I’ve been playing SF4 for the past few months and one thing about it has consistently bothered me.
From a design standpoint, I don’t get why half if not more of the damage in an average match is caused during wake up. I’d rather both players be standing and fighting with complete control of their characters and all of their options, rather than constantly playing a mini-game with only a couple of options.
I think nearly every good fighting game has wake up as a big part of the game.
Even games like Marvel where you can 100% characters or almost do it have resets or knockdowns which lead into you guessing.
You could try Smash Bros as its wake up game involves more tech chasing and you arn’t punished as hard for your mistakes, sacraficing a couple of % at the least to a stock at the most (which you get 3-4 of)
Smash and Melty.
You barely sacrifice anything permanent, outside lives, for a bad tech for the former. You would probably die anyway by the time it can kill a stock.
One of the many reasons why Brawl’s moon gravity felt like ass.
While Melty, you getting wrecked shit with OTGs all the time with some characters, but when you get out, you’re getting out.
Only a few characters have non-corner wakeup you should prepare for. Of course, this trades with it having an insane corner and air game.
Uhh no, Melty has some really strong wakeup games. There is a huge cast of characters that have forced knockdown setups. Then there’s another bunch that are capable of tech punishing. For a lot of the cast you trade airthrow ender (usually higher damage) with okizeme setup (usually lower damage, some cost meter).
inb4 mash 2A/wakeup DP.
And to answer the OP, I think Blazblue has way less emphasis on okizeme than Guilty Gear and Melty Blood.
For the Street Fighter 4 series, I usually find a lot of the setups boring. Maybe because of the pace or because I don’t see orbs/trees/deers/discs/DORILO put out on screen. Akuma, Ibuki, characters with projectile+FADC (especially Seth) are some characters I remember that have something to put out on screen and use for okizeme. Despite all the hate Yun gets(got?), I found his okizeme very interesting. I wasn’t too fond of Viper though.
Oh yeah, intentional corner crossup is some fucked up bullshit.
In (what I consider) great 2D games oki and momentum mean a lot. In SF4 momentum is almost non-existent because you must keep pausing and respecting the defensive options at all times. And if you like the constant need to guess right between each and every move you should try a game that does it in an actual complex and balanced way which is probably Virtua Fighter.
That’s what I meant though. You aren’t getting braindead major damage from wakeup, they’re just solid mixups.
I already know most of the tells as is though, so I’m wrong out of bias anyway.
As for BB, really? You practically never want to tech early remotely near a corner from what I remember of CT, CS1, early CS2.
The only reason why I think it doesn’t have as much priority is because the safe tech window is too huge for…everything.
while there is less emphasis on oki than gg, you still have to deal with quite a bit of oki that absolutely forces you to block versus much of the cast in bb(rachel, litchi, carl, etc), and rolls are pretty shitty tbh. so, i dont think bb really counts for what OP wants.
Blazblue basically doesn’t have oki unless you’re in the corner or in specific situations. It’s also terrible.
Let me break this down for you: wakeup is important because it places incentives in taking action. Generally when a lot of combos can translate into a knockdown, you want to land a hit, even if it’s rather weak. Or put the opponent in a situation where you’re in place to have a higher chance of causing that situation. When you are rewarded for actions deemed positive (generally, punching a dude in the face is the most fundamental “fun” aspect of a fighter), then you will almost certainly want to reach towards that goal. When a knockdown gives you the option of snowballing ahead from common positive interactions (frame advantage, proper positioning, damage), then the game becomes oriented towards taking these actions and whoever is better at taking them wins.
It is the reward for doing the things that are good in fighting games.
Now, say what you want about knockdowns leading to lots of damage, I don’t think it’s really balanced that well system wise in a lot of newer games (SF4 especially). However, they are fundamentally important for creating action in games, which is fun.
Unless you like seeing Dhalsim mirrors all day in which case ok that’s cool too.
tl;dr “It’s good design”.
I could rip into how the knockdown system in SF4 is absolutely terrible, which is probably why your opinion on knockdowns formed in an inaccurate manner.
Why isn’t the reward of a highly damaging combo enough incentive for aggressive play?
I think I should emphasize that my complaint isn’t related to how punishing it is to be knocked down.
Specifically, I dislike that a player is vulnerable on wakeup because it results in a mini-game with only a couple of options for each player, and because the result of the mini-game is often another knockdown, a ton of time in the average match is spent within this simple mini-game. I don’t understand why, because the footsies/zoning/baiting/punishing/countering etc. involved when both players are standing is just vastly more interesting to me.
its no more of a minigame than any other situation, you’re just focusing on one aspect and singling it out. the only difference here is there are less apparent false options.
i could go into the reasons its extremely important for pacing purposes, but that takes waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay longer to write. specifically because i have to go into tension curves which is a monumental effort to explain.