The true reason stage interaction shouldn't be allowed in tournaments

[REDRUM]

If i spent time and money traveling I'd rather they be turned OFF.

The argument that they are toned down or aren't as bad as IGAU means shit to me in MK.

 

[Sultani]

Half of the responders didn't even read the argument against interactables. Shocking.

Positional advantage WILL present itself, not only at the start of the match, but also at the start of a round. Even if it's minor, so what?

Most of the arguments against turning them off have something to do wth how it was fine in injustice. For the people freaking out about the idea of having interactables off, why are you so strongly in favor of having them left on? There have been little to no compelling arguments in favor of them, just flaming and claims that people are "whining" if they don't want to use them.

"U woont go 2 majur so u can't think interactibles are bad." god just shut up with that.

 

[Duck Nation]

And here goes the loop that leads into 30 pages of useless, recycled bickering.

So.

Can we lock this thread too, yet?

 

[REDRUM]

Even competitive sports have home field advantage.

Because in real life there has to be a physical location where Arena's/stadiums are built and the humans who live around these arenas or fields will root for their home teams. Sports do not allow home teams to make physical alterations that change the competition's balance.

Interactables in relation to Sports let's say football would be the equivalent of allowing teams to use Cheerleaders as extra blockers to gain physical advantages, Baseball pitchers get to throws 3 balls at you simultaneously, Soccer players climbing on the goal posts and drop kicking Goalies in the back of the neck when they are attempting to block a PK etc etc

 

[Compbros]

Alright, this is the only point that really needs to be addressed here. Answer? As it turns out, anyone. The conversation, "hey guys, how about we try this?" "Well, we'd rather not," is enough. It's not something you need to experiment with or fiddle over. That is a conclusion in itself, and again, it's a valid one.

That's enough not to get change? "Let's try this", "nah". That is an awful mentality and pretty much says that unless an overwhelming majority wants a change then we shouldn't even have a discussion of why one thing might be better than the other. How do we get things to change?

 

[Rude]

Because in real life there has to be a physical location where Arena's/stadiums are built and the humans who live around these arenas or fields will root for their home teams. Sports do not allow home teams to make physical alterations that change the competition's balance.

Interactables in relation to Sports let's say football would be the equivalent of allowing teams to use Cheerleaders as extra blockers to gain physical advantages, Baseball pitchers get to throws 3 balls at you simultaneously, Soccer players climbing on the goal posts and drop kicking Goalies in the back of the neck when they are attempting to block a PK etc etc

No.

 

[Brutal Chimney]

Positional advantage is going to happen regardless. when you play without interactable you are potentially taking away anouther players tool. in DOA picking a stage that favors your character or doesn't allow them their tools is considered cowardly

 

[Duck Nation]

That's enough not to get change? "Let's try this", "nah". That is an awful mentality and pretty much says that unless an overwhelming majority wants a change then we shouldn't even have a discussion of why one thing might be better than the other. How do we get things to change?

You get things to change by not trying to argue opinions based on things no one knows about yet. Any amount of discussion on any topic regarding tournament standards - and this applies to your other thread too - is all conjecture anyways, and without having the game in our hands it's arguments about nothing. Wait until you have real things to talk about, then use those facts to drive a discussion.

And then? Accept that the community may resolve to change nothing. I know from the way you bandy about the IGAU interactables thread that you didn't agree with that choice. It was not, however, a choice that was solely yours to make or one where your voice counted for more than others did. You're not always going to get what you like; that isn't forums, that isn't video games, that is life.

 

[STRYKIE]

Kenshi and Kabal were allowed to live, but interactables should be banned? Those characters shut down 70% of the roster. I don't get it.

Kenshi, Kabal, or any of the rest of the top tier in MK9 excelled simply at taking already known fundamental weaknesses and rubbing salt in the wounds. And then taking the last slice of pizza. And then circling Waldo with a bright purple pen. That's not quite the same as say, in Tekken 4 where every single character in the game were just plain automatically doomed against Jin's JFLS. The latter of which could come into to play for this thread's argument if interactables recurrs to favor one player more than the other.

Not to mention, MKX will have a good training mode to evaluate such things, MK9 did not.

 

[WakeUp DP]

Kenshi and Kabal were allowed to live, but interactables should be banned? Those characters shut down 70% of the roster. I don't get it.

U forget 100% combos Cyrax!

 

[Crathen]

While we are discussing this let's also ban walls , they give some characters unfair advantages.

No , seriously does someone already played the game and can confirm that wall escapes don't take any meter / stamina + are invicible for the full animation totally unpunishable? How dare you having options different from mines , let's make forward and backdashes the same while we're at it because it's unfair advantage.

Point i'm trying to make , let it play out , just by looking at it throwing interactables seems very weak and jump escapes take stamina + meter and can be punished , imo in the long run you're not gonna see them used often.

 

[PND OmegaK]

So if interactables were mirrored down the center of the stage would everyone be completely fine with them?

 

[Sultani]

Maybe smash tournaments should be played with items on.

 

[Brutal Chimney]

Maybe smash tournaments should be played with items on.

Smash doesn't play with items on because they're random. in MKX you know exactly where the interactables are.

 

[Dramatica]

I agree. We should therefore remove stages with corners and only play on infinite planes, because let's be honest, not being able to move back / backdash is at least as strong of an impact as additional attack.

Sorry is this a joke? Spatial confinement is a part of every symmetric game or sport, and it has nothing to do with non-symmetrically placed interactable objects

 

[A F0xy Grampa]

before you post about how we should wait to see how they play out or how they are not as powerful as in injustice. you should be aware that this thread was not made to disuss how broken or not interactables are and your post will be remove in order to keep this discussion on topic and free of distractions... finish reading this post so you can fully understand what the argument is about and your opinion will be more than welcome as long as it is not out of topic.

the true reason why we should talk about banning stage interaction has nothing to do with how broken or not they are. it is all about how they break the balance between player 1 and player 2 at the beginning of a fight. i think we can all agree that player 1 or player 2 having a advantage over the other one no matter how small this advantage is ...well is just not fair.
stage interactable in some stages gives a position advantage to player 1 or player 2 by placing an object more accessible or closer to player 1 or player 2...the problem is that stage interactions are not the same when you move to the left of the screen as when you move to the right of the screen in other words player 1 position in the stage at the beginning of a match doesn't mirror the position of player 2 at the beginning of the match creating a position advantage for one of the two players.

how this affect a fight? lets say you have a stage that has an object that can be grab and throw in mid air only at the right side of the screen just behind player 2 and the match is a mirror match between two heavy zoners which use projectiles to zone. this automatically places player 2 at an position advantage at the beginning of round one because he doesn't have to worry about player 1 countering his projectile with the object but player 1 has to worry about the object behind player 2 since he can use it to check his projectile attacks ... why should player 1 start the match at a disadvantage just because he is placed in the right side of the screen?

i personally think that stages should be neutral and they should not place a player in a position advantage but this is not the case when comes to interactables for our games because they do not place the players in a mirror position.

what do you guys think about this

discuss

@Pig Of The Hut @GGA 16 Bit @Tom Brady @MITDJT

This is nowhere near as much of an issue as the idea of variation locking the winner when the opponent switches characters.
Whats gonna have more effect? An uppercuts worth of damage from an interactable, or an entire variation?

Also, whats to say player 1 doesnt block the interactable and shoot their projectile back?

 

[TotteryManx]

It really feels like people on this site have only ever played MK. Plenty of fighting games have stage differences, where a person can get an "advantage" DOA, Tekken, SC, and VF. Some of you really need to diversify your portfolios.

I believe the problem is with people that have only played MK9. Older MK games had interactables as well placed in different locations on the stage. Personally, I'm use to stage interaction because I love SC, but I'll admit it feels odd bringing back interactables in MK. Got use to MK9 I guess lol.

 

[xInfra Deadx]

 

[TopTierHarley]

I believe the problem is with people that have only played MK9. Older MK games had interactables as well placed in different locations on the stage. Personally, I'm use to stage interaction because I love SC, but I'll admit it feels odd bringing back interactables in MK. Got use to MK9 I guess lol.

That's the thing, it seems some people can't let of a game that was 4 years ago. "Nostalgia " glasses are very rampant. Gotta learn to except new mechanics and stop being dinosaurs lol.

 

[ChaosTheory]

I'm interested in letting them roll and seeing how it goes. That said, though... I see a lot of guys mentioning "block the intetactable, no big deal."

It might be more significant to think about , for example, who gets access to the tiger's head or whatever other 3/4 screen jump interactable is at play. It could potentially swing the flow of a match if a player is scared to zone for fear of risking a full-screen jump in punish.

I'd think more along those lines as opposed to who gets to throw Blanche. Throwables look very, very limited in their usefulness from what I've seen.

 

[Barrogh]

Sorry is this a joke? Spatial confinement is a part of every symmetric game or sport, and it has nothing to do with non-symmetrically placed interactable objects

Your statement I was responding to, however, only mentioned "attacks only available at specific spots", and corners are perfectly fine example of spots that provide additional options - as well as remove others on top of that - they just do that by interfering with some move properties rather than blatantly add something that has different animation and properties altogether, but impact is similar if not more considerable. Corner combos and things like crossup or input/wakeup reversal setups would be good example of how they can practically alter move properties - just for being in a special spot, effectively. (May or may not be applicable, depending on particular game in question.)

Corners are indeed placed symmetrically. However, FGs as a whole aren't really symmetrical unless we are talking about mirror matches. Since nothing says at this point that they are supposed to be, can as well roll with what's being offered in term of stages.

I mean, clear bias towards p1 or p2 isn't something to be proud of, but there's difference between symmetry and balance.

That's the thing, it seems some people can't let of a game that was 4 years ago. "Nostalgia " glasses are very rampant. Gotta learn to except new mechanics and stop being dinosaurs lol.

Since interactive arenas of 3D era weren't widely considered as an improvement on their own (as far as I know), it's at least fair to say that people are entitled to their suspicion towards something new.

That said, this time it's clearly not new, but opinions may still vary. For one, IGAU had some examples of stages that favour characters that already were problematic to others. Sure, MKX doesn't seem to have different stage elements usage by different characters, but this doesn't mean some characters won't be better at controlling space and interactibles (think Zod and someone like Shazam, Grundy or some other power character).

 

[Dramatica]

Corners are indeed placed symmetrically. However, FGs as a whole aren't really symmetrical unless we are talking about mirror matches. Since nothing says at this point that they are supposed to be, can as well roll with what's being offered in term of stages.

I mean, clear bias towards p1 or p2 isn't something to be proud of, but there's difference between symmetry and balance.

Good post. I want SYMMETRY, which I should have explained better from the start. It then follows that I want interactables turned off, because the only symmetric alternative is symmetric interactables and that doesn't excite me either. Cheers

 

[The Farmer]

What is the difference in blocking an interractable at distance and blocking a projectile at distance? We need to play the game first, this thread is beyond reason and WE are ALL ill-equipped to discuss this issue since we haven't played this game yet.......

 

[SaJa]

I have done 1 tournament. I got top 2 because I played Kotal vs Ermac. Now that I'm thinking about it, interaction would have helped me to balance the matchup (Ermac tp on me as soon as I used distance specials).

It wasn't a problem on igau, I don't see why it will on mkx.

 

[YOMI DJT]

I don't think they present a huge advantage. Are there guaranteed setups off them? How punishable are they? Do interactables respawn?