Anyone else not buying into the SFV hype??

1394042444554

Comments

  • QuarkQuark Joined: Posts: 4,068
    edited August 2016
    Cipher wrote: »

    What I want to say,you can't just compare one character in a game and then say his normals are stubby,because they got changed in the other game.
    It's first of all a different game,then it's a different focus,you have to keep in mind how the tools got balanced etc. etc. CATCHPHRASE!
    Also it's common in Capcom games that a hit/hurtbox never matches the animation. Or do I have to remind you of Vanilla Sagats st.hp that hit like 2m in front of his fist.

    I realize that the moves are intentionally shorter than they were in previous games. The fact that it was intentional doesn't mean it was a good choice.

    I'm not even talking about balance here... the game is very well balanced; I just dislike the fact that it funnels you into a particular playstyle. And the stubby normals definitely play a part in that (see Uroboric's post above since he explained this better than I'm able to).
    gorillacat wrote: »

    Are you guys the fun deciders? This game is more fun to me than SF4 and I'm just glad I'll be able to spend the next 5+ years playing it rather than whining about it on a board or pretending to play Guilty Gear.

    I never claimed to decide what other people find fun. If you enjoy SFV that's great; I honestly wish I could say the same. My question is why you feel compelled to hop into a thread dedicated to venting about the game's problems just to tell us how much fun you are having with it yourself... almost as if you are the one who has trouble accepting opinions that differ from your own? ;)

    Guess I'll go back to pretending to play Guilty Gear now. Because it's like, totally inconceivable that there are actually people out there who play non-Capcom games. That's just crazy talk.

    "Please understand, I never had a secret chart
    To get me to the heart of this or any other matter"
  • gorillacatgorillacat Joined: Posts: 368
    Quark wrote: »
    Cipher wrote: »

    What I want to say,you can't just compare one character in a game and then say his normals are stubby,because they got changed in the other game.
    It's first of all a different game,then it's a different focus,you have to keep in mind how the tools got balanced etc. etc. CATCHPHRASE!
    Also it's common in Capcom games that a hit/hurtbox never matches the animation. Or do I have to remind you of Vanilla Sagats st.hp that hit like 2m in front of his fist.

    I realize that the moves are intentionally shorter than they were in previous games. The fact that it was intentional doesn't mean it was a good choice.

    I'm not even talking about balance here... the game is very well balanced; I just dislike the fact that it funnels you into a particular playstyle. And the stubby normals definitely play a part in that (see Uroboric's post above since he explained this better than I'm able to).
    gorillacat wrote: »

    Are you guys the fun deciders? This game is more fun to me than SF4 and I'm just glad I'll be able to spend the next 5+ years playing it rather than whining about it on a board or pretending to play Guilty Gear.

    I never claimed to decide what other people find fun. If you enjoy SFV that's great; I honestly wish I could say the same. My question is why you feel compelled to hop into a thread dedicated to venting about the game's problems just to tell us how much fun you are having with it yourself... almost as if you are the one who has trouble accepting opinions that differ from your own? ;)

    Guess I'll go back to pretending to play Guilty Gear now. Because it's like, totally inconceivable that there are actually people out there who play non-Capcom games. That's just crazy talk.

    I jumped in to comment on that specific guy complaining about two things that are the exact opposite of each other (pros can't excel because of low skull required and infiltration winning everything is boring). Complaints that make sense are fine, so you can take your passive aggressive wink emojis elsewhere.





  • CipherCipher Catchphraser Joined: Posts: 1,817
    gorillacat wrote: »

    A more complicated game allows for more interesting and expressive gameplay, at the expense of a higher skill floor. It doesn't necessarily provide a higher skill cap."

    Are you guys the fun deciders? This game is more fun to me than SF4 and I'm just glad I'll be able to spend the next 5+ years playing it rather than whining about it on a board or pretending to play Guilty Gear.

    The problem is that people pretend SFIV had a deep gameplay.
    People tend to confuse deepth with technical.

    SF2 is deep game
    SFIV is a technical game

    The problem is how people tend to confuse combos for deep gameplay or varierty. Or like I said previously technical and deep gameplay.
    SFIV had no moment were I got hyped,because of choices and decision that were made. In the end you had OS,that beat OS,that beat another OS,that beat the backdash.
    You were basicly learning SFIV and practicing these 1f links for 300 hours before you got into matches and had to learn how to play.

    SFV takes the approch "learning by doing", the game was simplefied to lower the entrance barrier,but also allow for a more deep less technical gameplay.
    Also the "learning by doing" approch is much more comfortable.
    You don't have to sit long in training to get the basics down or learnthings like OS. You basicly learn what your character can do and then it's up to you to learn to use the tools.
    I don't know,but my definition of fun is to play the game and not play training mode 24/7 to be able to play the game.
    Other than that was SFIV gameplay and system more your enemy,than your actual opponent.

    I think I drift away.
    I rather take deep over technical gameplay, thats why I don't like SFIV very much.
    Uroboric wrote: »
    There's a big difference between having a single (slow, risky) poke combined with a bunch of short range normals (SFV norm), and having a few buttons intended for zoning plus longer range normals overall (previous games). Especially when the slower walk speed in SFV is considered.

    The range that footsies happens becomes closer, which increases jump opportunities. The winning strategy is then to distract your opponent and try for jumps, which are low risk/high reward until the opponent has meter.

    That is pretty much something that existed since SF2 tbh. You had them in SFIV too,the problem with SFIV are close normals. You don't have them in SFV,so your st/cr normals have to get more jobs.
    Noone complained about this in Alpha2 and that game is one of the best SF games out there.

    The only reasons why jump-ins in SFIV were less reward were:
    1. The overall lower damage
    2. DP FADC
    3. You could still jump-in against chars with bad anti-airs all day,it's a legit tactic since 1992.

    Footsies plays on different ranges,you still have characters with long pokes (Chun-Li,Cammy,Karin) and they still play midrange just fine. Unless you want to tell me SFIV footsies was a long range game.
    Also zoning with normals in SFIV? I can name you 3 2 chars who did this : Dhalsim,Chun-Li thats 2/44.
    Zoning in SFIV was mainly safe fireballs with fast startup and fast recovery.
    Quark wrote: »

    Guess I'll go back to pretending to play Guilty Gear now. Because it's like, totally inconceivable that there are actually people out there who play non-Capcom games. That's just crazy talk.

    I still play Persona 4 Arena and I enjoy it,since I love this game! Oh and KoF too.
    SteamId, leave a comment before adding!
    Street Fighter: Cammy, Rose
    Tekken: When's Jun? , Asuka
    Guilty Gear: Ramlethal, Jack-O

    My SFV Cammyguide!
  • UroboricUroboric Joined: Posts: 281
    edited August 2016
    Cipher wrote: »
    The only reasons why jump-ins in SFIV were less reward were:
    1. The overall lower damage
    2. DP FADC
    3. You could still jump-in against chars with bad anti-airs all day,it's a legit tactic since 1992.

    Note that I didn't say jumps had less reward in SFIV (though they did, somewhat). I said they are easier to land in SFV than older games, which makes constant jump attempts a dominant tactic in the game.

    Watch EVO top 8 from 2015 and then 2016, the amount of jumping in 2016 was dramatically higher.
    Cipher wrote: »
    Footsies plays on different ranges,you still have characters with long pokes (Chun-Li,Cammy,Karin) and they still play midrange just fine. Unless you want to tell me SFIV footsies was a long range game.
    Also zoning with normals in SFIV? I can name you 3 2 chars who did this : Dhalsim,Chun-Li thats 2/44.
    Zoning in SFIV was mainly safe fireballs with fast startup and fast recovery.

    I meant zoning in the general sense of moves often used to maintain positional advantage, often just by threatening it at the proper range. Most characters had two or three of these in that game: Bison st.mk/st.hk, Yun st.mk/fwd.hp, Balrog st.hp/st.hk/st.mk, Cammy st.mk/st.hk, etc.
  • TouchdownTouchdown Joined: Posts: 498
    edited August 2016
    Cipher wrote: »
    The problem is that people pretend SFIV had a deep gameplay.
    People tend to confuse deepth with technical.

    SF2 is deep game
    SFIV is a technical game

    The problem is how people tend to confuse combos for deep gameplay or varierty. Or like I said previously technical and deep gameplay.
    SFIV had no moment were I got hyped,because of choices and decision that were made. In the end you had OS,that beat OS,that beat another OS,that beat the backdash.
    You were basicly learning SFIV and practicing these 1f links for 300 hours before you got into matches and had to learn how to play.

    SFV takes the approch "learning by doing", the game was simplefied to lower the entrance barrier,but also allow for a more deep less technical gameplay.
    Also the "learning by doing" approch is much more comfortable.
    You don't have to sit long in training to get the basics down or learnthings like OS. You basicly learn what your character can do and then it's up to you to learn to use the tools.
    I don't know,but my definition of fun is to play the game and not play training mode 24/7 to be able to play the game.
    Other than that was SFIV gameplay and system more your enemy,than your actual opponent.

    I think I drift away.
    I rather take deep over technical gameplay, thats why I don't like SFIV very much.
    Entire SF series has always been the same depth mentally [don't jump, spacing etc], it's just the different systems/mechanics added to them that makes them technically different.

    Post edited by Touchdown on
    "I see many intermediate to intermediate-advanced players stuck in the realm of theory fighting. They are stuck in their minds, hung up on making “the right decision” at every point in the game..These players don’t play with enough intuition, with enough “feeling,” with enough creativity, unpredictability, and daring..."
  • NG1313NG1313 Joined: Posts: 1,562
    Uroboric wrote: »
    Cipher wrote: »
    The only reasons why jump-ins in SFIV were less reward were:
    1. The overall lower damage
    2. DP FADC
    3. You could still jump-in against chars with bad anti-airs all day,it's a legit tactic since 1992.

    Note that I didn't say jumps had less reward in SFIV (though they did, somewhat). I said they are easier to land in SFV than older games, which makes constant jump attempts a dominant tactic in the game.

    Watch EVO top 8 from 2015 and then 2016, the amount of jumping in 2016 was dramatically higher.
    Cipher wrote: »
    Footsies plays on different ranges,you still have characters with long pokes (Chun-Li,Cammy,Karin) and they still play midrange just fine. Unless you want to tell me SFIV footsies was a long range game.
    Also zoning with normals in SFIV? I can name you 3 2 chars who did this : Dhalsim,Chun-Li thats 2/44.
    Zoning in SFIV was mainly safe fireballs with fast startup and fast recovery.

    I meant zoning in the general sense of moves often used to maintain positional advantage, often just by threatening it at the proper range. Most characters had two or three of these in that game: Bison st.mk/st.hk, Yun st.mk/fwd.hp, Balrog st.hp/st.hk/st.mk, Cammy st.mk/st.hk, etc.

    Anti-airing spontaneous jumps with a jab is very present in V, so how could it be that jumping is better here than it was in IV? It was actually in IV that those spontaneous jumps would lead to a hit-confirm or almost worse yet, a throw to an "okizeme", just for jumping at the spur of the moment.

    I completely agree that hitboxes should match animations, such as on Ryu's cr.MK. The culprit in the "stubby pokes" is the cancelable ones - Nash's cr.MK for example does not have the same disconnect between hitbox and animation. It does indeed feel strange at first that the ranges are no longer the same on what animation-wise still looks like the same, but it's a matter of getting used to it. I think they've gone with a good concept when cutting down on the range on pokes that lead to combos. As somebody said some time ago, the "economy between the buttons" in SF has never been better than in V, and I think that's a very good game-design accomplishment.

    Bison can still "zone" but just not with that ridiculous st.HK from SFIV. His entire gameplan revolved around just st.HK and cr.LK :anguished:
    Uroboric wrote: »
    There's a big difference between having a single (slow, risky) poke combined with a bunch of short range normals (SFV norm), and having a few buttons intended for zoning plus longer range normals overall (previous games). Especially when the slower walk speed in SFV is considered.

    The range that footsies happens becomes closer, which increases jump opportunities. The winning strategy is then to distract your opponent and try for jumps, which are low risk/high reward until the opponent has meter.

    I can't say any of this makes any sense to me.

    If the range is close and you jump, then that would imply that you want more space, no? Or do you mean the range magically becomes perfect for a cross-up? :|

    The first sentence in your post is like a "choo-choo"-train and I don't know how to respond to that one..
    "Forbidden"? Not today! Shoryuken!!!
  • QuarkQuark Joined: Posts: 4,068
    edited August 2016
    Cipher wrote: »

    The problem is that people pretend SFIV had a deep gameplay.
    People tend to confuse deepth with technical.

    SF2 is deep game
    SFIV is a technical game

    The problem is how people tend to confuse combos for deep gameplay or varierty. Or like I said previously technical and deep gameplay.
    SFIV had no moment were I got hyped,because of choices and decision that were made. In the end you had OS,that beat OS,that beat another OS,that beat the backdash.
    You were basicly learning SFIV and practicing these 1f links for 300 hours before you got into matches and had to learn how to play.

    SFV takes the approch "learning by doing", the game was simplefied to lower the entrance barrier,but also allow for a more deep less technical gameplay.
    Also the "learning by doing" approch is much more comfortable.
    You don't have to sit long in training to get the basics down or learnthings like OS. You basicly learn what your character can do and then it's up to you to learn to use the tools.
    I don't know,but my definition of fun is to play the game and not play training mode 24/7 to be able to play the game.
    Other than that was SFIV gameplay and system more your enemy,than your actual opponent.

    Are you referring to someone in particular in the part that I bolded? Because as far as I can tell, nobody in this thread is arguing that SF4 was better because it was "more technical." Most of the comparisons to SF4 are used to highlight SFV's simplified neutral game, homogenous character design, and skewed risk/reward ratio, none of which have anything to do with option selects or hard knockdowns. SFV was simplified in many ways and the removal of option selects is only a small part of that really.

    I have seen a few people asking for more complicated combos, but the reasoning there is not that longer combos make for "deep gameplay" but that they are cool and visually appealing. I can see both sides of this argument but I don't think its nearly important as the problems I mentioned above.

    "Please understand, I never had a secret chart
    To get me to the heart of this or any other matter"
  • The-OlympianThe-Olympian 4 the Glory of Gaea Joined: Posts: 2,134
    in SFV you are actually forced to play in a certain way tho, it resets all situations to a stand still. there's no depth beyond that.!!

    you always go back to a boring neutral. knockdown has no consequence in most situations other than a corner push.
    What of the Hunting, Hunter Bold? Brother, the Watch was Long and Cold.
    What of the Quarry ye went to Kill? Brother, He Crops in the Jungle Still.
  • CipherCipher Catchphraser Joined: Posts: 1,817
    edited August 2016
    in SFV you are actually forced to play in a certain way tho, it resets all situations to a stand still. there's no depth beyond that.!!

    you always go back to a boring neutral. knockdown has no consequence in most situations other than a corner push.

    Ah thx,that you remind me of this.

    In SFIV you got rewarded for each and every knockdown with safe setups,safejumps etc. You basicly didn't take a risk,while your opponent was thrown into a massiv guessinggame that wasn't a 50/50 but most of the time a 70/30 or even worse(I'm looking at you Akuma!). Getting knocked down in IV was mainly game over or guess right.

    In the meantime most knockdowns in SFV reward with a easy throw/meaty mixup. It's just rock,paper,scissor compared to SFIV rock,paper,rocketlauncher,shotgun,CATCHPHRASE,huli duli,scissor gameplay.

    It's not SFV's fault that IV rewarded you,for avoiding the neutral and go nuts if you score a knockdown.
    CVS2's gameplay has much more depth than IV will ever have and thats a game where knockdowns mean less to nothing.
    SteamId, leave a comment before adding!
    Street Fighter: Cammy, Rose
    Tekken: When's Jun? , Asuka
    Guilty Gear: Ramlethal, Jack-O

    My SFV Cammyguide!
  • UroboricUroboric Joined: Posts: 281
    NG1313 wrote: »
    Anti-airing spontaneous jumps with a jab is very present in V, so how could it be that jumping is better here than it was in IV? It was actually in IV that those spontaneous jumps would lead to a hit-confirm or almost worse yet, a throw to an "okizeme", just for jumping at the spur of the moment.

    True, a few characters do have an extremely good jab AA (weird design IMO).
    NG1313 wrote: »
    If the range is close and you jump, then that would imply that you want more space, no? Or do you mean the range magically becomes perfect for a cross-up? :|

    I don't see what's confusing about the statement that jumps become a more attractive option at close range, has this not been the case since SF2?

    Scenario 1: player 1 jumps from far away (not on reaction), player 2 did something, but since player 1 was far away player 2 recovered and anti-airs. Even if player 1 had hit, it would have been at max range and their biggest combo wouldn't work.

    Scenario 2: player 1 jumps from close range, player 2 did the same thing, player 2 doesn't recover in time eats a big combo.

    Of course, footsies generally happening at the perfect range for a cross up, and many characters having situational anti-airs makes the situation even worse in SFV. Seriously, why do you think jumping is so prevalent in the game?

  • MelubasMelubas Joined: Posts: 271
    Quark wrote: »
    Cipher wrote: »
    You can't simplifie the neutral game, get that in your head,thats impossible.
    The neutralgame is the most complicated aspect of SF and a barrier since the 90's.
    SFIV didn't had a good or deep neutralgame it stomped SF's neutralgame with a gigantic boot and trempeld on it till it didn't move anymore

    You say that it's impossible to simplify the neutral game, and then 2 sentences later say that SFIV had a simple neutral game. Um.. what?
    Cipher wrote: »
    Talking about character designs,you can remove 50% of the SFIV cast and would still have any kind of gameplay presented. You don't have this in V,where every char plays different and has his own gameplay.

    Almost every single character in SFV has the same gameplan: get in the opponent's face, frame trap with stubby normals until you land a knockdown, go for a meaty/shimmy, then rinse and repeat. Nash is an exception simply because his space control tools are better than most of the cast, and Dhalsim plays a little differently too (although he's still an aggressive character). Everyone else I can think of fits that gameplan to a T.

    When you say that 50% of the SFIV cast had a similar gameplan (at least I think that's what you're trying to say?) it makes me wonder if we were playing the same game. Just look at the characters that are present in both IV and V and note how homogenized they've become:

    SF4 Vega - plays an evasive, medium-long range neutral game to whittle down the opponent's health
    SF5 Vega - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    SF4 Ryu - well balanced between offense and defense, combines strong zoning and footsies with basic offense off of a knockdown
    SF5 Ryu - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    SF4 Dhalsim - heavily reactionary keep-away character, sacrifices damage and offensive capabilities for some of the best space control in the game
    SF5 Dhalsim - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    etc, etc.

    A lot of us were hoping for a truly defensive character with the release of Guile, but NOPE. Capcom decided it would be better to give him shitty normals and fireballs so he's forced to play the same YOLO offensive game as everyone else. Remind me how this game's character's are diverse again?
    Cipher wrote: »
    And now the risk reward. SFIV was low risk, high reward the whole time. You're fastest and safest normal (3f jab) could lead into 300-400 damage Combos, on block they started pressure and if you whiffed them,well fuck it you whiffed them there will nothing happen.
    Then we mix the Vortex gameplay in that left the opponent basicly without options since most Vortexes beat all their wakeup options(namely Akuma,Cammy,Yun) or the zoning,with low startup fast recovery fireballs and safe on block fireballs.
    Or the fuckload of unblockables and ambigious safejumps people got of most of the stuff the game gave you,like a simple throw could lead into a unblockble what would lead into a 300+ combo,what would lead back into a safejump.
    If SFV's risk/reward is skewed,then must SFIV's be insane.

    Yet high level SFIV play saw far fewer YOLO jump-ins than SFV. I think that's good evidence that the risk-reward favors the attacker too heavily in V.

    There weren't a "fuckload of unblockables" in SFIV. I can think of only a few characters that had unblockables, and even then they were mostly patched out in Ultra.

    Nor were there an abundance of vortex characters. There were only a handful of true vortex characters even in AE, and then the introduction of delayed wakeup heavily weakened the vortex of any character who wasn't named Ibuki.

    As for fireballs not being complete shit in SFIV... well, I don't really see the problem there.


    This.

    I was just going to write an answer to the latest two pages but you basically wrote it for me.
    Playing Vega, Gen and T. Hawk.
  • NG1313NG1313 Joined: Posts: 1,562
    edited August 2016
    Quark wrote: »
    Cipher wrote: »
    You can't simplifie the neutral game, get that in your head,thats impossible.
    The neutralgame is the most complicated aspect of SF and a barrier since the 90's.
    SFIV didn't had a good or deep neutralgame it stomped SF's neutralgame with a gigantic boot and trempeld on it till it didn't move anymore

    You say that it's impossible to simplify the neutral game, and then 2 sentences later say that SFIV had a simple neutral game. Um.. what?
    Cipher wrote: »
    Talking about character designs,you can remove 50% of the SFIV cast and would still have any kind of gameplay presented. You don't have this in V,where every char plays different and has his own gameplay.

    Almost every single character in SFV has the same gameplan: get in the opponent's face, frame trap with stubby normals until you land a knockdown, go for a meaty/shimmy, then rinse and repeat. Nash is an exception simply because his space control tools are better than most of the cast, and Dhalsim plays a little differently too (although he's still an aggressive character). Everyone else I can think of fits that gameplan to a T.

    When you say that 50% of the SFIV cast had a similar gameplan (at least I think that's what you're trying to say?) it makes me wonder if we were playing the same game. Just look at the characters that are present in both IV and V and note how homogenized they've become:

    SF4 Vega - plays an evasive, medium-long range neutral game to whittle down the opponent's health
    SF5 Vega - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    SF4 Ryu - well balanced between offense and defense, combines strong zoning and footsies with basic offense off of a knockdown
    SF5 Ryu - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    SF4 Dhalsim - heavily reactionary keep-away character, sacrifices damage and offensive capabilities for some of the best space control in the game
    SF5 Dhalsim - rushes down and frame traps opponents

    etc, etc.

    A lot of us were hoping for a truly defensive character with the release of Guile, but NOPE. Capcom decided it would be better to give him shitty normals and fireballs so he's forced to play the same YOLO offensive game as everyone else.
    Cipher wrote: »
    And now the risk reward. SFIV was low risk, high reward the whole time. You're fastest and safest normal (3f jab) could lead into 300-400 damage Combos, on block they started pressure and if you whiffed them,well fuck it you whiffed them there will nothing happen.
    Then we mix the Vortex gameplay in that left the opponent basicly without options since most Vortexes beat all their wakeup options(namely Akuma,Cammy,Yun) or the zoning,with low startup fast recovery fireballs and safe on block fireballs.
    Or the fuckload of unblockables and ambigious safejumps people got of most of the stuff the game gave you,like a simple throw could lead into a unblockble what would lead into a 300+ combo,what would lead back into a safejump.
    If SFV's risk/reward is skewed,then must SFIV's be insane.

    Yet high level SFIV play saw far fewer YOLO jump-ins than SFV. I think that's good evidence that the risk-reward favors the attacker too heavily in V.

    There weren't a "fuckload of unblockables" in SFIV. I can think of only a few characters that had unblockables, and even then they were mostly patched out in Ultra.

    Nor were there an abundance of vortex characters. There were only a handful of true vortex characters even in AE, and then the introduction of delayed wakeup heavily weakened the vortex of any character who wasn't named Ibuki.

    As for fireballs not being complete shit in SFIV... well, I don't really see the problem there.

    Remind me how this game's character's are diverse again?

    No thanks - you just claimed that Ryu with a fireball, Dhalsim with a quick teleport, and Vega without either, all play the same --- I don't think there's any point in writing an argument to someone in that frame of mind :angry:
    Uroboric wrote: »
    NG1313 wrote: »
    Anti-airing spontaneous jumps with a jab is very present in V, so how could it be that jumping is better here than it was in IV? It was actually in IV that those spontaneous jumps would lead to a hit-confirm or almost worse yet, a throw to an "okizeme", just for jumping at the spur of the moment.

    True, a few characters do have an extremely good jab AA (weird design IMO).
    NG1313 wrote: »
    If the range is close and you jump, then that would imply that you want more space, no? Or do you mean the range magically becomes perfect for a cross-up? :|

    I don't see what's confusing about the statement that jumps become a more attractive option at close range, has this not been the case since SF2?

    Scenario 1: player 1 jumps from far away (not on reaction), player 2 did something, but since player 1 was far away player 2 recovered and anti-airs. Even if player 1 had hit, it would have been at max range and their biggest combo wouldn't work.

    Scenario 2: player 1 jumps from close range, player 2 did the same thing, player 2 doesn't recover in time eats a big combo.

    Of course, footsies generally happening at the perfect range for a cross up, and many characters having situational anti-airs makes the situation even worse in SFV. Seriously, why do you think jumping is so prevalent in the game?

    I still don't get what you mean. I don't even see the point in your examples, I'm sorry to say.
    "Forbidden"? Not today! Shoryuken!!!
  • DevilJin 01DevilJin 01 Get some shill in yo system Joined: Posts: 56,794 mod
    edited August 2016
    GO1 and MOV are 2 pretty different Chuns. Nuki has his own style too


    Oh and this was just said about the character that took up 3 spots in top 8 on ESPN

    Post edited by DevilJin 01 on

    Ain't nothin, Capcom's ruthless still producin.  Cut em a check or find yoself toothless.  Keep it shill with no confusin.  Niggas say I'm shill...they ain't hard I can prove it YEEEAH


  • qspecqspec Joined: Posts: 301
    If you all don't like the game, I get it. It has very real issues... but the circle jerk here has got so out of hand that real complaints can't possibly be distinguished from hyperbole.

    Whatever happened to people who don't like something just going quietly into the night?
  • CybernatorCybernator Joined: Posts: 47
    in SFV you are actually forced to play in a certain way tho, it resets all situations to a stand still. there's no depth beyond that.!!

    you always go back to a boring neutral. knockdown has no consequence in most situations other than a corner push.

    Ryu, mister middle-of-the-road, gets meaties off nearly every combo except heavy DPs. How is that a reset of the situation?

    I'd argue that while characters not having universal armour footsie-killers and other 4 staples might create more cast playstyle centralisation, that's practically a return to form for SF. You don't see people playing Rose in A2 throwing low forwards when her low strong is THE button. In SF4 there's a lot of ILLUSION of flexibility in playstyle because of how technical the game is. SFV pares that down and restricts the options (as if they were already the "best" one). Like many have said of selectable super arts in III- most characters realistically have one optimal one to choose, with MAYBE a second (like Dudley, though it plays out so similarly it makes the choice moot, sometimes). SFV has attempted to do that with most normals, and even to a degree with its specials. I've barely used Medium tatsu in my life until V, which is a good sign.

    I agree with the earlier points about how light AAs are both easy and not a great deterrent. I think there are many potential solutions to this, but only a few that really feel like they'd gel with the mission statement of V. This isn't the thread for that, though. Ultimately, I feel like SF4 is the odd duck in terms of longevity, especially stacked up against giants like ST/CvS2/etc which are pretty well-known for neutral. Difference is that SFV came out deep in the information age by overly savvy developers. Nothing feels like a surprise, especially when there's no egregious (and often really awesome) hitboxes and such. It's stuff like that that causes HE KICKED THE FIREBALL to be a legitimate surprise.
  • vitalvital Joined: Posts: 324
    Cipher wrote: »
    in SFV you are actually forced to play in a certain way tho, it resets all situations to a stand still. there's no depth beyond that.!!

    you always go back to a boring neutral. knockdown has no consequence in most situations other than a corner push.

    Ah thx,that you remind me of this.

    In SFIV you got rewarded for each and every knockdown with safe setups,safejumps etc. You basicly didn't take a risk,while your opponent was thrown into a massiv guessinggame that wasn't a 50/50 but most of the time a 70/30 or even worse(I'm looking at you Akuma!). Getting knocked down in IV was mainly game over or guess right.

    In the meantime most knockdowns in SFV reward with a easy throw/meaty mixup. It's just rock,paper,scissor compared to SFIV rock,paper,rocketlauncher,shotgun,CATCHPHRASE,huli duli,scissor gameplay.

    It's not SFV's fault that IV rewarded you,for avoiding the neutral and go nuts if you score a knockdown.
    CVS2's gameplay has much more depth than IV will ever have and thats a game where knockdowns mean less to nothing.

    i think in the RPS analogy, sfv knockdown gameplay is Rock-Paper

    Scissors will either never make it or be $15 dlc
  • TouchdownTouchdown Joined: Posts: 498
    Cipher wrote: »
    You can't simplifie the neutral game, get that in your head,thats impossible.
    The neutralgame is the most complicated aspect of SF and a barrier since the 90's.
    SFIV didn't had a good or deep neutralgame it stomped SF's neutralgame with a gigantic boot and trempeld on it till it didn't move anymore
    Here is an example of what I mean:
    tumblr_n5e09nvcR91r53v56o1_500.gif

    Thats the poor neutralgame in SFIV.

    Talking about character designs,you can remove 50% of the SFIV cast and would still have any kind of gameplay presented. You don't have this in V,where every char plays different and has his own gameplay.
    If you talk about how you play the character, that's still something you can choose by yourself. You're never forced to play a certain way, but if you want to come with the "but character X has to be played to be effective" then fine, it was the case in SFIV too and in 3S and in CVS2 and in Alpha2 and in ST. Thats one of the most stupid arguments I hear these days.

    And now the risk reward. SFIV was low risk, high reward the whole time. You're fastest and safest normal (3f jab) could lead into 300-400 damage Combos, on block they started pressure and if you whiffed them,well fuck it you whiffed them there will nothing happen.
    Then we mix the Vortex gameplay in that left the opponent basicly without options since most Vortexes beat all their wakeup options(namely Akuma,Cammy,Yun) or the zoning,with low startup fast recovery fireballs and safe on block fireballs.
    Or the fuckload of unblockables and ambigious safejumps people got of most of the stuff the game gave you,like a simple throw could lead into a unblockble what would lead into a 300+ combo,what would lead back into a safejump.
    If SFV's risk/reward is skewed,then must SFIV's be insane.
    So characters in SFIV don't need to space their normal's properly at a certain distance to hit or be safe?
    People don't pay for jumping recklessly like in every SF game?
    So I can throw a fireball anywhere on the stage and not get punished?
    Whiffs don't/can't get punished in SFIV?

    Seriously all this falsehood about SFV being "player oriented" and SFIV not so just made me V-Reversal your post.
    "I see many intermediate to intermediate-advanced players stuck in the realm of theory fighting. They are stuck in their minds, hung up on making “the right decision” at every point in the game..These players don’t play with enough intuition, with enough “feeling,” with enough creativity, unpredictability, and daring..."
  • NG1313NG1313 Joined: Posts: 1,562
    Touchdown wrote: »
    Cipher wrote: »
    You can't simplifie the neutral game, get that in your head,thats impossible.
    The neutralgame is the most complicated aspect of SF and a barrier since the 90's.
    SFIV didn't had a good or deep neutralgame it stomped SF's neutralgame with a gigantic boot and trempeld on it till it didn't move anymore
    Here is an example of what I mean:
    tumblr_n5e09nvcR91r53v56o1_500.gif

    Thats the poor neutralgame in SFIV.

    Talking about character designs,you can remove 50% of the SFIV cast and would still have any kind of gameplay presented. You don't have this in V,where every char plays different and has his own gameplay.
    If you talk about how you play the character, that's still something you can choose by yourself. You're never forced to play a certain way, but if you want to come with the "but character X has to be played to be effective" then fine, it was the case in SFIV too and in 3S and in CVS2 and in Alpha2 and in ST. Thats one of the most stupid arguments I hear these days.

    And now the risk reward. SFIV was low risk, high reward the whole time. You're fastest and safest normal (3f jab) could lead into 300-400 damage Combos, on block they started pressure and if you whiffed them,well fuck it you whiffed them there will nothing happen.
    Then we mix the Vortex gameplay in that left the opponent basicly without options since most Vortexes beat all their wakeup options(namely Akuma,Cammy,Yun) or the zoning,with low startup fast recovery fireballs and safe on block fireballs.
    Or the fuckload of unblockables and ambigious safejumps people got of most of the stuff the game gave you,like a simple throw could lead into a unblockble what would lead into a 300+ combo,what would lead back into a safejump.
    If SFV's risk/reward is skewed,then must SFIV's be insane.
    So characters in SFIV don't need to space their normal's properly at a certain distance to hit or be safe?
    People don't pay for jumping recklessly like in every SF game?
    So I can throw a fireball anywhere on the stage and not get punished?
    Whiffs don't/can't get punished in SFIV?

    Seriously all this falsehood about SFV being "player oriented" and SFIV not so just made me V-Reversal your post.

    You can ask the exact same damn questions, only with SFV instead.

    If you don't like V then fine, but what the hell is all this back and forth nonsense?.......

    But IV was in fact a shitty, imbalanced game - if you played say Ryu then perhaps the game was a-okay, but if you played a low-tier character then the game was bullshit.
    "Forbidden"? Not today! Shoryuken!!!
  • Aqua SnakeAqua Snake Never Outskilled... Joined: Posts: 1,328
    edited August 2016
    GO1 and MOV are 2 pretty different Chuns. Nuki has his own style too


    Oh and this was just said about the character that took up 3 spots in top 8 on ESPN


    And from Uncle Valle earlier today:



    I guess someone should tell Valle that he is wrong! :dizzy:
  • TouchdownTouchdown Joined: Posts: 498
    NG1313 wrote: »
    You can ask the exact same damn questions, only with SFV instead.

    If you don't like V then fine, but what the hell is all this back and forth nonsense?.......

    But IV was in fact a shitty, imbalanced game - if you played say Ryu then perhaps the game was a-okay, but if you played a low-tier character then the game was bullshit.
    If you don't know how to block, space, read, etc in SFIV like in the game I like in SFV, SF will feel imbalanced because you are not learning the fundamentals. Period. That's my going back and forth point.

    "I see many intermediate to intermediate-advanced players stuck in the realm of theory fighting. They are stuck in their minds, hung up on making “the right decision” at every point in the game..These players don’t play with enough intuition, with enough “feeling,” with enough creativity, unpredictability, and daring..."
  • itzpookiieitzpookiie Sherry Jenix's Soulmate Joined: Posts: 4,098
    edited August 2016
    Aqua Snake wrote: »
    GO1 and MOV are 2 pretty different Chuns. Nuki has his own style too


    Oh and this was just said about the character that took up 3 spots in top 8 on ESPN


    And from Uncle Valle earlier today:



    I guess someone should tell Valle that he is wrong! :dizzy:

    I know Valle is most likely better than me by a lot
    But everytime I see him play rashid, he abuses the shit out of spinning mixer hitstop
  • QuarkQuark Joined: Posts: 4,068
    This isn't remotely true. Watch actual top players play said characters and not take cues from online play where people are laregly doing cheap derpy XCOPY imitations of styles and getting away with playing like idiots.

    ROM plays a mid ranged Vega that fishes for whiff punishes and goes in only after establishing momentum or after knock downs. Nemo plays clawless and goes ham from the start playing super aggressive and taking risks.

    DamDai and Choi play Ryu like it's ST and throw a million fireballs zoning at range patiently grinding down the match. Daigo/Tokido a patient mid range style mostly dependent on spacial control an positioning and finally you have the retarded go nuts style that everyone tries to copy from Forwude online where you press buttons, buttons and more buttons and play super aggressive.

    Arturo "the Time Out Gawd" Sanchez's Sim is the antithesis of "rush down". I don't know where you're pulling otherwise from. He's doesn't play like a Gllty or F. Champ either.

    I suggest watching the EVO top 8 again. Even with multiple repeat characters there were clear distinctions in style even during mirror matches depending on who was playing. Now don't get me wrong. The game could certainly do with more mechanics or tools so it feels less restrictive, but to assert all characters play the same and everyone plays the characters the same is hyperbole and pure bs.

    I found this post insightful. You clearly have a better knowledge of the competitive scene than I do.

    That said, I don't think the fact that pro players have different styles proves that SFV's roster is diverse. It's more of a testament to the skill of those players than it is to Capcom's game design. I still maintain that the most characters' tools are relatively similar in SFV, regardless of how players may choose to apply those tools.

    A few other gripes: first, Tokido is hardly a patient space controller in this game; he plays quite aggressively and in his games vs. Daigo it appears that Daigo's more defensive style is outmatched by Tokido's aggression. Tokido has had more success than Daigo in general in SFV, and I don't think it's far-fetched to say that Daigo's commitment to a patient neutral/zoning game has been holding him back (although I believe he is slowly abandoning this style as he figures out the game more).

    I would make a similar argument about Art; MAJOR props to him for beating Momochi at Evo but his overall performance has been less consistent than Fchamp and I think that can be attributed to his reactive style. When it works, it works beautifully, but it's a very precarious way to play in SFV since you have to play much, much more consistently than your opponent when you're relying on stray pokes to kill characters that can stun you in 5 seconds if they get their hands on you. I've seen a few games where Art played perfectly for 3/4ths of the round only to fudge a single anti-air (or even fuck up his IAT input lol) and then lose the round as a result. Meanwhile Fchamp can afford to be less consistent than Art in his play since he has a much more proactive and aggressive playstyle.

    So although we see a diversity of playstyles in the current professional meta, I think it's possible that the less aggressive players will be weeded out or forced to adapt as time goes on. That's just speculation, though; you do make some good points and I'll grant that I exaggerated how homogenous characters are in SFV. I still think SFV's roster is by far the most homogenous of any SF game to date.
    "Please understand, I never had a secret chart
    To get me to the heart of this or any other matter"
  • NG1313NG1313 Joined: Posts: 1,562
    Touchdown wrote: »
    NG1313 wrote: »
    You can ask the exact same damn questions, only with SFV instead.

    If you don't like V then fine, but what the hell is all this back and forth nonsense?.......

    But IV was in fact a shitty, imbalanced game - if you played say Ryu then perhaps the game was a-okay, but if you played a low-tier character then the game was bullshit.
    If you don't know how to block, space, read, etc in SFIV like in the game I like in SFV, SF will feel imbalanced because you are not learning the fundamentals. Period. That's my going back and forth point.

    I didn't understand what you meant by that, but fine.
    "Forbidden"? Not today! Shoryuken!!!
  • BERSERKERRRBERSERKERRR mathemagician Joined: Posts: 109
    all these people arguing, haha. why does it matter to you what other people think? it's fine if you people enjoy sfv, but honestly when you guys try to take up the position of pretending sfv's designs are superior to sf4, it becomes hard to take anything you guys say remotely serious, really. you guys are complaining about hyperbole arguments against sfv, but most of you do the exact same to sf4 in return.

    as for this cipher guy, you are one silly bird.
    Cipher wrote: »
    Explain me how everyone in SFIV had a faster walkspeed?
    Because I don't see it.
    Walkspeed was allways character specific.
    Cammy,Chun-Li,Karin,Juri,Guile,Ibuki,V-Triggerd Birdie,Vega,Balrog have all fast walkspeeds.
    Most characters walkspeeds are pretty ok.
    I can't even remember how Seth walked you down in the corner with his incredible walkspeed,that was just a bit faster than Zangiefs!

    Slower walkspeed is a weak argument,since all characters allways moved differently fast,in general are rushdown and footsies characters the ones with fast walkspeed and defensiv/turtle/grappler chars the ones with slower ones.
    you're right it's char specific, but i suspect you're intentionally playing dumb here in an attempt to devalue his actual point, since it's obvious he meant *on average* the walkspeed is significantly higher in sf4 than in sfv. and your cute, hyperbolic counter-example is from a char with one of the slowest walkspeeds in sf4.
    Cipher wrote: »
    Stubby normals are also subjektiv,I allready told you that they were in SFIV too and existed in every other SF game too.
    Or maybe you want something like Poisons st.mk? That thing that went on forever and was cancleable on top of beeing safe on block and fast.
    If you want long ranged normals,pls look at the footsies chars we have and talk with them about their stubby normals that have no range.
    stubby normals are not a matter of subjective interpretation, no. they are a matter of historic comparison. all you have to do is compare hitbox/hurtbox extensions with previous games compared to the original idle hitbox size and you'll easily see that these normals extend far less than pretty much any other equivalent-use normal in previous iterations. that's not a matter of opinion.
    Cipher wrote: »
    Stronger jump-ins are a subjektiv argument after all. SFIV rewarded you with more BS and 90% of the jump-ins in IV beat everything that wasn't a DP and even there DP's got beaten sometimes,because stuff like Dudley j.hk existed.
    stronger jump-ins are also not a matter of subjective interpretation, no. they are a matter of basic math/risk-reward evaluations. you also add in a nice, random hyperbole about how "90% of jump-ins beat everything in 4," which honestly voids anything you say forever in the future in this thread. that single line alone loses you any authority on this subject permanently,

    Cipher wrote: »
    The "fundmaental" problems SFV has are? I hear noone in the competetive scene complaining about the gameplay. The complains are mostly the input delay.(and the lack of D-Input on PC,I mean seriously,they still haven't implented this.)
    of course. some of them genuinely enjoy it (which is perfectly alright, despite what people in this thread may try to get you to believe,) but if you gave it some thought you'd realize why them not complaining is not a valid (or even smart) argument, since most people in the competitive scene have zero incentive to voice gameplay concerns like that because all it does is spread negative vibes/energy that could potentially harm the growth of what gives them their earnings. most with any sort of self-interest/preservation will try their best to only focus on the positives in order to maximize their own "career"'s lifespan.

    so when that's one possible (and a big one) motivation, trying to use their lack of complaints as an argument is silly at best. but honestly dude, you should stop posting. most of what you say is complete nonsense. it's fine that you like sfv, and didn't like sf4, that doesn't mean you have to make a fool out of yourself with all kinds of retarded arguments.
    retsu go justin
  • anzharanzhar five times Joined: Posts: 994
    i never bought in to the next gen hype

    instead i got a jl audio sound system for my car

    PS3 is as good as it gets!!!
  • SkieghSkiegh I am Ryudo Unit 2R Joined: Posts: 436
    edited August 2016
    Most newer players aren't going to be playing at the level to worry about the hit/hurt boxes and as long as they are moving around and hitting buttons the game will seem pretty obvious to them. The hit boxes were off in SFIV and even other games like the Alphas as well, but people at that level just start to make cognitive memory of where to place those buttons.

    The hit box/hurt boxes are an issue, but definitely overstated as something that a newer player would have to worry about. They're just pressing buttons any way.

    I actually disagree -- I mean, I agree that they just want to hit buttons, but I disagree that they aren't going to get annoyed by things making no sense in context. I know this due to my own experience as of late of abusing Ibuki's air throw to reduce my hurtbox. I can tell the players I'm using it on sometimes just don't understand what is going on, because they have every right to, it makes no sense. Why does whiffing an air throw reduce my hurtbox to the size it really should be to begin with? Who the hell knows.

    I can tell the player thinks it's them mistiming their anti-air, when in-fact, it's me just doing something which for whatever reason changes my size with no visual indicator. That's frustrating, and stuff like that builds annoyance on players and causes them to leave. If aerial attacks as a whole had a general theme of doing this, then it would be fine, and seen as some balancing tool for certain normals, but it seems random and arbitrary.

    And yes, the hitboxs were off in SFIV, quite a bit actually. In-fact, in SFIV, I think hitboxes were the problem. In SFV, I think it's hurtboxes that are the problem. Generally we need more of them on recovery, a reduction on AAs and a reduction on jumps as a whole. This is all subjective desires of mine, however.

    --

    I do think this game's attempt at being simple only made it more complex to newer players. Using the limited combo paths again, why can't Laura hit with her EX elbow or MP elbow in combos, but LP elbow works? No simple reason for that other then "it can't." Why can't she hit with her fireballs twice in a combo? Random.

    Why can I hit with Ibuki's f.HK, b.MP after EX Kunai but not just a MP? SFIV has this problem too. I think it's making things overly complex for no reason. It's like yeah, I can hit with Makoto's j.HP after EX fukiage, but why can't I just use her grounded HP? *Shrugs*
  • TouchdownTouchdown Joined: Posts: 498
    edited August 2016
    NG1313 wrote: »
    Touchdown wrote: »
    NG1313 wrote: »
    You can ask the exact same damn questions, only with SFV instead.

    If you don't like V then fine, but what the hell is all this back and forth nonsense?.......

    But IV was in fact a shitty, imbalanced game - if you played say Ryu then perhaps the game was a-okay, but if you played a low-tier character then the game was bullshit.
    If you don't know how to block, space, read, etc in SFIV like in the game I like in SFV, SF will feel imbalanced because you are not learning the fundamentals. Period. That's my going back and forth point.

    I didn't understand what you meant by that, but fine.
    Cool.
    Post edited by Touchdown on
    "I see many intermediate to intermediate-advanced players stuck in the realm of theory fighting. They are stuck in their minds, hung up on making “the right decision” at every point in the game..These players don’t play with enough intuition, with enough “feeling,” with enough creativity, unpredictability, and daring..."
  • ValoonValoon Joined: Posts: 1,980
    Daigo just won a tournament with fireball zoning and it was against crazy agressive Eita.

    So I guess it can work afterall.
    [SFV] Ken
    [USFIV] Ken
    [GG-XRD] Sol
Sign In or Register to comment.