Re-opening an old wound for proper healing


I want to ask this community something about this game that I’m not sure many people have considered when defending its legitimacy as a functional, balanced and diverse fighter.

Now I know we have heard about it all regarding how this game is considered “broken” by some of the pros. Some saying the parrying system homogenizes all the characters into a big unifying parry-first fest.

But something I have noticed regarding the criticizers of this game is that they consider the better fighting games (you should know what they are) as some kind of approximating analog of chess. I can understand that distinction and comparison and so I would like to offer you what I consider Third Strike to be:


Compared to chess, backgammon is a completely different beast whereby the person dominating the game can lose everything just by a simple dice roll. Now some might say that it is all about luck, but that is not true. The nature of backgammon is STRATEGIC ADAPTATION. The nature of chess is STRATEGIC DETERMINATION.

You can corner/zone your opponent in Super Turbo purely because you understand your enemies weakness via their archetype.

In Third Strike this can happen also, but in this case you can avert and alter the nature of your character’s archetype by subverting the determined method of being beaten using the parrying system.

Therefore, the parrying system is dismantling the old challenge at hand as well as the player needing to adapt to a new challenge by being parried. Suddenly what is known in Super Turbo cannot be easily successful in Third Strike. This is important and distinctive in recognizing that parrying isn’t just a better form of blocking.

The most typical way a parry is used is when a player is on the losing end of a fight and can frantically reverse the entire script by mastering a chain of parries. What is the best example?

I think you guys know exactly what example best expresses my point here.

Anyways, parrying is the yin, blocking is the yang. Both serve important purposes in the game of a match. Winning isn’t as linearly defined as one would think in Third Strike because anyone with enough skill and understanding of the parrying function can dismantle their opponent even if they have almost no life left in their bar.

I would like to hear your thoughts on this matter.



My thoughts; you spelled “therefore” incorrectly.


There you go, edited for maximum effect.


my thoughts… :o


This is simply not true because parrying is hard to pull off. Yes even for the best players. It cant be the yin of blocking unless you always get a parry. You always block when you hold back. You dont always parry when you hold forward.


you have a weird romantic vision of parry.

where you went wrong is thinking there is ever a script.
this is 3s, it’s all improv dingus.

no one thinks parry is ‘better blocking’. it has as much to do with blocking as jumping does.


one of the biggest lessons I learned pointlessly arguing on SRK is that using analogies is one of the worst rhetorical strategies


Yea, I meant in terms of gameplay function, not input function.

Anyways, I have not thought about what I wanted to convey clearly and must claim that this thread is dead.

Continue as ya’ll were elsewhere on this forum.


Can you have one without the other? It’s is simple as that.


That’s irrelevant regarding the analogy I used.


your mom’s irrelevant after her anal I used


I don’t think the game has been called broken by these so-called pros. It’s been called unbalanced because of 2-4 characters historically dominating top 8 at Evo (a series of poorly run tournaments on a bad console port). It’s been called dumb by people that prefer proper spacing over the high-risk / high-reward, complex mind game meta that comes with the parry system.

Strategic adaptation and strategic determination both exist necessarily and fundamentally in all fighting games. This distinction doesn’t work.

The way you wrote that last sentence makes it seem as though you don’t have a whole lot of experience with this game. Parrying isn’t a better form of blocking, even in the most basic sense. It is indeed more rewarding if landed, but it’s also very unsafe if used improperly. It would be better to say that parrying is much more volatile than blocking.

Again, your statement makes it seem as though your only experience with this game is watching the Daigo parry video. This is not the most typical way that parrying is used. At a high level, parrying is used in a very wide variety of scenarios, both offensively and defensively. Take the following video as an example:

Here, you’ll see parrying used both offensively and defensively. At times, each opponent uses parrying in close-quarter encounters where it is used as the start of an offensive approach, such as dash-in low parry followed by a max damage combo. Other times, you’ll see it used in lieu of blocking, such as neutralizing a projectile. Sometimes, you’ll see each player bait parries from the opponent and take advantage of it by delaying their timing or choosing a different option altogether. At high-level play, all of these strategies are used and more. If you see parrying used only one way - only as a defensive tactic or only as a comeback effort - then you’re most likely not watching very good players.

Overall, I appreciate your efforts in trying to prompt an intellectual discussion about the mechanics of 3rd strike versus other games like Super Turbo, but I think your thought process would be a lot different if you had more experience playing the game. It’s also worth mentioning that for those that love this game, there is no wound to be healed. We love it as it is and the unkind words from those that don’t appreciate its beauty have never and will never hurt us.


Your argument and defense is about as frivolous as your mum’s devotion to your dad after I fucked her to oblivion.


Yea, like I said, I need to revise my original post.

The “chain of parries” is a rare example of the typical use of parries, you are correct. I wanted to more so state that parries are typically used in the later stage of the fighting scenario when one of the player’s life-bar is more depleted than the other. It’s a commonality in matches with initiated players where this occurs. This battle is quite unique, but I would not say this scenario common in tournaments?

Regarding the rest of your response, thanks for the critique, food for thought.



3rd Strike is figuratively life when you think about it. Make a stupid choice? Get fucked up. Make a good choice? You can still get fucked up. Wanna play safe? You’re gonna let life just fuck you up. 3rd Strike taught me that life is about getting shit on over and over again but keep moving forward and rolling with the punches. Sometimes the world is an unblockable shit sandwich but if you play your cards/parry right you’ll end up okay in the worst of situations. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses but damn is life/3rd Strike not great.