[Discussion] "This character is super easy to use"

[GLoRToR]

"Execution barrier" is just a slang word for "fake difficulty".

 

[Slips]

Always an interesting topic. I feel like the things that look cool and are fun to do need to be easy for the casual while the little things that a casual/spectator won't notice should have skill.

Fighting games where the skill gap is in the movement seem to do best (Tekken, Smash, MK9, ect). The casual/spectator don't notice the skill yet retain seeing the cool flashy combos and moves and are able to replicate them.

Fighting games where the skill gap is in the combos and defensive mechanics have a bigger barrier of execution and has a more niche' following. There are exceptions, but this seems to be the case in general.

 

[Rearawt]

quote for truth. This is basically the end of the thread. Any argument against this is total BS.

Yes, this is obviously why Divekick is the absolute pinnacle of fighting games..

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

Ptw and m2d in the op = thread is about zoning

ALWAYS!

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

@PLAYING TO WIN

The more I read, the more I realize that things will be fine in regards to this subject.

How easy something is to do EXECUTION-WISE is kind of irrelevant in the counter-pick INJ2 argument where every top player had a few pocket characters they could whip out on the fly with no practice.

The point is that some of the shit in that game was so oppressive to deal with for some characters that it was easily abusable, which is the true villain here.

Repetitive actions that have minimal risk involved the majority of the time end up being easy to pick up and abuse if they completely shut down other specific characters for a good portion of the match.

^^^^This is basically referring to braindead safe pressure, safe 50/50s, and zoning which is too strong.

From what we've seen and heard:

Braindead safe pressure: Gone
Safe 50/50s: Gone
Zoning which is too strong: ???

What we DO know though is that NRS has nerfed Baraka's mid fireball to a high and reduced the amount of pushback on Skarlet's safe Blood Tentacle. These were two things that people had concern for as far as "strong zoning" in the demo-build.

I think NRS has a definite plan in mind.

They don't want anything just handed to players like it was in INJ2 sometimes and they don't want things to be so easily strong that it's abusable by someone who is just picking up the character.

You make a lot of very good points. In reflection I think the biggest issue for me is that I do not want a character who is easy to use/master and also to have them be top 3 like deadshot. I have always thought top tier should require investement.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

Having top characters be easy to pick up can be fine imo, I would rather they be more like Nina from Tekken or Setsuka from soul calibur so they actually take dedication, but I’m fine with them being easy too.

Deadshot’s problem, since he’s the example here, was not only was he easy, it was also because he was top tier because he had pretty much everything you could want in a character outside of good midscreen damage. He had an invincible, safe with bar, armor breaking with bar, wake up that you couldn’t just jump and punish on a read. He had insane meterbuild and the best zoning tool in the game, and to top it all off he had staggerable 50/50s, a fast mid, and a low d1. That was a case of him having way too much at launch which was honestly more of a problem than him being easy to use. If he was hard to use he very likely would have become a problem eventually anyways.

You somewhat contradicted yourself. You are ok with top tier being easy to pick up? That was why deadshot was so good. Poorly designed top tier that people had as an alt.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

The key to this discussion is separating DEPTH from EXECUTION. Having a few high execution and a few low execution characters is ideal for most fighting games and shouldn't be some barrier that prevents you from enjoying the game, but DEPTH is where a game's longevity comes from. SFV is stupid simple from an execution standpoint at times, but about half the cast is incredibly deep (Urien, Menat, G, Dhalsim, Ibuki, Chun, etc). You can play most of those characters at a somewhat decent level with low execution, but you could spend months in the lab coming up with new stuff and crazier combos/confirms/setups/etc and still not even be at the highest level.

100% agree

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

I take back my blah blah portion of my statement. I didn't expect this as a response and I was tired of reading all the posts in the "but why you change the amplify moves?" thread.

Well, personally, execution being difficult completely turns me off of them. I've only made short forays out of NRS games due to this sort of thing, but as an example I'll use my characters choices. I'll never play the kabals and skarlets of MK9 or JCs (cancels) of MKX due to not having the reflexes nor the time to get them down. I just don't feel that difficult inputs should be a way to weed out players. Anyone should be able to pick up a fighter and be able to perform the moves simply.

It should be all about how and when you use those moves. To me that's what determines the skilled players from the unskilled ones. If you use them at the wrong time, you get blown up. Doesn't matter if you had to input df1 or dbfu3 to do the move imo.

Great points. I view execution in fighting games as a piece of the puzzle for being a complete player. Knowing when and how to use moves is like a baseball player knowing when and how to swing the bat. They also need to be able to run the bases and catch. You couldn't be a complete baseball player with out all pieces of the puzzle.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

One question I have, is counter-picking more driven by the game itself, or is it more driven by the community/culture surrounding the game? In general it seems like there's more counterpicking in NRS games, and I don't know if that's simply because that's how the scene has always done things, or if it's something specific about the NRS game mechanics.

I have to say game. Top players in other games have and are required to invest so much time to master a character that their alt just cannot compete.

This is a real example. I was pretty good in sf4. In one tournament I had to play Jwong in winners semi's. I mained dhalsim and rufus usually shit on him. I tried thawk who was supposed to be a good mu vs rufus. My thawk was decent and i invested a large amount of time into him as an alt/casual character. Justin came up to me after winning and said something along the lines of. "even if its a bad mu just stick with your main bc you will have a better chance with a character you know inside and out vs a alt" This mentality is true for most games. I2 it was not bc so many characters had so little depth and could be learned at the highest possible level in such a short time.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

This is the crux of the issue that I feel like people aren’t getting across well.

A character being easy to use is one thing, but being easy to fully learn is different. If a character is so devoid of nuance and complexity that you can figure them out completely in a day, that’s a poorly designed character. If that character is both AND top tier, it’s toxic to the competitive scene for both players and viewers, as we’ve seen.

Ryu is an easy character to use but learning to play him effieciently isn’t entirely superficial, in almost all of his appearances he has things that are beyond beginner level awaiting below his simple surface and he has room for player personality to show.

You can see ten different Ryu players and they’d all have differences in play, but literally every single Deadshot is the same thing.

That’s boring to watch and to fight against, it isn’t fun design.



All that said, they haven’t shown a character yet that didn’t seem to have some underlying potential complexity to them so I’m not too worried.

Exactly. BC there is depth in the game and room for player personality. Also ryu is generally considered bad in sf5. Imaging if learning menat or urien was as easy as ryu?

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

To be clear, it wasn't just a 2 day Deadshot being able to beat just _any_ character. It was a 2 day Deadshot fighting what was an 8-2 matchup in his favor.

Yes! This is the point of my conditioned fear going into mk11 and hearing 16 bit constantly say they are easy and good for beginners. What if, say kabal, was top tier again and had super lopsided mu's? You could learn him in a week... wont it be the same thing?

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

@PLAYING TO WIN


While you can say that having to spend years to learn a single character increases longevity, the opposite argument could be made as well. Being forced to stick to your main because you've committed so much time can get boring and cause you to drop a game. In that light, being able to relatively easily pick up and begin learning, at a competent level, multiple characters, can also increase the longevity and excitement of a game.

'thumbs up'

Then i think as long as those easy to use characters have a lot of depth and the games engine allows for creativity them it will work out.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

Agreed wholeheartedly p2w. Some responses by people who clearly don't play competitively really grosses me out. Implying stuff like execution shouldn't matter is the scrubbiest mindset to have imo.

I worked in my execution so hard for mvc3. Learning plink dashing and lightning loops. And when my execution failed me I faced reprucussions for it. That's how it should be. If I hadn't had a lot of executional issues early and didn't master it I wouldn't have felt such pride in my play. And even worse, if the combos were indeed easier I would have been beating people I lost to from execution errors. Idk why newer age players consider harder execution a bad thing? Dumbing down games so everyone can compete more comfortably lowers the top level skill one can attain and it's painfully obvious in current games where new players are randomly beating God's they have no chance of beating in older titles. It happens all the time in sfv.

my man! umvc3 was one of the games i was thinking about while making this. watching the way fchamp could move with magneto was just mind blowing and motivating! He was one of maybe 3 players that could do that it. When we watch sonics manta or semij catwoman... i don't ever remember seeing them do things that i couldn't do.

I hear you on the investment part. I LOVED labing sinestro and figuring out all the crazy nuances. Cowboy was a better player but there were things i could do that no other sinestro on the planet could do at the time

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

At last one of the zoning zealots realized how catastrophically brain-dead the zoning style can be. Specially in NRS games were there's no collision of projectiles nor a way to dodge it like Tekken. Have fun seeing the same move over and over again and the emergency plan if They got in.

we all get it it trust me. this is why @General M2Dave and I always say we want a good zoner but extremely hard to use to avoid a dead shot situation.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

quote for truth. This is basically the end of the thread. Any argument against this is total BS.

ok i have to be a little negative here so sorry in advance. This type of attitude is wrong. It makes me think you just want to use a top tier without having to invest any work! Look at KOF or UMVC or SF5. What if every could execute like Mr KOF or move like fchamps magneto or do menat sako combos? See this level of play should motivate you to want to work harder for something.

This is true about anything in life. Anything worth anything is about the journey and investing your time. Not picking up a top tier and beating other top players without any investment.

Im very sorry to say this, i really am, but this mentality is everything wrong with our community and the at hand discussion.

 

[Marlow]

I2 it was not bc so many characters had so little depth and could be learned at the highest possible level in such a short time.

I actually think I2 had/has some pretty decent depth, though. Is counter picking always a sign of a game lacking depth? I kind of like seeing counter picking in games, it seems to give viewers a chance to see more different matchups or characters used.

 

[Marlow]

we all get it it trust me. this is why @General M2Dave and I always say we want a good zoner but extremely hard to use to avoid a dead shot situation.

Agreed that Day 1 Deadshot was a badly done version of a zoner character.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

pretty sure im the only street fighter playere here bro lul

the only real one. i competed early in the game but i do not anymore. can you give some insight to this thread? i know how good you are and loved playing you in 12. you were one of a few that required me to think or get messed up. the only one baiting push blocks et cetera. im a fan. wish you traveled.

if anyone does't know shazzy was ranked in the top 5 (or better) for sf5 online ranked and thats no joke.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

Make it so hard so you have a handfull of players at tournaments and some spare change as a pot bonus.

wasn't true for umvc3. extremely hard game to play and had the largest entry numbers for a long time. thoughts?

 

[untitledsix]

You make a lot of very good points. In reflection I think the biggest issue for me is that I do not want a character who is easy to use/master and also to have them be top 3 like deadshot. I have always thought top tier should require investement.

As people have already stated, Deadshot was indicitave of a balance issue. Deadshot was both top tier and easy because he had several strong tools which were overly powerful. A well balanced top tier will have many tools to cover all situations. The skill comes from having the knowledge to utilize the characters full tool kit. It has nothing to do with execution.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

Always an interesting topic. I feel like the things that look cool and are fun to do need to be easy for the casual while the little things that a casual/spectator won't notice should have skill.

Fighting games where the skill gap is in the movement seem to do best (Tekken, Smash, MK9, ect). The casual/spectator don't notice the skill yet retain seeing the cool flashy combos and moves and are able to replicate them.

Fighting games where the skill gap is in the combos and defensive mechanics have a bigger barrier of execution and has a more niche' following. There are exceptions, but this seems to be the case in general.

the man. the myth. the legend. Do you think top tier characters that require little investment should exist?

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

As people have already stated, Deadshot was indicitave of a balance issue. Deadshot was both top tier and easy because he had several strong tools which were overly powerful. A well balanced top tier will have many tools to cover all situations. The skill comes from having the knowledge to utilize the characters full tool kit. It has nothing to do with execution.

Again I disagree and this has not been true for a long time in the fighting game community.

just watch this. tell me... if everyone could move like fchamp and it was easy to do... It blows my mind that people actually think like you! you millennials want everything easy! f'ing work for it! god damn kids get off my porch.

 

[untitledsix]

If you make prepatch Deadshot arbitrarily more difficult to play via execution, it doesn't add any depth or quality to gameplay. It's still Deadshot and people are still going to pick him up because, no matter what, execution is easy to learn. All it takes is time in the lab. It's the game knowledge and decision making that's the hard part.

 

[M.D.]

Execution barrier is the most lazy and useless clueless design decision in the world.

Hm, i have an 8-2 matchup with this character, better make that character need to solve 3rd degree equations before you press any move, that would balance it.

Since in the pro scene there will ALWAYS be a skynet t1000 pro player able to input everything (see kof, setsuka, alpha pat players, instant airs blablablabla) you will ALWAYS be destroyed by that top tier character nonetheless.

Ah he has difficult inputs it's ok that he could mop me 10-0. So when a guy comes that can do the inputs, what do you do? Get mopped 10-0. That's not the solution, never was.

This is only a request that mediocre players want to be a big fish in a small pond, playing with casuals and having a good ranked record because 90% of the people won't invest in learning the execution.

Horrendous topic, it should die in the seven fires of hell along with the execution barrier concept.

 

[PLAYING TO WIN]

i think im literally going to just start responding with hype top 8 matches of games that required investment and had depth. it makes me sad to think people actually think execution shouldn't matter. go play chess then.