Is it Quantity or Quality?


#1

Which do you prefer?

A fighter that has around 12-20 characters, but excellent sprite work, sound, almost perfect balance, and being accessible to just about anyone. I.E. Garou and Street Fighter 3.

Or

A fighter that has around 40-50 characters, but the sprites are re-used and starting to show their age, balance is broken, and an intricate system that isn’t so accessible? I.E. KOF 02 and MVC2.


#2

:rofl:


#3

I said almost, tard.


#4

a game where 2 characters rape the rest of the cast isn’t almost perfectly balanced. :rofl:


#5

That kind of describes MvC2, but not 2002. Cause you know, most of their sprites get new animations, and tweaks yearly, even the newest remake has tons of new animations/moves. Now, if you are referring to the sprite style, then that’s different.

Also, IIRC (could be wrong) KOF '02 was way more balanced than SF3.


#6

Even though this thread seems wack, it brings up a kind of valid point.

I’ve never thought it was necessary for every character in a game to be playable. If a game has 80 characters, with 16 of them perfectly balanced, I’m pretty happy about that. When you look at Marvel, there may be a shit load of characters, about roughly 10 of them are very competitive, which is a much higher number than a lot of other fighting games. Why is it necessary for 100% of the cast to be playable?


#7

I prefer balance, but sometimes you find a character you prefer before they are claimed to be cheap. This was the case when I picked up brawl. I played Ike cuz i enjoyed fire emblem:por, then people started hating him cuz he was too powerful or he had too much reach. blablablah.


#8

I don’t think any developer create games with intention that some characters will be garbage (unless they intentionally create joke characters like Dan or Neco Arc), regardless of how large the size of the cast is.

It’s just that the greater the number of total characters, the higher odds there is for the tier gap to be wider.


#9

Qualtity


#10

Well, you’ll probably not have that problem here. Calling things “cheap” is like begging for a flaming in this place.

Anyway, both options sound good to me. I can take either one.


#11

you failed hard when you put sf3 as an example of balance :rofl:

as for the question, i want both, like GG, good amount of chars, good variety of styles, you can always play different with every char so you arent limited, and has good balance, and the work on the sprites is simply awesome

yes it is


#12

I would like to have both. But if I have to choose I would have to go with quality.


#13

Quality, cause I want some assurance the character that i begin to like or find awesome, if at least half-way competitive, MvC2 w/ Captain America is a uphill batter no matter what but he’s my guy so I play him.

I don’t want to have to ditch characters I like in order to be competitive.


#14

Quality is always best. But, 30ish characters is a good number for me… It’s like in between quality and quantity. Because quality can sometimes get boring if there’s no quantity. But, quantity without quality gets boring even faster. So, a balance of both is needed imo.


#15

Fun >>> Balance.
Seriously, if you guys think balance matters that much you should be playing Karate Champ and SF1.
I would prefer playing an ultra broken but fun game over a well balanced but boring game anyday.


#16

So, we must sacrifice balance for a fun playing experience?

There is a threshold on how broken a game can be, you know. SSIII is severely broken on every level, and that game sucks ass because of it.


#17

The game which achieves a moderate balance both quantity and quality is usually one of the best there is - though the scale of both factors may differ between one person to the next, especially when it comes to quality.

So I’d say that if a game has like 20 + characters and decent enough balance or everyone is usuable in some form or fashion, then that’s pretty good with me. Of course, there are games with larger casts and are a bit unbalanced (like say, KoF XI), but I enjoy them too - so yes, it’s purely subjective.


#18

I never played III, but if I play it and find it more fun than SSVSP (the most balanced game in the series afaik), I seriously would prefer playing SSIII over SSVSP.
An good example of fun > balance is how MSF is way more balanced than MVC, yet everybody prefers MVC over it because MSF is way too boring. (Like, the most boring fighting game capcom ever made IMO.)


#19

Quantity vs. Quality

Quality always wins.

…Ike is low tier in SSBB.

I miss your old AV


#20

Quality, as long as the game plays good it is a play for me.