Parry thread [Archive]

goodm0urning

10-26-2007, 11:43 PM

Okay, here's my serious take: if the kids absolutely must have their all-purpose fuck-off universal counter, then give it to them--but limit its usefulness severely; it just stops the combo and push-blocks the opponent out of close range. Make it a mixture of an Alpha Counter, a Just Defense, and a red parry. It can only be used to break combos. It has a command. It doesn't give you an instantaneous recovery. If super meter returns in SF4, the counter eats some or all of it. If there is no super meter, then you lose some life, which forces you to roll the dice that you would have lost more life if the combo had continued than if you did the counter.

I just don't like the idea of the (re)introduction of universal options that utterly dominate the gameplay. If they must exist, then make them one of many useful tools in the system, rather than the one go-to option that people can depend on anytime they're in a pinch.

Hellion

10-26-2007, 11:47 PM

*snip*

In otherwords, bringing the fight back to the characters?

Manx

10-27-2007, 03:11 AM

snip

You just designed a game, there! Maybe you can go work for Capcom. :tup:

Don't try to put limitations on Parry. it's either in or it's not. It can't be an alphacounterjustdefendredparryhelperassistcombotec hhit that simply eats up meter or health because then you've just defeated your whole argument and added yet another powerful tool to the game. Besides, if it costs you to do it, then what is the difference between you risking your meter/health and your opponent risking theirs by attacking you with the posibility of getting paried? You've just taken the shoe off and put it onto a different foot.

Some people make it seem as if every hit in every other tournament match gets parried, but in reality both players are still risking more than they are rewarded, player A by making a risky attack and player B by parrying that attack when they only anticipate that it is coming.

Ashenwraith

10-27-2007, 03:27 AM

I don't understand what the point is in having both a block and a parry in a fighting game.

Have one or the other, but when you have both it just needlessly complicates the game.

If combos are a problem just give players the ability to super out of them - problem solved without dumping another layer of crap on the game.

MiLky

10-27-2007, 03:35 AM

http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=99742

I agree with Viscant in that thread. Other than that, I agree that parries are SF3, SF4 should be new.

SweetJohnnyV

10-27-2007, 04:44 AM

First up, I think SF4 should have it's own feel. Making SF3:4th whatever doesn't make much sense to me. Secondly, I agree with Viscant, Seth, etc. who've all outline what how parries break a lot of the mechanics that I loved in SF2/SFA.

With that being said, I'll restate what I've said in a previous parry thread. If there's going to be a system to counter moves, I'd like to see it work as a Counter Move. Think about Karin in SFA3 or Kasumi(I think that's her name) in SvC. In other words, you have to do an actual command, and when you do your counter move an animation comes out. If you guess incorrectly, you're stuck in your animation and you can be hit.

A real counter move system still allows you to thwart advances from your opponent, but it also carries a big risk. Almost as importantly, it does it's own damage. You don't get to follow up with whatever devastating combo/super you might have for free. IMHO, this system is a nice alternative that allows you to stop an obvious attack, without causing many play mechanics to become degenerate.

polarity

10-27-2007, 04:50 AM

DevilJin 01

10-27-2007, 05:24 AM

God made parries so they would be in SFIV and the world would be a better place.

Ashenwraith

10-27-2007, 05:47 AM

I'm gonna try to stay well away from this discussion as it's become evident people on the other side just don't get it, but I will say I never really understood what made those counter moves any more than shitty DPs. I guess the window for catching stuff is bigger?

I think it's really just a 'more/bigger is better' way of seeing things that most people have (this might also be why you see so many people requesting a 20+ character roster).

There are probably a lot of other players who are going to be upset if SF4 doesn't have tag team or whatever feature from their favorite fighting game.

YellowS4

10-27-2007, 06:12 AM

yes.
Down parry out of it!

xero15

10-27-2007, 07:12 AM

if its 3d (hopefully it aint but if it is do it right) i would like to see it somewhat like tekken 5 where when you parry it throws their body away and resets momentum so both players will be recovering from the action. if its 2d it could still be done somewhat similar where when you tech its somewhat like the throw tech system and pushes the two players back. those are my 2 cents.

TaiPing

10-27-2007, 08:31 AM

I did not like the parry system in SF3, SF3:2I, CvS2, and most games that implemented of a version of it. I only loved it in SF3:3S. It made the game more exciting and forces my opponents and myself to perform mix-ups (not repetitive or obvious). To perform a fireball, all it takes is QCF P. I love how I can counter it by tapping forward. If it takes 2 HCF P to perform a fireball, then it is just stupid. I love how strategies are not as guaranteed as most other games. It forces me to think more. However, I do not want it back in SF4. They will probably fail and put it back to SF3:2I days. It is pretty much like trying to win a game of Russian roulette with a shotgun.

If they are going to bring a form a parrying back, bring back red-parrying instead and make projectiles not [due to popular demand] parry-able.

That is all I have to say.

two2tone

10-27-2007, 09:03 AM

Parry is so good in many ways because take for instance... when someone has no stamina in SFII and whatnot... one fireball and ITZ OVER! period! u cant parry that shit! done! NO comeback here kids!!! but in parryable games (3s maybe?) you cant do a fireball kill if it was predicted? get what i mean? it's like a next level thing? daigo/wong evo2k4 moment showed a lot on what could have happened IF parry was not invented. Sure it has its flaws BUT it can always be tweaked towards perfection but never perfected of course... anyways i just felt like i wasted 5 mins of my life typin this shit

Obliterate

10-27-2007, 09:12 AM

I love the parry system, but I'd but a limit to it, have it take away from your super bar much like an EX attack. Each parry requires 10% of your super bar or some shit like that.

Hellion

10-27-2007, 09:29 AM

I only loved it in SF3:3S. It made the game more exciting and forces my opponents and myself to perform mix-ups (not repetitive or obvious). To perform a fireball, all it takes is QCF P.

If they are going to bring a form a parrying back, bring back red-parrying instead and make projectiles not [due to popular demand] parry-able.

On mixups, there are only 3: High/low, throw. How can that not get repetitive or obvious when you're only using moves that don't have serious lag on them until you score?

The game was more exciting fighting for position, if you're loosing ground it's alomst like you can see death coming. With character variety the depth comes from the various strategies each character implements in their gameplan vs that of others. On that note alone, maybe if you were down to that last pixel of life in the corner you deserved to loose.

Red parrying is in there, but in all high-level tourney vids how often do you see it put into play? meh.

TaiPing

10-27-2007, 09:49 AM

I was being as general as possible without going to details. I never understood the notion of "you deserved to win but did not." It had always been "a win is a win" for me. I would rather not have a debate and I will keep it that way.
Red parrying is in there, but in all high-level tourney vids how often do you see it put into play? meh.
Which is exactly why I do not mind it being back.

shoultzula

10-27-2007, 11:11 AM

3s is a different kind of street fighter.

frame advantage, option select parries are broken and when you do it right, you get free block. So you get to eliminate your opponents counter footsie attempt basically after every frame advantage, then go into another frame advantage setup and continue the process.

you can jump in parry on a majority because very few characters have proper AA. You actually have to sit there and re adjust AA timing on normals to create an AA so its ok to jump in on someone who can't do them. IMO, only a few characters have true AA like akuma as an example when he has bar. Thats an AA. Not s.jab's then mixup. Your opponent only lose a few points of life for doing something thats wrong to begin with and he has a chance to actually block out and get away? nah thats crap.

I like 3s, I play it when people are willing too but I can't lie to myself and say its the epitimy of street fighter @ its highest level when its the total opposite. Its still a fun "broken" game though.

pootnannies

10-27-2007, 11:44 AM

Lvl.3

10-27-2007, 11:59 AM

Did anyone see any parries in the video, no. They're probably gone. Why do these threads keep poping up?

YellowS4

10-27-2007, 12:02 PM

Did anyone see any parries in the video, no. They're probably gone. Why do these threads keep poping up?

Did you guys see other characters? Shit, they're probably gone too.

Wantonx

10-27-2007, 12:08 PM

I hate it when people say parrying sucks or makes the game unbalanced. It helps make lower tier characters playable and adds to the game. So fuck those guys

Lilman

10-27-2007, 12:15 PM

Did you guys see other characters? Shit, they're probably gone too.

:rofl::rofl:

Mychale

10-27-2007, 12:56 PM

Yeah I don't see the point either. There was already a thread about parrying that had every idea in it and every argument was argued. Plus there was a vote(in favor of parry). Pointless is what this is.

There won't be parry in SF4 because it will be Sf4. Wouldn't mind seeing it. Lets see what capcom can come up with thats new. I just hope some of the nonsense thats posted in here ugh.. nvm.

SweetJohnnyV

10-27-2007, 02:35 PM

I'm gonna try to stay well away from this discussion as it's become evident people on the other side just don't get it, but I will say I never really understood what made those counter moves any more than shitty DPs. I guess the window for catching stuff is bigger?

I think the biggest difference between counter moves and DPs are that counter moves are purely defensive. You can't do a combo into a counter move, for instance. And yeah, they work more dependably for catching stuff...if you guess right. If you do a high counter move and your opponent attacks high, you stuff it clean. There's no possibility of trades or whatever. But if they attack low, you also get stuffed clean.

With that explanation out of the way, I think I'm gonna bail from this discussion now too. All this stuff has been argued over too many times before...

ShYtFaCe

10-27-2007, 04:27 PM

Parries are the ultimate fallback to true balance. No game will ever be 100% balanced regardless of character played, parries allow the lower tiers to compete, IMO. I think now that they're in they shouldn't ever be removed.

hubcapsignstop

10-27-2007, 05:47 PM

I'd like to see a character with a DP that has 1 frame of totally vulnerable startup before going invincible but does big damage/sets up a big combo opportunity. It doesn't even have to look like a DP I guess, could just be a counter move that intercepts everything. Basically creates a character that has a really powerful anti-air/footsie option if you're good at predicting pokes, but is still weak against getting meatied on wakeups. We've seen the inverse before, so I think that'd be pretty cool. :china:

edit: Actually a character that does most of their damage from intercepting the opponent's attacks in general would be pretty neat. Hell, you could even just give them 3S-style parries and a really fucking short guard meter!

im a big 3S fan, but i think if parries show up strictly as a character specific thing i would think that would be pretty cool

caliagent#3

10-27-2007, 06:35 PM

I hate it when people say parrying sucks or makes the game unbalanced. It helps make lower tier characters playable and adds to the game. So fuck those guys

3s chun disagrees

Pablo_the_Mex

10-27-2007, 09:41 PM

ElderGOD

10-27-2007, 09:49 PM

How to fix blocking vs parrying?

A block gives meter, make a parry use up meter.

With characters who have a full bar and only one bar, this means that they will be unable to directly do a super after (ex: hugo gigas breaker) unless they chain attacks into super.

CrimsonDisaster

10-27-2007, 09:50 PM

On mixups, there are only 3: High/low, throw. How can that not get repetitive or obvious when you're only using moves that don't have serious lag on them until you score?.

Different parry directions. Delayed attacks. Little fakes with movement/whiffed jabs. Frame traps. People need to wrap their minds around the idea that mindgames go beyond "does it hit high or low?"

I'm not a terribly huge fan of parries but I'll admit they worked out okay in 3S, even if the top characters benefit way more from parries (and are generally better off in terms of risk/reward for trying to parry them) than the low tiers.

Hellion

10-27-2007, 09:51 PM

I hate it when people say parrying sucks or makes the game unbalanced. It helps make lower tier characters playable and adds to the game. So fuck those guys

Here, you can read all this.
http://forums.shoryuken.com/forumdisplay.php?f=176

So fuck those guys
http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=99742
All this too,
or if you want some extra help read this in particular.
http://forums.shoryuken.com/search.php?searchid=1142394

Parries are the ultimate fallback to true balance.
You can read this.
http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=34754

Class dismissed.

Hellion

10-27-2007, 10:03 PM

Different parry directions. Delayed attacks. Little fakes with movement/whiffed jabs. Frame traps. People need to wrap their minds around the idea that mindgames go beyond "does it hit high or low?"

Mindgames do go beyond high and low, because mindgames encompass the whole of the match. Up close those are mixups, and it doesn't change the fact that in the end there's only 3, high/low/throw.
Where are those mindgames like in A3 where you actually have to bust your ass to get in on Dhalsim, or playing as Geif trying to bust his ass for position to get in on a shoto? Eliminated.
At least Dhalsim was considered good in Alpha even with all the madness about V-Ism.
...
eh. This could go on forever.

NO PARRIES!:annoy:

Silks

10-27-2007, 10:29 PM

LOL I liken this thread to some kid watching an ant colony build a big sand home and then smashing and kicking it away. Then, watch them start building it again... again... again...

discuss that

Humbag

10-28-2007, 12:26 AM

Oh wow Your all oso amartst.

PARRY PARRY PARRRY
ARORRY PARIRY PARYYY

yeah Parrieys rock.

screw da haeraxz, beer i s gooed as welill.

Luigi-Bo 87

10-28-2007, 12:27 AM

Oh wow Your all oso amartst.

PARRY PARRY PARRRY
ARORRY PARIRY PARYYY

yeah Parrieys rock.

screw da haeraxz, beer i s gooed as welill.

The fuck did I just read?:wtf::confused:

Humbag

10-28-2007, 12:32 AM

Theui Bidble: acording to Huimbard

Luigi-Bo 87

10-28-2007, 12:40 AM

:confused:

Are you trying to overthrow j1n James?:bluu:

I wouldn't mind parries returning. Parries=skill imo.

Humbag

10-28-2007, 02:14 AM

Ive been posting like that for a while now when i get drunk.

Damn, im sober now :(

Luigi-Bo 87

10-28-2007, 02:32 AM

Ive been posting like that for a while now when i get drunk.

Damn, im sober now :(

lol. Don't get bro raped.:rofl:

Sasmasta

10-28-2007, 02:43 AM

^LoL. "Where's Chad!?" :sad:

But to stay on topic...

Alot has been discussed in this thread. Some of it has made me rethink my decision on it.

Now I don't know what side I'm on. Parrying is great in my opinion because it allows you bust an 'Evo.' [ala Evo Moment #Daigo. I forget the number...].

However, as alot of people pointed out [in the old thread], it can easily be abused and shouldn't have as much priority as it GIVES you. There should be some sort of penalty for using it AND/OR have the timing be more stricter.

Just as long as there's no air blocking, I'm okay with whatever decision is made on parrying.

Thank you.

ringopan

10-28-2007, 02:52 AM

parrys in the form we are familiar with (aka tapping forward or down in 3s), may or may not return, but hopefully the essence of the parry will return.

what is a parry? it is succesfully anticipating your opponents next move, and going seamlessly from being on the defensive to launching your own attack. this is the natural flow of actual fighting, and i feel it is important to have a system in the game that captures this. if you have the ability to read your opponent, you should have an option besides guarding when you are fighting at close range.

polarity

10-28-2007, 03:59 AM

B.L. Pancho

10-28-2007, 05:03 AM

LOL Polarity.

You might as well coin that phrase and put it in your sig since you have to reiterate it so often.

two2tone

10-28-2007, 07:33 AM

stop making ur attacks predictable and it wont get parried? sure they can have lucky guesses but that's like 10% of the time not all the time

Hellion

10-28-2007, 09:21 AM

this is the natural flow of actual fighting, and i feel it is important to have a system in the game that captures this. if you have the ability to read your opponent, you should have an option besides guarding when you are fighting at close range.

That's more like the flow of actual fighting at mid range.
Point blank whoever's initiating the assault has the other guy in "block mode."
Parry's eliminate old favorites, and in all these other threads people want old favorites back, even the likes of Vega.

Vega would be complete ass for example in a game with parries (where parry alone is the sole element to the game). His only saving grace in CvS2 are RC's and CC's dominating so greatly that playing P-Groove isn't worth it, though HE himself makes for an interesting P-Character as it compliments his game of RANGED fighting, ironically.

People want six buttons, but watching Valle and Diago '06 go at it what's the point?
Just to allow the top players to weed out the buttons people won't use? Perhaps I'm hitting that point too hard, they do often enough use other buttons, but only because other moves aside from the regular normals are executed.

stop making ur attacks predictable and it wont get parried? sure they can have lucky guesses but that's like 10% of the time not all the time
It's a 50% chance(at range) Jumpins are 50% as well; Do they jump HK? No?
All jump-ins with parry do is force the guy on defense to hold off on anti-airs or even blocking because he wants to land that extra damage. 50/50.

Close in it's more like 33%.
If a character is crouching more likely than not it's back to 50/50 again guessing what he's doing next even at point blank if both characters are crouching, the other waking up.
After half the round against a strong player you more likely than not will know what his in-close patterns are in a game where you're forced to go all out at point blank range, and even then it will always be a guess.

Even then, it's a guess with benefits; option select parries?
When you consider the inclusion of such, it's understandable why they went to the two button throw in 3S.

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 06:49 AM

par·ry: verb, -ried, -ry·ing, noun, plural -ries.
–verb (used with object) 1. to ward off (a thrust, stroke, weapon, etc.), as in fencing; avert.
2. to turn aside; evade or dodge: to parry an embarrassing question.
–verb (used without object) 3. to parry a thrust, blow, etc.
–noun 4. an act or instance of parrying, as in fencing.
5. a defensive movement in fencing.

...........

Ok, seriously, I wouldn't be suprised if it returned somehow. but then again, alot of new elements introduced to the series never end up being stapled features. But I doubt they'd make this game without some sort of advanced gaurd.

Ok I didn't post in the other thread. I have an idea on how parries could be fixe if you think the parry is broken.

1. 1st thing I would do is get rid of the RED PARRY! I know it takes skills to red parry, but I believe you should have to commit to parry the entire multiple attack/super like you had to do in SF3ng and SF3 2I. Chipping someone to death is cheap so that's why red parries was added in SF3 3rd strike.

2. I would add something like the chicken option in tekken. It would be a counter to the parry. Make it an "Alpha Just Frame Counter" so you counter the parry. That would look better than dash throw/throw breaks fest you see in 3S because people are afraid to throw out pokes!

Alpha counter the parry will do an attack depending on the button you use like in alpha2.

My 0.02

TrueSephiroth

10-29-2007, 07:11 AM

Jida

10-29-2007, 07:11 AM

if you have the ability to read your opponent, you should have an option besides guarding when you are fighting at close range.

And I guess if you have the ability to guess randomly, you should also have an option besides guarding. And also if you can walk forward slightly, crouch at opportune moments, and mash forward while jumping you should have a different option.

Ya know what? Anyone who can walk forward and crouch briefly should have the ability to choose something other than guarding.

stop making ur attacks predictable and it wont get parried? sure they can have lucky guesses but that's like 10% of the time not all the time

That looks like this:

I've never heard of option select parrying.

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 07:31 AM

Hellion is correct, Vega would lose a shit load of gameplay due to Parry being implemented, other characters that would fail too would be someone like Blanka...seriously...wtf is he going to do? Even someone like Guile would not be able to do anything with his Sonic Booms remotely consistently on any lvl.

Seriously, if it does not add more depth or help out to improve the game mechanics of Street Fighter...why bring it back? That just does not make any sense to me. I for one am completely against Parry...as I have been since the last thread was removed.

Add an alpha counter to sf4 that only works against parries. Then that would stop the empty jump strategy and add more to the gameplay imo.

TrueSephiroth

10-29-2007, 07:44 AM

Add an alpha counter to sf4 that only works against parries. Then that would stop the empty jump strategy and add more to the gameplay imo.

How about not adding Parry within the first place, then you wouldn't need to have some sort of alpha counter to counter it. There is no need for a counter to counter a counter, Parry just simply isn't needed.

As I've said, it doesn't add to the depth or overall development of the game, why bother implementing something that has shown to not improve the way we play SF, I'm sure the last 10983402938 threads we've had of this has enough statements to prove so already.

TaiPing

10-29-2007, 10:06 AM

Hellion is correct, Vega would lose a shit load of gameplay due to Parry being implemented, other characters that would fail too would be someone like Blanka...seriously...wtf is he going to do? Even someone like Guile would not be able to do anything with his Sonic Booms remotely consistently on any lvl.
I think the only thing I agree with is that it makes Guile completely useless. Vega and Blanka on the other hand would not be useless. In fact, if every groove has parry, maybe Blanka and Vega would not be as top tier and people would use other characters. Then again, I only liked parries in 3S. The parry system is obviously flawed but can be fixed. Remy's Light of Virtue for example should not be parry-able unless they change it to QCF P, but that would use Remy's purpose. Same goes with Guile's Sonic Boom, but he is not in 3S. There are a lot more examples but I would not adventure any further.

I have more gripes towards whiffing than to parries.

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 10:14 AM

How about not adding Parry within the first place, then you wouldn't need to have some sort of alpha counter to counter it. There is no need for a counter to counter a counter, Parry just simply isn't needed.

As I've said, it doesn't add to the depth or overall development of the game, why bother implementing something that has shown to not improve the way we play SF, I'm sure the last 10983402938 threads we've had of this has enough statements to prove so already.

I will agree that parries have turned a lot of people away from the SF3 series in its early years, but I don't agree with getting rid of parries. I have friends that hate 3S because of parries. You need some kind of counter system in your fighting game. If not parries then what? I saw the quote when someone said there was a counter.

"it's called a dragonpunch!!!"

Well I don't play with ryu, ken, sagat, akuma, or feilong with great dragon punch anti air. You can't wake up with the blanka ball unless you roll cancel the move. Every character doesn't have the anti air/invincible attack on start up/wake up like those characters listed earlier! Bison and blanka are shit out of luck when getting up without a super or a stupid glitch (rc) attack in cvs2! Wtf can characters like hugo, 12, oro, and Q do against urien, yun, akuma, ken, necro, and every other good character in 3s without a parry huh? I know what would happen. It would be easier to beat the worst characters. They already suck and if the parry was taken away they would be a waste of memory space on the game. Yes capcom needs to make better characters so they would have more options for anti air/wake up attacks, but they don't have them. No one wants to play a game with 10-15 ryu/ken clones! Every game has its good and bad points. AC were too good in A2. IMO it promoted turtling. So what did they do? Did they take AC out of A3? No they didn't. They reduced the damage on AC's and let it reduce your gaurd meter plus using super meter to do AC's. Now I am against gaurd meters because of the following:

1. I'm a ninja turtle. LoL and I don't want to be forced to play a certain way.

2. usually in a game with a gaurd meters some characters are in/near the top tier because they have high priority on abused normals attacks like rolento, cvs2 cammy, or A3 sakura. While I do think those characters are well made to fit a game with a gaurd meter they aren't as good without the gaurd meter in the game, but still playable in high level tournament play IMO.

They are better than hugo, alex, 12, sean, and oro without parries IMO. The problem is making better characters overall so they don't depend on parries to be the only good counter for meaty attacks. I don't want to argue over this topic. Just giving my opinion. Hopefully I won't get the random flame responds that most of these type of threads cause!

**Edit**:

P.S.-anyone that thinks the parry is broken and it ruins SF3, but in the same game don't think kara normal throws are broken or oro and urien unblockables aren't broken are wrong and don't have a real/credible arguement in this thread against parries. IMO since you like to abuse a glitch(kara any attack is a programming glitch in the fighting engine and unblockables are Program glitches) that wasn't meant to be in the game. While parries were put in the game to add more options in gameplay.

Just like most of the community thinks that (rc) made cvs2 a better game even though capcom released the FIXED versions of cvs2 on gamecube and xbox. They re-released the game the way it was suppose to be played without the RC glitch. How did people in the community respond to the fixed version of 3S on dreamcast and cvs2 on GC/xbox? FUCK THIS BULLSHIT GAME! I won't play the fix version in tournament play. I will only play the arcade version in tournament play. I'm guilty of this and a lot of you are as well. I use to hate RC in cvs2, but now I look at it in a different way. How can I hate on one glitch (RC) in cvs2 when I abuse the fuck out of kara throws and oro's unblockable glitch in 3S.

More food for thought.

Arsenal

10-29-2007, 10:21 AM

...Every character doesn't have the anti air/invincible attack on start up/wake up...

Truest post in here. Just think about it for a minute.

polarity

10-29-2007, 10:36 AM

player2

10-29-2007, 10:45 AM

In some of the fighting games I have played in years past, the life meter gave you an indication of when you were in danger (like flashing), and in some cases, an advantage was given (like a desperation move in Fatal Fury games).

I say that to say this as a casual fighter: would there be a problem if parrying (or any other defensive option) were enabled when a fighter's lifebar reached the "danger zone?

When an opponent is close to dying, sometimes that gives the person with the upperhand a chance to toy with the near-dead with:

keep-away tactics (to pass the time and taunt/embarass the opponent)
pokes/block strings
light attacks
special moves they know the opponent can't block
supers that will chip them to death (hey, a win's a win)

It's a mentality we have grown accustomed to when winning is on the horizon, that of toying with/embarrassing the opponent. I would like to see that change a little. I like winning as much as the next person, but it would be nice to see a player give their all without resorting to cheap tactics or toying with near-dead prey.

Besides, what if the shoe was on the other foot? How would you feel if your character was @ 0 vitality, the opponent timed a special/super attack to catch you as your character stood up/recovered from a juggle, and your character doesn't have a move that (1) has an invincibility-frame startup or (2) can avoid the attack? Wouldn't it be nice to have a defensive option (like parrying) to at least keep you in the game?

Keep in mind that I'm not tourney-worthy, pro-parrying, nor anti-parrying. However, I wouldn't have a problem if parrying was introduced in SF4 as a defensive tactic only to be used when one's life bar flashes or is close to being depleted.

Zandwich

10-29-2007, 10:52 AM

I think parries should be put in the next game but i think dragons should be removed. i understand what ur sayin polarity but dragons have no place in a fightng game. dragon is a mythicl beast and CLEARILY, th game is based completeley on real life. ryu i a strong warriro why u debase him and add a dragon into the game. [polarity u need to calm down and chill out.... . parries rule

archetype

10-29-2007, 11:23 AM

I wouldn't mind parries returning. Parries=skill imo.

Please explain this. Because I have no idea how tapping forward or down because you thought I would do something is "skillful."

In some of the fighting games I have played in years past, the life meter gave you an indication of when you were in danger (like flashing), and in some cases, an advantage was given (like a desperation move in Fatal Fury games).

I say that to say this as a casual fighter: would there be a problem if parrying (or any other defensive option) were enabled when a fighter's lifebar reached the "danger zone?

Yes.

When an opponent is close to dying, sometimes that gives the person with the upperhand a chance to toy with the near-dead with:

keep-away tactics (to pass the time and taunt/embarass the opponent)
pokes/block strings
light attacks
special moves they know the opponent can't block
supers that will chip them to death (hey, a win's a win)

Why are you calling this "toying"? I can use whatever assortment of moves and tactics I want if you are near death or with full health. Its a fighting game you know. I'm supposed to hit buttons and do shit so your life bar disappears by any means necessary.

It's a mentality we have grown accustomed to when winning is on the horizon, that of toying with/embarrassing the opponent. I would like to see that change a little. I like winning as much as the next person, but it would be nice to see a player give their all without resorting to cheap tactics or toying with near-dead prey.

Stop calling it toying with/embarrassing please. Like I said before its a fighting game, you are supposed to win. If you cant handle someone going on all out on you when they trying to win, don't go to a tourney. You will be sorely disappointed.

Besides, what if the shoe was on the other foot? How would you feel if your character was @ 0 vitality, the opponent timed a special/super attack to catch you as your character stood up/recovered from a juggle, and your character doesn't have a move that (1) has an invincibility-frame startup or (2) can avoid the attack? Wouldn't it be nice to have a defensive option (like parrying) to at least keep you in the game?

Jesus, do you hear yourself? People have been getting killed by wake up fireballs and attacks for more than a decade. There wasn't a problem then, and there isn't one now. Maybe you shouldn't let yourself get owned the hell up and thrown in the corner with a dude sittign on lvl 3 supers. That situation is COMPLETELY avoidable. You dont need parry to fix that shit. You need (and everyone else arguing this point) to step you street fighter game up.

pootnannies

10-29-2007, 11:42 AM

Please explain this. Because I have no idea how tapping forward or down because you thought I would do something is "skillful."

or tapping any punch or kick buttons because your opponent's next move MIGHT have frame disadvantage or they're not blocking high/low whatever

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 12:02 PM

Haha so you're openly acknowledging that you want LESS character variety now? Characters can do well without good wakeup options; plenty of characters in ST do. Every character does not need the best answer to every single possible bad situation they could be put in - that's boring. Universal options that water down character individuality (and by the way, 3S parries homogenize the roster WAY more than giving everyone a DP would) are not a substitute for good character design.

Why? Hyper Fighting is pretty undeniably the best balanced SF there ever was, and it didn't need a counter system to do it.

1. Please read all of my post. Don't just snip a line out of it and spin it in your favor sir. I said that NO one wants to play a game with 10-15 ryu/ken/akuma clones! That was before I added the edit PS part.

2. Sf2HF is the most balanced sf ever?!?!? Rotflmao...... You know, I know, and everyone knows there is no such thing as a balanced sf game. Unless I'm mistaken isn't the top tier the same as ST? Isn't it the following:

(sim, sagat, guile, ryu) minus vega and rog and replaced by ryu and guile because vega and rog don't have good invincible anti air/wake up attacks and ryu/guile are better in HF?

Just wondering if I was making a false statement.

TrueSephiroth

10-29-2007, 12:22 PM

1. Please read all of my post. Don't just snip a line out of it and spin it in your favor sir. I said that NO one wants to play a game with 10-15 ryu/ken/akuma clones! That was before I added the edit PS part.

2. Sf2HF is the most balanced sf ever?!?!? Rotflmao...... You know, I know, and everyone knows there is no such thing as a balanced sf game. Unless I'm mistaken isn't the top tier the same as ST minus vega and rog and replaced by ryu and guile because vega and rog don't have good invincible anti air/wake up attacks?

Just wondering if I was making a false statement.

You must be joking, Hyper Fighting is the most balanced SF period. The only character that has difficulty is Bison, everyone else can fight effectively well. Ryu maybe #1 in HF, but he does not hold it with an iron fist.

The gaps between him and middle-tier characters is not big whatsoever, which is why HF's playability of characters is very high. This shouldn't even be argued.

Btw, we have been playing Pre-SF3 games without Parries or some retarded universal counter...and we did well without it. So how is "adding" parry going to make things better when it hasn't been proven to do so?

What's with everyone wanting some sort of universal counter? Not everyone having anti-airs or something universal adds to character variety and character individuality.

polarity

10-29-2007, 12:27 PM

1. Please read all of my post. Don't just snip a line out of it and spin it in your favor sir. I said that NO one wants to play a game with 10-15 ryu/ken/akuma clones!

But you don't mind a game where almost everyone plays the same like 3S...?

Dandy J

10-29-2007, 12:33 PM

why does everyone need an invincible wakeup

why isnt street fighter just a game with one character with all the moves

that seems to be what you guys want it to be

Jida

10-29-2007, 12:35 PM

But you don't mind a game where almost everyone plays the same like 3S...?

That's really what it's going to boil down to. Regardless of how well someone against parrying expresses themselves the opposition won't ever admit that they could be wrong about the effects of parrying on gameplay. Ever. No one's ever going to say "Oh well...I guess I was wrong". Never gonna happen. People love their precious parry and will do just about anything to justify it. Doesn't really matter how fucking stupid it gets. SK's gonna do this thread like he did a dozen others....:rolleyes:

pootnannies

10-29-2007, 12:45 PM

goodm0urning

10-29-2007, 12:55 PM

sk started this thread. and couldn't the same be said about parry haters?Why does one have to be a "parry hater" in order to make a logical argument against the inclusion of parries in post-SFIII games?

Henaki

10-29-2007, 01:06 PM

That's really what it's going to boil down to. Regardless of how well someone against parrying expresses themselves the opposition won't ever admit that they could be wrong about the effects of parrying on gameplay. Ever. No one's ever going to say "Oh well...I guess I was wrong". Never gonna happen. People love their precious parry and will do just about anything to justify it. Doesn't really matter how fucking stupid it gets. SK's gonna do this thread like he did a dozen others....:rolleyes:

Pretty much!

In other news, if SF4 doesn't have free Alpha Counters it will be a total failure and not worth playing period. Please offer me incredible amounts of information as to the drawbacks of free Alpha Counters which I will promptly IGNORE. Not everyone can escape pressure in Street Fighter very well so I think giving everyone a free Alpha Counter would make this very possible and balance the game.

TaiPing

10-29-2007, 01:15 PM

Why does one have to be a "parry hater" in order to make a logical argument against the inclusion of parries in post-SFIII games?

Logic is an unfair statement because a lot of people have different "logics". Most of my friends believe in the one true God while my parents believe in many. I on the other hand do not believe in any. Where is the logic there?

When a person is not use to something, it is logical that they do not want to be part of it and want to say anything that justifies their own side. This goes for both sides, by the way. Just because you think it is logical does not mean it is.

Though, I still do not understand why people want the same game. It is Street Fighter IV ... not Street Fighter III: 4th Edition. Though, I would love it. I am still waiting for Yun's SA3 making him not able to block (like Makoto's SA3) and Chun's SA2 power is to be cut in half. I was hoping for something like STHD and it is happening, so maybe luck can happen after all, just like parries.

Henaki

10-29-2007, 01:22 PM

Logic is an unfair statement because a lot of people have different "logics". Most of my friends believe in the one true God while my parents believe in many. I on the other hand do not believe in any. Where is the logic there?

When a person is not use to something, it is logical that they do not want to be part of it and want to say anything that justifies their own side. This goes for both sides, by the way. Just because you think it is logical does not mean it is.

Cool so by your wrong definition of logic what you just posted is logic.

By the dictionary's definition of logic, what you just posted is "wrong".

Shin00bi

10-29-2007, 01:27 PM

When this game comes out, it won't scare me away if it has Parry, but it will probably scare away new-comers, so I vote 'nay' for Parry.

I want all new players to this game to not be instantly dominated by 3S-like Parries the day it comes out. We need competition, and a revived community.

goodm0urning

10-29-2007, 01:52 PM

Logic is an unfair statement because a lot of people have different "logics". Most of my friends believe in the one true God while my parents believe in many. I on the other hand do not believe in any. Where is the logic there?A logical or valid argument is one in which the conclusion of the argument follows the premises of the argument in a logical fashion. I absolutely made a fair statement unless your personal definition of logic is different from the working definition of logic that the sciences have adopted. In other words, if your definition of logic is wrong.

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 01:52 PM

You must be joking, Hyper Fighting is the most balanced SF period. The only character that has difficulty is Bison, everyone else can fight effectively well. Ryu maybe #1 in HF, but he does not hold it with an iron fist.

The gaps between him and middle-tier characters is not big whatsoever, which is why HF's playability of characters is very high. This shouldn't even be argued.

Btw, we have been playing Pre-SF3 games without Parries or some retarded universal counter...and we did well without it. So how is "adding" parry going to make things better when it hasn't been proven to do so?

What's with everyone wanting some sort of universal counter? Not everyone having anti-airs or something universal adds to character variety and character individuality.

I'm for hugo having a true anti air DP move instead of the special grab version, but I don't want the same moves with every character. Hell wouldn't even need to jump with his DP. He needs something like ryo hcb and punch attack in kof96. Can we atleast agree that the characters made in SF2 were made better compared to the sf3. I love old school sf2 gameplay. But we are talking about a new version of sf. Hopefully they will bring elements of both sf2 and sf3 that we the community can agree on and love to play for sf4.

The more I think about it the more I don't think capcom should listen to the people when its about gameplay. The more I think about it the only thing that could ruin sf4 is the feedback from the community as a whole. People tend to not change their opinion on how sf is suppose to play in their book. Play testing the beta version of the game is good feedback from the community. Asking and listening to the majority of the community for the entire direction of sf4 may ruin the game before it has a chance to be worthy of the brand street fighter 4!

Spirit Juice

10-29-2007, 01:56 PM

lol @ everyone having a DP

I remember when GGXX: Accent Core was getting loc tested and the Japanese BBS decided to play a joke by saying everyone in the game had a DP. Everyone was freaking out until the rumor/joke was proven false. :lol:

Everyone getting a DP wouldn't be the answer. I'm not against having a universal defense system, even parries, so long as they're balanced. Actually, I'd prefer alpha counters more than I would parries. IMO, CvS2 alpha counters were pretty well balanced for the grooves that had it. They weren't overpowered in the slightest and were normally used to avoid guard crushes and being chipped to death, but they required a good chunk of meter to do it.

two2tone

10-29-2007, 02:23 PM

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 02:33 PM

Yeah, so who wants to play 3rd Strike?

polarity

10-29-2007, 02:36 PM

best balanced my ass elaborate

It has the highest percentage of viable tournament-winning characters :confused: How about you elaborate on why it isn't?

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 02:47 PM

But you don't mind a game where almost everyone plays the same like 3S...?

Every game has its flaws. And let me state for the record "I prefer SF2 gameplay over SF3 gameplay". With that said getting rid of parries is not the solution IMO. Create something that will balance the parry system.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 02:49 PM

For me, I dont see a reason to include parries in SFIV. Not because they're bad but simply because it's SFIV. 3S doesn't have alpha counters or a guard meter so why should SFIV have parries?

polarity

10-29-2007, 02:49 PM

Every game has its flaws. And let me state for the record "I prefer SF2 gameplay over SF3 gameplay". With that said getting rid of parries is not the solution IMO. Create something that will balance the parry system.

Why? What is so great about parries that necessitates keeping them in the game?

Humbag

10-29-2007, 02:49 PM

Yeah, so who wants to play 3rd Strike?

Me.

Let us fight with dignity.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 02:52 PM

Why? What is so great about parries that necessitates keeping them in the game?

Probably something to do with the fact that they just own everything around you and they give you that feel good feeling.

Oh and I'll be on the godweapon server. If you wanna p2p send me a PM.

UltraDavid

10-29-2007, 03:25 PM

best balanced my ass elaborate
Every character was competitive and the tiers were much more ambiguous. That's not to say that individual matchups weren't bad or that tiers didn't exist, but compared to every other fighting game Capcom has made, Hyper Fighting is the most balanced one. Super Turbo is second place, and then things get a little more debatable. But this is neither here nor there.

The parry system is well balanced in that it devalues strategy equally for everyone; that kind of thing can't help but be balanced. What's imbalanced about 3S is the cast of characters.

Mercy

10-29-2007, 03:49 PM

I think everyone has a valid opinion of why they should and shouldn't put parries in 4. I would like to see parries in 4 but a lot tighter on the window. If they remove parries A LOT of things would have to change to balance it in order for certain characters to have a chance to get in. I'm pretty sure Capcom is gonna do something totally different for 4, trust that.

Pablo_the_Mex

10-29-2007, 03:52 PM

I believe capcom needs to at least bring in a more old school feel to actually make money. I see tons of casual players line up to 3S machines immediately shout "This is HELLA different" and leave, never to play a street fighter game again. Parries would just keep alienating new players who never got the hang of them in the first place.

Silks

10-29-2007, 04:37 PM

Maybe this thread will get deleted and everyone can start all over again next week.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 04:43 PM

Maybe this thread will get deleted and everyone can start all over again next week.

*prays

Pablo_the_Mex

10-29-2007, 04:45 PM

Keep it open, I like continuous ownage. Kills time at work.

SwmmrManShen

10-29-2007, 04:49 PM

from what i've heard (i'm too young to have been part of the hyper fighting, or any SF2 golden days) was that hyper fighting, while balanced, was very unforgiving and required an incredible amount of tenacity to succeed as high level.

I remember reading in the tomo ohira (or whatever his name was) threads that the game was about forcing your opponent into a slow frustrating loss. Honostly, that just does not sound very exciting

Pablo_the_Mex

10-29-2007, 04:50 PM

And what is so exciting about 3S? You like watching 2 chuns twitching back and fourth?

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 04:53 PM

And what is so exciting about 3S? You like watching 2 chuns twitching back and fourth?

LOL. Even people that like 3S stay away from those matches when they can. You get the jist after the first few attacks. Hell...some people just can't watch CVS2 or even ST at all. Half the matches to the untrained eye in CVS2 are "2 people twitching back and forth". Some people like to sum up Guilty Gear as "people dashing back and forth looking for a combo". When you understand the mind games behind it it's much more. I've only started to like watching Chun vs. Chun after I understood the mind games behind the matchup more. Any fight is more fun to watch when you understand the intensity behind it. What's exciting about 3S is ninjas.

FMJaguar

10-29-2007, 04:53 PM

With that said getting rid of parries is not the solution IMO. Create something that will balance the parry system.

This already happened, in addition to moves like DPs, things like JD, green block, slashback, and some others that i'm forgetting, do a better job of what parry claims to do. Why not use any of them?

Gaijinblaze

10-29-2007, 04:55 PM

And what is so exciting about 3S? You like watching 2 chuns twitching back and fourth?
haha, i knew you were one of those

pootnannies

10-29-2007, 04:59 PM

Why does one have to be a "parry hater" in order to make a logical argument against the inclusion of parries in post-SFIII games?

your logic isn't everyones logic. hating on 3s because you get mad that people can predict your moves and capitalize on that, doesn't make it a 100% guessing game. it isn't 50% either. attack low, attack high, throw. how many frames do i have to wait until i try parry? that applies to every attack. and even if they tried to parry your attacks it doesn't mean they'll always do it right.

you don't like parry in sf3? that's cool, don't play it. but don't try to convince everyone in here that parry makes sf3 games "broken". if people want it in sf4 so be it.

it's funny that when a parry thread comes up "parry haters" are attracted like flies on shit. the last one had a poll and guess what? most people wanted parries even though the majority of the posts were against it.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 05:02 PM

your logic isn't everyones logic. hating on 3s because you get mad that people can predict your moves and capitalize on that, doesn't make it a 100% guessing game. it isn't 50% either. attack low, attack high, throw. and even if they tried to parry your attacks it doesn't mean they'll always do it right.

you don't like parry in sf3? that's cool, don't play it. but don't try to convince everyone in here that parry makes sf3 games "broken". if people want it in sf4 so be it.

it's funny that when a parry thread comes up "parry haters" are attracted like flies on shit. the last one had a poll and guess what? most people wanted parries even though the majority of the posts were against it.

Parry is just too powerful. Only god can stop it.

Pablo_the_Mex

10-29-2007, 05:03 PM

Right, lots of mind games going on when both fighters are unwilling to do anything. After all, it is just a FIGHTING game. CVS2 is also on its own level of retardation.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 05:06 PM

Right, lots of mind games going on when both fighters are unwilling to do anything. After all, it is just a FIGHTING game. CVS2 is also on its own level of retardation.

It's tough to do anything in the Chun/Chun matchup because Chun does such a good job destroying herself. Simple as that. It's a really broken matchup and it's not really so much on the players as it is the matchup itself. The matchup itself is obviously even but because of the retartedly good tools Chun has...it forces the matchup to be rather redundant. It's like 2 people in Halo trying to fight each other point blank with rocket launchers. It's tough not to be cautious just because Chun Li's tools are so good and at the same time it makes it so easy to just bait her and punish.

UltraDavid

10-29-2007, 05:08 PM

it's funny that when a parry thread comes up "parry haters" are attracted like flies on shit. the last one had a poll and guess what? most people wanted parries even though the majority of the posts were against it.
Pro-parry barely won, but almost no pro-parry person could articulate why they voted for it outside of uninformed opinions. It's fine that people like the parry, but what it seemed like was that people only liked the parry because they hadn't really thought about why or what the parry really does to gameplay.

Pablo_the_Mex

10-29-2007, 05:09 PM

I just don't like how the matches turn out, or rather, the match ups.

DevilJin 01

10-29-2007, 05:11 PM

Pro-parry barely won, but almost no pro-parry person could articulate why they voted for it outside of uninformed opinions. It's fine that people like the parry, but what it seemed like was that people only liked the parry because they hadn't really thought about why or what the parry really does to gameplay.

Yeah...if anything the pro parry people really never had to argue. Capcom is gonna do what they want outside of what they may read on their forums. Parry pretty much does all the talking for itself. Even if it does debase the strategy of SF, people like it and that's pretty much all the reason you need to want parry in SFIV. As vital as it could be for the next SF game to not have 3S style parries, they are generally something that a lot of people obviously dont mind or like. If you like it and it's your kind of strategy...GG's. If you don't...call Capcom. In all seriousness...parries more than likely won't be implemented in SFIV the way they were in 3. If at all.

Hellion

10-29-2007, 05:35 PM

It sounds like people want to defend parries just because-
-----it beats everything
-----it gives them that warm fuzzy that they could've cheated death, and if they died it's due to lack of skill.
-----not everyone has a dragonpunch.
-----it discourages "TIGER!" "TIGER!" "TIGER!" "TIGER!"
-----it encourages more variety in characters picked
(regardless of how similarly they're forced to be played)
(BTW the landing of your powerful genei jins or chun's death super and the skill to pull either off doesn't take away from the fact that in-close they all play the same)

For those that argue on balance, in old games you didn't NEED a dragonpunch to be remotely competitive. In fact the dragonpunch is a very vulnerable move if it misses. All characters with the exception of Cammy and Blanka IIRC could take the top in a SFII Turbo tourney and its all based on their level of skill.
Cammy in particular had a horrible matchup vs Honda.

For that one post on having a game with 15 Ryu/shoto/ken/akuma clones or whatever, Polarity was correct in saying in this sense what's the difference from playing a game with 15 shotos, and another with 15 different looking characters that are all forced to fight exactly the same way?

If people can't beat a gimmicky/turtle style of background play like Sagat's Tigers then you simply can't adapt and need to step it up.
Low strong A2 Rose anyone? What good is her godly priority in that poke if its neutered because of parry? It's not like she can just walk up to take that position she's godly at, she has to fight for it.
If you let her walk up to that range you gave that player the match.
Can't beat RC Blanka Elec, nor Vega's RC Roll Claw?
These moves are all the same as Sagat's Tigers in Turbo. If you can't adapt and beat it, you will be beaten.

BTW before RCs were even discovered (or knowledge of widely spread) Blanka was top tier, competitive only with Sagat. RC's gave him an edge, may even have tipped the scale in that bid for dominance.
RC's helped bump Bison up a few grades and his CC only cinched it.
The same goes across the board for numerous characters (at least more so than 3S). It depended on how much effort you put into learning to beat what the top teams were consisted of.

On the matter of getting chipped to death, you may as well think of that as the knockout punch to your however well (or poorly) played game vs your obviously better opponent.
Good players keep their cool even when they're loosing or in the face of other such BS like fighting a raged CvS2 K-Groover, and oftentimes win when they're clearly on the loosing side of the match, within a fierce's worth of death, or even a pixel.

------
On the account that parries give you that "good to go" feeling, and you feel rewarded with your skilllz pulling of a Diago, and that if you failed to parry as needed it was the failing of your own skill, think of everything above for a sec.
-It replaced skill with a simple button tap that was covered with option selects, and single handedly eliminated a style of play prevailent in previous incarnations.
While there is a talent required definitely to pull off parrying entire supers, that's a talent that anyone could easily learn in training mode (applying it to tourneys another matter), and isn't practical for the majority of players.

Parry is just too powerful. Only god can stop it.
God I love this, I'd sig it if it weren't for the one I got already.

bodler

10-29-2007, 05:44 PM

true dat true dat true dat. and thats when watching begginer level or mid level players who does evrything out of nerves gets boring as fuck

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 05:49 PM

shinblanka

10-29-2007, 06:02 PM

This already happened, in addition to moves like DPs, things like JD, green block, slashback, and some others that i'm forgetting, do a better job of what parry claims to do. Why not use any of them?

Sounds good to me. More and more I think about it sf4 will be shity if capcom listen to the majority of the community. We can't agree on shit, so let capcom work its magic. Play testing is the only input that should be used when it comes from the community. That's beta testing and online suggestions.

ill_will

10-29-2007, 06:10 PM

Silks

10-29-2007, 06:16 PM

its because its the internet. noone is going to change anyone elses mind, people who like parry are gonna still like it no matter how many essay's anti-parry people post up.

i <3 parry

Um... I remember seeing more than one person who loved parries in 3s admit that the "anti-parry brigade" made great points and that they saw the bullshit the parries can cause. However, I don't remember seeing the reverse happening. Obviously we essay writers know what we are talking about eh? Unless you missed that huge thread that got deleted...

ill_will

10-29-2007, 06:22 PM

Um... I remember seeing more than one person who loved parries in 3s admit that the "anti-parry brigade" made great points and that they saw the bullshit the parries can cause. However, I don't remember seeing the reverse happening. Obviously we essay writers know what we are talking about eh? Unless you missed that huge thread that got deleted...

congrats :rofl:

pootnannies

10-29-2007, 06:22 PM

exactly hellion, if you can't beat whatever tactic your opponent is using on you then you must adapt. i wish you'd start taking your own medicine. if you somehow are constantly parried, then it's because you need to adapt and not be so predictable.

i like parry ,although it could use a tweak it's still part of strategy. it kills some of the old sf2 strategy that everyone was used to (and why not, it's a new game) but adds new ones. you don't have parry option select on everything you parry either, so it isn't completely safe at all times. the window to perform a parry is a little too wide in 3s i admit. does it break the game? hell no. do you have to adapt to the changes no matter how unfair you think it is? well if you're a good player you can.

the worst thing about 3s is not the parries, it's the character balance. i personally wish that at least chun was banned from tournament play. you shouldn't be rewarded so highly for easy tactics. there were plenty of characters in 3s that required a lot of skill to be able to use them effectively. i liked that because it was more challenging then playing chun or ken, but what does it matter if with all your extra effort in learning a more challenging character you can't beat decent chun players consistently? that's 3s's problem.(that doesn't mean you shouldn't try though=p)

IMO parries would not destroy sf4 if they were implemented. somethings do carry on from sf game to sf game. six buttons, 3 punch 3 kick. jump, block, special moves, etc...

if sf4 doesn't have parries i couldn't care less, as long as there is something new there to take it's place.

goodm0urning

10-29-2007, 06:39 PM

your logic isn't everyones logic.Logic is logic. It doesn't belong to anybody. Why do so many people have such a hard time understanding that?

polarity

10-29-2007, 06:48 PM

its not worth playing anything but the top tier in 3s because they all play the same anyway so why not get the most out of it

Hellion

10-29-2007, 07:04 PM

i wish you'd start taking your own medicine. if you somehow are constantly parried, then it's because you need to adapt and not be so predictable.

Not adapting isn't my problem.
Giving up the depth that came with a thought out gameplan is.

you don't have parry option select on everything you parry either
While this is true, that doesn't mean that with every jab or short thrown that players aren't option selecting.

but what does it matter if with all your extra effort in learning a more challenging character you can't beat decent chun players consistently?

its not worth playing anything but the top tier in 3s because they all play the same anyway so why not get the most out of it
Therein lies the problem.

Silks

10-29-2007, 07:26 PM

congrats :rofl:

thanks? :rolleyes:

Humbag

10-29-2007, 08:18 PM

There isnt many pro-parry people in here cause they be busy playing the game instead of bitchin.

lol, just playin

SF3 parries should stay with SF3.

I wanna see something new anyway.

MannyKal

10-29-2007, 08:45 PM

Were parries in P-groove (CVS2) overwhelmingly broken?

If they weren't, what properties made it not as 'broken' as SF3 parries?

And could those properties make a SF4-parry acceptable?

Humbag

10-29-2007, 09:12 PM

Not really. They were much much harder than 3s parries though.

nothingxs

10-29-2007, 09:24 PM

UltraDavid

10-29-2007, 09:25 PM

It was P-groove generally that sucked, not its parries.

player2

10-29-2007, 10:36 PM

*systematic destruction of p2's thought* Please don't get the idea that I am constantly on the recieving end of a good beat down.

Looking back on my post, it did come off as a bit 'scrubby,' but as I stated in the title of my post, it was "just a thought." I've done the things mentioned in my last post to other players when the win margin was large enough. While it was fun for me, it wasn't for my opponent. Sometimes, the player(s) would challenge me again, only to have the same thing happen. The only problem was that, in the long run, people stopped playing against me. And every player knows you're only as good as your competition.

I'm still on the fence about the whole 'parry' situation. I'm trying to see things on both the winning and the losing side. On the one hand, I see a near-death player try everything he can to regain the upper hand, only to have all of his normals / specials / EX-specials / supers parried against the underdog]. On the other hand, I think of Evo moment #37... for the underdog]

I don't know where the balance should be struck. If there is going to be new blood introduced to the series, do we want to keep beating noobs with our years of experience, or do we want something that will make us step our game up higher than where it is now, while at the same time giving newcomers a chance at victory? Sure, conditional parrying may be a dumb idea, but it was 'just a thought' nonetheless.

In the end, though, player skill will always prevail no matter what the in-game gimmicks or tactics.

Henaki

10-29-2007, 10:53 PM

Were parries in P-groove (CVS2) overwhelmingly broken?

If they weren't, what properties made it not as 'broken' as SF3 parries?

And could those properties make a SF4-parry acceptable?

It's not that parries were bad.

It's the fact that P groove ONLY had parries, it had the second worst super bar (this is seriously the biggest contributing factor), shortest guard bar, no two button throw, 3 better supers grooves with roll cancel (an equally powerful system mechanic). It's really not that parries are bad at all in CVS2, it's the fact that it was put on such an awful groove that it's actually somewhat balanced. Hell P Kyo and Cammy are outright playable at high levels and P has the 2nd worst super bar in a game which is very reliant on supers!

UltraDavid

10-29-2007, 11:02 PM

Parrying doesn't work for or against the underdog, seems like that's a common misconception. It works equally for both players at all times, and that's why you have the constant and inescapable guessing games that define Third Strike. At no point can the aggressor stop guessing for fear that he'll get parried into big damage, and at no point can the defender stop guessing for fear that he'll get hit (or also parried) into big damage.

That Justin v Daigo moment is so retarded, I mean it's really not a good example either for parrying. It involves a player correctly anticipating a single thing from his opponent, and for that reason only he wins a match in which he had been systematically beaten until only a few seconds before that moment; in other words, it let a player who had played poorly overcome his poor play and it made a player who had played well and then made one poor decision lose an otherwise well-played match. Even looking at it as a cool comeback, it's much less entertaining than the comeback that starts at 3:21 of this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCuZ3b7GuKc). Not only is it way shorter, but it's only technically difficult, not strategically, as opposed to Wolfe's comeback which was difficult and entertaining in every sense, from strategy, to mixups, reactions to straight up luck that his opponent messed up. That CE Bison is retarded is unimportant for the purposes of this example.

Hellion

10-29-2007, 11:57 PM

Not only is it way shorter, but it's only technically difficult, not strategically, as opposed to Wolfe's comeback
I like how this sentence summed up all the crap I wrote.
Obviously you have a talent for getting to the point, bravo sir.

NG1313

10-30-2007, 12:27 AM

The way I see it, Dhalsim won because he put the pressure on the opponent and played right. He capitalized on his best moves first (the two noogie-traps.. which he could've lost since I saw Bison throw Dhalsim after Dhalsim's slide earlier in their game) and then mixed it up when Bison was anxious to jump away from another grab. Had there been parries, Dhalsim probably would've been looking for one when he was down to 1% life and Bison charging a Psycho. Bison wouldn't go for a parry because he was stunned by the noogie-traps and didn't know what to expect (plus he was in the lead and thus on the defensive). The same principles are also in effect in 3S with its parries.

I don't know why you're so eager to discredit skill behind parrying, even Daigo's big moment. It doesn't take skill to guess a parry on wake-up, but it takes experience to implement and avoid option select parries and attention to exploit weaknesses you see with your opponent's defense. And it took strategic positioning and the intuition that never hurts in any SF for Daigo's parry-comeback.

All that said, I understand the gripes people have with parrying and I may be biased because I'm a fan of 3S. I guess parrying has replaced fireball games, and are that much more useful/ flexible/ powerful. I was never fond of competing for the number of fireballs thrown out, anyway. Which is what a Ryu Vs Guile game is about, basically. And not so much with Dhalsim Vs Bison, just as how parries aren't that useful for Ken rushing down Q, for example. That may be wrong since Q won't get many openings and Ken might leave room for an option select parry here and there... in which case you could just call it a fireball trap.

Silks

10-30-2007, 12:57 AM

...I was never fond of competing for the number of fireballs thrown out, anyway. Which is what a Ryu Vs Guile game is about, basically.

It is? That ryu sure would be tasting a lot of backfists if that were true. Don't you think WHEN the fireballs are thrown comes into play just a little? And from WHERE they are thrown?

I know I'm just attacking your example. But if that's how you view it, I think you're over-simplifying matters

NG1313

10-30-2007, 01:58 AM

Henaki

10-30-2007, 07:52 AM

The same variables are present with parrying.

I'm just attacking SFII to defend 3S.

Anyway... the more fireballs you block, the more you are at a disadvantage. Strategies are simple. The difficult part is tactics, in my opinion. You'll need a tactful way to advance in on Guile as Zangief, not a strategy... unless every Guile player plays the same. And 3S is more about tactics than knowing as much as possible about the match-up and be ready with a strategy that opponent's character will have difficulties with. That's my opinion.

You realize making it so your jump-hits 3 fireballs later is the definition of strategy right. Or does your dictionary also contain the synonym "opinion" under "logic".

Tactics: Right now
Strategy: Plan that spans more than 1 move.

A tactic would be jumping in and doing an attack, a strategy would be, waiting on LP fireballs till Guile throws a HP fireball, jumping over it, positioning yourself properly for the jump-in, then wait for Guile to throw a third fireball so you can jump in and do a combo and gain momentum of the match. SF2 has positioning based strategies, while SF3, when it does, are usually no longer than 2 moves.

KayinNasaki

10-30-2007, 02:04 PM

The more you block, the more at a health disadvantae your at, but not a positional one. I BELIEVE for most fireball traps you either need to force a block on either a meaty ball or a slow ball. so after the second ball hits, you've at less of a disadvantage. Or something like that. Your disadvantage changes all the time in the trap.

On another topic, it amuses me how a lot of parry supporters assume anti parry people just can't deal with parries and lose to them and thusly hate them. SFIII has parries. Thats the mind games that are involved. When I play SFIII I play up to that and all the anti parry people who play 3rd strike do too.(which seems to be most of the anti parry guys) It's the fact that, compared to what else is out there, think parries devalue many aspects of gameplay.

Of course then we have to hear people bring up "tiger tiger tiger tiger"(as if we want SF4:SF2 again), but tiger spam is ALSO retarded and no one wants that in a new game (Beside smaybe HD Remix, though I think it should go). I'm also sure most people don't want retardedly strong throws either. SF2 has it's own feel and thats fine. So does SF3. They all have their good and their bad. We don't want SF3s bad stuff, nor do we want SF2's bad stuff..

The problem is that a lot of uninformed people WANT SF3s bad stuff. If someoen came along and asked for Tiger Tiger Tiger in SF4 (AS A UNIVERSAL MECHANIC) we'd butcher them.

Pablo_the_Mex

10-30-2007, 02:38 PM

The problem is that a lot of uninformed people WANT SF3s bad stuff. If someoen came along and asked for Tiger Tiger Tiger in SF4 (AS A UNIVERSAL MECHANIC) we'd butcher them.

This pretty much sums it up.

dbycrash

10-30-2007, 02:46 PM

the best/most intreuging thing that could happen imo is that some characters have the abiility to parry in their moveset while others dont, yet they are still balanced through other means, or better yet.. being able to pick the style(a-la groove) of your character where one would include parries(for 3s players) and the other(s) would not.

.. best of both worlds.

KayinNasaki

10-30-2007, 02:51 PM

People bring up grooves as a solution too much. Problem is, groove systems almost always end up with there being very cleanly defined grooves you should use and blahblahblah and just leads to a game with lots of unviable options that stubborn people will insist on making work. And parries will end up A) Too good and a dominate groove B) Not good and thusly the 3S players who pick it will just be grumpy.

Gvingm a few characters a parry is fine though.

TaiPing

10-30-2007, 02:52 PM

Most of the pro-parry guys are not even saying that they want the parry system in SF4. Most of them are defending the parry system for 3S, which is pointless considering this is a SF4 forum. If CAPCOM were to release an upgrade version for SF3, there should be a parry system (refined and polished) because it had always been part of the SF3 mind games. It would be naked without it.

goodm0urning

10-30-2007, 02:53 PM

That Justin v Daigo moment is so retarded, I mean it's really not a good example either for parrying. It involves a player correctly anticipating a single thing from his opponent, and for that reason only he wins a match in which he had been systematically beaten until only a few seconds before that moment; in other words, it let a player who had played poorly overcome his poor play and it made a player who had played well and then made one poor decision lose an otherwise well-played match.I disagree with some of this. What Daigo did was remarkable, because he successfully baited a player who is legendary for his extremely (some would say excessively) careful style of play.

Like it or not, parrying is a part of strategy in 3S, and Wong has only himself to blame for losing the match. He was winning, he got overconfident, and he handed the win over to Daigo. He made a monumentally bad decision that eclipsed the relatively minor poor decisions Daigo had made previously in the match, and all Daigo had to do at that point was correctly guess the precise moment to tap forward--no small feat itself, since he couldn't do it on reaction.

Henaki

10-30-2007, 02:54 PM

Parrying is not a part of strategy. Parrying can be defined as both a tactic and an ability. Usually, there have to be steps involved in getting a parry for it to be a strategy. At no point did Daigo purposefully lose all but 1 pixel of health just so he could parry a super so he could do a 1/3 life super combo. Also you kind of defeat your own argument?????? Guessing is also completely nonstrategic because a strategy involves a multi-step thought process, there are gambles in strategies but not "I will fire an arrow maybe it will hit then he dies if it doesn't oh well I lost an arrow".

STRATEGY:
1. Also, strategics. the science or art of combining and employing the means of war in planning and directing large military movements and operations.
2. the use or an instance of using this science or art.
3. skillful use of a stratagem: The salesperson's strategy was to seem always to agree with the customer.
4. a plan, method, or series of maneuvers or stratagems for obtaining a specific goal or result: a strategy for getting ahead in the world.

LOGIC:
1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.

Can you guys graduate 4th grade English before we continue this conversation?

ramza

10-30-2007, 02:57 PM

I disagree with some of this. What Daigo did was remarkable, because he successfully baited a player who is legendary for his extremely (some would say excessively) careful style of play.

Like it or not, parrying is a part of strategy in 3S, and Wong has only himself to blame for losing the match. He was winning, he got overconfident, and he handed the win over to Daigo. He made a monumentally bad decision that eclipsed the relatively minor poor decisions Daigo had made previously in the match, and all Daigo had to do at that point was correctly guess the precise moment to tap forward--no small feat itself, since he couldn't do it on reaction.

just fyi you can input the first parry after the flash "on reaction", daigo didn't do that however.

TaiPing

10-30-2007, 03:01 PM

I think what made evo2k4 moment #37 amazing was that Daigo did his trick in front hundreds of people, under a lot of pressure, managed to bait, parry the super, and did a combo that cleaned Justin’s HP. It is the combination of all this that makes it amazing. If Daigo did that on Justin in a casual game with no pressure, it would not be as fantastic, unless it is a $1000 money match or something like that.

Parrying is not a part of strategy. Parrying can be defined as both a tactic and an ability. Usually, there have to be steps involved in getting a parry for it to be a strategy. At no point did Daigo purposefully lose all but 1 pixel of health just so he could parry a super so he could do a 1/3 life super combo. Also you kind of defeat your own argument?????? Guessing is also completely nonstrategic because a strategy involves a multi-step thought process, there are gambles in strategies but not "I will fire an arrow maybe it will hit then he dies if it doesn't oh well I lost an arrow".

I think what goodm0urning meant is that the parry system is needed to put into consideration when formulating a plan in 3S, such as what not do because the opponent might parry out of it. Also, parry could be a part of your strategy if you can predict what your opponent is going to do next and give them a meaty combo ... or throw.

DevilJin 01

10-30-2007, 03:39 PM

There isnt many pro-parry people in here cause they be busy playing the game instead of bitchin.

lol, just playin

SF3 parries should stay with SF3.

I wanna see something new anyway.

Pretty much.

Silks

10-30-2007, 03:58 PM

Henaki

10-30-2007, 04:06 PM

I think what goodm0urning meant is that the parry system is needed to put into consideration when formulating a plan in 3S, such as what not do because the opponent might parry out of it. Also, parry could be a part of your strategy if you can predict what your opponent is going to do next and give them a meaty combo ... or throw.

Yeah except none of those fit the definition of strategy. Also "formulating plan" good one.

goodm0urning

10-30-2007, 04:32 PM

Parrying is not a part of strategy.Anything that affects the way you strategize in a game is necessarily a part of strategy. Knowing what you can do is a part of strategy. Knowing the things your opponent can do, as well as the ways your opponent can counter what you can do, is a part of strategy. Failure to take any of these things into account constitutes an error of strategy.*

*See Evo Moment #37 for further reference.

TrueSephiroth

10-30-2007, 04:43 PM

It's not that there isn't any form of strategy for a SF game that incorporates parry, it's the mere fact that it waters down everything with it's introduction and does not improve the depth of the gameplay that is the problem with Parry.

I honestly do not see why it should return if it doesn't help to make the gameplay more deep. What Wolfe did to Valle was infinitely more amazing then what Daigo did to Wong, because Wolfe did not have a universal trump card to depend upon, instead he had to rely upon what Dhalsim was given as an individual character and utilize it to basically perfection to achieve the win.

Henaki

10-30-2007, 05:04 PM

Anything that affects the way you strategize in a game is necessarily a part of strategy. Knowing what you can do is a part of strategy. Knowing the things your opponent can do, as well as the ways your opponent can counter what you can do, is a part of strategy. Failure to take any of these things into account constitutes an error of strategy.*

*See Evo Moment #37 for further reference.

You're throwing the word strategy around like it has any practicality in SF3. There's mindgames and mixups sure, but not strategy. The highest level of strategy is a two step process (play fairly defensively till I have meter, then find a safe opportunity to use it) which is functional for basically 3 characters. Theres no step by step process to gain an advantage and then ride it properly. It's merely a tactical and reading game, and I'm not insulting it at all, that's just what it is.

Tigerboi

10-30-2007, 05:04 PM

Oh wait... that actually involves risk. If you're gonna lose anyway, I guess go with parry ;)

......what?

EDIT: OH yeah, uh, quite honestly, if it returned, oh well. From a strategic standpoint, I love it. But it does kind of turn everything into a mind game.

Spirit Juice

10-30-2007, 05:17 PM

I think it would've been even more amazing if Daigo, in the same exact situation at that same evo, would've anticipated the super and jumped at the exact right moment over it. Then punished Chun from behind :D

Oh wait... that actually involves risk. If you're gonna lose anyway, I guess go with parry ;)

If Daigo didn't parry that super (as opposed to jumping over it, which I don't think he would've been able to anyways), he wouldn't have been able to win the round in one combo.

Anything that affects the way you strategize in a game is necessarily a part of strategy. Knowing what you can do is a part of strategy. Knowing the things your opponent can do, as well as the ways your opponent can counter what you can do, is a part of strategy. Failure to take any of these things into account constitutes an error of strategy.*

*See Evo Moment #37 for further reference.

I would lump that into "yomi" more than anything if you're going to say it's part of knowing what you can do. Knowing your opponent's options vs. your options isn't really strategy, but simply knowledge of the game. How you use that knowledge is up to you, which is, in turn, strategy. Parry is a relatively safe game mechanic that everyone can do (but not every character can use it to its full potential), which is why it waters down the game's depth. Yes, it is another option you and your opponent can do, but when it is applied in this way, it merely becomes a guessing game with little risk because of option select.

For example, a Player X is locked down in the corner by Player Y. Player Y knows an assortment of normals, specials, etc. that'll keep X locked down. X knows an assortment of normals, specials, etc. that'll get him out, but he must wait until he sees a hole in Y's pressure in order to escape. Naturally, X is in at a disadvantage due to block stun and pressure, and ultimately, at the mercy of Y. If X slips up and makes a mistake, Y will land a combo. Y knows the ins and outs of this match up, knowing what is guarenteed to be the safest and most effective way to pressure X. Granted it's not impossible for X to escape, but it's difficult because he put himself in that position due to poor play and now must outplay Y to get out of this bad position. However, if you throw parry into the mix, nothing Y is doing is guarenteed to be safe. Y isn't playing stupid either; he's mixing it up rather well and isn't being predictable in any way. X knows what his options and what Y's options are as well, but rather than outplaying Y, X only needs one parry, which can offer little risk because of option select parries, to change his fortune around. Now the game has been watered down to either X outplays Y in this situation or turns the match around because of one guess. Much more strategy and depth comes into play when X outplays Y and gets himself out of the corner as opposed to guessing an option select parry to turn the match around.

goodm0urning

10-30-2007, 06:04 PM

You're throwing the word strategy around like it has any practicality in SF3. There's mindgames and mixups sure, but not strategy. The highest level of strategy is a two step process (play fairly defensively till I have meter, then find a safe opportunity to use it) which is functional for basically 3 characters. Theres no step by step process to gain an advantage and then ride it properly. It's merely a tactical and reading game, and I'm not insulting it at all, that's just what it is.No insult taken, but be that as it may, I still disagree. And mind you, I'm not a huge fan of parrying. I find it as annoying as anybody else would when an opponent's crucial parry messes up my plan and leaves me wide open for punishment.

Knowing ahead of time that that could happen, and keeping it in mind at all times during play, is something that's woven into the fabric of SFIII, just as much as Alpha Counters are in A2. Anybody who believes that Justin's random super should have clobbered Daigo is thinking in terms of other games in the series and applying them to SFIII, rather than thinking of SFIII in its own terms.

But that's an old argument here, and I doubt it will ever be resolved. If anything even remotely like parrying winds up in SF4, I hope it's balanced and strictly limited such that it will be one of many useful tools, rather than the one overarching tool that affects all gameplay (every SF since A2 seems to have one of these).

pootnannies

10-30-2007, 09:44 PM

You're throwing the word strategy around like it has any practicality in SF3. There's mindgames and mixups sure, but not strategy. The highest level of strategy is a two step process (play fairly defensively till I have meter, then find a safe opportunity to use it) which is functional for basically 3 characters. Theres no step by step process to gain an advantage and then ride it properly. It's merely a tactical and reading game, and I'm not insulting it at all, that's just what it is.

mindgames and mixups are part of strategy. for example: ryu jumps at ken and ken blocks, as soon as ryu lands, ken wants to sweep. the ryu player, knowing that's what usually happens from one of these situations, considers that a mix up (eg. uoh) at this point has a greater chance at evading ken's sweep and then punish. if ryu continues to mix up some other situations he can confuse his opponent.

let's say that a swat team is about to invade a house with armed criminals. do they just come in and guess where the criminals are going to be? kind of, but they have a plan. they've done this before so they know what the criminals are MOST LIKELY to do. this is an educated guess but it involves PLANNING.

most parries use educated guesses. there are some desperate moments where you might just attempt one but most of the time that's not the case.

and don't give me that bullshit answer, "guessing games in 3s aren't educated guesses"

think before you post

Henaki

10-30-2007, 11:39 PM

mindgames and mixups are part of strategy. for example: ryu jumps at ken and ken blocks, as soon as ryu lands, ken wants to sweep. the ryu player, knowing that's what usually happens from one of these situations, considers that a mix up (eg. uoh) at this point has a greater chance at evading ken's sweep and then punish. if ryu continues to mix up some other situations he can confuse his opponent.

let's say that a swat team is about to invade a house with armed criminals. do they just come in and guess where the criminals are going to be? kind of, but they have a plan. they've done this before so they know what the criminals are MOST LIKELY to do. this is an educated guess but it involves PLANNING.

most parries use educated guesses. there are some desperate moments where you might just attempt one but most of the time that's not the case.

and don't give me that bullshit answer, "guessing games in 3s aren't educated guesses"

think before you post

Uh no I'm pretty sure you're the one who needs to think considering you still don't know the definition of strategy after I posted it in this thread.

If you can't even have a basic comprehension of the English language, how are you expecting to even make a valid point in the first place?

Oh and you're putting words in my mouth too because I never said guessing games weren't educated? You can guess and weigh options at the same time, that doesn't mean it's strategic...

Actually fuck it, my words are wasted every single time I post because people can't even grasp basic logic... or the definition of it.

Teh.

archetype

10-30-2007, 11:51 PM

I would lump that into "yomi" more than anything if you're going to say it's part of knowing what you can do. Knowing your opponent's options vs. your options isn't really strategy, but simply knowledge of the game. How you use that knowledge is up to you, which is, in turn, strategy. Parry is a relatively safe game mechanic that everyone can do (but not every character can use it to its full potential), which is why it waters down the game's depth. Yes, it is another option you and your opponent can do, but when it is applied in this way, it merely becomes a guessing game with little risk because of option select.

For example, a Player X is locked down in the corner by Player Y. Player Y knows an assortment of normals, specials, etc. that'll keep X locked down. X knows an assortment of normals, specials, etc. that'll get him out, but he must wait until he sees a hole in Y's pressure in order to escape. Naturally, X is in at a disadvantage due to block stun and pressure, and ultimately, at the mercy of Y. If X slips up and makes a mistake, Y will land a combo. Y knows the ins and outs of this match up, knowing what is guarenteed to be the safest and most effective way to pressure X. Granted it's not impossible for X to escape, but it's difficult because he put himself in that position due to poor play and now must outplay Y to get out of this bad position. However, if you throw parry into the mix, nothing Y is doing is guarenteed to be safe. Y isn't playing stupid either; he's mixing it up rather well and isn't being predictable in any way. X knows what his options and what Y's options are as well, but rather than outplaying Y, X only needs one parry, which can offer little risk because of option select parries, to change his fortune around. Now the game has been watered down to either X outplays Y in this situation or turns the match around because of one guess. Much more strategy and depth comes into play when X outplays Y and gets himself out of the corner as opposed to guessing an option select parry to turn the match around.

Good shit Spirit Juice. That 2nd paragraph is my thoughts typed through your enlightened fingers.

Everybody read that shit and go towards the fucking light.

ElderGOD

10-31-2007, 12:09 AM

I agree with above post but parrying is fun.

Plus it looks cool.

hubcapsignstop

10-31-2007, 11:10 AM

remember Chaka's counter system from JoJo's
that shit was fun

Hellion

10-31-2007, 12:05 PM

remember Chaka's counter system from JoJo's
that shit was fun

But useless against Dio.

borg07of09

10-31-2007, 12:10 PM

to counter moves (block) and not take damage, you have to parry. there is no more block. everytime you parry this builds meter (only way to build meter is this way only). this can make for a truly offensive game.

pootnannies

10-31-2007, 12:31 PM

archetype

10-31-2007, 01:18 PM

^ your point?

Spirit Juice

10-31-2007, 01:46 PM

strat·e·gy

1. Also, strategics. the science or art of combining and employing the means of war in planning and directing large military movements and operations.
2. the use or an instance of using this science or art.
3. skillful use of a stratagem: The salesperson's strategy was to seem always to agree with the customer.
4. a plan, method, or series of maneuvers or stratagems for obtaining a specific goal or result: a strategy for getting ahead in the world.

Using the example I posted above, I don't see how parry really adds something to "strategy." How does strategy come into play when player Y is mixing it up perfectly, not being predictable or repetitive in his mix up in any way, against player X, but knows he can do little to stop a random "educated guess" of a parry that'll make all his hard work moot in an instant? There is little player Y can do against player X doing a parry and instantly turning the match around. Where is the depth of X having to outplay player Y to escape the bad situation he put himself in when a parry simply removes this factor?

Parry isn't exactly a "strategy," but rather just a random interval in the situation. It isn't strategy when both players have to think "Well, I could do this, but it can parried. I can do this instead of what I thought about just a second ago, but that can get parried too!"