How much does balance mean in a fighter, really?

[Cthulhu27]

I went to a little friendly tournament series last week and had a blast. Hadn't really gotten a chance to play fighting games with anyone in a while... and had some interesting conversations while I was there. I'd like to get some more opinions about one of those discussions:

Is a fighting game really worse if it isn't balanced?

The immediate answer to this is usually yes. If a game isn't balanced, then it can be less fun to play because some of the characters just aren't worth using. I don't think the real answer is quite this simple though... games can be great even if the balance is pretty far out of whack.

And I'm willing to back up this with some simple examples of popular games: Street Fighter III, King of Fighters <fill in number here>, Neo-Geo Battle Coliseum, Marvel Vs Capcom 2, Tekken (most of em'), Soul Calibur, etc. I love all these games, and I don't think you'll find too much dissent about them being classics. Yet most of them have balancing issues (although some more serious than others).

Street Fighter III (I'm just talking about 3'rd Strike, since that's the only one I really remember anymore) is incredibly good, but it clearly has divisions between the upper and lower tier characters. If you look at the pro gamer lists, usually 70% or so of the people use Chun-Li and Ken. The rest are scattered among a few other characters, with most of the roster being ignored. When was the last time you saw someone really good with Twelve or Sean?

Marvel vs Capcom 2, despite having a huuuuge roster, has maybe 20 characters you'll see consistently - probably less. The majority of them just can't stand up to the others. Yet the game is still a blast. KoF and NGBC fall into these lines as well.

Okay, you probably get the point of what I'm trying to say. I guess my feeling about games is that if there are enough characters in the "useful pool" that can compete against each other, then the game can be fun. If the pool of characters that is really strong is just too small, then the game suffers because most people looking to compete at it will just use the same people.

I'm interested in hearing other people's feedback on this...

[pherai]

Balance is relative. So long as a game doesn't degenerate into 1 dominate strategy, the game has a chance competitively. Depending on how fun the gameplay is will determine peoples tolerance for balance issues. People like to talk about Marvel being broken all day, but there is a top tier of about 6-8 characters who are all pretty equal. For that community, that is balanced enough.

As a side note, I think its silly to insist a certain percentage of characters should be playable in any given game. If a game needs to include 100 characters in order to get 12 of them right, it doesn't bother me.

[Shinryuuken_SA2]

Depends. Balance in diversity is what makes some fighting games stand out the most. SF2 is the prime example, every characters has at least 1 reason to be picked up. And then you have some other "balanced" but dull and boring fighting games because every characters has their own fireball, dragon punches/kicks, and so on. Of course balance is very hard to attain with this method.

[N_paul]

So long as the game allows multiple strategies to be effective, whether through a couple of characters (Marvel) or a larger amount of tournament viable characters (I dunno, SF2?)

Balance isn't a big deal honestly, it's important that maybe 5 or 6 characters, or even 3-4 are playable, but it's really the game engine that makes it good. In fact, most games develop a top 3 or 4 (like, every competitive game out).

It's when a game has a top 1 character that is MOST definitely the best in all matchups that balance is an issue, even with 2 it's a problem.

Counter characters > balance although I guess that's technically the same thing.

[Helter Skelter]

I have to disagree with most of the posts above. I agree that balance is overrated (quoted from Zakuta) and in the end it's kinda impossible.

However, I truly believe character viability should never be left by the wayside.
Many good games regardless of the character balance seem to allow every character to be used at high level.
Games like MvC2 and Street Fighter III 3rd Strike are fun to watch but seeing the same few characters becomes tedious.

I also think the players who play games with bad character viability are the ones who don't mind it as much.
Mainly because they are so used to it, but in reality no one should get used to playing 3 out of 20+ characters.


Anyway, each to their own. However, I don't like when games look like this (http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3816/streetfighteriii3rdstriup3.jpg).

[Mr.hitBOX]

So long as the game allows multiple strategies to be effective, whether through a couple of characters (Marvel) or a larger amount of tournament viable characters (I dunno, SF2?)

Tekken is a better example for the large roster that is balanced

[tataki]

Tekken is a better example for the large roster that is balanced

but most tekken characters are effective pretty much for the same reasons...
safe launchers, strong juggles, juggling lows etc.

i'd rather go with koichi taking 1st place in DF using i-no.

[Nocturnal]

Garou :wonder:

[Warrior's Dreams]

being balanced isnt everything.

If it is, then Karate Champ is the game for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oqq1ijzQhI

[woof]

balance means nothing to me if a game is fun

[Dandy J]

Garou :wonder:
*cue some guy coming in and saying that kevin beats the whole cast 9-1*

And yes it's all about fun and variety. MvC2 only has so many top characters, but you can find a strong character to do what you want. You can run away, turtle, zone, lockdown, rushdown in MvC2 and win, because there are top tier teams for all of those playstyles.

And then on the other hand you've got something like Samsho 5 Special, which is one of the most balanced fighting games ever, and also one of the most boring fighting games ever. 5sp is what happens when the logic for balancing the game is 'nerf everything'.

[caliagent#3]

*cue some guy coming in and saying that kevin beats the whole cast 9-1*


Kevin beats the whole cast 8-2

[chopperbyrne]

Balance is important, but it's not the most important thing a good fighting game needs. All fighting games will have a top 3-6 characters which are top tier and used most often.

A good game needs variable playstyles and characters.

O. Sagat in ST is very dominant over most of the roster, but the game is varied enough that it doesn't matter.

[FatalFuryD]

Garou :wonder:
QFMFT

Kevin is awesome, but I seen him in person get worked by Grant, Gato and few others. His meter gaining shit is amazing, but when both players hit that P-power, the game changes. Super spammers are not going to be successful in MOTW. When a game has enough awesome subsystems, the shitty characters can break through. God, I miss playing mow.

[AudioCG]

Balance is important, but it's not the most important thing a good fighting game needs. All fighting games will have a top 3-6 characters which are top tier and used most often.

A good game needs variable playstyles and characters.

O. Sagat in ST is very dominant over most of the roster, but the game is varied enough that it doesn't matter.


I think your stance on balance is true by default, soley because it happens that way, I think HD Remix stands a damn good chance at having the closest thing to a perfectly balanced fighting system, the only other games I can think of like that are maybe GG and Garou, but niether of those titles have had decades of play at a high level to "play test" the game.

We shall see how important true balance really can be (hopefully), ST was already reasonably balanced, I am interested to see if the previously under picked characters at Evo will start to show up more often.... (Blanka, T. Hawk, Cammy, Guile, etc)

I think that a truly balanced fighter brings a games true variety out in full force (Because all the fighters can be truly competitive).

[COUM]

When a game has enough awesome subsystems, the shitty characters can break through. God, I miss playing mow.

If the ability of lower ranked characters to compete depends on every character having a bunch of the same good moves, I don't know if you can call that "balanced" in any positive sense.

[ShinRyuHoshi]

Funny how I was just reading one of David Sirlin's older articles concerning balance in fighting games and this topic appears today. Take a look at this informative article if you haven't already; it discusses how diversity and balance tend to be inversely proportional to one another, cites a few examples of different games in different genres dealing with this issue, and even discusses about fighters that are so broken, it tends to balance itself out in the end! Good academic read:

http://www.sirlin.net/archive/game-balance-part-1 (Part 1)
http://www.sirlin.net/archive/game-balance-part-2-a-detailed-example/ (Part 2)

-SRH-

[lamewadd]

People like to talk about Marvel being broken all day, but there is a top tier of exactly 3 characters out of 70 who are all pretty equal.

Fixed.

[3SJ]

I went to a little friendly tournament series last week and had a blast. Hadn't really gotten a chance to play fighting games with anyone in a while... and had some interesting conversations while I was there. I'd like to get some more opinions about one of those discussions:

Is a fighting game really worse if it isn't balanced?

The immediate answer to this is usually yes. If a game isn't balanced, then it can be less fun to play because some of the characters just aren't worth using. I don't think the real answer is quite this simple though... games can be great even if the balance is pretty far out of whack.

And I'm willing to back up this with some simple examples of popular games: Street Fighter III, King of Fighters <fill in number here>, Neo-Geo Battle Coliseum, Marvel Vs Capcom 2, Tekken (most of em'), Soul Calibur, etc. I love all these games, and I don't think you'll find too much dissent about them being classics. Yet most of them have balancing issues (although some more serious than others).

Street Fighter III (I'm just talking about 3'rd Strike, since that's the only one I really remember anymore) is incredibly good, but it clearly has divisions between the upper and lower tier characters. If you look at the pro gamer lists, usually 70% or so of the people use Chun-Li and Ken. The rest are scattered among a few other characters, with most of the roster being ignored. When was the last time you saw someone really good with Twelve or Sean?

Marvel vs Capcom 2, despite having a huuuuge roster, has maybe 20 characters you'll see consistently - probably less. The majority of them just can't stand up to the others. Yet the game is still a blast. KoF and NGBC fall into these lines as well.

Okay, you probably get the point of what I'm trying to say. I guess my feeling about games is that if there are enough characters in the "useful pool" that can compete against each other, then the game can be fun. If the pool of characters that is really strong is just too small, then the game suffers because most people looking to compete at it will just use the same people.

I'm interested in hearing other people's feedback on this...

Ok let's say you like 3-4 characters out of a 25 character cast. Now you like these characters and all and don't really want to play with other characters as seriously. Now you put in hours strategizing and training only to find that said 3-4 are bottom or low tier. Now you have 2 choices.

a)Play with the best tiered character not because you like them or want to but because you want to win. Then feel cheated that only 1/4 of the 25 character cast is playable at high level.Oh and the characters your liked are garbage and are not useable at all. I mean its fun playing with characters that you don't care for or like just so you can win.Have fun!

b)Don't play with them and get owned over and over agian until you start hating the game itself and become apathetic to fighters in general(the whole reason why fighters are a niche genre and madden is king).

[3SJ]

Fixed.

3 out of 70 characters that are winnable with is broken beyond imagination. I mean if they just made 30 characters that are winnable out of 70 it would be still broken but almost respectable balence-wise.

[COUM]

The total number of characters is irrelevant. If a game has 10 viable characters out of a roster of 40, and you just delete the bottom 30 characters from the game, does it become more balanced?

It's worthless judging Marvel on the basis of how many individual characters are usable seeing as it's a team-based game. There are a ton of different viable team configurations, and so many variables go into constructing a team what with DHCs and different assist types that even teams that share some of the same characters can play radically differently. Marvel is balanced.

[3SJ]

The total number of characters is irrelevant. If a game has 10 viable characters out of a roster of 40, and you just delete the bottom 30 characters from the game, does it become more balanced?

It's worthless judging Marvel on the basis of how many individual characters are usable seeing as it's a team-based game. There are a ton of different viable team configurations, and so many variables go into constructing a team what with DHCs and different assist types that even teams that share some of the same characters can play radically differently. Marvel is balanced.

Upine feces!

If you went though the trouble of making 52 playbable characters you should either make them ALL good or ALL average not just 10/40 of them are useable.

As a gamer I expect more from developers than 10 winnable characters for $50-60.

[FallingEdge]

All of you should play more VF.

:wgrin:

[Xiii]

It's not easy to make a balanced fighter without extensive playtesting and you really have no clue how balanced something is until a lot of people start playing and doing things you never thought about.

When designing characters and their movesets, as a designer you would need to think about the end goal strength and weakness of your character and usually you would want the character to either balance out or focus on a particular strength. This is easy when creating 1 character, but when you have more than that, you have to balance against every other character and the more you have, the harder it gets because there are so many variable matches. MvC2 was destined to not have a fully balanced cast, it was designed so that you could pick anybody and hopefully the partner characters can cover for a weak character's dispositions. 1v1 fighters are easier, but the same rules apply. Guilty Gear in it's many iterations have gotten closer to a really diverse cast of characters that are well balanced to an extent. With a few awful counter matches still present, it is still very good in the balance department when it comes down to it.

In the end we can only hope that when you've reached the end of the road for a fighter at top level play, if the game is still fun with whatever viable characters are left then the game is balanced enough. That's even if you only have 10 out of 60 characters viable ala MvC2. In a perfect world, you would see everybody used in competitive play like in Guilty Gear or ST, but sometimes having a balance that's akin to most fighters like 3S where really only 1 character doesn't get played really at all in high level competitions is good because some people like the challenge of learning less favorable characters.

Having balance in a game just means the only thing you need to worry about when playing a fighter for a long time is whether or not you'll get bored. The only reason you'll ever feel cheesed at a balanced game is because of lack of your own skill rather than the game being bullshit.

[lw3]

Tekken is a better example for the large roster that is balanced

Have u played virtua fighter? Every char has a good chance to win. tiers make no difference in that game. It boils down to the skills of both people

[Sakura.Densetsu]

So long as there are enough decent and balanced characters to be played seriously and no one or two characters really shows up as so broken as to completely scew the game then that is as far balanced as it really needs to be. Extra characters can remain fun in casual mayches.

In SFIII, while 70% of people use Chun and Ken it is not because they are brokenly excessive over everyone else. When a character is Fan popular and Strong enough to be top-tier then it will be played more than any other character. likewise, people tend to swarm to the characters who the champions play. Ken is all Three. Fan popular, Strong enough to be in the top tier, and Daigo has made him seem Uber. The Daigo vid with the Parry in the finals vs Chun Li has become such an iconic part of the scene that people will be more likely to pick these two characters.

Many players are sheep. They play what they see at the top. In a game with only a limited number of choices, it is harder to really see that. I also play other competitive games and see the same. Magic The Gathering for an example. Some big event comes along and someone creams everyone with some new deck. Everyone netdecks it and plays it locally and kills all their Scrub friends. People try and bring it to some other big event and it does not do so well, often the deck suddenly does not place. It was pure surprise factor that won for it the first time.

So if an event is top 2 of Ken/Chun, then more people play Ken/Chun and we see more Top Twoes with these two characters. Unlike the random quirky Magic deck, they are solid characters so do not get dethroned easily.

Now if people were allowed to play Gill in tournaments, that is an example of a character that would actually make the game unbalanced.

The games which maintain tournie playability are those which are both fun to play and watch, while having enough playable characters to have diversity and nothing which truly stands out as broken. To truly maintain its place on the scene, it is the type of game where new strategies and techniques pop up once in a while. In SFIII and ST, there is still room for innovation and growth.

However, it is the fact new things are found or innovated constantly which also may lead to the downfall of the intended balance. Many of the tricks in ST were not really intended during development. If someone found some way in SFIII for someone to somehow do a Super or EX without using up any Super Bar, it would make the game fall completely apart at the competitive level. Say Ryu could suddenly do EX Hadoukens without wasting bar due to some abuseable glitch being discovered.

[COUM]

I don't think VF should really win any prizes for good balancing. Granted, the tiers are very, very close, but that's because the core, extremely useful moves of basically everyone's move set are near-identical

[lw3]

I don't think VF should really win any prizes for good balancing. Granted, the tiers are very, very close, but that's because the core, extremely useful moves of basically everyone's move set are near-identical

what do u mean by near identical?

[Cthulhu27]

Um, wow, I had no idea so many people would respond so quickly. These are pretty impressive forums. :rofl:

I'm glad to hear from people who share my sentiments (and from the people that politely disagree too of course :wgrin:). You guys bring up some interesting points.

BTW, what is "ST"? I've heard a lot of people mention it, and while I feel like I should know what that stands for, nothing comes to mind.

[nGuman]

Um, wow, I had no idea so many people would respond so quickly. These are pretty impressive forums. :rofl:

I'm glad to hear from people who share my sentiments (and from the people that politely disagree too of course :wgrin:). You guys bring up some interesting points.

BTW, what is "ST"? I've heard a lot of people mention it, and while I feel like I should know what that stands for, nothing comes to mind.

ST is Super Turbo, as in Super Street Fighter Turbo 2.

[Gaijinblaze]

what do u mean by near identical?
I hope you're not actually expecting an answer to that.

The way I see it, balance is only a major issue if the game lacks other redeeming qualities. About half of 3S players pick a top tier and Marvel goes without saying, but people still enjoy playing those games competitively.

If anything I'd say balance has more of an effect on personal enjoyment rather than the competitive playability of a game. Some people might get tired of seeing a certain character, others might not, but in general it doesn't seem to affect the integrity of high-level play. I'm sure there are games more balanced than ST that are already long dead.

Edit: Thinking ahead, I wonder how online play and greater use of the Internet will do to the value of balance in a fighting game. There's already this "me too" (sorry I keep saying that) philosophy where every random player wants to feel like they know things that otherwise wouldn't affect their enjoyment of the game. When newer titles come out there are going to be people who have never played a fighting game in their lives telling me what the tiers are. With less of a divide between casual and hardcore players, will the average consumer start caring about "balance" and "tiers" just because hardcore players say so? To the degree where it might affect the success of a game in some way?

[Luigi-Bo 87]

I don't think VF should really win any prizes for good balancing. Granted, the tiers are very, very close, but that's because the core, extremely useful moves of basically everyone's move set are near-identical

What?:confused:

[Dandy J]

As a gamer I expect more from developers than 10 winnable characters for $50-60.
get out

[Dandy J]

what do u mean by near identical?
Everyone has the same speed throws, fast mid, sidekicks, low kicks, launchers, sweeps, etc. The moves to vary in properties/damage/execution/recovery, but everyone generally has the same basic tools under all their 'signature' moves that set them apart. Some stray from the mold more than others (Lei, Shun), but by and far they all have offensive tools that work in similar ways for the same purposes.

And let's not forget the best move in vf5 that everyone has; fuzzy guard!

[Luigi-Bo 87]

Hmmm, I never looked at it like that. I guess I can see where you would get that from. But VF isn't the only fighter like that, that's for sure. I think it's because that VF has no "special" moves, so a lot of people would fight in a similar manner by default. And yeah, fuzzy guard is dope.

[Dandy J]

Ya, most 3D fighters are like that.

[FistsofFury]

Balance rarely is a serious problem because most of the time:

1)people playing each other are not at the same skill level
2) Most players do not use every tool that their character has in every single match.

Balance is only an issue in extremes. SNK Boss syndrome (wtf his projective covers the whole fucking screen wtf) and crappy no damage dealing pixies. The shit that is just obvious.

But this is coming from a guy who thinks all the players obsessed with tiers need to get real. Because tiers assume a lot of the players too.

Tiers assume:
"If both players are at the same skill level and both are using everything their particular character has then the person with the higher tiered character will win"

and NOT

"the higher tiered character will usually win"

[Luigi-Bo 87]

I still think that people who play ST should really consider VF, since it's 3d ST imo. (soooo many acronyms lol)

[orochizoolander]

If it's fun and not completely one sided then balance isn't an issue.

Look at 3S where the big 3 have a sizable advantage over the rest, I remember last year at evo everyone was booing the top8 matches because it was a chun fest yet you don't see 3s declining in popularity anytime soon.

[Pablo_the_Mex]

So long as there are enough decent and balanced characters to be played seriously and no one or two characters really shows up as so broken as to completely scew the game then that is as far balanced as it really needs to be. Extra characters can remain fun in casual mayches.

In SFIII, while 70% of people use Chun and Ken it is not because they are brokenly excessive over everyone else. When a character is Fan popular and Strong enough to be top-tier then it will be played more than any other character. likewise, people tend to swarm to the characters who the champions play. Ken is all Three. Fan popular, Strong enough to be in the top tier, and Daigo has made him seem Uber. The Daigo vid with the Parry in the finals vs Chun Li has become such an iconic part of the scene that people will be more likely to pick these two characters.

Many players are sheep. They play what they see at the top. In a game with only a limited number of choices, it is harder to really see that. I also play other competitive games and see the same. Magic The Gathering for an example. Some big event comes along and someone creams everyone with some new deck. Everyone netdecks it and plays it locally and kills all their Scrub friends. People try and bring it to some other big event and it does not do so well, often the deck suddenly does not place. It was pure surprise factor that won for it the first time.

So if an event is top 2 of Ken/Chun, then more people play Ken/Chun and we see more Top Twoes with these two characters. Unlike the random quirky Magic deck, they are solid characters so do not get dethroned easily.

Now if people were allowed to play Gill in tournaments, that is an example of a character that would actually make the game unbalanced.

The games which maintain tournie playability are those which are both fun to play and watch, while having enough playable characters to have diversity and nothing which truly stands out as broken. To truly maintain its place on the scene, it is the type of game where new strategies and techniques pop up once in a while. In SFIII and ST, there is still room for innovation and growth.

However, it is the fact new things are found or innovated constantly which also may lead to the downfall of the intended balance. Many of the tricks in ST were not really intended during development. If someone found some way in SFIII for someone to somehow do a Super or EX without using up any Super Bar, it would make the game fall completely apart at the competitive level. Say Ryu could suddenly do EX Hadoukens without wasting bar due to some abuseable glitch being discovered.


I may be drunk as fuck right now, but I do not need to be sober to tell you that no one gives a shit about your long winded rants about shit you don't even fully comprehend.

In other news, fuck 3s. That game is hot garbage. People clown on games like marvel because they only see a handful of characters winning tournaments. These are the same people that started playing SF because they saw some gay ass video of Daigo baiting JW into a super. Right, no one gives as shit about your bitch ass opinions you fucking noobs.

Yeah, fuck 3s that game is fucking disgusting.

[GStick]

If there were 5 iterations of SF3 I'm sure it would be pretty well balanced too.

[*Onslaught*]

Considering the line up at EVO. Not at all.

[Vicioustale]

as long as every character is in the least bit viable then the balance is ok. A game can have viable characters, be balanced, fun as hell, but people always flock to the top tier. Like the 3s scene there's so much top tier played, when Ryu,Ibuki,Necro,Oro,etc. are perfectly usable characters.

Hell even Guilty Gear that I keep hearing is so balanced, when I watch vids, I'm always seeing a whole lot Testament and Eddie, some slayer, jam,potemkin and then 1 or 2 different characters.

[MagnetoManiac]

Vampire Savior's balance makes 3rd strike's balance look like mvc2's

[Fulaani]

I don't think VF should really win any prizes for good balancing. Granted, the tiers are very, very close, but that's because the core, extremely useful moves of basically everyone's move set are near-identical
uhm, what are you talking about?

*edit*

you do make a good point about same jab, low punch, throw etc speed and such. However if you played the game seriously you'd see how no character plays alike.

Besides I don't think there are any moves that have universal properties besides jab and low punch. Elbow isn't universal by any means, neither are sweeps. Throws are all the same speed but throw escapes are done by guessing the correct throw. Grapplers Goh and Wolf have much more variety in their throw commands than a character that relies on strikes like Eileen for example.

[roninwarrior24]

Vampire Savior's balance makes 3rd strike's balance look like mvc2's

Question (not trying to be sarcastic here): Can Morrigan, Lilith, Anakaris, and Victor compete against Sasquatch, Q-Bee, and Lord Raptor? This is considering both players know their stuff.

When it comes to balance, it really depends on the game. I find Marvel to be quite interesting because there are tons of viable teams (even though most of them have a Big 4 character or two in them and Santhrax can shut out 90% of the entire game), each specializing in different gameplay tactics.

Also, in GGXXAC, aren't Eddie, Testament, and Slayer some of the hardest characters to use in that game? They are definitely top tier, but thankfully they aren't "scrub" top tiers.

Overall, the game mechanics have more priority over character balance, although both are somewhat important.

[lamewadd]

Considering the line up at EVO. Not at all.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I laughed.

But yeah, get prepared to see a grand total of ten different characters appearing between every game.

[COUM]

If there were 5 iterations of SF3 I'm sure it would be pretty well balanced too.

Nice try but Hyper Fighting is the best balanced SF2, the best balanced SF, and pretty damn much the best balanced fighting game ever, as well as one of if not the most varied, and it's the 3rd iteration in the series.

[lamewadd]

Nice try but Hyper Fighting is the best balanced SF2, the best balanced SF, and pretty damn much the best balanced fighting game ever, as well as one of if not the most varied, and it's the 3rd iteration in the series.

That doesn't change the fact that another two iterations of SF3 would probably result in more than Chun0-and-Yun/gun-and-run matches.

[Dandy J]

you do make a good point about same jab, low punch, throw etc speed and such. However if you played the game seriously you'd see how no character plays alike.

Besides I don't think there are any moves that have universal properties besides jab and low punch. Elbow isn't universal by any means, neither are sweeps. Throws are all the same speed but throw escapes are done by guessing the correct throw. Grapplers Goh and Wolf have much more variety in their throw commands than a character that relies on strikes like Eileen for example.
I played vf competitively during the vf4 days, and I think the variety between characters in vf is way less pronounced than the variety between characters in most 2d fighters.

It's like if you took a 2d game where everyone was a shoto, but their dps all had slightly different startup/damage/recovery/hitboxes, and their fireballs all had different startup/damage/recovery/hitboxes/speed, and say that no character plays alike.

[Fulaani]

It's like if you took a 2d game where everyone was a shoto, but their dps all had slightly different startup/damage/recovery/hitboxes, and their fireballs all had different startup/damage/recovery/hitboxes/speed, and say that no character plays alike.I'm sorry but that's just retarded.

I'm trying to think of an answer to this but I can't think anything besides "that's just not true." Same jabs/low punches and similar elbows/sweeps does not say anything about variety in the light of their 100 other moves including plus some characters using different stances for different purposes.

[Luigi-Bo 87]

Um, Aoi good at throws too.:lovin: Speaking of stances, fuck Flamingo stance and fuck Lei-Fei all together!:mad:

[tl613]

The only real way to balance a game is for every character to be exactly the same. Once you make even a slight difference one character will be more powerful than another. I forget which SF it is but Ken is ranked higher than Ryu because of his rolling throw, all other aspects being the same.

I play HnK and MvC2 all the time with my friends. Those games have clear tier lists and brokeness, but when you talk about FUN it doesn't matter. My friend uses Cable and Sentinel, I use Megaman and Servbot. I get my ass kicked, oh well I had fun. In a tournament or competition, sure it's good to have fun, but the main purpose is to WIN.

[suprez]

I remember getting owned the first few time i played with Necro.After 10 loss in a row (arcade) i picked ken and i defeated him the first frigging round i picked Ken.
I was like *WOW i'm GOOD DUDE with this charact0r*
The guy was looking at me with a Evil Grin.He than picked Ken and owned my Ken and replied - OMG i'm GOOD WITH DAT CHARACT0R*

That mean everything.

[Dandy J]

I'm sorry but that's just retarded.

I'm trying to think of an answer to this but I can't think anything besides "that's just not true." Same jabs/low punches and similar elbows/sweeps does not say anything about variety in the light of their 100 other moves including plus come characters using different stances for different purposes.
ok

youre mistaking nuances for radical differences

[*Onslaught*]

The only real way to balance a game is for every character to be exactly the same.

Only if you're trying to achieve perfect balance. which doesn't exist. But it is possible to achieve balance as in every/most characters competitive. I can only think of a handful of fighters that have managed to achieve this.

[Fulaani]

ok

youre mistaking nuances for radical differences
yea all their unique moves aside from the same low punch and jab are just nuances.

go play akira like you play kage and see what happens.

[Superking]

balance is overrated.

[Helter Skelter]

balance is overrated.

Word. However, I don't think character viability should be.

[Dandy J]

yea all their unique moves aside from the same low punch and jab are just nuances.

go play akira like you play kage and see what happens.
mix up low/mid/throw, fuzzy, space, have strong defense? works for both

[Fulaani]

mix up low/mid/throw, fuzzy, space, have strong defense? works for both
so what are you saying, they all have mids, highs and lows, they all use their limbs, so bland. Let's give some characters fireballs for varieties sake.

And the fact that you listed low first shows you don't really know much about the game.

[Luigi-Bo 87]

Ouch:wasted:

[Dandy J]

And the fact that you listed low first shows you don't really know much about the game.
i know much much much much much more about vf than you do trust me

peace

[Fulaani]

i know much much much much much more about vf than you do trust me

peace
you probably do. I don't claim to know a lot about the game, but it is my fav fighter. BUt I just really disagree with what you said about variety. and listing lows first was just stupid.

[Dandy J]

lows always come first

"If you low kick them at the beginning of the round then you don't have worry about doing it at the end of the round!" - Konjou Akira, 2003

[caliagent#3]

so what are you saying, they all have mids, highs and lows, they all use their limbs, so bland. Let's give some characters fireballs for varieties sake.

And the fact that you listed low first shows you don't really know much about the game.

jokes. lol

[Gaijinblaze]

Is it just me or do those two get along a bit too well?

[Fulaani]

lows always come first

"If you low kick them at the beginning of the round then you don't have worry about doing it at the end of the round!" - Konjou Akira, 2003
VF is about mids or throws. Lows usually have horrible properties. Check the command list if you don't believe me.

I'm not saying lows are useless, but the main guessing game revolves around mid or throw.

[COUM]

VF is about mids or throws. Lows usually have horrible properties. Check the command list if you don't believe me.

I'm not saying lows are useless, but the main guessing game revolves around mid or throw.

do you seriously think he doesnt know that

[Fulaani]

do you seriously think he doesnt know that
he probably does. but why is he saying lows always come first.

[COUM]

it was a joke :confused:

the point was youre probably not gonna a land lows very much (e.g. more than once per round) so if you do it at the beginning of the round you dont have to worry about it at the end. hence "lows always come first"

[Fulaani]

ah ok, hmmm he did mention lowws first before that but whatever this is getting retarded.

im out :)