Are combos really necessary to make a "Good Fighter"?

[JOE!]

Link to original post: [drupal=3738]Are combos really nescesarry to make a "Good Fighter"?[/drupal]



So yeah, I've been doing some pondering latley, and something that has come up alot over the past few years whenever the "Brawl vs Melee" debate comes up. Specifically this one complaint I see time and time again:

"Brawl sucks because it doesnt have combos" and/or "Melee has combos, so it's much deeper".

I never really thought much of it before, as I saw it as more of a thing of preferance (as there -are- combos in Brawl, just not as spectacular as they apparently are in melee). But now that I've given it some thought, why exactly do combos "make" a fighter?

In my opinion, a combo is simply a prolonged string of hits, be it a tilt lock or a continuous string of different moves you managed to get together. But there is a limit to almost all combos: the engine. The game's engine, specifically the physics engine, is what allows characters to pull off these strings, based on how characters get hit and get knocked around/etc (depending on the game) and become vulnerable enough to be hit again before they recover.

Right away this should raise a red flag about the way most "true fighters" work. Based on the way combos happen, to me it seems as if you arent really fighting your opponent, but rather the engine as you attempt to follow up your inputs on your "dummy", since that guy is locked in hitstun/whatever, and cant really do **** until the combo cannot be continued/he dies/etc. How is that a "fighting" game when you are barely going toe to toe with your adversary? Sure, there is fighting at the start, but thats all to set up that key move that usually starts up that string, and then **** ensues. Thats fighting your opponent for 10% of the match, then the actual game the other 90% as you follow up the physics until you cant...then go back to square one of hitting that set-up.

I got into fighters for the competition, not to show off how well I can abuse a game engine. Which leads me to another thing that irks me about combo-centric fighters: inevitabley, the "combo-*****" characters are the bar-none best choices. By that, I mean that in any given fighter, 9/10 times the best character is the fast little guy who can zip around, and hit you once and begin a stupidly good chain of attacks that cause massive damage, then either zip out and restart that till you die, or whatever else is benifical in that game. Again, in my opinion these characters arent even designed to be "good" usually. By design, they are usually balanced out by being very frail with either low weight/health, or frailty to combos themselves. However, that is horribly off-set by the fact that these are the characters that abuse the physics the best, so in turn they -are- the best as the best players are the ones that can abuse the egine best with the best abuser of the engine from the roster.

Not to start this debate again, but look at the top tier in Melee and Brawl. In melee, the combo-centric one of the two, the top characters consist of the characters that abuse the game's engine the best, and all have essentially the same playstyle with slight variation: Fox and Falco are the silly-fast traditional combo-whores, Shiek is similar, but with less "tricks" and more "shennanigans" (aka CGs and locks, etc), Marth is similar to them, but slightly slower (however he makes up for this with just sheer range), and Jiggs is a unique case in that she has the silly combos like Fox/Falco/Shiek do (as well as a great finisher) as well as the excellent gimping power Marth has (just without the range). However, all these can be kinda clumped into "rushdown", aka the fighting game archetype I described above as the little guy who can zip in, do a ton of damage/etc in a combo, and be relativley safe as long as they reliably land the first hit.

Now lets look at the top 5 in Brawl, which is regarded as having very little combo-centric properties. We have MK, who ironically seems to be built for the role of the combo-*****, but is best for a whole other slew of reasons (mainly that everythign he does is safe and that he has the best options for like everything), Snake is a slow and strong fighter with stage control elements and an ability to tank damage like nobody else can. Right away that deviates from the "standard" in that a top-tier isnt a super-fast combo character (that isnt broken...arguably). Diddy is a whole other can of worms as he is essentially one big mindgame as his banannas force situations which he takes advantage of, Falco this time around plays out like more of a ranged fighter who has some combos, but then mainly punishes with his epic laser, and finally the ICs have a totally unique 2in1 style, as well as a terrifying grab-focus.

Looking at the two we have Melee with it's best characters as I've described: 5 "combo-whores" who are excellent at abusing the physics moreso than the other fighters, and Brawl with a comparitivley much more varied top tier with 5 different-enough playstyles (esp with Snake) to get a comparison here.

Don't get me wrong, combos can be fun as hell to do/watch, and Brawl has a bunch of issues in it's own right to offset what I've said about Melee. It's just that from what I've experienced, combo-based fighters kinda suck the spirit out of fighting games, especially those with varied rosters, as they only provide buffers for the players to weed out before they find the combo-whores of the game and **** with them. I mean, would Snake even be this good if Brawl kept melee's physics, or he would just be more combo-fodder for Fox?

 

[LAW2222]

this is just of huge defense for brawl that uses flawed logic
the biggest reason the top five in brawl aren't "combo whores" is because of the very small pool of combos in brawl lol
but at the end of the day brawl is the slower and campier of the two, which will never change

 

[Shy Guy!]

This is actualy a great read. I a huge melee player and follower but recently
go into brawl. I like how 2 pro level players who play the same character can have completely different play styles and I love how the thinkingprocess isn't "how can I start my pillars" or something.

I actualy find it to have more depth almost, because of factors you listed. Not to bag on melee at all though

sometimes I find it more competitive actualy. The tension between the two players, trying to think of the smartest tactics they can Which are always changing based on how the opponent plays.

Crazy combos are great to watch and fun to show off and be flashy but the tension of two people thinking hard about tactics and etc is something I cannot take my eyes off of.

Excuse for poor spelling and getting my point across : it's 240am I'm very tired :D

 

[JOE!]

this is just of huge defense for brawl that uses flawed logic
the biggest reason the top five in brawl aren't "combo whores" is because of the very small pool of combos in brawl lol
but at the end of the day brawl is the slower and campier of the two, which will never change

there are combos in brawl, and last I checked (this was written a few months ago just reposted now that blogs are working), Brawl has a few more "gaurenteed" combos then melee did, then again theyre at low % and are influenced by a bigger roster, but w/e.

And you could camp in melee, it's just that there was a two-way reward between approach and camp as opposed to the heavy favor towards camp in brawl.

Anywho, Im not trying to defend brawl per-say, but rather ask if combos are necessary to make a good fighter? As it seems where ever I go people allways love them combos, but I just never got why...

 

[Mota]

Good read, well put.

I agree with you JOE! I'm a fan of Tekken, one of those combo heavy games and you're right when saying it's practically fighting for 10%. That 10% being mindgaming, sidestepping in and out, poking around with a few jabs and kicks for that all important pop up, which usually depletes about a third to a half of the health bar. So 2 pop ups, (at worst 4 maximum) is needed to finish your opponent. Only a few characters out of a massive roster get used, being the top tiers.

Even though this is the case, I still enjoy Tekken, it's a 'good fighter' to me. It's tense watching who will get the pop up first. Then again there are those that play with a diffrent style, a minimum of pop ups.The game is usually first to win 3 rounds, so it a winner isn't decided in 8 seconds lol.

No, combos aren't necessary to make a good fighter. it works for some and may not work for others, all down to preference.
Brawl is decent enough, however I wished there was a greater punishment to stop campy play. Also Brawl isn't what most would call a 'traditional' fighter is it XD.
I don't think Street fighter would work as well without much comboing XD

 

[Jim Morrison]

brawl doesnt have combos and it sucks

therefor, fighters without combos suck

 

[JOE!]

Brawl has combos, your argument is invalid

it just lacks the silly ones seen in most fighters

 

[Seikend]

I do appreciate that you at least have some sort of understanding of how melee works, moreso than the average brawl player who claims melee is all zero to death comboes, you don't have to think and plan etc. and have clearly never properly played the game (and likewise, melee players make just as ridiculous claims about brawl).

I do think you over simplify the melee characters. But on the other hand I won't go into it, as it is a fair observation that combos are a significant part of melee.

Your argument that 10% of the time you're fighting your opponent is flawed. I don't know how other fighters work because I don't play them, but in melee when you're being comboed you're not just a dummy. There's DI. You influence which direction you go in. When comboing you're not just having to consider the game engine, your opponent still has a very significant input. A good way to show this is to play against a CPU. You can pull off silly combos on CPUs in melee just because they don't DI properly.

I don't believe that combos necessarily hurt or improve a game competitively. The impact it has is in a player's personal enjoyment. For example, I personally enjoy Melee's combo system, but I would hate a combo system that I would become a "dummy" as you put it, with no input on how the combo pans out. But that's purely a personal thing and has nothing to do with how competitively viable a game is.

TL;DR - A lack of combos does not hurt Brawl. The combos in melee do not hurt it in any way either.

People using combos as their reasoning in the Brawl Vs. Melee debate are dumb.

 

[Lythium]

it just lacks the silly ones seen in most fighters

This statement pretty much indicates that you have no idea how to play a fighting game that isn't Smash.

Combos aren't silly; they're how you maximize your damage output. :I

 

[Jim Morrison]

Basically, in any fighter that isn't Smash, you can make combo videos by just performing them on the computer and people will be like oooh wooow.

Smash has DI, others don't. The game end.

 

[INSANE CARZY GUY]

fox has the most optioons and things to use in melee you can play him basically anyway you want fairly easily. I've played so campy as falcon before I as like 20 sec. from timming out on FD vs marth but I have also rushdown on people and finsihed in like 3 minutes.

 

[JOE!]

I do appreciate that you at least have some sort of understanding of how melee works, moreso than the average brawl player who claims melee is all zero to death comboes, you don't have to think and plan etc. and have clearly never properly played the game (and likewise, melee players make just as ridiculous claims about brawl).

Yeah, i have a bit of knowledge about Melee, it's just i wasnt around the scene for it's heydey so I dont know "that" much about it

I do think you over simplify the melee characters. But on the other hand I won't go into it, as it is a fair observation that combos are a significant part of melee.

See above, I know they have very varied playstyles among the top tier, as ICG Mentions below, but alot of the time you see them played as rushdown.

Your argument that 10% of the time you're fighting your opponent is flawed. I don't know how other fighters work because I don't play them, but in melee when you're being comboed you're not just a dummy. There's DI. You influence which direction you go in. When comboing you're not just having to consider the game engine, your opponent still has a very significant input. A good way to show this is to play against a CPU. You can pull off silly combos on CPUs in melee just because they don't DI properly.

Quite, look at a SF4 vid and you'll usually see this:

Footsies -> hit 1 to a few hit combo -> reset to neutral -> some blocks and more footsies -> another hit to a few hit combo ->repeat till a winner.

Thats the ideal combo situation IMO, where it's not overly dominant either way. Unfortunatley, in other examples I think the characters lack the ability to DI, as Enema says, which can scew the balance between using combos, and setting up the windows to nail the opponent with them.

In Smash games, DI really effects what can be done with combos, but as I said above the top tier of melee also happen to be the ones most adept at comboing, among other things, which is also a common trait among top tiers in almost any other fighting game.

I don't believe that combos necessarily hurt or improve a game competitively. The impact it has is in a player's personal enjoyment. For example, I personally enjoy Melee's combo system, but I would hate a combo system that I would become a "dummy" as you put it, with no input on how the combo pans out. But that's purely a personal thing and has nothing to do with how competitively viable a game is.

Indeed, I am simply curious as to why "comboing" is the almost universal standard for how offense should work in fighters.

This statement pretty much indicates that you have no idea how to play a fighting game that isn't Smash.

Combos aren't silly; they're how you maximize your damage output. :I

But why should it only be combos? Also, combos dont only maximize your damage, but your safety as the other character cannot retalliate and hurt you.

fox has the most optioons and things to use in melee you can play him basically anyway you want fairly easily. I've played so campy as falcon before I as like 20 sec. from timming out on FD vs marth but I have also rushdown on people and finsihed in like 3 minutes.

Yep, as I said earlier: camping is a viable strategy in melee, it's just that its a much more even balance between offense and defense there

 

[Spoon]

To say that a lot of the "pro" or "top tier" matches are just rushdown is plain ignorance of Melee's metagame.

You try blind rushdown as Falco, Falcon, or even Fox and you will be in a world of hurt if the other person can react, or anticipate such hasty decision making. "As long as they reliably land the first hit" is the key phrase here: indeed, if they can reliably land the first hit; but that's to assume, like some who argue pro-Brawl, that there are "little mindgames in Melee, it's mostly tech skill". I was watching an M2K vs. ColBol match the other day, and when you really realize how each player controls the space, so quickly and nimbly, you can really appreciate the battle even when they aren't actually hitting each other. Every approach has to be calculated, especially against good players. In a game where, as you imply, any hit can turn into a combo, you'd obviously have to watch out for retaliations, correct?

What makes combos (and combo videos) in Melee so epic is not just the "hey look what I can do with this game's mechanical limitations" factor, but rather that combined with the total dominance of the other opponent's attempt to escape. Often the most impressive combos are the ones that require the quickest reactions on the combo'ers part: there are few combos that are guaranteed to work. I'm talking quick tech chases, reading DI, and manipulation of the vast variations of the stage and weights of the characters comboing and being combo'd.

Sure there are some basic combos that are seen over and over again and certainly don't need any more praise, but it's that ever expansive potential of what you can do with a hit, or rather, several hits, that truly reflects upon the player's ability to develop and succeed in a fighting game.

It's partially indebted to the fact that Melee itself is such a sandbox for player design when it comes to fabricating such intricate manipulations of the stage and game mechanics that separates it so heavily from the pace and flow of more standard 2D fighters. Indeed every combo is reliant not just on the weight of the opponent, but the percentage, the spacing of the hits, the shape of the stage, and the ability of the player to react to changes in DI and teching. That, in itself, is one of the many factors that makes high-level Melee play so impressive (and I dare say crowd-pleasing) that leaves many who play Brawl afterward feeling unsatisfied.

 

[JOE!]

You're eggagerating what I said a bit.

What I meant by rushdown (probably my fault for implying it like this) is that they can run in with a good approach, then just go to town. Not saying that takes no skill, just saying theyre the best at doing it when done right.

Second, as for the 1 hit needed, I never said "any" hit, just as Mota said, usually its the "pop-up" move that is needed to start the **** that pursues in the form of either straight up comboing, or tech-chasing which may as well be comboing as the opponent usually has no control over what happens other than the moves the chaser makes.

Anywho, what other games can this apply to? And nobody has answered why comboing (and friends) seem to be the only way offense is portrayed in fighters?

 

[LordoftheMorning]

I'm trying to learn to play Blazblue with a big group of verterans who hang out at my college.

... I suspect there are few things that will make you as sick of combos as that. Essentially, I have to wait through a rotation of 6 people, only to get my *** handed to me twice. During that time, I only get about 30 seconds of time to try and figure out how my character works.

I know I must sound like a total scrub, but it's really freaking hard to deal with. Don't get me wrong, I haven't given up on Blazblue yet, nor do I hate combos in my fighters, but there definitely is a point where there's too much combo potential and it hurts the game.

 

[Spoon]

Second, as for the 1 hit needed, I never said "any" hit, just as Mota said, usually its the "pop-up" move that is needed to start the **** that pursues in the form of either straight up comboing, or tech-chasing which may as well be comboing as the opponent usually has no control over what happens other than the moves the chaser makes.

Anywho, what other games can this apply to? And nobody has answered why comboing (and friends) seem to be the only way offense is portrayed in fighters?

lol whoops I didn't mean to say "any", my bad.

and I wouldn't say that comboing is the ONLY way offense is portrayed in games, it's just that it's probably one of the biggest factors (and in some games, one of the areas of the game that requires the most development in technical skill). Especially in street fighter, really the only tech skill comes into play during a combo (with a few exceptions with characters that require quick inputs in order to feint and dance about, like Cammy and Viper). The rest is smart spacing, building meter, setting up for supers/ultras, and footsies come into play there.

Look at Guilty Gear. That's a game where speed and offense is probably one of the biggest things that makes the game so memorable, and really watching pro players play you can tell just how ridiculously fast the game is. Combo strings are long, and in the right circumstances, can be very long, but who's the best in the game? Among Eddie/Testament, who totally dominate the field if played correctly, is that huge, heavy, high-damage output, few-combos needed Potemkin. With characters like him, you succeed by understanding the flow of the faster characters and learning to tear apart their approaches and miscalculated pressure strings.

However, if you want a more practical answer, I'd probably say that most people like combos because most people like winning/owning people. We see a good combo and go "whoa, no one can escape that guy!" or "didn't know those two moves worked together like that." In some fighting games you could even say that the fastest player wins (note I said player and not character). It's one of the thrills of watching/playing a fighting game that leaves Melee players unsatisfied when watching Brawl matches or combo highlights. Something about "random hits" (not saying that all hits in a Brawl match are random but bear with me here) seem less legit; and since no one can truly know what a player was thinking (after that combo might've started because he did the first bair on accident), combos are usually what tell people "hey, I know what I'm doing and I'm good at it, look at this combo." Since Brawl relies less on combos, many hits have to be struck on an opponent forced into situations, and, like you already implied, it isn't as easy to just rush them down.

 

[Lythium]

Indeed, I am simply curious as to why "comboing" is the almost universal standard for how offense should work in fighters.

It's not. Footsies and poking are also a part of being offensive, especially in a really defensive game like Street Fighter as you mentioned here: "Quite, look at a SF4 vid and you'll usually see this: Footsies -> hit 1 to a few hit combo -> reset to neutral -> some blocks and more footsies -> another hit to a few hit combo ->repeat till a winner." Getting a combo isn't about being offensive. You can easily be defensive, and punish someone and land a combo off of their mistake. It isn't so black and white as you make it seem. There's rushdown, there's blockstrings, there's zoning, etc. There are lots of ways to apply pressure and be offensive. Landing a combo isn't really one of them.

But why should it only be combos? Also, combos dont only maximize your damage, but your safety as the other character cannot retalliate and hurt you.

Combos do maximize your damage. You'll get a lot more damage off of a series of hits that cannot be teched out of, than you will off of pokes. And that's the whole point of a combo. Your opponent isn't supposed to be able retaliate until it's finished, and unless you have really sloppy execution that will give them a chance to tech out. And in a fighting game that isn't broken, the combo will have to end eventually.

I'm trying to learn to play Blazblue with a big group of verterans who hang out at my college.

... I suspect there are few things that will make you as sick of combos as that. Essentially, I have to wait through a rotation of 6 people, only to get my *** handed to me twice. During that time, I only get about 30 seconds of time to try and figure out how my character works.

I know I must sound like a total scrub, but it's really freaking hard to deal with. Don't get me wrong, I haven't given up on Blazblue yet, nor do I hate combos in my fighters, but there definitely is a point where there's too much combo potential and it hurts the game.

Practice? Or make friends with one of the people you play with, and ask him to teach you about the game?

BlazBlue can be a pretty frustrating game to someone who's playing against an opponent who knows what they're doing. Also, if you haven't already, I suggest you read this: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs/

Also, who do you play? That game has some pretty severe match-ups.

 

[MikeKirby]

Some people like chess, some people like checkers.

 

[LordoftheMorning]

Practice? Or make friends with one of the people you play with, and ask him to teach you about the game?

BlazBlue can be a pretty frustrating game to someone who's playing against an opponent who knows what they're doing. Also, if you haven't already, I suggest you read this: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs/

Also, who do you play? That game has some pretty severe match-ups.

I am already friends with a couple of blazblue players, and they've shown me the ropes already. I started out trying to play Litchi for like a month, but I wasn't getting anywhere so I tried Ragna. Then I went to Tsubaki, who's actually working out the best so far. The thing is, getting combo'd excessively, ESPECIALLY by the same combo every time (because Ragna, Litchi, Tager, and a few other players seem to just use the same one over and over), will grind your gears inevitably.

 

[Spoon]

It's not. Footsies and poking are also a part of being offensive, especially in a really defensive game like Street Fighter as you mentioned here: "Quite, look at a SF4 vid and you'll usually see this: Footsies -> hit 1 to a few hit combo -> reset to neutral -> some blocks and more footsies -> another hit to a few hit combo ->repeat till a winner." Getting a combo isn't about being offensive. You can easily be defensive, and punish someone and land a combo off of their mistake. It isn't so black and white as you make it seem. There's rushdown, there's blockstrings, there's zoning, etc. There are lots of ways to apply pressure and be offensive. Landing a combo isn't really one of them.

Couldn't have said it better myself

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

It's good to see that our Smash Researchers have such a comprehensive knowledge of video game theory.

 

[JOE!]

What? I cant be curious about why combos seem to be the only form of offense, A Pimp Named Slickback?

 

[Purple]

Lord of the Morning you might be taking the wrong way to play that particular fighter. Start off learning the basics of the character (the pokes, what moves you can abuse, etc.) These are the things you'll be coming to most often in a match. In most fighting games (save crossovers like MvC) much of the game is poking, zoning, etc. So that's the most important thing. Then learn the bread and butter (simple as ****) combos.


Combos have no real affect on how good you are in most games. Having good execution is great, however if you can't land it how would it make you any better :s.

Combos aren't necessary to make a good fighter, having fundamental concepts like zoning, spacing, etc. do.

@a pimp named slickback - it's called smash researcher for a reason . He doesn't have to know about other games to be one.

 

[Ballistics]

combos are sexy, is sexy important? I think so

 

[kr3wman]

No, but they certainly do help.

 

[JOE!]

No, but they certainly do help.

but why do they help?

 

[Madtsunami]

delete this post

asking that is like asking why people play games, imo

Every game is different. some involve shooting baskets, some involve getting touchdowns, and some involve combo skill. This is just the way the games are made.

I really have no idea how to put this other than it's kind of dumb how people feel like they have to debate this crap. play the games, compete if you want, have fun

 

[JOE!]

the issue is that characters can work in fighters without having to (heavily) rely on combos... so why is it seemingly the standard?

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

characters can "work" without jumps either. doesn't mean jumps are bad.

I thought that would be known to a "smash researcher"

what a joke imo

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hmm... You know, I'd argue that in most conventional fighters, a lack of combos is definitely a bad thing. It reduces the gameplay to entirely footsies, which makes for a very slow, plodding, dull game. While many 3D games can get past this (Soul Calibur, for example), many can't, and most don't even try any more. You need a very different movement style in order for "just footsies" to be enough. The smash engine is perfect for this kind of gameplay-almost no game allows for so much mobility in any direction, or as much variance (through various stages). It means that "just footsies" is STILL a lot!

The opposite ("Just Combos") can also be very bad.

 

[El Nino]

Some people like chess, some people like checkers.

That's basically my response to this topic.

characters can "work" without jumps either. doesn't mean jumps are bad.

If I'm understanding him correctly, he isn't saying that combos are bad. He just doesn't think that combos should be used as the judging standard to say whether a game is a good fighter or not.

To use your analogy, to him, judging a fighter based on its combos would be the same as judging a fighter based on its jumps.

 

[Lythium]

but why do they help?

the issue is that characters can work in fighters without having to (heavily) rely on combos... so why is it seemingly the standard?

I like how I've addressed both of these questions in my post, which you still haven't responded to.

:3c

 

[Purple]

Lythium your post is too big for people to read obviously. :s

 

[INSANE CARZY GUY]

if I jab as fox and don't follow up i'm punished when I could up-smash.

combos are a type of pressure no pressure of any sort like no stun would make it a game of who can mash the attack button the fastest.

hitstun makes it so you can punish without being punished everytime.

really think of a game with 0 knockback/stun no press makes defence/offense pointless

also in ssbm anyone can get up on some people like fox everyone gets off on him. even kirby could do SOME damage.

defence is simply to beat offense and offense is to pressure. without pressure everything is kindof gone and it's spaming moves that you can't really punish.

also play bushido blade combos=pressure to cause them to make mistakes but it only takes one hit to kill sometimes. realist fighter if i've ever seen one

 

[Purple]

Oh my god ICG what are you talking about.

Get out of here.

 

[Spoon]

....lolwut

 

[kr3wman]

Hmm... You know, I'd argue that in most conventional fighters, a lack of combos is definitely a bad thing. It reduces the gameplay to entirely footsies, which makes for a very slow, plodding, dull game. While many 3D games can get past this (Soul Calibur, for example), many can't, and most don't even try any more. You need a very different movement style in order for "just footsies" to be enough. The smash engine is perfect for this kind of gameplay-almost no game allows for so much mobility in any direction, or as much variance (through various stages). It means that "just footsies" is STILL a lot!

The opposite ("Just Combos") can also be very bad.

This.

Although the Just Combos part is really really entertaining and fun if you ask me.

 

[Madtsunami]

this user blog is OVER

continue the discussion i dare you

 

[Purple]

someone remind me to edit this post with information

 

[Falconv1.0]

Go learn the basics of Street Fighter, get back to me on whatever we're talking 'bout.