I haven't written here in a while, and with a heavy heart at the loss of my Frankenstein avatar, I write the following to possibly help some of you deal with the mental blocks associated with character matchups, especially as you approach the biggest tournament of all time, EVO 2013. Now here's event where you'd be a fool to assume you'll be able to dodge any given character in the bracket.
I've seen arguments left and right over the implications of the matchup charts. Some people believe they serve as an indicator of which character should win in a vacuum of sorts, where player ability can be put to a side, and the outcomes are predicted solely on the physics of each character. It's a guide where you'd be ill-advised to pick, say, Samus against a Sheik or Falcon.
To me, these lists serve only as a reminder of who will have to work harder to achieve the same desired outcome. But even that, I feel, is irrelevant, and I'll explain why.
When it comes to putting your skills to the test at a tournament, I believe there is only one acceptable goal: perfect execution. If that is not your only acceptable level of output, there is something wrong with your competitive mindset. And if you think about it, a Sheik player might be at an advantage against a Samus player in the sense that the Sheik wouldn't have to try as hard to achieve perfect execution in the matchup. But the closer both players get to perfect execution, the more of a wash the whole advantage becomes.
The way I always looked at it was: "If I could take all the time in the world, and think of a way to win in a given situation, then there is a solution, and it's my lack of proper execution that caused me to lose". In a mindset where your only goal is perfect execution, there is no room to blame your character, nor the advantages of another. And you never should. If you played perfectly, it wouldn't matter if Ice Climbers could wobble you. If you played perfectly, it wouldn't matter if Falcon could combo Samus with ease. I absolutely loathe the word "impossible" when it comes to playing a matchup. Sadly enough, it gets thrown around all the time. It gets to the point where people will even try to convince a player that they're wrong about their chances in a matchup, despite that player's proven ability to beat top-flight competition in that very same matchup.
I mean, I might be dating myself, but didn't Kage beat Tope? Didn't Linguini take out overtriforce? I've even had people tell me I'd lose to character X if I played a player that knew what he was doing, as my character would give me no options. It's absolutely ridiculous that people would go so far as to blame the shortcomings of some of the best competition in the nation before admitting that a given matchup may be just as winnable as any other. And that's really the end-all disadvantage in a matchup, a player's willingness to lose it before it really even begins. I want to stress this: the disadvantage barely exists if your only goal is to think and execute perfectly.
Falcon combos Samus? I only play to not get caught.
Sheik's grab destroys Samus? I only play to not get grabbed.
Did I get caught? My fault. Did I get grabbed? My fault.
And if you think the pursuit of perfection is a turn off, then you should be playing casually, not to win.
I understand there's a sense of outdated stubbornness involved in the decision to stick to one character through thick and thin. I'm not suggesting anyone do that. However, there is nothing outdated about taking responsibility over your own shortcomings, rather than blaming your character for your loss. And hopefully, that type of mindset will aid players in mastering characters, possibly several, before turning to the next flavor of the month to save the day.
Good luck at EVO everyone
I've seen arguments left and right over the implications of the matchup charts. Some people believe they serve as an indicator of which character should win in a vacuum of sorts, where player ability can be put to a side, and the outcomes are predicted solely on the physics of each character. It's a guide where you'd be ill-advised to pick, say, Samus against a Sheik or Falcon.
To me, these lists serve only as a reminder of who will have to work harder to achieve the same desired outcome. But even that, I feel, is irrelevant, and I'll explain why.
When it comes to putting your skills to the test at a tournament, I believe there is only one acceptable goal: perfect execution. If that is not your only acceptable level of output, there is something wrong with your competitive mindset. And if you think about it, a Sheik player might be at an advantage against a Samus player in the sense that the Sheik wouldn't have to try as hard to achieve perfect execution in the matchup. But the closer both players get to perfect execution, the more of a wash the whole advantage becomes.
The way I always looked at it was: "If I could take all the time in the world, and think of a way to win in a given situation, then there is a solution, and it's my lack of proper execution that caused me to lose". In a mindset where your only goal is perfect execution, there is no room to blame your character, nor the advantages of another. And you never should. If you played perfectly, it wouldn't matter if Ice Climbers could wobble you. If you played perfectly, it wouldn't matter if Falcon could combo Samus with ease. I absolutely loathe the word "impossible" when it comes to playing a matchup. Sadly enough, it gets thrown around all the time. It gets to the point where people will even try to convince a player that they're wrong about their chances in a matchup, despite that player's proven ability to beat top-flight competition in that very same matchup.
I mean, I might be dating myself, but didn't Kage beat Tope? Didn't Linguini take out overtriforce? I've even had people tell me I'd lose to character X if I played a player that knew what he was doing, as my character would give me no options. It's absolutely ridiculous that people would go so far as to blame the shortcomings of some of the best competition in the nation before admitting that a given matchup may be just as winnable as any other. And that's really the end-all disadvantage in a matchup, a player's willingness to lose it before it really even begins. I want to stress this: the disadvantage barely exists if your only goal is to think and execute perfectly.
Falcon combos Samus? I only play to not get caught.
Sheik's grab destroys Samus? I only play to not get grabbed.
Did I get caught? My fault. Did I get grabbed? My fault.
And if you think the pursuit of perfection is a turn off, then you should be playing casually, not to win.
I understand there's a sense of outdated stubbornness involved in the decision to stick to one character through thick and thin. I'm not suggesting anyone do that. However, there is nothing outdated about taking responsibility over your own shortcomings, rather than blaming your character for your loss. And hopefully, that type of mindset will aid players in mastering characters, possibly several, before turning to the next flavor of the month to save the day.
Good luck at EVO everyone