 you will not see every character. It's how it is. There will also be hype sets at tournaments where people don't change character and boring ones where they do.
Well sort of, it depends on the situation. If the opponent is doing something variation-specific then sure, but if what they're doing is specific to the player (i.e. jumping or waking up a lot) then that's something that carries over that you can still adapt to. I understand your point though.
This part of your post implied that you didn't understand, so I guess I'm not the one who needs to spot the irony.
When I say shunning variations I mean that, with Variation Lock, we'd be treating the Variations as separate characters, as opposed to variations of the same character.
The way I see it, each character has a core moveset, and the variations add to that core moveset.
Think of variations like attachments to a firearm.
- A sniper rifle is a zoning weapon. Variation 1 puts an underbarrel shotgun attachment to give it some close-range power, but it's not a full-fledged shotgun, the sniper rifle is still primarily a zoning tool, and the added weight makes it harder to keep steady. Variation 2 cuts the scope for the iron sights, now it is more like an assault/sniper rifle mix, but it sacrifices some long-range ability to be more rounded out in the midrange footsie game.
- An assault rifle is a jack-of-all-trades. Variation 1 adds a grenade launcher to increase its mid-range power, variation 2 gives a precisional scope for better zoning, variation 3 adds an extended magazine to buff up its natural power at the cost of what the other two variations would give.
- A shotgun is a close-range brawler. Variation 1 can add explosive shells for damage, variation 2 can add a muzzle attachment to round it out for mid-range combat, variation three could add an underbarrel flamethrower for pyromaniacs.
- A light machine gun is a pressure machine. Variation 1 adds a bigger ammo box for better pressure, variation 2 adds a grip attachment for better stability (or, movement), variation 3 adds a flare launcher for confusion (a neat projectile for the projectile-less character).
- And then there's this freaky weapon: the Kaballin's MMH-A1. It has all the rounded-out power of an assault rifle (variation 1), it can transform itself into a sniper rifle (variation 2), and it has a separate barrel for firing special shotgun shells (variation 3).
Though I think this gun is DLC, if I am not mistaken.
Variations are attachments to a core character, not an entirely different moveset. It changes match-ups and it makes having to learn your character a different process with the rules quoted above, but that is the nature of the beast! That's how it is with variations in this untraditional game.
NRS added these variations for a reason, and we should not just brush them aside in favor of the traditional rules of other popular fighting games. By the inclusion of these variations, MKX is not traditional. NRS knew that they could make something fun and potentially very hype by adding the variation stuff! To limit variations with a winner-is-always-variation-locked rule is to defeat the purpose of variations.
More fun and hype = Better recognition (probably) and longer MKX life.
Less fun and hype = When's Injustice 2?
Accept the variations,
Embrace the variations,
Love the variations.
My life does not revolver around firearms.
This was a general point about fighting games, not about MKX. If I lose the first game, I want to adjust, be it through sticking to the character I lost the first game with or changing MY character since I would feel it would give me a better chance to adjust. What the fuck does that have to do with MKX, variations, or whether my opponent changes variations or not?
And what is so bad about counter picking?
There is nothing "bad" about it, but why force the winner to stick with their variation if the opponent changes to counter? They are the same character, but you should be able to change to compete.
Hmm thats like letting the winner switch stages on MK9. Lets say a Kitana player wouldnt like a Kabal player to switch stages when they win lol. Yeah its the same char but circumstances changes the MU.
And guess what? Something like this is allowed for the top-played fighting game on the market right now.
Because changing your own variant is only changing something for your character, choosing the stage you are choosing tools for both yourself and your opponent. We do allow going back to the stage select in those games but in IGAU only in a 'let fate decide' manor in that you might get something you might not.
True, but changing a variant can also change a MU (just like a stage), and thereby change the opponent's use of their tools - which is just as significant.
One reason I can think of for having character lock outside of the current discussion is the barrier of entry for newcomers would be much lower under a character lock ruleset than no character lock. If there wasn't any character lock for the winner, new players will have a tough time against advanced players because they will have to master more than one character plus all variations associated with each character to be competitive. Matchup knowledge will cripple newcomers (kind of how new players aren't attracted to Tekken Tag 2 because of the knowledge barrier). Newbies may find the character knowledge needed to be competitive daunting under rules that support open character selection at any time.
We already allow the loser to chose something that will make the winners tools no longer work as well, another character.
This already happens in other fighting games with similar variation systems. Variations will always affect match ups and can act as a counter to a counter pick. These are however, still allowed in those games.
The point was to illustrate that there was already a known, tournament proven solution to the issue at hand.