Sirlin had some pretty good on-point examples on different views of professional play/balance issues of fighting games and etc. games alike. but the actual sumary did not really grip me until he showed a picture of a mirror match of ryu in which both are doing RH’s at each other. He basically was saying if nothing has variety it is balanced (or at least that what i think he meant). So if that is the case then shouldn’t some balanced fighters won’t last as long as the opposite > variety in which the characters attributes themselves makes the game unbalanced. For exp., A week ago I had an idea for a fighter where players will play with their personally created fightres who have the exact same normals, overheads, crossups, frame data most likely would be the same. ame prioity, same hitboxes, and whatever. almost everything would be exactly the same. except the only difference would be the supers/gauges the characters had or just diffenet sprites to make it look good. seeing as supers, and tactical guages are in a category of its own it would be a balanced game. but then something like this would not last long media wise, and even for us underground enthusiasts. Because then the other fighters would shine so much over a game like this that it would get no play. i dont know but no variety means no fun for me. MvC2, CvS2, 3S, and GG always has some player complaining about whats broken and what isn’t. But its still being played even with the knowledge we scounged up from bs we seen.
So basically what im saying is complete balance/same thing for each character: = No Play or Boring fighter?
Im pretty sure if a fighter was able to do this it would get hell o’ a lot of play.