SCIV vs. Tekken 6: some objective feedback needed

I_N

[08] Mercenary
EDIT: SCIV vs. Tekken 5: DR feedback will also be greatly appreciated.

Hi there,

I'm in an urgent need of some brain-storming. I have to write a post in a local fighting games community forum concerning the title subject. It's not newbie-oriented, so the comparison must be as objective as possible, and may actually contain a fair amount of technical info. Any thoughts on game mechanics/engine respective strengths and weaknesses are more than welcome! Competent Tekken 5: DR/Tekken 6 players only, please :)

Thanks in advance!

PS: Oh, they would be interested in SCIV/BlazBlue comparative analysis, too, but that's like comparing, say, a space shuttle to a pineapple, so I think I'll pass. Nevertheless, if someone has some original thoughts to share - please do so.
 
I'm not a good Tekken player (failed your requirements immediately!), but there is one observation that has kept me from getting into the series mechanically and where I feel SC is superior.

Tekken has each button as a different limb while SC divides it into guard/horizontal/vertical/kick. Tekken's makes no sense at first glance. I couldn't tell you why to use a different limb over another without studying each characters whole move list. The strings in the game feel random and picking up a character or even figuring out why to use one attack over the other feels far to blurred until you hit a high level of technical play. Sc on the other hand is more obvious and presents a far more coherent learning curve. You may not know the whole list but you know A is always good anti step and B is best for linear fights. You can rely on a few moves from each branch and then add as you learn more. It's simple and makes much more sense to me.

As well SC has a higher focus on spacing since it uses many different weapons. It makes it much more obvious with what mvoes to use because if they are weaker in frame data, they may be better at different ranges. In Tekken I'm just like...where the fucks my launcher?

I may be missing something but this is my immediate observations. I barely know tekken but just going in training had me confused.

Wall o text!!!!
 
SC has a block button. (This upsets some Tekken fans.) SC buttons are block, horizontal slash, vertical slash, and kick. SC has the guard impact system and air control which lets you escape form being juggled. (Some Tekken fans as well as fans of other FG's hate air control as well since long juggles = fun for some reason.)

Tekken has a button a limb. This is incredibly awesome and deeply thought out and hyper intuitive. Wanna grab someone? Hook your leg around 'em and one of your arms!
 
Wanna grab someone? Hook your leg around 'em and one of your arms!

i thought this was funny. but think of it this way, you're using the left or right side of your body, not just the two limbs. the animation portrays this.

i would agree that learning a character's basics in tekken might be a bit less intuitive, but not by too much. for pretty much any character, you have the same basic pokes: 1,2 jabs ; d/f+1 quick mid punch ; d/f+4 quick mid kick ; d+1_2 crouching interrupt a la SC's 2A ; 4 basic interrupt quick kick ; d/f+2 launcher/uppercut ; d+anykick low kick ; 1+2 strong attack of some kind.
there is no real analog to SC's horizontals for steppers, verticals for duckers. movesets for each character must be learned. but SC itself is moving further and further away from the simple A beats X, and B beats Y, is it not?

somehow proper punishment (max damage) seems tighter and more frequent in tekken. could be animation issues, expectancies, distance considerations..

spacing is less of an issue in tekken than SC, because the weapons are your limbs. for the most part, you need to be as close to your opponent as they do in order to hit them. due to this, the games are often more intense and quicker-paced.

juggles are the goal of tekken, it is how you do the most damage, typically. in SC, juggles feel like just another way to get damage, and are often 2 or three hits. tekken's gameplay is centered around gaining a juggle or two.

SC is more masher friendly (yes, i went there). if you block something that's -15 and you are in range for BB, you can mash BB and it will hit if your BB is i15. you can't do this in tekken, the buffer window is much smaller, and thus requires greater timing and knowledge of the move/matchup. input too early and nothing comes out. this also contributes to tekken's tighter, more in-your-face feel.

grabs in tekken are intended to be broken by visual cue rather than guesswork or ring positioning, although there are a few instances where you must guess the break. there are 3 ways to break a grab, 1 or 2 or 1+2, and you hit the button that corresponds to the input of your opponent. since there is no block button, it is not advisable to mash the input in anticipation of a grab, since you would actually be attacking.

lows in tekken are mostly launch punishable, even if they only do chip damage. by contrast it seems that most lows in SC are not so easily punished despite often being of a similar frame disadvantage (~-15). the best WS punishers in SC seem to be i16.

FC recovery in tekken is quite limited compared to SC. from full crouch, your options are: WS moves and FC moves and jumping moves. you can also RCC in order to do regular standing moves, and well timed f,f+whatever moves are fairly easily executed. compared to the ease and simplicity of the options in SC (all of the tekken options plus 6_4 moves, and any 8WR move), it is a far less advantageous to be in FC in tekken.

the 8 way run system is no where to be found in tekken, where movement essentially boils down to dashes (forward and backwards) and side steps and side walks. very few moves use the steps as input (like X's 2,N,B), and none make use of the side walk at all.

hmm i guess that's enough text.
 
Tekken - Step, Block, Launch, Combo, OTG, Oki, Repeat

Soul Cal - Attack. Block. Interrupt. Throw. Oki. Block. Gi. Attack. Throw. Block. Step. Attack. Block....


Soul Cal gives you more options. But if you like memorizing and repeating Block Strings and Combos (ala MvC2, SF4, etc) Play Tekken.

If you want to have fun...play soul cal.
 
lol tekken hate. the only one allowed to hate tekken is esom :P

from your list, the only option tekken doesn't have is GI. but some characters have reversals.

also what does "memorizing and repeating Block Strings" mean exactly?

i'd agree that SC is more deep with respect to mindgames, but that doesn't make it more fun necessarily. sometimes less is more.
 
Tekken is harder and Calibur is more newbie friendly. The gap between skill levels in Calibur is much easier to overcome than the gap in levels in Tekken - what I mean by this is that, if you play against someone 1 tier better than you, you may be able to win 1 or 2 out of 10 in Calibur, whereas this would be more like 1 out of 50 in tekken.

Calibur is easy to learn, mostly based on how easy all the moves and combos are. Compare this against EWGF, hayashida steping, snake dashing, etc.

The "Deepness" in respect to mindgames is BS - the psychology of the games is comparable though Tekken tends to be more aggressive than Calibur, where there is more turtling. Also, if anything the psychology of calibur is a bit more basic - a true rock, paper, scissors (Step > B > A > Step).

This is pretty much the short version of the differences (tournament player in both).
 
The "Deepness" in respect to mindgames is BS - the psychology of the games is comparable though Tekken tends to be more aggressive than Calibur, where there is more turtling. Also, if anything the psychology of calibur is a bit more basic - a true rock, paper, scissors (Step > B > A > Step).

Please explain the defensive options a tekken player has. It always seems like you can block defending m/l mixups .. or side stepping... and perhaps backdashing since the range of the game is shorter.
 
Defensive options? Well, interrupt is a big one, crush, step/evasive step, low parry...

Is this what you meant? I'm not quite sure what you are asking.
 
Tekken equals better competitive fighting game hands down:

Better mind games, less room for mistakes making matches tougher, grants a better competitor more room to crush a weaker one (Ex. Throw escapes are 100% within the player's ability if he/she can see them where as in Soul Calibur there are 50/50 throw escape choices even though you can react to them). Just some of the things off the top of my head.
 
@SU - I wouldn't say it is a "Better" game (though I prefer it), I would say that it is much more technical than Calibur - being less technical is "Good" for calibur and is likely one of the reasons for its continued popularity.

SC may be the least technical of all tournament fighters played now (unless you count Smash brothers...though I don' tknow anything about this game as I have never played a Wii) but is certainly the least technical of tekken, SF, BB, VF etc.
 
@SU - I wouldn't say it is a "Better" game (though I prefer it), I would say that it is much more technical than Calibur - being less technical is "Good" for calibur and is likely one of the reasons for its continued popularity.

SC may be the least technical of all tournament fighters played now (unless you count Smash brothers...though I don' tknow anything about this game as I have never played a Wii) but is certainly the least technical of tekken, SF, BB, VF etc.

I don't know what you mean by less technical, but if I'm right but thinking that you mean more in-depth, I'd have to disagree with you. I mean, honestly, I'm not trying to get into any hierachical debate about fighting games, but I feel you like all are judging them on what you feel they SHOULD be rather than what the game is trying to achieve.

I mean, honestly, try to play SF the way you play GG or SC the way you play Tekken. I mean, other than a dire ass-bruising that you'll gain, you should easily notice that none of them are play the same way. I mean the basics are the same, but that's about it (which is why people have preferred fighting gams in the first place).

And, honestly, I feel as though there's a bit of bias in a couple of these posts (sorry for not quoting, but I remember ideas, not names). I mean, for instance, someone used punishing an unsafe move as reasoning for how SC is a button-masher but, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but most fighting games have unsafe moves. How is it any different, unless while I've been in Afghanistan SC took on a Bushido Blade feel to it and BB equals instant fuckin' win now. If so, I apologize.

Still, getting back to my point, I feel like SC has one of the most refined defensive systems in most of the higher end fighting games. Still, on the other hand, my other fighting game favorite, GG, has insane offensive set-ups. Would I consider one more in-depth than the other? Not at all. I feel like, to include the presentation of the sames, both achieved what they intended to do extremely well and made it work within the framework of the game without diminishing anything else (SF on the other hand...).


For arguments sake, how the hell can anyone call SC a turtle fest while ignoring SF? I mean, just look at the fuckin' tier lists! It's a reason the shotos are always somewhere near the fuckin' top.

Still, if by technical you mean button inputs and all that jazz, I can't disagree, but, on the other hand, I've been playing fighting games since I was a wee little tike and I don't have any problem with inputs (pad or stick). Hell, I thought people were bullshitting when they talked about have trouble inputting Sophie's double TAS B or 'wave-dashing' for that matter. But, then again, to each his own.
 
What do you mean by less technical?

Most people say a game is more 'technical' when their combos are harder to do, or requires more inputs per second than another game. A mistake many people make though is equating technicality with skill; while it does take time to learn the inputs for your characters hardest combos, being able to execute them won't matter at all if you're no good with the fighting engine or at anticipating your opponents moves and reactions.
 
Thank you all for a lot of insightful and helpful comments I strongly disagree with, for the most part! ;) I am definitely going to incorporate a whole bunch of these observations in my analysis.
 
By technical I generally mean the move inputs are all easier - if you say that the moves in calibur are as hard to do as the moves in Tekken (not that tekken has particularly intricate move inputs...just moreso than SC) you are clearly mistaken.

This is what I mean when I say that SC is more "Masher" friendly...CF and RO give anybody a chance to take a round, or maybe even a match from someone that is a tier above them in skill level.

PLEASE NOTE:

I am not saying that SC players are all scrubs, or that there is no psychology or "Deepness" to calibur - if there were no substance to the game, nobody would play it. I play both, I enjoy playing both and I have a lot of respect for the top players in both games.
 
I think LKV hit the nail on the head regarding the technical differences between the two systems. However, I'll go ahead and add a few of my opinions: (Let me preface this by saying while I like both games-- Im much better at Tekken--so there's probably a little bias)

1: Good or bad, I feel that Soul Calibur's system is more reliant on yomi than Tekken's system is.

2: I agree that the skill gap between players is much larger in Tekken. I've seen my wife (Who completely sucks at Galaga, let alone SC) school some of my friends who have played SC for years by button mashing. With the exception of an occasional Eddy win, I've never seen anything of that "Calibur" (excuse the pun) happen in Tekken.

3: Comparing different fighters is like comparing apples and oranges.

4: I feel that Tekken is more "TekKnical" (Another lame pun) but this dosen't apply that it's a better game. If being more technical means a better game--we should all sell our copies of SC and Tekken and only play Virtua Fighter from now on.

5: Regardless of what game is more technical--this dosen't take away from the skills players have in both games. If lose to a SC pro- it's because they are a better SC player. If I lose to a Tekken pro-- it's because they are a better Tekken player.

I'll probably get some hate for my #2, but, I'm sure if my wife played a top SC player she wouldn't stand a chance. I'm just saying that if she played a mediocore Tekken player, she also wouldn't stand a chance.
 
By technical I generally mean the move inputs are all easier - if you say that the moves in calibur are as hard to do as the moves in Tekken (not that tekken has particularly intricate move inputs...just moreso than SC) you are clearly mistaken.

This is what I mean when I say that SC is more "Masher" friendly...CF and RO give anybody a chance to take a round, or maybe even a match from someone that is a tier above them in skill level.


PLEASE NOTE:

I am not saying that SC players are all scrubs, or that there is no psychology or "Deepness" to calibur - if there were no substance to the game, nobody would play it. I play both, I enjoy playing both and I have a lot of respect for the top players in both games.

what is this ?
Having the security knowing that your hp is higher than theirs regardless of ring positioning and waiting the timer down, or having to keep on your toes fighting for ring positioning at all stages of the game ? RO can cause upsets, but the entire element of ring out is a moot point in tekken, so they're not used to keeping that in mind.

One thing i did notice , if i do recall is that tekken has a tighter input buffering times, but that was back comparing sc2 and sc3 buffering times to tekken.
I suppose timing inputs in the game can be equated to technical ability (like guitar hero).. but the term tehcnical to me meant the lil nuances (tech-roll, tech escape.. tech etc) that add depth especially on the defensive end.
 
blaz blue vs SC4

blaz blue: why are you blocking when you could be rushing down?!?!

SC4: more open ended in how you can play
 
And, honestly, I feel as though there's a bit of bias in a couple of these posts (sorry for not quoting, but I remember ideas, not names). I mean, for instance, someone used punishing an unsafe move as reasoning for how SC is a button-masher but, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but most fighting games have unsafe moves. How is it any different, unless while I've been in Afghanistan SC took on a Bushido Blade feel to it and BB equals instant fuckin' win now. If so, I apologize.

i don't know if you're referring to my post, but i'll assume you are. what i was noting was that you can input commands very early in SC in order to punish unsafe moves from block-- if the move is -15 you can be fairly certain that as long as you don't input the command too late, your i15 move will hit. whereas in tekken you basically have to do the input the very frame that you recover. so in tekken you retaliate when you recover from a block state, in SC you can retaliate much earlier, which means you can bash away on that B button and it will hit them. in tekken you will likely have your move blocked or ducked or whatever if you retain the "oh i can retaliate around now-ish" leeway that SC offers.

and you are not mistaken, every fighter has unsafe moves :P


i do feel though that 8WR moves are harder to buffer than single input moves for some reason.
 
Back
Top Bottom