Most balanced fighters?

[Brightside6382]

You cant really compare smash to most other fighting games, smash is more of free roaming than other fighters were you can even really run away or anything, smash gives you i think more control. I use to play SCII and long ago i played Street Fighters but nothing compares to smash. Smash is more balanced because its not really how many combos you can do but more of knowing how to use your characters simple moves. Since smash is kinda not really a combo doing game. Unless you play IC's like me

Sry to just pick you out like this but this is an example of what I was previously talking about.

Well since Smash is played like a fighting game and people are bringing it up in this thread as a balanced "fighting game" I see no reason why we shouldn't compare smash to other fighters.

First of all SCII was never really a competativly played game at all, maybe people played for a year or two but the scene quickly died.

I notice a misconception that alot of smash players have about other more conventional fighters are combo's. Performing combo's isn't as easy as dialing a phone # as many smashers for some reason or another seem to believe. Linking supers from a 2 frame jab or doing a link with only a 2-5 frame time window is not easy. If anything in more conventional fighters knowing your characters "simple" moves is more important because you have to know the frames and the links of all your moves so you can perform those "Oh so easy combos"

Smash is NOT a balanced game. How often do you see anyone below mid-tier even get high in a tourneys? Hardly ever, thats why people create "low tier tournies" so the low tier garbage characters can actually see the light of day.

 

[pdk]

You cant really compare smash to most other fighting games, smash is more of free roaming than other fighters were you can even really run away or anything, smash gives you i think more control. I use to play SCII and long ago i played Street Fighters but nothing compares to smash. Smash is more balanced because its not really how many combos you can do but more of knowing how to use your characters simple moves. Since smash is kinda not really a combo doing game. Unless you play IC's like me

this is one of the worst arguments for ssbm's favor since there is no game that is about how many combos you can do, sparky; those 50-hit combos you see on youtube are almost never plausible in actual matches and bread-n'-butter combos are just as prevalent in ssbm as in sf or whatever (probably moreso since so many of them start with grabs and grabbing is already super important in ssbm)

and balance is balance is balance; sheik can turn around and walk away from her opponent instead of walking backward but that doesn't make her less broken, and the fact you can shorthop or whatever in ssbm but not street fighter doesn't mean that the mixup options and depth in sf disappear

ssbm players of all people should get that one fighter's system is not the standard by which all others are measured or even should be measured (one game's nuances != another game's nuances, it's not hard to grasp), but... guess not

 

[MetaKnight0]

I bet most of the knowledge SSBM players have about other fighting games can be summed up by combo videos daigo mvc2 infinite link is in sc2 fanboy etc. etc.

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

Some of the ignorance for you SSBM purist blinds you from other fighting game engine mechanics. To make this not as long as how I would've made it, I'll just talk to some about Street Fighter since it was brought up by The_Smash_Champ. Frankly, let me tell you this Smash Champ, you don't know nothing about Street Fighter if you believe it's just a combo game.

Take for example Street Fighter II : Hyper Fighting, this game is far from being a combo game. Infact when it was played at the highest lvls (during the Golden Era of Fighting Games) there was almost no chances of landing a big combo. Street Fighter was played with the whole emphasis of zoning, spacing, chipping, footsies, and controlling the clock to win. That's why so many matches went down to the wire, because great players would pin you down, not allowing you to much, except for maybe two-three options, and those two-three options can be punished by the one who's pinned you down.

You are always constantly thinking 3-4 strategies ahead of time, and landing combos within SF2 is extremely, extremely rare, especially at the highest lvls. Because jumping forward is a risk in itself.

So no, you are wrong, it's not about landing combos, and I'll tell you this right now, in SF2, if you don't know your characters...you are DEAD PERIOD.

Street Fighter II has some of the best character individual characteristics I've seen within a fighting game ever.

For example, if your playing Guile, his SonicBoom has almost near instant recovery right after it, allowing Guile to follow right after his SonicBoom. This gives Guile a huge zoning and spacing game, because this gives Guile a buffer infront of him as protection.

Not only that but Guile's c.mk, it's one of the best pokes within the game, it's long reaching, far, very safe. Also it works great with when following up with his SonicBoom, because if they block the Sonicboom and try to retaliate, you can go into his c.mk and stuff them before they can do anything.

Then bam, Sonic Boom, and your zoning them out again. If the SonicBoom hits them, you can do a BackFist and wham, there dizzy, and you've got a potential to land a combo. Or what if they try to jump over Guile...nothing to worry about, since he recovers almost instantly, c.fp.

They get hit and fly back, and you throw out another c.mk before they land, making them having to block again. Throw out another Sonic Boom, and there as square one again.

You see, that's how Guile is played, he zones, chips, and punishes you.

If your playing like say someone like Balrog, you must play aggressive, meaning you cannot zone like someone like Guile or Ryu. You have to constantly be in there face, rushing them down, trading shots.

Balrog players will trade shots because Balrog usually will benefit more from it, not only that but many Balrog players will take the damage, just so they can position themselves to be more aggressive. If Ryu throws out a Fireball, TurnPunch right through it and wham, Ryu get's stuffed. If your playing someone like Sagat, his biggest strength are his Tiger Shots, especially his low Tigers, your constantly shooting them, outzoning, chipping, and frustrating your opponents making them resorting to jumping forward to you.

This is where the bigggest mistake comes in, you jump in. Tiger Uppercut, your back at Square one, however, smart players will jump upward only and move forward when neccessary. No biggie, if they get within outside of sweep range, they'll have to guess, if Sagat doesn't throw out another Tiger Shot, he could go into Tiger Knee to whiff, however they'll land next to their opponent and throw them.

Not only that, but they'll use Tiger Knee's to close in the distance, since that is a far faster way to move with Sagat then to actually walk.

So you see, Character Individuality in a game like Street Fighter II (In particular) is very, very present. You cannot pick someone like Zangief and expect to sit and zone your opponents...no, what you'll be doing is trying to get in with well timed jumps, body presses, and to try and land the SPD. However, to move away from this, these concepts of the game does not dictate "balance". Just because SSBM is easy to learn does not mean it's a "balanced" fighting game and I'll agree with BrightSide, on that SSBM is definetly not as balanced as some of you claim it to be.

I for one play Link, and going up against someone like Fox or Falco is just stupid...seriously, this matchup is almost like a Goat trying to take on a Tiger. SSBM is definetly not one of the most balanced fighting games I've seen out there. However, I would like to also emphasize to people who haven't taken this into concept.

Let is us not forget that Balance is quite overrated, just because a game isn't the most balanced does not neccessarily mean that it doesn't have a well developed game engine. To much of people's amazement, Tekken 4 was quite arguably one of the most broken Tekken games of all time, however hidden under that was the deepest Tekken Game Engine ever created.

Not within any other Tekken game was Defense so much emphasized, character individuality was at it's best in T4 if your playing Paul your saying "I can't let myself get knocked down and cornered." or with Ling your saying "don't Tech!!!" or with Nina your saying "Can't let her runaway." Also, unevened stages brought out another strategy...Knowing Where Your Character Is, because say for example, if I'm Jin and where on an unevened floor, I'm going to do everything to make sure your on the higher stage, while I'm on the lower part, so that I can obtain the advantage, while you are at the disadvantage.

The only time when a game is stupidly unbalanced yet with horrible gameplay is a game like DoA...*shrugs*, back in DoA2 they had crap like 22-Frame Counters in which ANYONE could pull off, it basically came down too...who could chain-grab the most while doing the most combos...which was just ludicrious.

So for me, although we are talking about which fighting game is the most balanced, it's not always neccessarily the most deep, aside from a few though. Balance doesn't always make the fighting game a better game.

For real though, honestly, only post about a fighting game if you actually have some high lvled on hand knowledge of the game. Because, by saying this and this isn't as balanced...yet you have almost no knowledge because the basic concepts...well, your statements is pretty much balogna.

 

[rockman2k1]

Some random fighting games and how they rank in terms of balance.

Virtua Fighter (4Evo/5)
Guilty Gear XX (Accent Core/Slash)

Well balanced

Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection
3rd Strike
Super Turbo
KoF 98
Soul Calibur 2
King of Fighters XI

Bad, but playable (for whatever reason)

Smash Bros. Melee (Space Animals, followed by rare Marth/Peach)
MvC2 (God 4)
Capcom vs SNK2 (K-Scrub, A-Groove)


Trashy balance

Soul Calibur 3
Anything Mortal Kombat (except UMK3)

 

[Grey Fox]

Melee is the most balanced game ever to be created on this wonderful exilarating planet.

 

[pdk]

hasn't accent core already developed a reputation for stuff like baiken domination?

 

[greenblob]

When I think of character balance, I usually tend to prioritize the number of characters rather than the percentage of characters that are usuable in tournaments. I'll give an example that's familiar with almost everyone here. In Melee, although the top and high tier characters are the most common, you generally see everyone in the top three tiers (so from Fox to Ganondorf). In the original N64 Smash, although you generally see lots of Pikachus, every character other than Samus and Link are more or less tournament viable. Smash 64 has a higher percentage of usable characters, but Melee has more in terms of sheer number. Therefore you could say that Melee is more balanced than 64 Smash in terms of characters.

 

[Pasqual]

When I think of character balance, I usually tend to prioritize the number of characters rather than the percentage of characters that are usuable in tournaments. I'll give an example that's familiar with almost everyone here. In Melee, although the top and high tier characters are the most common, you generally see everyone in the top three tiers (so from Fox to Ganondorf). In the original N64 Smash, although you generally see lots of Pikachus, every character other than Samus and Link are more or less tournament viable. Smash 64 has a higher percentage of usable characters, but Melee has more in terms of sheer number. Therefore you could say that Melee is more balanced than 64 Smash in terms of characters.

I get what you're saying in this post but I have to disagree. Theoretically, a game could have 100 characters with only 30 competitively viable ones, and that would make the game balanced by your criteria. I think balance really has more to do with percentages, since the idea is literally to balance the entire cast. Melee's not balanced because a significant percentage of the cast cannot compete at higher levels.

 

[greenblob]

Well, you could have a fighter with only one character and that'd be 100% balanced character-wise, but the how is that any different from having 100 characters with only 1 that's usable?

 

[Professor Pro]

SSB64 is way more balanced compared to SSBM

 

[Pasqual]

Well, you could have a fighter with only one character and that'd be 100% balanced character-wise, but the how is that any different from having 100 characters with only 1 that's usable?

...there's no balance when it's only 1 character. You'd just have, y'know, one character. Balance is about the relationship between the characters. A game with 100 characters and only 1 usable means there is no balance whatsoever.

The idea of balance isn't just to make a big chunk of the roster viable; it's to make every character in the game viable.

 

[pdk]

Well, you could have a fighter with only one character and that'd be 100% balanced character-wise, but the how is that any different from having 100 characters with only 1 that's usable?

that character can be packin' infinites and unblockables left and right and the game would still be "balanced;" it takes effort to make sure no character absolutely trumps another

 

[rockman2k1]

hasn't accent core already developed a reputation for stuff like baiken domination?

I would'nt know, I do know that she is'nt the best, just really good. It's probably due to the fact that she's a lot easier to play than say........Eddie.

 

[GoldenGlove]

I haven't played any other fighting games competively, so I won't attempt to gauge how balanced those are. I will say that SSBM is pretty unbalanced. Everyone below mid-tier is pretty much unusable in tournament. Even then, while mid-tiers have some stuff they can do, they tend to get weeded out because high tiers simply have more options for achieving the same result. I recall someone saying that SSBM forces variety because it's more based on character match-ups than tiers. This isn't really true, because the only match-ups that end up mattering are the high-tiers vs. other high-tiers. High-level smash seems kind of like rock paper scissors between space animals, Marth, and Sheik.

However, I agree with what OWS said. Bad balance =/= bad game.

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

I didn't say Bad Balance ='s Bad Game, what I said was Bad Balance doesn't always neccessarily mean Bad Game. As with the case for MvC2, a prime example of a completely unbalanced game, yet a very deep and fun game engine.

You have your gem balanced games like SF2:HF the most balanced SF game ever made + it has the most solid SF game engine to boot. Then you have VF4:Evo a very balanced game (Unlike most other companies, Sega actually listens to the smart/top lvled players, instead of the mass scrubs) with a very, very good game engine.

However you'll have games like the older DoA games which where just unbalanced + poor game engine (22 counter frames can go to hell seriously). To me, that's just a complete loss, I can take unbalanced gameplay, however I can't stand unbalance+crappy game engine.

If you at least have great game engine but have fairly poor balance, I can take it and play it, however if you have horrible game engine+ horrible balance factor, then that's just too much to bare.

 

[GoldenGlove]

I didn't say Bad Balance ='s Bad Game

I know, =/= means "does not equal". It's a slash through an equal sign.

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

Oh, lol, sorry, I didn't know that, hahaha, you learn something new everyday.

 

[Unsafe]

I've seen and played alot of 3D fighters (which is where my background is) and this is what I will say:

#1 Virtua Fighter 4 & 3 series (with Final Tuned being the best)
#2 Virtua Fighter 5 series (early revisions sucked but it's good)
#3 Dead or Alive 3 JPN version
#4 Tekken 3
#5 Tekken Tag Tournament
#6 Tekken 5 Dark Ressurection
#7 Dead or Alive 4 and 2
#8 Soul Calibur 2
#9 Tekken 4
#10 Soul Calibur 3


VF overall has been the landmark standard for balance within a game. However it is very unpopular outside of Japan due to it's complex nature.


I don't want to start an arguement but from what I have played of 2D fighters I would say:

#1 Street Fighter 2 Hyper Fighting
#2 Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo
#3 King of Fighters '98
#4 Capcom vs. SNK 2
#5 Super Smash Brothers Melee
#6 King of Fighters '02
#7 Guilty Gear XX Slash
#8 Street Fighter 3 Third Strike
#9 Guilty Gear XX Accent Core
#10 Marvel vs. Capcom 2

Anything else imo is a little too unbalanced or I have not played it.

 

[greenblob]

To people who replied to my post, well, you get my point.

What's the purpose of balance?

...

OK, let me ask a similar question. Why are you all tired of seeing 90% of the tournament smashers playing Space Animals? Variety. You want variety. A good competitive game has a diverse roster of usable characters with a variety of moves and choices and numerous playing styles. This is why I believe that the number of usable characters takes priority over percentage of usable characters.

 

[Pasqual]

To people who replied to my post, well, you get my point.

What's the purpose of balance?

...

OK, let me ask a similar question. Why are you all tired of seeing 90% of the tournament smashers playing Space Animals? Variety. You want variety. A good competitive game has a diverse roster of usable characters with a variety of moves and choices and numerous playing styles. This is why I believe that the number of usable characters takes priority over percentage of usable characters.

Variety is always going to be considered in relation to the size of the roster though. If you have 10 viable characters out of 15, then you've got good variety since most of the cast is playable and that means most of the different characters' playstyles don't sit around collecting dust.

Now, let's say you have 10 viable characters out of 40. You still have the same amount of characters as the first example, but with so many characters being rendered fancy paperweights, you know you're missing out on a good chunk of what was put into the game to give more variety. Thus, the maximum potential for variety in the game is limited when a hefty percentage of the cast is unusable.

In those examples, I'm assuming that there are noticable differences in the playstyles of the characters. Akin to how a Pichu player must walk the line between dealing the most damage they can to their opponent while self-inflicting as little as possible (or at least, only hurting themselves when the damage is cost efficient, so to speak), whereas a Bowser can tank and trade off damage with less trepidation. In games where each character plays similarly, the balance does not have to take the percentage of usable characters into account so much as in other games. There is still the factor of character preference, fanboyism, and the like, but that's another debate.

 

[rockman2k1]

I've seen and played alot of 3D fighters (which is where my background is) and this is what I will say:

#1 Virtua Fighter 4 & 3 series (with Final Tuned being the best)
#2 Virtua Fighter 5 series (early revisions sucked but it's good)
#3 Dead or Alive 3 JPN version
#4 Tekken 3
#5 Tekken Tag Tournament
#6 Tekken 5 Dark Ressurection
#7 Dead or Alive 4 and 2
#8 Soul Calibur 2
#9 Tekken 4
#10 Soul Calibur 3


VF overall has been the landmark standard for balance within a game. However it is very unpopular outside of Japan due to it's complex nature.


I don't want to start an arguement but from what I have played of 2D fighters I would say:

#1 Street Fighter 2 Hyper Fighting
#2 Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo
#3 King of Fighters '98
#4 Capcom vs. SNK 2
#5 Super Smash Brothers Melee
#6 King of Fighters '02
#7 Guilty Gear XX Slash
#8 Street Fighter 3 Third Strike
#9 Guilty Gear XX Accent Core
#10 Marvel vs. Capcom 2

Anything else imo is a little too unbalanced or I have not played it.

Dang, what were you smoking when you came up with those lists? There's *NO* way CvS2 is more balanced than half those games, KoF '02 is dominated by Angel, and Slash is a lot better than most of those games above it, 3S should be a little higher, and ST should be a little lower.

As for 3D, Tag should be lower (*cough*Mishimas*cough*) Soul Calibur 2 should be higher (glitchy system, but most characters can hang with the tops). And I'm not sure about the JPN version of DoA3, but I remember Aynane, and Hayabusa being the only real characters seen at high play (which is rare in itself, lol)

 

[greenblob]

Variety is always going to be considered in relation to the size of the roster though. If you have 10 viable characters out of 15, then you've got good variety since most of the cast is playable and that means most of the different characters' playstyles don't sit around collecting dust.

Now, let's say you have 10 viable characters out of 40. You still have the same amount of characters as the first example, but with so many characters being rendered fancy paperweights, you know you're missing out on a good chunk of what was put into the game to give more variety. Thus, the maximum potential for variety in the game is limited when a hefty percentage of the cast is unusable.

In those examples, I'm assuming that there are noticable differences in the playstyles of the characters. Akin to how a Pichu player must walk the line between dealing the most damage they can to their opponent while self-inflicting as little as possible (or at least, only hurting themselves when the damage is cost efficient, so to speak), whereas a Bowser can tank and trade off damage with less trepidation. In games where each character plays similarly, the balance does not have to take the percentage of usable characters into account so much as in other games. There is still the factor of character preference, fanboyism, and the like, but that's another debate.

Does maximum potential matter? How is having an unusable character any different than leaving it out?

Warning: the next part of this reply consists of analogies.
This is somewhat comparable to a large and small restaurant. Let's say the large restaurant has 10x as many items on the menu compared to the smaller restaurant, but the vast majority of the food is stuff you'd never eat. Although you'd probably never order the broiled snake or grub rotisserie, the large restaurant still has more types of food to choose from, while the small restaurant only has your usual hamburger, hotdog, and salad. So, you'd probably end up going to the larger restaurant most of the time, assuming that everything else (such as price, location, quality of food, etc.) is constant.

Another analogy (before I go any further, please note that I do not wish to turn this into a console debate): Let's say there are two consoles out on the market, console A and console B. Console A has a few games, but almost all of them are worthwhile. Console B has a library of games that is several times larger than that of A, but only about half of them are good games. Assuming that you don't have to have any of those games and that the "good games" are all equally good, which one would you choose? Console B.


...And you get the idea. Variety is the reason for character balance, and variety depends mostly on how many, rather than what percent.

 

[Peaches]

I dunno, I think that you're just trying to draw too many conclusions from weak analogies.

Just leave it simple, you should have a decent number of playable characters in tournament play, as well as a fairly even percentage them compared to the overall roster.

Besides, we've already pointed out that balance isn't even a big deal. A lot of the best games aren't really all that balanced and balance isn't as simple as it seems due ot counter strategies and mathcups.

 

[Pasqual]

Does maximum potential matter? How is having an unusable character any different than leaving it out?

Yes it matters. The characters are designed so each one has its own unique aspects. These unique aspects are usually somewhat evenly distributed throughout the entire cast. The difference between an unusable character and leaving one out is that, with the unusable one, you can look and say, "wow, I wish I could play Abc's playstyle competitively without being crippled by the character's flaws".

And it's not that I'm saying I'd rather they leave a non-viable character out; that'd be idiotic, since if they knew the character wasn't viable than they would likely attempt to fix it. I'd just prefer they take more times in the testing stages to help balance the characters before shipping. I know, even then, that the balance won't be perfect, but that extra time could be the difference between a third of the cast being viable and three quarters being viable.

Warning: the next part of this reply consists of analogies.
This is somewhat comparable to a large and small restaurant. Let's say the large restaurant has 10x as many items on the menu compared to the smaller restaurant, but the vast majority of the food is stuff you'd never eat. Although you'd probably never order the broiled snake or grub rotisserie, the large restaurant still has more types of food to choose from, while the small restaurant only has your usual hamburger, hotdog, and salad. So, you'd probably end up going to the larger restaurant most of the time, assuming that everything else (such as price, location, quality of food, etc.) is constant.

This analogy doesn't work. The foods you don't eat are because you choose not to, not because of any inherent flaw in the food. It's a matter of preference.

Another analogy (before I go any further, please note that I do not wish to turn this into a console debate): Let's say there are two consoles out on the market, console A and console B. Console A has a few games, but almost all of them are worthwhile. Console B has a library of games that is several times larger than that of A, but only about half of them are good games. Assuming that you don't have to have any of those games and that the "good games" are all equally good, which one would you choose? Console B.

Again, the analogy doesn't work. The catalogs of each system can continute to expand (as could the menus of the restaurants) whereas a game is shipped and is done, excluding the occasional online updates, although these are more often in the form of costumes and levels instead of characters. I would choose Console A because its track record would show me it would be more likely to continue to produce higher quality games, whereas B's spotty history would not garner much trust on my behalf.

...And you get the idea. Variety is the reason for character balance, and variety depends mostly on how many, rather than what percent.

Variety is not the reason for character balance. Making the game fun is the reason for character balance. Variety is an extension of making the game fun. It does depend on how many, but it also depends on the percent, going back to my maximum potential point.


Peaches put it pretty well, I think.

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

Dang, what were you smoking when you came up with those lists? There's *NO* way CvS2 is more balanced than half those games, KoF '02 is dominated by Angel, and Slash is a lot better than most of those games above it, 3S should be a little higher, and ST should be a little lower.

As for 3D, Tag should be lower (*cough*Mishimas*cough*) Soul Calibur 2 should be higher (glitchy system, but most characters can hang with the tops). And I'm not sure about the JPN version of DoA3, but I remember Aynane, and Hayabusa being the only real characters seen at high play (which is rare in itself, lol)

As much as people try to point out, 3S although decently balanced, is not as balanced as people try to claim it to be. Until I see more than just Yun, Chun, and Ken dominating almost everysingle tournament scene, then I'll beg to differ. Also, ST is definetly up there as one of the most balanced 2-D fighting games of all time, "maybe" not #2 I'll still have to think this over, however most of the characters from ST are and can be played at the high lvls, much moreso when compared to 3S, and the only SF game that has more playable characters at the highest lvls then ST is HF.

Tag although dominated by Mishima's has a solid amount of playable characters when compared to most other Tekken's. The only people who can dominate with Mishima's are either Koreans or if your name is Ryan Hart, otherwise outside of that, they aren't nearly as dominant because they take an incredible amount of execution to be played at the near unstoppable lvl.

Tekken 3 was just insane, almost everyone did near half-life draining damage, however some had better options then others, but that game was full of extremely powerful characters, so I guess that pretty much balanced itself out.

Tekken 4 shouldn't even be placed up there if you looked at from a Balance Issue, because Jin dominated 95% of the Tournament Scene for years with an Iron Fist (Most ridiculously overpowered legal tournament character for Tekken ever). However if you removed Jin from the frey, the cast of playable characters was quite solid actually to much of people's disbelief.

As I've said from a balance standpoint character-wise, T5 : DR is the only one that truly stands out, to see characters like Julia placing in the Top 3 amazes me beyond any recognition, and although DevilJin is considered #1 overall, he is not TTT Jin strong nor not nearly as dominant. To have such a multitude of characters placing well in T5 : DR is definetly to not deny it's character balance factor, so sad I despise T5's game engine the most.

Also for Pasqual, let me state this, it's nearly impossible to find out what's really good, and what isn't during the Testing Stages. Believe me, I had a close friend who tested SC2 and they spent tons and tons of hours testing it before it was released and we all know how bugged that game got in certain parts.

The amount of Beta Testers, or Game Testers do not equal the amount of players who will get to experiment with the game when it is released to the public, because more players playing this game especially top lvled players, the better chances of finding something then the testers would've most likely missed out on. For example, it's nearly impossible to have known that 3*11 for Steve in 5.0 could lead to an infinity, or that M. Bison was able to connect a combo after his Scissor Kick within CE to lead into a dizzy and re-dizzy combo.

However what we don't hear is the amount of things that the Testers do find out, for instance, if it hadn't of been for them, Steve's punches in Tekken4 would've been 6 Frames, which it initially was, instead of the 8 Frames it was changed too after it was tested. As you can imagine how stupid good his 121's would've been if they where 6 Frames, because he would've been the only character to have 6 Frame jabs, and thank goodness they found and sought out this, because gosh forbid, his 121's in T4 where simply his best 121's ever.

I don't think any amount of testing can find out all of the glitches and what not's in every fighting game. Because some glitches can be found right away (Ahvb was discovered 3 days after MvC2's release), while some overpowered tactics or moves took almost a year to be found too overpowered like with T4 Jin, when T4 first came out, Jin was far from being considered #1 with everyone bustling that Lee or Paul where considered the contenders for the #1 status.

It wasn't until much later when people started to use and abuse the power of JFLS, 21's and Parry, and discovered how powerful these moves really where.

I agree with Peaches, Balance isn't that big of a deal, or in my own exact words, Balance Is Overrated Completely.

 

[Pasqual]

Also for Pasqual, let me state this, it's nearly impossible to find out what's really good, and what isn't during the Testing Stages. Believe me, I had a close friend who tested SC2 and they spent tons and tons of hours testing it before it was released and we all know how bugged that game got in certain parts.

Yeah, the testing will never catch every little thing, I understand. But if they were to add more testing time and bring in more players (particularly, if it's a continuation of a series, more respected pros of the earlier games) then that would help in cutting down the factor of major broken discoveries later down the road. And yes, it all depends on exactly how much more testing time and how many more pros they bring in to determine how good a chance they have of catching certain things, I realize that. And they can only test for so long and bring in so money pros since, hey, they're trying to turn a profit as well as make a good game. But, like I said, a little more time could be the difference between 1/3 being viable and 3/4 being viable.

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

Yeah, the testing will never catch every little thing, I understand. But if they were to add more testing time and bring in more players (particularly, if it's a continuation of a series, more respected pros of the earlier games) then that would help in cutting down the factor of major broken discoveries later down the road. And yes, it all depends on exactly how much more testing time and how many more pros they bring in to determine how good a chance they have of catching certain things, I realize that. And they can only test for so long and bring in so money pros since, hey, they're trying to turn a profit as well as make a good game. But, like I said, a little more time could be the difference between 1/3 being viable and 3/4 being viable.

No matter what, even if you had 1-2 extra more months, you won't get it all, you also have to abide in, that certain games have to be released at certain times, so trying to make for a "more balanced" game is very time consuming, not only that but cost factors if the game was going to take longer as well. Like I've said, alot of the things discovered can take months and in some cases, even years, and this is from tons of players playing this game nation wide, not just some players. Also getting more Beta Testers to play the game cost $$$, and is definetly time consuming.

For me as stated before, having a better game engine far outweighs having more characters playable. Take for me with Tekken 5 : DR, seriously, I don't care how balanced the character roster is within the game, because of crap like Crushes+Juggles+Wall Splat leading to 70%+ damage is the most stuupid thing ever within Tekken, and with crushes destroying you because you threw out a jab, and that single jab could result in you losing out 70% of your life... that isn't even a character balance flaw, that's simply a game engine flaw.

I'd for one rather want for unbalanced characters then horrible game engine. Most of the unbalanced games that are played today at the high lvls, have very good, or else very solid game engines, which is why people still play them on the competetive lvl today. That is the most important element.

 

[Pasqual]

No matter what, even if you had 1-2 extra more months, you won't get it all, you also have to abide in, that certain games have to be released at certain times, so trying to make for a "more balanced" game is very time consuming, not only that but cost factors if the game was going to take longer as well. Like I've said, alot of the things discovered can take months and in some cases, even years, and this is from tons of players playing this game nation wide, not just some players. Also getting more Beta Testers to play the game cost $$$, and is definetly time consuming.

Aha, we're basically saying the same thing to one another now.

As for horrible game engine versus imbalanced characters, I agree with you. I'd take a game with a great engine and poor balance over a game with great balance and a poor engine any day.

 

[rockman2k1]

I tend to enjoy fun games.

Testing a game IMO does'nt really help. If anything look for bugs to take out, since a majority of the time most people will play games casually. The hardcore players (or tournament players) are the minority. Also, even putting in some of the best players from a continued series does'nt guarantee anything. Bombsolider can playtest Brawl till the day it comes out and the title can be infinitly more broken/glitchy than SSB/SSBM could have ever been.

In fact, some of the most broken fighters have been playtested by some of the greatest players for those particular franchises.

Also Seph, never did I say that 3S' balance is good enough to where all other games should be judged. It's decently balanced as you put it, it just has so many more problems, but it's still a lot better balanced than half the games on the list above.

 

[dizzy]

Guilty Gear XX Accent Core is pretty well-balanced. According to most ranking charts, the game's most uphill match-ups still give around 35% win chance to the weaker character. Out of the game's 253 or so match-ups, only about 3 are considered less balanced than 40-60, which means that the other 250 can easily go either way. I've seen Bridget (bottom tier) players pretty much break even with high-level Testament (top tier) players, even with the Badlands loop, and it's not extremely uncommon to see bottom tier characters place well in tournaments.

That's better than I could say for Smash, where Bowser, Pichu and Mewtwo have basically never reached top 10 in any major competition...

 

[Peaches]

Yeah, but badlands loop is so stupid looking.

 

[dizzy]

Yeah, but badlands loop is so stupid looking.

Yeah -_-

Too bad, right?

 

[OneWingSephiroth]

Also Seph, never did I say that 3S' balance is good enough to where all other games should be judged. It's decently balanced as you put it, it just has so many more problems, but it's still a lot better balanced than half the games on the list above.

I wasn't comparing 3S to those other games, I was comparing 3S to ST, you commented that ST should have been lower, however within that list alone, ST would still be within the Top 3 most balanced within that list. However I do agree with you that 3S would be higher, and at least Top 5 or #5 among that list though.

 

[MetaKnight0]

IIRC badlands loop is usually off a throw, only loops 4 times (or at least if you want to OTG Phantom Soul), and does like 125 damage. Most of the videos I've seen with good Testaments, they tend to do one-hits instead.

 

[Unsafe]

Dang, what were you smoking when you came up with those lists? There's *NO* way CvS2 is more balanced than half those games, KoF '02 is dominated by Angel, and Slash is a lot better than most of those games above it, 3S should be a little higher, and ST should be a little lower.

As for 3D, Tag should be lower (*cough*Mishimas*cough*) Soul Calibur 2 should be higher (glitchy system, but most characters can hang with the tops). And I'm not sure about the JPN version of DoA3, but I remember Aynane, and Hayabusa being the only real characters seen at high play (which is rare in itself, lol)

Look, from what I see of CvS2 I can see way more teams with a low tier character than I ever could in say Marvel. Is Roll cancel and CC really gay and make it unbalanced? Yup. But you know what is also gay and unbalanced? Yun fest 3S, Space Animal fest Smash, and GG loops. If anything you are more likely to see a low tier (even with other top tiers on a team) in CvS2 than you are going to see... say Alex in a top 8 results for a major 3S tournament. That's why I say CvS2 over those other games.

To me Slash Ky/Sol was ******** and the game was even less fun than Reload. Plus the unnecessary need to make Robo Ky completely suck in all areas in Slash baffles me. Overall GG is probably more balanced than most of those games I listed ahead of it but they stupid balancing decisions Arc does makes my head hurt.

3S should not be higher, in fact I was thinking of making it lower as well as smash. Those games now brought to the pinicle of competition have had their imbalance pretty obvious to see for a while now. At least Smash is Marth/Fox/Falco/Peach/Shiek fests, where as 3S has become a completey Yun/Chun/Ken fest.


ST should not be lower because you can win everyone (so long as Akuma is not involved). The only impractically hard characters are Cammy and Blanka. It's only beat by HF where everyone stands a chance.

Tag should not be lower because Mishimas mastered are so rare that you are literally playing theory just thinking about them. Mishimas are monsters when mastered but you can make so many mistakes that it leaves room for everyone elses monstrosities to come in.

SC2 and SC3 both completely sucked balls. The only reason why people even remotely think well of SC2 is because SC3 SUCKED THAT BAD. SC2 was a big fat glitch/turtle fest. SC3 did the unthinkable and managed to surpass SC2 in big fat glitchy fest. I would honestly refrain from listing either of them and just put up Soul Calibur 1 but no one plays that anymore.

JPN ver of DoA3, Bass, Gen Fu, Hayate, Jann, and Busa were top. There was a large middle tier and low tier was like Ayane (LOL) Brad Wong and Zack. Seriously DoA3 was good but people just don't know it.


Despite this yes balance really doesn't matter, it's what you think is fun. Only the Japanese care about balance which is why Virtua Fighter is popular over there and not here.

 

[Yum_Cha]

Samurai Showdown 2 is consider one of the most balanced games ever.

In general, Guilty Gear is pretty balanced, probably with Slash as the most since #R and X2 had Eddie with is unblockables. Accent Core is pretty balanced, but yet Eddie makes his gay return with more unblockables but they are extremely hard to do.

You could also argue X-men vs Street Fighter, since everyone in that game has an infinite.

CvS2 is more balanced then Third Strike, you have people like Combofiend and Buktooth getting into finals with low/mid tier characters at EVO, where 3S is mainly all Yun, Ken and Chun for EVO results.

 

[freeman123]

Mortal Kombat 2

 

[Team Giza]

Virtua Fighter 4 Evo: But that might just be because there isn't too much character diversity.

Guilty Gear: Huge character diversity but still allows must of the characters to be playable in tournaments and have the chance of winning. Very good game balance here.

Sonic the Fighters: I guess have a lot of universals really helps the balance. But each character still feels quite unique. The game itself kind of has the focus on grabs, RPS to set up advantage, and defense predicting though. The game still has quite a good balance, I have a lot of trouble putting together a tier list besides Sonic and Bark which have a bit of a disadvantage. Unfortunately it has a lack of characters (only 8).

Garou: Balanced 2d fighter on a old machine that still looks great and has good graphics. I highly recommend checking this one out.

 

[Peaches]

Hay Guyz, I Saw So And So Playing A Low Tier And They Won A Tournament, That Must Mean The Game Is Balanced And Therefore Amazing11!