The Warrior Shrine: State of the NRS Scene, the sequel! Plus other stuff

[Charybdis]

The last Warrior Shrine podcast, though one of incredibly high quality podcasting, engendered no small amount of controversy in the scene. This discourse is healthy of course, but it can't be denied that it seems like it was, to no small degree, a spark which set off a fairly heated discussion which can be found here https://testyourmight.com/threads/the-state-of-the-nrs-scene-warrior-shrine-off-season.67075/

If you missed it.

On this edition, @Temp and @Jango address the feedback and arguments made against their thesis in a very diplomatic way (though rest assured, Temp thinks all who disagree with him are scum, subhuman scum).

Seriously though, this is a really good and sensible continuation of a discussion that the community probably needed to have, so tune in and get your hit of that juicy, juicy internet drama that the NRS community does so well.

The boys continue to break down the current competing analysis of the state and meta of Injustice 2, the drama of top players who, coincidentally, are no longer winning at the game now disowning the game, the philosophy of playing low tier characters (inspired by Shujinkydink), make some Evo Predictions, and address some listener questions

And there's some brief Soul Calibur talk, for the degenerates among you.

Check it out here:

Also, Temp and Jango continue to break kayfabe by referring to me as my name and not as a Greek monster of myth, which I find personally offensive. I don't find it as offensive as Jango's continually damning up-play of Superman, who is barely top 15 with only like three good tools.

He died for our sins.

Shout out to Temp for up-playing Batman, while playing Blue Beetle, an undercover and under-rated top 10 (don't @ me).

Blue Beetle subtly hanging out in Top 10

As always, check back to TYM everyday for all the latest discussion on the NRS scene, both competitive and lore-based, and all the latest news on Injustice 2 and the Mortal Kombat series!

 

[KingHippo]

I think, for me, it's experience that makes me very weary of when players of influence start saying a game isn't good, but continue to play it for monetary gain. I have seen games be essentially memed to death because it was clear people weren't taking it very seriously when it was on a big stage, which sucked for the people who did like it and stuck around because they got left with nothing.

Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite is a good example of a game that, regardless of what anybody thought, got killed because people decided it was easier to mock it on social media then try and discuss what could and couldn't be fixed, which led to people soullessly playing it for the Battle of the Stones tournament. If Chris G is to be believed (and there's a good chance he probably shouldn't), Capcom's main E-Sports guy personally told him "fuck that game" when he gave him a second place trophy. That guy probably had no idea wtf he was talking about, but he knew what he saw on social media about what people said, so he said that, which Chris repeated to his followers, which then meant a surprising amount of people lost faith in the game apropos of nothing.

Groupthink is a very powerful thing, and I think it's unwise to assume that people don't just squawk and repeat what they hear. Even people who should know better, like tournament organizers, can only follow what top players and other people of influence say about a game, and if it's overwhelmingly negative then they'll go along with it. At that point, there's a big difference between nuanced talk of the game's flaws between two people who understand the minutiae at high level, and the Twitter hot takes of people who have a lot of followers but don't really know what they're talking about repeating or retweeting people saying the game sucks, which then serves as confirmation bias for their opinion.

Even with NRS games, this kind of thing matters. As you'll hear in our new episode later this week, early NRS games had a real bad habit of having the top guys make jokes and laugh about how bad it was while still continuing to play it, and people would kind of just pick that up and it would become like a running joke that "Yeah, this game kinda sucks, but whatever."

Niche FGC games in general have to break the habit of not taking themselves seriously. If people are playing your game (and the numbers at US tournaments are there for I2), there's no reason to pull the dog and pony act of being hyperbolic in order to get dev's attention (which is honestly what a lot of this posturing is, lbsh) when you could either A) just stop playing or B) just keep it to yourself. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, but when you have a platform, your voice gets signal boosted to tens of thousands of people for every thousand followers you have. And people believe who appear to know what they are talking about over their own opinions all the time.

Also, yes, it is weird that people don't like Mega Man.

 

[JBeezYBabY]

I think, for me, it's experience that makes me very weary of when players of influence start saying a game isn't good, but continue to play it for monetary gain. I have seen games be essentially memed to death because it was clear people weren't taking it very seriously when it was on a big stage, which sucked for the people who did like it and stuck around because they got left with nothing.

Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite is a good example of a game that, regardless of what anybody thought, got killed because people decided it was easier to mock it on social media then try and discuss what could and couldn't be fixed, which led to people soullessly playing it for the Battle of the Stones tournament. If Chris G is to be believed (and there's a good chance he probably shouldn't), Capcom's main E-Sports guy personally told him "fuck that game" when he gave him a second place trophy. That guy probably had no idea wtf he was talking about, but he knew what he saw on social media about what people said, so he said that, which Chris repeated to his followers, which then meant a surprising amount of people lost faith in the game apropos of nothing.

Groupthink is a very powerful thing, and I think it's unwise to assume that people don't just squawk and repeat what they hear. Even people who should know better, like tournament organizers, can only follow what top players and other people of influence say about a game, and if it's overwhelmingly negative then they'll go along with it. At that point, there's a big difference between nuanced talk of the game's flaws between two people who understand the minutiae at high level, and the Twitter hot takes of people who have a lot of followers but don't really know what they're talking about repeating or retweeting people saying the game sucks, which then serves as confirmation bias for their opinion.

Even with NRS games, this kind of thing matters. As you'll hear in our new episode later this week, early NRS games had a real bad habit of having the top guys make jokes and laugh about how bad it was while still continuing to play it, and people would kind of just pick that up and it would become like a running joke that "Yeah, this game kinda sucks, but whatever."

Niche FGC games in general have to break the habit of not taking themselves seriously. If people are playing your game (and the numbers at US tournaments are there for I2), there's no reason to pull the dog and pony act of being hyperbolic in order to get dev's attention (which is honestly what a lot of this posturing is, lbsh) when you could either A) just stop playing or B) just keep it to yourself. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, but when you have a platform, your voice gets signal boosted to tens of thousands of people for every thousand followers you have. And people believe who appear to know what they are talking about over their own opinions all the time.

Also, yes, it is weird that people don't like Mega Man.

MVCI was a special kind of case. Yes, people should like the game for the game, but it was VERY apparent that Capcom did not givAfuck about delivering a good product or even treat their top players w/ respect. I mean, they're representing their game at high level. My thing is this, if the devs dont care, why should we continue to support their product? Thats where I'm with that. Yes, its about the fun of the game, but also support is a big factor to keep it fun. WE are the consumers that pay top dollar for these games. And for somebody who's played video games since Atari days, video games are more expensive than ever. If the game doesn't deliver to its expectations, than I have the right to voice my displeasure and will never put another cent in their future products. That's just me tho

 

[CrimsonShadow]

The last Warrior Shrine podcast, though one of incredibly high quality podcasting, engendered no small amount of controversy in the scene. This discourse is healthy of course, but it can't be denied that it seems like it was, to no small degree, a spark which set off a fairly heated discussion which can be found here https://testyourmight.com/threads/the-state-of-the-nrs-scene-warrior-shrine-off-season.67075/

I think to be honest though, the spark was that article and not the podcast

I'm not sure how many people listened to the podcast before jumping in, because the article had already said a lot by itself and was fairly controversial.

 

[Charybdis]

I think to be honest though, the spark was that article and not the podcast

I'm not sure how many people listened to the podcast before jumping in, because the article had already said a lot by itself and was fairly controversial.

Not gonna lie, didn't really read the thread, RL has been fairly hectic recently. Good to know though, discourse is always good

 

[Swindle]

Fox in the henhouse! FOX IN THE HENHOUSE!!!!!!

 

[Jango]

I think to be honest though, the spark was that article and not the podcast

I'm not sure how many people listened to the podcast before jumping in, because the article had already said a lot by itself and was fairly controversial.

I know you're right, but

Also, @KingHippo Mega Man is life.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I know you're right, but

I’m sure the podcast was great! People do it in other podcast threads too. They read the title or summary and immediately go ham, haha.

Anyway, I’m happy to see so many people putting out content and dialoguing with the community.

 

[Temp]

I think, for me, it's experience that makes me very weary of when players of influence start saying a game isn't good, but continue to play it for monetary gain. I have seen games be essentially memed to death because it was clear people weren't taking it very seriously when it was on a big stage, which sucked for the people who did like it and stuck around because they got left with nothing.

Marvel vs. Capcom Infinite is a good example of a game that, regardless of what anybody thought, got killed because people decided it was easier to mock it on social media then try and discuss what could and couldn't be fixed, which led to people soullessly playing it for the Battle of the Stones tournament. If Chris G is to be believed (and there's a good chance he probably shouldn't), Capcom's main E-Sports guy personally told him "fuck that game" when he gave him a second place trophy. That guy probably had no idea wtf he was talking about, but he knew what he saw on social media about what people said, so he said that, which Chris repeated to his followers, which then meant a surprising amount of people lost faith in the game apropos of nothing.

Groupthink is a very powerful thing, and I think it's unwise to assume that people don't just squawk and repeat what they hear. Even people who should know better, like tournament organizers, can only follow what top players and other people of influence say about a game, and if it's overwhelmingly negative then they'll go along with it. At that point, there's a big difference between nuanced talk of the game's flaws between two people who understand the minutiae at high level, and the Twitter hot takes of people who have a lot of followers but don't really know what they're talking about repeating or retweeting people saying the game sucks, which then serves as confirmation bias for their opinion.

Even with NRS games, this kind of thing matters. As you'll hear in our new episode later this week, early NRS games had a real bad habit of having the top guys make jokes and laugh about how bad it was while still continuing to play it, and people would kind of just pick that up and it would become like a running joke that "Yeah, this game kinda sucks, but whatever."

Marvel Infinite is one of those situations where it's hard to say what could have been. There are so many variables. If just one thing had changed about the game's release situation, things may have unfolded very differently. Top players blowing up the game didn't help, but the entry numbers were solid, and I think the viewership was good, too. If the game had just secured an Evo spot, I honestly think the negativity storm would have blown over. Would it have gotten that spot if more people had praised the game and entered more tournaments? I don't think we'll ever know. Wizard and Markman have given conflicting opinions on this. The former said it was the lack of community participation, yet Markman seems to heavily imply Disney blocked the game. I'm inclined to believe Markman more given the tournament participation was fine, but it's moot now I guess.

If my theory about twitter negativity is wrong, then IMO the best solution is to organize the conversation better. I would KILL to hear Reo and SonicFox have a recorded discussion on the quality of the game. If Wizard tunes into that podcast, everyone gets heard. And there's no better time than now: the Evo numbers are pretty low. Mr. Wizard has probably been thinking (for some time now) "what exactly is up with Injustice 2?" If the community can make the case that we can maintain the current numbers, our situation may be okay. 300+ entrants isn't bad if that's your true competitive base. The only other thing I can think of to help IJ2 is to travel for SoCal regionals. That may be the best chance we have to show Wizard our game is hella sick. We'll see, though.

Niche FGC games in general have to break the habit of not taking themselves seriously. If people are playing your game (and the numbers at US tournaments are there for I2), there's no reason to pull the dog and pony act of being hyperbolic in order to get dev's attention (which is honestly what a lot of this posturing is, lbsh).

Yeah, I definitely agree with this point. This is the bane of having an American game. The SFV players are probably incredibly blessed that the balancing dev at Capcom Japan doesn't read Eventhubs comments. Japanese companies seem to treat feedback and balancing differently overall. Ono once said they made Yun purposely strong in AE to recreate the old-school days of uniting the community against a top tier. That clearly backfired, lol. And I don't even know what the fuck's up with Cammy in SFV. Of course, there are some benefits to having devs lurking, too. They're definitely getting wiser to the feedback since MKX because despite all the complaining, Ivy and Grodd didn't get the Takeda treatment.

Also, yes, it is weird that people don't like Mega Man.

The crazy thing is that over the course of just this past year, we probably have well over an hour of Mega Man X talk on the editing room floor. The MMX topic just keeps coming back for reason.