The Gabriel
Mean Man
#scrubquotesand it does bring back a cheaper style.
#scrubquotesand it does bring back a cheaper style.
This is very well put and I agree with everything here to the tee. Perfect elaboration on what you meant. I think that is exactly the balance everyone should take into consideration for sure.Again, constructive criticism is an entirely separate topic. Here's a healthy mindset:
"Ask for what you want -- but make the best of what you have."
This is the mentality that sustained and grew the FGC over many years. What it means is that you're free to not like certain things, give feedback, say what you'd change, etc. But that you don't take it as a source of entitlement and conditionally support your own community only when you get exactly what you want. This is the mentality that grew Smash, Street Fighter, etc.
Believe it or not, it is possible to both give feedback on things you'd like to see changed, while still fully supporting a game for as long as possible. And that's the mentality we need to have if we want to continue to grow. Otherwise, if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot every single time certain people are not 100% satisfied with some aspect of a game (and people will never, ever be 100% happy with any competitive game -- that's just common sense), then we will keep killing our own momentum with every new game.
I mean, yeah. You can act like a dick about it or you can understand some people like a cleaner, tighter game.#scrubquotes
FGC players are given shit and call it cake. In no other video game genre would you hear the excuse "but it would be harder to balance" bandied about. Motherfucker, if it's harder to balance, then you hold the developers to it and you criticize them until they do a good enough job. And if they don't do a good enough job then you don't buy the DLC and you don't buy the next game. It's like some weird-ass version of battered wife syndrome over here, "sure it's not perfect but it's the best I can get."Tournament variations were obviously a rushed afterthought and it's a joke that we're being forced to adhere to them.
It's like making pro Hearthstone or MtG players use pre-made default decks only.
There are zero arguments for locked tournament variations that hold up under even the lightest scrutiny.
This is mostly because most other competitive games have a ton of classes/heroes and they literally just ban the ones that are broken/unbalanced for the moment.FGC players are given shit and call it cake. In no other video game genre would you hear the excuse "but it would be harder to balance" bandied about. Motherfucker, if it's harder to balance, then you hold the developers to it and you criticize them until they do a good enough job. And if they don't do a good enough job then you don't buy the DLC and you don't buy the next game. It's like some weird-ass version of battered wife syndrome over here, "sure it's not perfect but it's the best I can get."
Well first of all, this is only a sound argument if we assume that custom variations will make balancing characters harder instead of easier, which is not a safe assumption to make. Especially not if NRS intends for casual mode to be somewhat balanced -- and there's no reason it shouldn't be; even the notoriously lazy and incompetent Hearthstone devs balance for Wild (the "anything goes" mode). If HS devs are held to a higher standard than you, that's not a good sign. And balancing ranked and kasual separately would obviously be more difficult than balancing a single mode with kustoms enabled.In a game with 100 heroes you have far fewer loyalists competitively. The MOBA mindset is that heroes are shallower, and if you can't play your favorite hero in the league you just pick another who basically fills the same role.
If we could just ban a hero for a tournament because we felt like it or the moves were unbalanced, it'd be a different conversation. But the FGC has a different mentality that's built on having less characters to play, but at least attempting to make it so that you can play whoever you want and have a decent shot.
See, I'm not always a shill!For once I completely agree with you. The should try to just let the playerbase run wild, see what happens and patch accordingly.
Having a system like this in place and not using it to its full potential is a shame.
^^^ All of this. Set variations COULD have been a-okay and make this a totally different conversation if they'd actually been put together in a way that wasn't rushed as fuck.Tournament variations were obviously a rushed afterthought and it's a joke that we're being forced to adhere to them.
It's like making pro Hearthstone or MtG players use pre-made default decks only.
There are zero arguments for locked tournament variations that hold up under even the lightest scrutiny.
I don't think it matters that they're not default, just that they're not added to variation lineup. I don't see why they couldn't have have just added them as extras and mark them with a trophy to show they're the tournament ones.Tbh I think the issue is the tournament presets not being the default ones.
Is that because of the tournament related options, or is it the grind of the krypt to unlock things? I'm thinking it's the latter.Clearly a big chunk of paying customers aren’t enjoying what’s on offer.
Is that because of the tournament related options, or is it the grind of the krypt to unlock things? I'm thinking it's the latter.
Literally what everyone felt at the beginning of MKX's lifespan. There was a lot of discontent with the game being so built around 50/50s and excessively plus pressure. That is a huge reason why, by the time MKXL dropped, a lot of that was altered.What's wrong with a 50/50 game?
Spot on.Again, constructive criticism is an entirely separate topic. Here's a healthy mindset:
"Ask for what you want -- but make the best of what you have."
This is the mentality that sustained and grew the FGC over many years. What it means is that you're free to not like certain things, give feedback, say what you'd change, etc. But that you don't take it as a source of entitlement and conditionally support your own community only when you get exactly what you want. This is the mentality that grew Smash, Street Fighter, etc.
Believe it or not, it is possible to both give feedback on things you'd like to see changed, while still fully supporting a game for as long as possible. And that's the mentality we need to have if we want to continue to grow. Otherwise, if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot every single time certain people are not 100% satisfied with some aspect of a game (and people will never, ever be 100% happy with any competitive game -- that's just common sense), then we will keep killing our own momentum with every new game.
Thanks breh.Literally what everyone felt at the beginning of MKX's lifespan. There was a lot of discontent with the game being so built around 50/50s and excessively plus pressure. That is a huge reason why, by the time MKXL dropped, a lot of that was altered.
50/50s still exist in MK11, but they are far less dangerous mixups.
Also, I don't think MK11 needs customs. Not yet, at least. I want them, don't get me wrong. But I don't even think MK11 itself is completely ready for the potential issues that brings into the game. It was never designed around custom movesets from the start, and NRS made that known.