Dreiko said:
Oh, but this is exactly like SSBB, it's using a gimmick in place of good mechanics to draw people in. It was an accident that melee got where it got and it was utterly unintended by the developers.
I have to ask: what are "good mechanics" then?
Isn't that true for most if not all Japanese games though? All of these games are Japanese since they're fighting games and all noteworthy fighters have indeed been that. They'd obviously have some form of anime style in them...though I'd argue against SF4 and on and MvC3 belonging in that category since they abandoned sprites and their art style is more transitional than entirely anime-like or western-ish, anyways, no, that wasn't the sense I was talking about.
Even so, the fact remains that MK is not and never was made in Japan. MK is entirely US-made, and quite possibly the only US-made fighting game that's actually worth a damn. My guess - and this is pure conjecture - is that more companies aren't willing to try since as they were growing up, they thought of fighters as "too complicated". I'd hate to see these guys try VF5...
Fun question: remember Tao Feng: Fist of the Lotus? Yeah, me neither.
You say that as though it's a good thing. Just because the MK games of the last 10 years have been horrible it's no excuse to praise mediocrity. MK dares to pit itself as equal of other actually good fighters so that's what I'm comparing and judging it on, not past MK games.
Which again begs the question: what are good mechanics to you? I can almost definitely tell we're gonna have a conflict of interest...
They don't have the type of a "scene" that is commonly thought of when describing fighter followings, they're just like any other game fanbase, which is quite a few notches below what good fighters have.
Hmm... you got me on that one. But you keep saying that MK is "bad" without explaining why.
Losing and not wanting to get better are not tied. You can win with basic things thus feel no need to push yourself since you're already winning with what you know. In something like guilty gear which you mention, even if you win, you know you could win better and more impressively and that your foes will eventually surpass you if you don't get better. It's quite more than just not wanting to lose. The battle system alone pushes people to want to explore it and as a result get better.
Okay, now I'm baffled. How does the system in MK 2011 not push people to want to get better at it? I
could abuse projectiles and certain moves as I play others (which can be said about
any fighting game really), but anyone worth his or her salt is gonna eventually see through my "winning strategy" and stuff it. Let me know; there are more than a few things not making sense here.
Getting stomped is normal when you set out into a new series, as long as people have no undeserving sense of self-worth about them they should take their just deserts and push onwards into greatness, that's truly meaningful fun.
No comment.
I did but I wasn't playing them in the fashion that I play them now. I just messed around with no understanding, I had no concept of real high level competition or the internet telling me what I could be doing that I was not. I was like 7 at the time anyways, you can't expect more than that lol.
Yeah, okay. I'll admit, you make a good case here. I certainly look at and play fighters far differently now than I did back in high school.
Are you crazy? You like the broken CT with the terrible bursts and the 9-1 matchups more than CS? You pretty much lost all validity right there and that's really not an opinion-related issue even. As for the CD with the tutorials...they're all online...and they're so ridiculously outdated you wouldn't believe it. 2 minutes searching on youtube will give you ten times better stuff. Those things in the CD are just combos too, CS has actual tutorials for every single action you can take, including how to walk and jump, that's what noobs need, not a 20 hit combo with Taokaka when they don't know how to jump cancel.
Whoa, wait... are you for real? You honestly think CS is the better game when the character balance is truly all over the place? The worst match-ups in CT are probably Tager vs Nu/Arakune, but the Tager would have to be a novice of some kind. Have you ever seen someone like Mike Z use him? It may be an uphill battle, but if you have the patience, you can win (like how Mike Z can at more than a few Ranbats tournaments).
Further on CS' balance, you really believe that CS' Guard Primer system (where you could infinitely turtle unless your opponent did certain moves), Ragna's relaunches, Litchi's ability to effortlessly
combo from anywhere on-screen, Jin's pressure with his
self-looping st.B, all of Bang. And if what my friend was saying about the recent Platinum update is true...
Confirmation: Yeah, he was right. This new update is fucking terrible. Damn near everyone sucks now...
Anyway, The CT tutorials actually give practical advice and combos. In CS, sure you get some of that too included in-game, but the game doesn't tell you what may be some good character strategies and some tips to avoid getting stomped on. Things like how Ragna's st.B is one of the best pokes in the game, the fact that you could combo d+D after a CH st.C or after st.C on crouching opponents, or how his Hell's Fang had very slight frame advantage on block (granted, you had to figure that last one out yourself).
How about this: let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that.
Obviously being any kind of scrub is bad, out of those kinds, the least bad was the one I mentioned above, that was my point. The self aware scrub is going to either quit or try to get better you see, so either way they'll be out of their misery soon one way or the other.
Then "scrub" is the wrong term to use in this sense. I think "new player", "novice", or "beginner" works just fine.
