How should TOs handle the Gem System? (READ THE OP, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BALANCE)


#1

With the announcement of the new Gem System, a few questions have come up on how this should be handled in tournaments.

The biggest problem at the moment lies not with the whole customization aspect (that’s actually cool when you think about it), it’s the fact that you’re going to have to buy gems as DLC. This off coruse raises a few of questions.

  1. Is it okay to have a game where you really do have to shell out more money (over the initial investment) to be competitive?

  2. Should TOs have to fork out money for the gems?

  3. If only DLC gems are banned, is it still worth it to have to police the system to make sure no one sneaks in a banned/DLC gem?

Please keep discussion on this topic civil (no unproductive discussion, raging/ranting, etc.). For general Gem System discussion, use the other thread.


#2

After thinking it through all of the hate, It’ll depend on how will the DLC be handled. If we get multiple DLC-exclusive gem packs, it might be a good idea to ban them so TOs don’t have to fork out a shitload of cash. On the other hand, if there are only a few DLC packs then what’ll be the difference between a gem set and a DLC character?

Now, as for the “free” gems, they should only be banned if there isn’t a easy way to unlock them, like a really cheap DLC-code like BB does with Mu or some cheat code of sorts.

I’m against downright banning all gems simply because there’s no sign that they’ll break the game. Banning simply because isn’t a good reason. I don’t want to play a different game from tournaments when I’m fooling around online. This ain’t Smash.


#3

The issue is on how hard or easy bans in individual gems or packs will be to enforce, if it’s too much trouble, then just ban the system entirely.


#4
  1. Yes, you have to make an initial investment for pretty much every videogame, competitive or not. It’s not a matter of if it is okay, the real question is how much is reasonable? Something like buying gems is immediately unreasonable, there’s a lot of them and there are probably going to be a ton more.

  2. Same as 1. So no, they shouldn’t.

  3. There’s no evidence that this would be difficult to police. It leads to a funny situation however, where an important (I guess?) microtransaction and gameplay system becomes undesirable to possess except for fucking around. There is no incentive to buy the special edition because of the gems, that’s for sure.

If Capcom wants Gems to work they need to make them mandatory. A part of me hopes they will, simply to see the backlash. Quite honestly, the game looks bad enough as is. I can’t ignore the people who genuinely want this to be a good game, or the people that end up playing it anyway though… so for their sake I hope they don’t do this.


#5

That shouldn’t be too hard. Just don’t download the DLC or delete the game data and the DLC gems will be unavaiable.


#6

Can we have a “wait and see” option? I don’t think we know enough about them yet.


#7

The issue isn’t even about stuff we don’t know, it’s about something we do know - the fact that you will have to buy gems as DLC.


#8

Honestly, I can see them pulling a Soul calibur Weapon Select and banning them outright.


#9

Honeslty, I’m hoping that, like in Soul Cal, this is a separate mode for versus and online.


#10
  1. Is it okay to have a game where you really do have to shell out more money (over the initial investment) to be competitive?
    No, absolutely not. The easiest example is what if you had to buy XF in Mahvel 3? XF is a huge factor (no pun intended) in MvC3 and bottom line is if you didnt have it at all while the opponent does bc they paid for it, you are already put at a huge unfair disadvantage.

  2. Should TOs have to fork out money for the gems?
    This is a hard one. My best answer would be that while small tournaments would have to pay for them (unless they just use PS360s from players who have bought them) bigger tournaments would/should probably get them free since not having access to them could potentially hurt a lot of people’s playstyles. I doubt Capcom would want people not playing at Evo and other big tourneys just because the tourney doesnt want to pay for DLC. How are DLC characters paid for in tourneys? Are they actually bought or do they get codes to unlock them?

  3. If only DLC gems are banned, is it still worth it to have to police the system to make sure no one sneaks in a banned/DLC gem?
    I dont see why they would be banned. Yes you have to pay for them however it would be the same as DLC characters. DLC characters dont get banned just because a few players might not have experience against them bc they didnt buy them. Or atleast I dont think DLC characters get banned. The only gems that should be banned are gems that have been basically confirmed as game-breaking/broken. However they seem like they’ll work like the SFA games where you to unlock items (that wasnt the term for them but I cant remember what they were) to be able to do things like super cancel, auto guard, etc.


#11

There has to be a good reason for banning the default, non-DLC gems outright. Even if they give stuff like auto-block or auto-throwbreak. Can’t ban stuff just because it looks bad.

(if that were true the whole game would be banned lol)

They’re bought for every system in the event running the game.


#12

Last I checked, Capcom gives Wiz DLC codes for EVO. However, that still leaves the question of the smaller TOs.


#13

I honestly don’t want them to be banned, as that would be taking away one of the more unique aspects of SFxT. It’d be like if they had a mode in Arcana Heart that disabled Arcana selection, and that became the tournament standard - or they forced everyone who played KOF’98, Last Blade 2, CvS, CvS2, etc., to play in a particular gameplay mode/groove.

To be on the side of caution, I would say ban all paid DLC gems in the beginning. Then just wait and see if the DLC flow would be manageable for smaller operators. This is the same line of thought I’ve seen incorporated in a lot of local Mortal Kombat tournaments.


#14

Will probably just be best to ban Gems outright. Not only would it save balance headaches, but also set-up time headaches.


#15

Theres some gems that give you things like auto block and auto tech. I dont think they will be balanced even if we ban DLC gems. The gem system should just be used for fun, and banned for competitive play.


#16

I thought that capcom already stated that the gem mode is not supposed to be used for tournaments. Gem mode is supposed to be a casual mode…


#17

Except Evo then. I don’t think Final Round gets anything, but please correct me if I’m wrong about other big tourneys.

Where did they say this?


#18

I think auto tech would be the only OP one since you couldnt be grabbed. However, the auto block one just saves you from mix-ups/cross-ups if you didnt try to attack. You can still be punished during your recovery frames. It also costs one bar per blocked attack so it wouldnt be that great.


#19

It was on an interview with Ono…I believe it was on Capcom Unity. Ono stated that Gem mode was for fun only. It was it’s own thing.


#20

The actual quote didn’t directly refer to the Gem System, but it’s still possible that’s what he was talking about. Or not, if S-Kill is genuine in giving the vibe that Gems would add a pleasurable layer of depth to competitive play.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Auto-Throw Tech gem works the same as Auto Black: only teching if you aren’t recovery, and costing a meter every time it does, and not working if you have no meter.