Current-Gen Fighting Games

[Purple]

7-3 is winnable in street fighter terms, not smash bros terms, in smash bros terms, it's "impossible" because it'll be more like chaingrabs and infinites.

SFIV isn't really broke, i mean, they take out infinites as soon as they find them ;/. unlike in brawl and melee where they don't patch ****.

I think it's just you're a casual player laijin, so you complain about everything, instead of finding out ways around it. You use what your opponent thinks is his high point, and turn it on them.

oh and by the way

Capcom vs SNK - a-groove pokefest -(shoshosho, paint the fence, etc.)
Tekken 5 - same as tekken 6 without a bounce system,
Marvel vs Capcom 2- hyper grav magnetic tempest
Guilty Gear Accent Core - dust loop
SF: Third Strike - parry > cr.mk > sa2 = half health. takes two seconds to learn. (oh **** they're going to mix up? low parry > cr.mk > sa2)

 

[Laijin]

So...this is what I'm getting out of this thread. You don't like new gen games because they're 'boring' to you..well sorry but that doesn't cut it in everyones book to call them 'byiad.'

If you really look at street fighters new cancelling system...it's a hell of a good system thus far. And for them to even be talking about SSF4 is pretty impressive, shows they're working to make a better game. I'd say they did a good job with the game overall. And yes...7-3 is very winnable.

I'm pretty sure when a game is boring, its not that good. Games are made for entertainment. If I'm not entertained, why are they good? And yes, this thread was made with my pure opinion. Thats the point of a discussion although theres not much a discussion going on here..

I hate the new cancelling system. I think its pretty stupid. If you mess up the perry, you actually get punished instead of rewarded? I would'nt mind this if SF4 did'nt already lean the advantage towards the losing player(Stuff like only if you get attacked do you build up ultra bar kinda bothers me..meaning you can't do an ultra if your doing amazingly well in the match).

When the **** did 7-3 actually mean winnable? Thats a weird scale your using cause to me 7-3 means "Definitely not likely to win". Sure its possible, but wow good luck for trying. From my experience, 7-3 says Nu vs Tager in BlazBlue. Can Tager win? Sure. Will he win? Probably not.

 

[Purple]

If it's not 10-0, it's winnable. obv. 7-3 gives a 30% chance, which is still a chance.


If you're playing it competitively, it's not going to be extra fun and awesome. it's fun in a competitive sense, why do you think brawl players play brawl? They're into the game, not exactly the camping and what the metagame has changed into.

Also, if you focus attack projectiles, you build ultra meter without losing health since it regenerates. It's like an easier k-groove.

We're not discussing because your opinion are the complete opposite of a previous thread you said before apparently.

 

[ama(m/t)]

And yes, this thread was made with my pure opinion. Thats the point of a discussion although theres not much a discussion going on here..

your first mistake

l2discuss

 

[GA Peach]

i dunno why some of you guys hate Tekken. if it's the move thing, the good competitive players easily go through their characters' move lists multiple times, learning EVERYTHING about their character. when i say everything, i mean EVERYTHING. all the commands of their 100+ moves, all their frame data, even opposing characters' moves and frame data. i've been training with Lei, and just about all of his 168 moves are used at some point(the 168 includes the sample combos). he is a situational character, and he has to change stances and strings depending on the opponent. i'm just starting to study the frame data now that i know a good number of my moves. i don't know about everyone's competitive background, but i know some examples of people who are having a hard time with the game. just about all of them are people whose first competitive game was a form of Smash, and they were simply spoiled by not needing to know any frame data, having a small move list, and numbingly easy execution for those moves, so you can simply sit down and play. unfortunately for most, Tekken is a game you HAVE to dump a load of time into to get the true enjoyment out of it.

SF4 is a solid game, so i dunno why you don't like the game, Laijin. it's one of those games that's a "sort of easy to pick up, harder to master" kind of thing. and fairly balanced. the 7-3s in the game are winnable, albeit difficult.

BlazBlue is also a good game for what it is. It's just an easier, slightly less balanced GGXX, but it still works. Granted, I still think GGXX is a better game, but it doesn't make BB a bad game, persay.

Also, MvC2, from a programming standpoint, was one of the worst games made. Every "advanced tactic", or rather, most, are simply glitches. truthfully, this discussion comes down to what classifies being a "bad" game to the individual. so, if someone wants to take the reins, pick an aspect of the games listed, and we can discuss from there.

 

[Purple]

i dunno why some of you guys hate Tekken. if it's the move thing, the good competitive players easily go through their characters' move lists multiple times, learning EVERYTHING about their character. when i say everything, i mean EVERYTHING. all the commands of their 100+ moves, all their frame data, even opposing characters' moves and frame data. i've been training with Lei, and just about all of his 168 moves are used at some point(the 168 includes the sample combos). he is a situational character, and he has to change stances and strings depending on the opponent. i'm just starting to study the frame data now that i know a good number of my moves. i don't know about everyone's competitive background, but i know some examples of people who are having a hard time with the game. just about all of them are people whose first competitive game was a form of Smash, and they were simply spoiled by not needing to know any frame data, having a small move list, and numbingly easy execution for those moves, so you can simply sit down and play. unfortunately for most, Tekken is a game you HAVE to dump a load of time into to get the true enjoyment out of it.

SF4 is a solid game, so i dunno why you don't like the game, Laijin. it's one of those games that's a "sort of easy to pick up, harder to master" kind of thing. and fairly balanced. the 7-3s in the game are winnable, albeit difficult.

BlazBlue is also a good game for what it is. It's just an easier, slightly less balanced GGXX, but it still works. Granted, I still think GGXX is a better game, but it doesn't make BB a bad game, persay.

Also, MvC2, from a programming standpoint, was one of the worst games made. Every "advanced tactic", or rather, most, are simply glitches. truthfully, this discussion comes down to what classifies being a "bad" game to the individual. so, if someone wants to take the reins, pick an aspect of the games listed, and we can discuss from there.

tl;dr

tekken - sorry you have to learn large move lists, get over it.

sf4 - relatively balanced ; stop looking at it from a scrub view, l2play sf.

BB- watered down guilty gear, stop saying it's bad and saying it's counterpart is obv. superior

mvc2 - requires your input on what's bad or not.

 

[GA Peach]

how was that too long to read? it's like a couple of paragraphs. what were your English scores in high school, Jamaal?

 

[Purple]

how was that too long to read? it's like a couple of paragraphs. what were your English scores in high school, Jamaal?

90+

also, "tl;dr" does mean "too long didn't read" but is used when you think people won't read your wall of text ("^" is a wall for smashboards) so you say tl;dr and sum it up very shortly.

If you noticed, i actually did read your post, i just summed it up shortly in mine.

 

[ama(m/t)]

lol @ pervarsaurs first attempt at making fun of someone

 

[Galuuda]

@GA Peach - So true about MvC2, I've been playing a lot of it lately and I was hoping to get into the competitive scene with it, but recently I just said screw it, I'm playing it for fun because most of the game is a disappointment 'competitive wise' All infinite's and cheap tactics basically. I'm confused as to why they don't ban things such as the magneto infinite.

Overall, I'd just like to say good points made, sir. Agreed with all of em (Except for tekken, haven't gotten around to playing it yet, so I'm not sure.)

 

[Purple]

lol @ pervarsaurs first attempt at making fun of someone

i didn't make fun of anyone actually.


get it together man, i can practically ignore your stuff nowadays

 

[GA Peach]

90+

also, "tl;dr" does mean "too long didn't read" but is used when you think people won't read your wall of text ("^" is a wall for smashboards) so you say tl;dr and sum it up very shortly.

If you noticed, i actually did read your post, i just summed it up shortly in mine.

well, you summed some of it up incorrectly, so i don't think you read it very well. you missed the point of the Tekken comments, which was the meat of the post. i was responding to people(CRASHiC is the only one i can think of off hand) that were saying the extensive move lists were overdone and not much of it was useful in competitive play. i wasn't telling them they just simply needed to get over learning a long list of moves.

@GA Peach - So true about MvC2, I've been playing a lot of it lately and I was hoping to get into the competitive scene with it, but recently I just said screw it, I'm playing it for fun because most of the game is a disappointment 'competitive wise' All infinite's and cheap tactics basically. I'm confused as to why they don't ban things such as the magneto infinite.

Overall, I'd just like to say good points made, sir. Agreed with all of em (Except for tekken, haven't gotten around to playing it yet, so I'm not sure.)

well, i would encourage you to play MvC2 in competition if you enjoy it. I just started training in it myself, and it is a great deal of fun, although I will say that the cast of characters you can viably win with is quite small. lol, but if you don't enjoy infinites, frame traps, and unblockable setups galore, you may not want to play it. to clarify, i was stating that a lot of the advanced tactics in MvC2 are actual GLITCHES, as in the tactics executed make certain aspects of the game work WIDELY outside of the intended programming.

but back to the competitive aspect of MvC2, it's kind of weird. it's like 2 games in 1. when you are playing with the lower tier, the game is vastly slower, and if you get hit, you'll eat a combo, but you'll be able to bounce back. when playing with the high tiers, the game speed is much increased, and when you get hit, even once, you may very well lose the match. so far the Magneto Infinite goes, it's not ACTUALLY an infinite, but it's kind of close, lol. if you try to infinite someone with the combo, they will dizzy out after a while and be able to ground tech away from you, so you can't ill them with it. if you choose to go to the Hyper Grav/Magnetic Tempest follow to the combo, the opponent can actually shake out of the Grav so the Tempest is not a guaranteed hit, and they can block it, thus not dying.

you should try out Tekken 6, as well. while not the best Tekken in the series, imo, this game is very good. to warn you, though, to get good, it will require some time to really study your character, but it's very worth it. Tekken is not a very "newbie-friendly" game. also, i appreciate your comments on my prior post, lol.