1)The better player should win, yes.
2)If a game has a mechanic that allows for worse players to beat better players then it is a bad game.
3) Dizzy admitted that his win over 16bit at UFGT had absolutely nothing to do with skill or adaptation or anything, it was entirely based on him winning every 50/50 and playing the level.
4) Noone wants wins like that.
5) I mean you might because you lack logic, but most people who play fighting games can recognize how stupid that is.
6) If the game randomly picks that in a 1/58 pick twice in a best of 3 set, well shit, but that's a less than 1% possibility as opposed to 50% like you want.
7) sorry if i want a more skillful game.
1) should.. Sure.. Always- no
2) X-factor, Supers, comeback mechanics or game mechanics in general all take skill and pre planning to play with it around.
3) So... Winning every 50/50 and playing the level "better" is no skill? I beg to differ.. That may not be "prime time" skill, such as AMAZING defense or UNCANNY timing.. But it is still skill non the less..
4) there are many that consider a win is a win at ALL cost..On this site even.. So no one is quite the blanket statement.
5) again.. Blanketing statement as "all" who play fighters see how stupid it is.. What about those that just shut up and play? Casuals and tournament players alike?
6) the griping and crying still persists due to ego being hurt that you lost to a TV.
7) and by more skillful you mean.. What? There has always been a character/stage/super/trait/mechanic in EVERY fighting game that has been unfair, rage worthy, has an advantage... Sorry if I like progression and like to adapt and deal with new elements, instead of cry foul/ban.