The DI/VI Naming Debate

[Thor]

I like how this sarcastic joke post has a lot more merit than most the reasoning in this thread for this whole naming debate.

It kinda puts it in perspective how petty an argument SB managed to start with this.

To be fair, I actually would really appreciate it being called Distance Influence, only so that I don't have to use two separate terms to refer to Smash games, and announcing for each game sounds the same (NO DEE AYE!). But that's mainly because I'm kind of lazy, and also because I don't like the sound of Vectoring (or Vector Influence, aka VI).

That said, I didn't expect most people to agree with my post, hence the

But if we called it that, I'd be very, very happy with the outcome.

 

[Fenrir VII]

Vectoring is a bad name because, as has been stated a few times in this thread, it essentially HAS to be described to anybody who doesn't know about it (and they still might not get it).

Knockback influence is a decent name, imo...

My problem with each of these, however, is that DI is still a thing in this game... so if you get usmashed, you can hold right to DI it and get results. So essentially, with either of these names, we'll have to talk about vectoring AND DI, or KI and DI, etc...
So I would prefer we just call it DI still (even understanding that the philosophy of DI is different for this game). crouch cancel has essentially been knockback influence forever, so we've already been calling down DI....DI. So I would prefer we just leave the naming alone, to avoid having to write an instruction manual for the new game.

 

[Zinth]

I like "Velocity Influence".

In physics, a velocity is a vector with both a speed and a direction.

Here, "velocity" serves as a more informative description than "vector" while still preserving the technical meaning of how it works (because a velocity is a vector of speed and direction, which are the quantities being influenced).

"Velocity influence" is also a better logical continuation from "directional influence" since both "velocity" and "directional" indicate the physical quantities being influenced. In contrast, the word "vector" indicates only the underlying mathematical model, and so calling this "vector influence" would be analogous to calling DI "scalar influence".

 

[Accelerator]

I think it's hilarious when people talk about it like Strong Bad invented the wheel. Most people when they play smash for the first time automatically react by holding the analog towards the direction of the stage after being hit. I did when I played smash 64 it's human nature. In melee DI was definitely important and a big factor. This time around in the new smash you're supposed to hold the direction towards where you got hit from. "Strong bad collected the data"- ok so the guy made a youtube vid recording him testing this out. Some guy living in a log cabin in the woods probably discovered this in the first 5 minutes of playing as well. Respect to Strong Bad for making it factual in a video but is there really a need for several threads and heated debate over this mechanic?



It's funny as hell watching people go nuts over this.

I don't know how you got the idea I worship Strong bad or anything, I don't even play Project M. The point is that you find it and explain it, you name it.

 

[smashbroskilla]

I don't know how you got the idea I worship Strong bad or anything, I don't even play Project M. The point is that you find it and explain it, you name it.

I wasn't trying to say that at all. I was addressing the community in general that's an advocate for him naming it campaign. You did say he discovered the tech(which to me at least is an obvious mechanic that doesn't need explaining). 2+2=4 look I discovered math

Once again respect to Strong Bad for putting it on front street but I don't think this mechanic is breaking news.

 

[Accelerator]

I wasn't trying to say that at all. I was addressing the community in general that's an advocate for him naming it campaign. You did say he discovered the tech(which to me at least is an obvious mechanic that doesn't need explaining). 2+2=4 look I discovered math

Once again respect to Strong Bad for putting it on front street but I don't think this mechanic is breaking news.

I wouldn't really call it intuitive for people who have played previous versions for years have been conditioned to do the exact opposite of what's occurring in Smash4.

Also, the explanation went a bit deeper than just saying "go the opposite way." He presented how much knock back is being reduced, or increased numbers wise.

 

[Chiroz]

I wouldn't really call it intuitive for people who have played previous versions for years have been conditioned to do the exact opposite of what's occurring in Smash4.

Also, the explanation went a bit deeper than just saying "go the opposite way." He presented how much knock back is being reduced, or increased numbers wise.

Actually he didn't. The numbers presented were made up. Which is one of the problems we have currently because people aren't sure just how much this mechanic affects gameplay. The numbers Strong Bad presented and the tests he lead gives us a 12% difference while 2 tests done by 2 different users have given numbers around 35-40%. I am more inclined to believe in the last 2 tests because they are actually using real numbers instead of hypothetical examples. This leads me to believe that there might be other "analysis" done by us which are wrong because we were taking the numbers in the test into consideration.

For example, we know Jiggz dies at 45% with no VI and we know she can survive at 51% with VI. Yet there is no proof she doesn't die at 35% without VI. As such VI could be a circle because the proof presented to us to "explain" that it was a square was that Jiggz still died at 45% even if you VIed horizontally. But, if Jiggz were to die at 35% without VI (something we don't know), what if horizontal VI allowed her to live until 44% while vertical allowed her to live up to 53% thus making it a circle instead of a square.

I believe the tests we have are inconclusive, and even if they aren't and Strong Bad did methodogically tested every % then he didn't present us with all that data. There are many holes in those tests and missing necessary data.

 

[LinkNIvy]

Can it just be called the in game name? I've given up on telling people that vectors are not ****ing new and having it falling on deaf ears. I'm just so... apalled that this fact isn't being acknowledged by most people. Like, it's objectively not new.

Stop it.

 

[Chiroz]

Can it just be called the in game name? I've given up on telling people that vectors are not ****ing new and having it falling on deaf ears. I'm just so... apalled that this fact isn't being acknowledged by most people. Like, it's objectively not new.

Stop it.

If you can find the in-game name for this technique we might be inclined to call it that.

 

[Espy Rose]

I weep for the Smash community if threads like this are what I have to look forward to.
In any case, I vote VI. It sounds the coolest.

 

[TeaTwoTime]

Yo like,

Why not just call it smash 4 DI. It tells you what kind of DI, and there's no way you're getting it confused with the other DI unless you're incompetent.

DI, Smash DI/SDI, and Smash 4 DI/S4DI... you know, I don't really think that's the ideal technique naming we should be striving for. If Vectoring/VI has been called confusing, then Smash DI and Smash 4 DI being two separate mechanics in the same game is right up there as well.

 

[Chiroz]

I posted this on the other thread but I'll go ahead and post it here too:



Here's some real life example ammunition.

Down at ZeRo's stream people were talking about DI, everything is fine and dandy until after a minute or 2 someone throws out the word "Vectoring". Once this happens at least 10 different people (if not more) ask what "Vectoring" is. They are answered with a variety of answers from deep mathematical answers to simple "It's like DI but it also changes your distance". The best answer I saw was "It allows you to change your knockback distance or your direction depending on where you point the stick". Obviously this was met with many mixed reviews from "Oh, I get it" to "Isn't that the same as DI?" and "Why is it called different, I don't get it?"

The mechanic was then explained thoroughly over and over again for about 30 minutes as more and more people popped up that didn't know what the mechanic was as soon as they read the name.



Now, here's the thing, when everyone was talking about DI in Smash 4 no one was asking what was DI. No one was asking how it was done. No one was asking if it had changed. Why? Because you assume it hasn't until someone tells you otherwise. If you see people talking about DI you expect it to be what you've always known. You might want to argue with me but this is a REAL example of people who were talking about DI and had NO idea it had changed until the word "Vectoring" was thrown into the mix. Just because of the word "Vectoring" they were able to realize that a mechanic that they knew from previous iterations has changed and they were able to learn something new, whereas if that word hadn't been used they would still remain ignorant to the change.



I had my theory that this would happen, but now I can actually give real life example. As such it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. Naming the ability DI will confuse semi-competitive players that aren't as hands down passionate as most of us here are. Those people that watch streams and play the occasional friendlies, they won't know what's happening and they will be out of the loop just because we want to keep a name for "tradition's" sake.

 

[Tristan_win]

Well I voted for KI since it made more sense to what was happening but from the looks of things if you count vecting and VI together then they take up over 50%. Due to VI being in the lead since the beginning I guess it's going to be next to impossible to change the terminology.

I'll call it VI for now on.

 

[UltiMario]

I had my theory that this would happen, but now I can actually give real life example. As such it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. Naming the ability DI will confuse semi-competitive players that aren't as hands down passionate as most of us here are. Those people that watch streams and play the occasional friendlies, they won't know what's happening and they will be out of the loop just because we want to keep a name for "tradition's" sake.

And yet DI changed more from 64 to Melee than it did from Brawl to Smash 4 and we still call it DI.

Just because we're in a more digital age and can see the people that don't follow Smashboards 24/7, it doesn't mean we need to change the terminology so they understand part of a mechanic in Smash changed. There are people that don't know Shields have 0 Shield Stun, a first for Smash which drastically changes the punish game. We don't need to call these "Supershields" or whatever other name you can think of just like how we don't have to change.

I can't even imagine your reaction to people watching that don't even know what DI is. The people that aren't willing to become informed don't define a community, the people that participate DO.

 

[Chiroz]

And yet DI changed more from 64 to Melee than it did from Brawl to Smash 4 and we still call it DI.

Just because we're in a more digital age and can see the people that don't follow Smashboards 24/7, it doesn't mean we need to change the terminology so they understand part of a mechanic in Smash changed. There are people that don't know Shields have 0 Shield Stun, a first for Smash which drastically changes the punish game. We don't need to call these "Supershields" or whatever other name you can think of just like how we don't have to change.

I can't even imagine your reaction to people watching that don't even know what DI is. The people that aren't willing to become informed don't define a community, the people that participate DO.

There's a great difference between people who don't want to become informed and others who want to but are unable to because of decisions such as this.

The shield stun example doesn't correlate to this one because it doesn't change the actions the player has to make, it only changes the outcome. As such if they are learning the game they will see the new outcome for themselves as they will still perform the same actions.

VI is a new action that leads into a new consequence. Sure the action and the consequence both greatly resemble that of a past mechanic, but calling it the same name won't allow players who are interested in learning to instantly disseminate the fact that the actions needed to perform this technique are different, they might just believe there's a different outcome every time they are performing the wrong action. Never learning about the new requisite for the outcome they desire.



You think this is so impossible but before Strong Bad wrote the post you didn't know this existed right? Sakurai obviously changed the mechanic yet he didn't tell anyone. It took the world 6 major events a week with a demo and about 2-3 full days to learn that the mechanic had changed in some way and there was something going on (and even then no one knew what it was). If Sakurai had written on a POTD: "Hey, this changed" we would have all known it before even picking up the game.

And we're talking about the most adamant and passionate Smash fans. What happens when the semi-casuals don't get their Sakurai POTD (in this case a new name)? You expect them to have a forums filled with thousands of players who are just starting too and are as casual as they are for the game? You expect them to read every single action in the game to see if it changed? I suppose they should check if running has changed or maybe how to perform Side-Special has changed in this game, they should also look that up. Or do you expect them to dig up old threads of when mechanics were discovered years from now?

Isn't it MUCH easier to just rename a mechanic to instantly convey the message that a player must relearn how to perform it?




Edit: Also I will just say that using 64 to Melee example is not in any way a real example. Back then the internet wasn't very popular and the scene was tiny. Chances of a game gaining popularity through people looking online how to play the game were extremely low. If you were looking for something like DI online you were basically invested heavily in the game. Whereas today any semi-casual will look up any term at any moment. Making this process painless allows for easier transitioning from semi-casual to semi-competitive or even full competitive which helps grow the scene.

 

[PlateProp]

DI, Smash DI/SDI, and Smash 4 DI/S4DI... you know, I don't really think that's the ideal technique naming we should be striving for. If Vectoring/VI has been called confusing, then Smash DI and Smash 4 DI being two separate mechanics in the same game is right up there as well.

SDI is called Hitstun Shuffling in Smash 4, the Hints section says so.

 

[Shaya]

And yet DI changed more from 64 to Melee than it did from Brawl to Smash 4 and we still call it DI.

DI was "discovered" during melee (it didn't exist in Smash64). And in Smash 64 it was only "Smash DI", something also discovered during melee which was realised to exist in 64.

 

[TeaTwoTime]

SDI is called Hitstun Shuffling in Smash 4, the Hints section says so.

I was referring to the name typically used for it by the community. Hitstun Shuffling has yet to be adopted by the community as the preferred name for refering to what we call SDI, if it ever will be. It just doesn't seem like good practice to have two mechanics both containing the words "Smash" and "DI" in that order.

 

[LinkNIvy]

If you can find the in-game name for this technique we might be inclined to call it that.

It's in one of the loading screen tips. There are screenshots of it but next time it pops up I'll take a screenshot and reply again with an imgur link

Also, the VELOCITY Influence for VI will work. That makes sense and is about direction and magnitude like Knockback Inflience.

 

[PlateProp]

I was referring to the name typically used for it by the community. Hitstun Shuffling has yet to be adopted by the community as the preferred name for refering to what we call SDI, if it ever will be. It just doesn't seem like good practice to have two mechanics both containing the words "Smash" and "DI" in that order.

i guess I should clarify then, when I said to call it Smash 4 DI, I meant only in discussion, it would be pretty obvious if a commentator says " That DI" when you're watching a stream of smash 4 as to which kind he was referring to.

So like, say we were talking here, and I was like "Yeah, Smash 4 DI is basically a simplified, more intuitive form of DI from the previous installments." That's how it would be used.

 

[-Philip Coast Philip-]

Raykz, do you not think that people in the future will understand?

You can notice the difference in DI in Smash 4 if you pay attention to it. As well, no one quite knows for sure whether Melee DI wouldn't be good DI in Smash 4. I think the worst scenario would be someone intuitively understanding how DI works in Smash 4 and then going back to play Melee and not knowing that DI doesn't work on the parallel.

So should the burden of "proof" lie with using a different term? I think if it does it only reinforces the idea that there are mechanics that stay the same between the series (which is untrue), or that we that we think that players will be unable to understand.

 

[TeaTwoTime]

i guess I should clarify then, when I said to call it Smash 4 DI, I meant only in discussion, it would be pretty obvious if a commentator says " That DI" when you're watching a stream of smash 4 as to which kind he was referring to.

So like, say we were talking here, and I was like "Yeah, Smash 4 DI is basically a simplified, more intuitive form of DI from the previous installments." That's how it would be used.

Then we're in agreement.

I've been following the points made by both sides of the argument here and think it's been great so far. As far as I can see there are several reasons to go with VI and several to go with DI, so I'm more or less impartial at this point. KI is a good middle-ground, too... but I rather like that both VI and DI rhyme with each other.

 

[Conda]

We already call DI by "DI in melee" and "DI in brawl" when we need to be specific and we're talking about multiple games' tech mechanics in one topic (also: never happens after the game's been out of a year, especially for non-controversial mechanics like DI).

"DI in Smash 4" is just following common sense 'keep it simple, stupid' reasoning. Those who are prone to rolling their eyes when people start taking technicalities too seriously will keep calling it DI, and the pro players and tournament attendees tend to be in that camp from my experience.

But on the internet, I'm not surprised to see "Vectoring" catch on. Makes the mechanic seem controversial and interesting, especially since we're hyped up for Smash 4 and want something funky to talk about, like a "BRAND NEW MOVEMENT MECHANIC! (just kidding, it's updated DI)"

 

[Jaxas]

@ Conda , in response to your post in the Vectoring thread

That is not at all what Zipzo was talking about. He's saying while it's different, the name "DI" still fits and can describe VI easier than "VI" can. Making it the better name.

Outside of this thread and forum, people will call it DI because it's the updated version of DI from past games. It uses different things, but DI can and does still explain the mechanics - direction + influence. You no longer change your direction, fine, but you still input a direction. There is no reason to have such a limited definition for a mechanic that has been in the series since the N64.


The math and technicalities do not matter once we learn it and understand "point in the proper direction to influence your knockback." Figuring out what the proper directions and %s are will be a normal process, but once we're done that we have to focus on being able to teach it easily. As a content provider and commentator, DI will let me do it much easier than VI, so I will use DI.

My goal and responsibility to the competitive scene is to bring players into this community, and provide as welcoming a vibe as I can. I have to represent the community in an inclusivist and down-to-earth vibe, but telling people "we renamed a mechanic into a mathematical word because it changed a bit" is the total opposite of what I want to do. It's the type of thing I never want to say to viewers of tournament streams and people who want to learn what the Smash community is like (and if we're as elitist as we are stereotyped as). "Vectoring" doesn't help our case, it's something that newcomers and onlookers can justifiably get a weird and elitist impression from.

I think you have a good point, however I don't really agree with calling it DI.
DI does not mean "point in the proper direction to influence your knockback", it instead means "point in the proper direction to inlfuence the direction you're launched"; you can "VI" along with or against your knockback and change the distance as well, which is something DI does not cover (as it does not change your direction).

Honestly, though, I don't think that 'Vectoring' nor 'VI' are the best options, because they do sound rather... odd, and as you mentioned not particularly welcoming.

My vote would be for 'Knockback Influence', or 'KI', since that actually describes what's happening; the ability to modify your knockback when hit.

Another thing that, while it has been stated already, I would like to reiterate, is that for semi-competitive or casual players, the change in moniker to reflect the change in mechanic would tip them off or at least make them question if it had changed, rather than assuming it had not.

 

[Conda]

This should not be about technicalities, because then we become a community who is too easily bothered by rhetoric and technicalities that we risk a lot of what many other competitive communities value - how attractive the scene is to join to outsiders.

It does not matter what DI meant in past games, the words in the name still effectively convey how it works in Smash 4. It's like 'mana' and how its mechanics are different in many games, yet the word 'mana' still conveys what its all about. DI has become a word like that.

There is zero confusion in any series about calling a mechanic something still even if it changed in the sequel/patch/whatever. There is no lack of clarity, nor an abundance of confusion. What is confusing is why a community who plays nintendo's fighting game competitively would be a group of people who are so absorbed in technicalities that they'd name a mechanic in their game after mathematics language. Not caring about that means we risk going further down the rabbit hole, until our scene is difficult for new players to get into.

Starcraft and LoL are more newcomer friendly when it comes to lingo and the 'personality' of their game mechanic names. Their names fit the game, feel logical, and not elitist. Smash shouldn't be the black sheep when it comes to this important element of competitive gaming. We can't not care about how difficult our game is to integrate into large tournaments.


We can't let Smash be the game people tune out for and close their stream window for, due to commentators tossing around words like Vectoring and other words that make no sense unless you read a forum post. Not being able to succinctly explain a mechanic, because it's so poorly named, is bad and a thing communities logically avoid. That's the whole point, and challenge, of picking good names for things.

You have to quickly explain mechanics to people who haven't seen high-level play of your game before often as a commentator at big events, because part of your job is making the game make sense to people outside of the community. If you can't do that, you're toast. Which is why commentators especially won't be tossing around words like VI and Vectoring - because DI makes their job easier. That's a clue to you all that it's a better word - it's easier for the professionals to explain. The only way you can explain VI easily is if you ignore the word 'vector' at all in the mechanic. Which means it should not have "vector" in the name at all.

Part of having your game at a large tournament and commentating is "SELLING" the game as a spectator experience - you have to explain basic mechanics, and it is very easy to alienate people with bad rhetoric during this stage. It matters, and sticking with names like "vectoring" gives the people on the ground - the commentators, the teachers, and the players - an uphill battle when it comes to making the game sound fun and engaging to new players and audiences.

 

[wannabe33]

Can't say I'm too passionate about this topic one way or another (I'll happily roll with community consensus), but from where I'm sitting, it seems that there's a much stronger case to be made for naming it vectoring over DI. This is a (now off-topic) post made in another thread, and I'd like for those who support the DI moniker to offer a response:

-----

So, you press your control stick in a direction, and it influences the direction and distance your character goes when getting hit.

Directional Influence.

As has been explained time and time again in this thread, vectoring differs from Melee and Brawl DI in that it adjusts not just angle (DI), but angle plus distance (vectoring). In short, it adds a vector.

This is not a small change. This is a substantial change. Since you talk about movement, here's a better analogy: in Fighter A, you can only move left and right at a set speed; in Fighter A2, you can mash the control stick in either direction and speed up your movement. Fighter A's mechanics use the control stick to adjust just movement direction (walking), but Fighter A2's mechanics use the control stick to adjust for direction plus speed (running). Now imagine a group of people insist we should call running walking. After all, they both involve moving the character, right? They both involve control stick input, right? "Running" is just Fighter A2's version of walking. Someone might say something as follows:

"So, you press your control stick in a direction, and it determines which way your character goes.

Walking."

That would be silly. And it'd be super confusing to new players.

 

[Jaxas]

It does not matter what DI meant in past games, the words in the name still effectivelly convey how it works in Smash 4. It's like 'mana' and how its mechanics are different in many games, yet the word 'mana' still conveys what its all about. DI has become a word like that.

This should not be about technicalities, because then we become a community who is too easily bothered by rhetoric and technicalities that we stop being welcoming and inclusive, and we start being intimidating and "a bit much" for newcomers to our scene.

I would agree with you were in not for the fact that you can DI like in previous games, and have it appear to work the same way, while it does not in fact help you survive longer. I think that the ability to influence more than your knockback, combined with the fact that that change is somewhat hidden, calls for a new name for the new mechanic. Especially since Knockback Influence/KI still sounds similar enough to Directional Influence/DI, while being an extremely simple and descriptive term (akin to Jump Cancelling, for example).

We can't let Smash be the game people tune out for and close their stream window for, due to commentators tossing around words like Vectoring and other words that make no sense unless you read a forum post. Not being able to succinctly explain a mechanic, because it's so poorly named, is bad and a thing communities logically avoid. That's the whole point, and challenge, of picking good names for things.

This is another reason I'm voting for KI, because it can be described simply. "Knockback Influence is holding a direction when hit to change where the Knockback from an attack puts you."

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Ugh...the word vectoring IS confusing because it asserts the technical basis for the limitations and function of the mechanic but fails to describe anything about what it does or when it's used.

It's a vague, unnecessary term that we've never needed in the past despite "vectoring" being present.

Wannabe you are just arguing in a circle for the purpose of trying to say we are not making an argument, when we are. YOU address it, or don't.

 

[Conda]

Ugh...the word vectoring IS confusing because it asserts the technical basis for the limitations and function of the mechanic but fails to describe anything about what it does or when it's used.

It's a vague, unnecessary term that we've never needed in the past despite "vectoring" being present.

Wannabe you are just arguing in a circle for the purpose of trying to say we are not making an argument, when we are. YOU address it, or don't.

Precisely. People are focusing too much on what word best describes the math at play. VI is not the best word just because it has 'vectoring' in the word, which is part of the math at play in the mechanic. That's precisely what makes it a bad name. There's no point in naming it - just name it the URL of a forum post that explains it. The name is helping nobody and only alienates people from wanting to learn what Smash's competitive climate is like.

We are all losing perspective of what should matter when naming a mechanic in a competitive game - for others to learn and understand as close to immediately as possible, and to prevent alienating newcomers. No game developer would name a movement mechanic in a colorful fighting game "vectoring" - you'd get fired if you told sakurai you won't budge on calling the mechanic VI. You are ignoring what is important, and overvaluing technical mathematic descriptiveness.

The only arguments FOR "VI" are ones that do not take into account the viewer experience. Ignoring that means many of us have a blind spot for the growth of the competitive community. We should all want the game to be as easy to get into and understand as possible. Husky and TB have this mindset with the games they commentate. They'd never use a word like "vectoring" or "degree-shifting" or "polarity-fractioning", as it would alienate people.

We don't have to keep that sort of stuff in mind. But for me, it's my responsibility as a commentator. That's where I'm coming from, which may be a niche perspective. This forum can choose VI, but I won't use it when on the air because I'd be doing my job poorly.

 

[Jaxas]

He doesn't have to because your preset definitions of the argument are incorrect from the get-go.

1. This analogy is false. A more accurate one would be that DI is to vectoring as moving is to walking or running.

2. No but it is a type of movement. IE Vectoring is a type of DI.

3. Except it is!

For the record so I don't get warned for more off-topic stuff I want to say this has more to do with the classification of the mechanic as a whole, rather than its name.

I don't think that DI is to Vectoring as Moving is to Walking/Running, because otherwise SDI and DI would both only be called DI, as would anything else that affects the direction you're hit after an attack (Crouch Cancelling might even fall under that, as it changes the direction of your knockback to, well, no knockback.)

If SDI has a different term, then I believe that KI should as well.

Ugh...the word vectoring IS confusing because it asserts the technical basis for the limitations and function of the mechanic but fails to describe anything about what it does or when it's used.

It's a vague, unnecessary term that we've never needed in the past despite "vectoring" being present.

Wannabe you are just arguing in a circle for the purpose of trying to say we are not making an argument, when we are. YOU address it, or don't.

I agree that Vectoring should not be the term used to describe this mechanic, for the same reasons. However I do think that we need a term other than DI, as that is confusing as it implies that it's the same as in previous Smash games.

 

[wannabe33]

Wannabe you are just arguing in a circle for the purpose of trying to say we are not making an argument, when we are. YOU address it, or don't.

I'm a patient man, so let me try to explain this again. I made a very simple argument in the other thread:

1. DI is to vectoring as walking is to running.
2. No one in their right mind would treat running as a "kind of walking."
3. We ought not treat vectoring as a "kind of DI."

I supported premise [1] previously -- DI and walking both deal with one variable (angle and direction, respectively) while vectoring and running deal with two variables (angle / distance and direction / speed, respectively).

Your response to this was twofold:

1. Actually, DI is to vectoring as "movement is to walking and running." (????)
2. We ought to treat vectoring as a "kind of DI" because vectoring is a kind of DI.

Needless to say, [2] is a waste of space. It's an assertion, not an argument. We're looking for arguments. You have yet to explain what you mean by [1], which is a cryptic claim to say the least. (EDIT: Jaxas also makes a good point -- by analogy, you're making the "DI" moniker too inclusive.)

 

[Conda]

Those of us involved with the tournament scene and bringing in new players - as well as casting the competitive scene in a positive and fun/welcoming/un-alienating light - don't care about what name has more mathematical detail in it. We care about what name best conveys what the mechanic does for the players you are watching on your screen.

Especially to viewers who aren't too familiar with smash - our responsibility is to lure them in, not lure them away.

I don't think that DI is to Vectoring as Moving is to Walking/Running, because otherwise SDI and DI would both only be called DI, as would anything else that affects the direction you're hit after an attack (Crouch Cancelling might even fall under that, as it changes the direction of your knockback to, well, no knockback.)

If SDI has a different term, then I believe that KI should as well.



I agree that Vectoring should not be the term used to describe this mechanic, for the same reasons. However I do think that we need a term other than DI, as that is confusing as it implies that it's the same as in previous Smash games.

Nothing is ever implied to be the same in a Smash Bros sequel. Everything works differently, and many things tend to work very differently. DI is one of them, but the name isn't worse for it since the words within can accurately describe how the new DI mechanics work. The do it even better than using the word "VI"/"vectoring" can.

 

[Jaxas]

Those of us involved with the tournament scene and bringing in new players - as well as casting the competitive scene in a positive and fun/welcoming/un-alienating light - don't care about what name has more mathematical detail in it. We care about what name best conveys what the mechanic does for the players you are watching on your screen.

Especially to viewers who aren't too familiar with smash - our responsibility is to lure them in, not lure them away.


Nothing is ever implied to be the same in a Smash Bros sequel. Everything works differently, and many things tend to work very differently. DI is one of them, but the name isn't worse for it since the words within can accurately describe how the new DI mechanics work. The do it even better than using the word "VI"/"vectoring" can.

I feel like your post has two halves here, and they don't agree with each other.
In the first you talk about casting the scene in a welcoming light and bringing in new players, which I agree is extremely important.
In the second you say that no one should expect things to hold over between sequels, as though everyone both in and outside of the Smash community should already know that; something which new/semi-competitive players wouldn't necessarily know. And DI (at least mostly) carried over from Melee to Brawl, so I would assume that it would then carry over to Smash 4 the same way as well.

Also, I'm gonna quote @ Chiroz , because he put it pretty well in the other thread.

Here's some real life example ammunition.

Down at ZeRo's stream people were talking about DI, everything is fine and dandy until after a minute or 2 someone throws out the word "Vectoring". Once this happens at least 10 different people (if not more) ask what "Vectoring" is. They are answered with a variety of answers from deep mathematical answers to simple "It's like DI but it also changes your distance". The best answer I saw was "It allows you to change your knockback distance or your direction depending on where you point the stick". Obviously this was met with many mixed reviews from "Oh, I get it" to "Isn't that the same as DI?" and "Why is it called different, I don't get it?"

The mechanic was then explained thoroughly over and over again for about 30 minutes as more and more people popped up that didn't know what the mechanic was as soon as they read the name.

Now, here's the thing, when everyone was talking about DI in Smash 4 no one was asking what was DI. No one was asking how it was done. No one was asking if it had changed. Why? Because you assume it hasn't until someone tells you otherwise. If you see people talking about DI you expect it to be what you've always known. You might want to argue with me but this is a REAL example of people who were talking about DI and had NO idea it had changed until the word "Vectoring" was thrown into the mix. Just because of the word "Vectoring" they were able to realize that a mechanic that they knew from previous iterations has changed and they were able to learn something new, whereas if that word hadn't been used they would still remain ignorant to the change.

I had my theory that this would happen, but now I can actually give real life example. As such it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. Naming the ability DI will confuse semi-competitive players that aren't as hands down passionate as most of us here are. Those people that watch streams and play the occasional friendlies, they won't know what's happening and they will be out of the loop just because we want to keep a name for "tradition's" sake.

 

[Conda]

The game is not out yet. When I'm commentating a tournament 4 years from now, I will not have to worry about viewers and players being confused because it works differently than in Brawl. There is zero long-term thinking going on, and absolutely no consideration being done for people who are outside of the scene.

Use vectoring if you want. If you aren't a commentator then it doesn't matter what you use honestly. But for some people, communication matters, and it is our job to not make people feel alienated by tossing around words like Vectoring just because some people on the internet felt it was a good name that melee/brawl players could google and read about.

If all I wanted to do is explain Smash 4 DI to brawl and melee pro players, I'd stick with "VI"/"Vectoring."
But that is not all that is important. In fact, it is the least important thing here.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

I feel like your post has two halves here, and they don't agree with each other.
In the first you talk about casting the scene in a welcoming light and bringing in new players, which I agree is extremely important.
In the second you say that no one should expect things to hold over between sequels, as though everyone both in and outside of the Smash community should already know that; something which new/semi-competitive players wouldn't necessarily know. And DI (at least mostly) carried over from Melee to Brawl, so I would assume that it would then carry over to Smash 4 the same way as well.

Also, I'm gonna quote @ Chiroz , because he put it pretty well in the other thread.

These "confused" people will figure out how the mechanic works at some point. Anything short of Sakurai coming out and writing a column about how a new mechanic works, will take research on your own time.

If you find DI seems to be working strangely, your first suspicion will be that something was changed about how it works. As a result you will look up DI mechanics and find the necessary information detailing how it works differently.

It's simple. It's not confusing. It's DI.

 

[Jaxas]

The game is not out yet. When I'm commentating a tournament 4 years from now, I will not have to worry about viewers and players being confused because it works differently than in Brawl. There is zero long-term thinking going on, and absolutely no consideration being done for people who are outside of the scene.

Use vectoring, alienate newcomers. I'll try to bring people in regardless, and I'll be sure to not make them feel alienated by tossing around words like Vectoring.

If all I wanted to do is explain Smash 4 DI to brawl and melee pro players, I'd stick with "VI"/"Vectoring."
But that is not all that is important. In fact, it is the least important thing here.

Even in 4 years there will still be new people, chances are that Melee will still be around in some capacity to represent old DI, and there will be people who used to be part of the scene coming back. These people are still likely to be confused as they enter the scene, as are people who watch some Smash stuff on occasion; I know that if I weren't into Smash as a whole as heavily as I am, I'd be confused by a lot of the Melee terminology when I watched EVO this year because it works differently than what I'm used to in Brawl.

Either way though, I still think that KI works as the best term as it is simple, descriptive, and shows the change for Smash 4. Also, Smash is a series that continues to have tourneys for the older games, which means that Smash 4's definition of DI won't just overwrite the old definition of DI.

These "confused" people will figure out how the mechanic works at some point. Anything short of Sakurai coming out and writing a column about how a new mechanic works, will take research on your own time.

If you find DI seems to be working strangely, your first suspicion will be that something was changed about how it works. As a result you will look up DI mechanics and find the necessary information detailing how it works differently.

It's simple. It's not confusing. It's DI.

I agree with most of your message, but think about how long it took people to realize that DI was working strangely. Some people eventually realized "Down DI", however for the people who aren't here on Smashboards all the time, it could take quite a while for them to realize that DI wasn't working right; if indeed they realize at all.

I know a large number of people who have been "DI-ing" for years by holding against the launch angle after having DI explained to them wrong/having only sort of heard about it/etc, and they never realized that it wasn't doing anything.

 

[wannabe33]

These "confused" people will figure out how the mechanic works at some point. Anything short of Sakurai coming out and writing a column about how a new mechanic works, will take research on your own time.

If you find DI seems to be working strangely, your first suspicion will be that something was changed about how it works. As a result you will look up DI mechanics and find the necessary information detailing how it works differently.

It's simple. It's not confusing. It's DI.

These "confused" people will figure out how the mechanic works at some point. Anything short of Sakurai coming out and writing a column about how a new mechanic works, will take research on your own time.

If you find walking seems to be working strangely, your first suspicion will be that something was changed about how it works. As a result you will look up walking mechanics and find the necessary information detailing how it works differently.

It's simple. It's not confusing. It's walking.

 

[Conda]

Even in 4 years there will still be new people, chances are that Melee will still be around in some capacity to represent old DI, and there will be people who used to be part of the scene coming back. These people are still likely to be confused as they enter the scene, as are people who watch some Smash stuff on occasion; I know that if I weren't into Smash as a whole as heavily as I am, I'd be confused by a lot of the Melee terminology when I watched EVO this year because it works differently than what I'm used to in Brawl.

Either way though, I still think that KI works as the best term as it is simple, descriptive, and shows the change for Smash 4. Also, Smash is a series that continues to have tourneys for the older games, which means that Smash 4's definition of DI won't just overwrite the old definition of DI.


I agree with most of your message, but think about how long it took people to realize that DI was working strangely. Some people eventually realized "Down DI", however for the people who aren't here on Smashboards all the time, it could take quite a while for them to realize that DI wasn't working right; if indeed they realize at all.

I know a large number of people who have been "DI-ing" for years by holding against the launch angle after having DI explained to them wrong/having only sort of heard about it/etc, and they never realized that it wasn't doing anything.

It took like 2-3 days after the game's japanese release for us to realize it works differently. Doesn't warrant an over the top name. I cant even imagine a complex starcraft mechanic being named Vectoring.

 

[Chiroz]

It took like 2-3 days after the game's japanese release for us to realize it works differently. Doesn't warrant an over the top name. I cant even imagine a complex starcraft mechanic being named Vectoring.

2-3 days of the release, clost to a week of the demo and 5-6 events for one person in the entire world to find out. We're talking about individuals here. How many people were playing Smash who post things online? At least 300,000? What are the chances for every individual to find out on his own?



Also I will just say, I am not a commentator myself but, I believe that you are wrong on who a commentator comments to. I think most of the people who watch commentators are semi-casual or semi-competitive. Not many hardcore pros watch or listen to comments from another person when watching a match. And even if they did once you get a number like 2,000 viewers (ZeRo's stream daily) then there's bound to be some semi-competitives around. They might or might not notice that DI changed by the way you address VI/DI every time it happens in game but why not make sure they do notice it 100% sure.

 

[Jaxas]

It took like 2-3 days after the game's japanese release for us to realize it works differently. Doesn't warrant an over the top name. I cant even imagine a complex starcraft mechanic being named Vectoring.

Keep in mind that the Demo has been out for much longer than that, and it still had the knew mechanic.

However, all in all I agree with you - it doesn't warrant an over the top name. I do think it deserves it's own name though, and as long as it's simple and descriptive then it should have one. Which is why I like KI, but honestly as long as it's simple, to the point, descriptive, and not pretentious/etc then I don't care what name it gets.

Calling it DI I disagree with, though.