Sasaki, post: 3831237 wrote:
Maj? You okay with me translating the article into german?
Canti., post: 3831246 wrote:
Great articles. Just wanna suggest you edit the OP with all the links, it'd be helpful.
Maj, post: 3831256 wrote:
I don't know when this trend started, but i've been noticing a lot of people throwing around words like "broken" and "OP" lately. Usually they're describing things that we would've considered moderately strong a few years ago. There also seem to be a lot of weird expectations when it comes to character balance. Of course the ideal result is to have almost every character be tournament-viable, but that's so far from realistic that it's simply not a good criteria for evaluating games. So i decided to write down my thoughts on the subject here:
What Does Unbalanced Mean?
Of course, most of the article is about what "unbalanced" doesn't mean, but i do get around to listing a few concrete examples at the end. I don't necessarily think that we need to have a universally accepted concensus on this topic, but i do think it's important to keep everyone's expectations reasonable - so that people don't start dropping games simply because less than half the cast is tournament-viable. I just don't think you can expect that from a fighting game, nor do i think anyone really wants to learn 30 different matchups inside-out. Does anyone really want to care what Fei Long vs T.Hawk looks like in ST?
tonylew84, post: 3831259 wrote:
Sagat's damage in SF4 wasn't broken. Ivan the Ooze in that Power Rangers fighting game is broken. More broken than Akuma in ST. You guys are just throwing shit around for the sake of it.
Tao Jones, post: 3831261 wrote:
Hey Maj...is there any way you can make a printer friendly version of your handbook (obviously the video examples would be nullified) that I could take to work and read when I'm bored?