Soul Calibur VI: General discussion

Klimat said:
You are applying way too much logic to SoulCalibur, it might crack at this point Kappa.
Like if a a 50 kg girl can blow someone's plate armor away with a pair of tiny tonfas, why would anyone ever need a 50 kg sword Kappa?
I think a sensible rule must be that a weapon/style should look cool and if it was actually used historically under any kind of circumstances, that's a great plus. As fas as SC goes, those particular historical circumstance may or man not apply at all, after all we are talking about a series that treats armor as purely cosmetic, so some leaps of logic can't be helped.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, totally, I agree. But those ricossi still tickle me, since half-swording evolved as a counter-measure to developments in armor, which is a barrier nobody in SoulCalverse ever seems to need to concern themselves with, least of all Siegfried! Maybe it's for fighting the Colossus from SCIII? ;)
 
Finally decided to weigh in on the stupid rematch debate,

I rematch when I rematch, I don't when I don't and I assume nothing if others don't. It's a game people. Sometimes I play for a bit, girlfriend wants attention and I leave, or I have to go do something else, or I get bored and feel like quitting. The attitude that you are under some kind of obligation to stay and rematch someone sounds a lot like work. Don't like forced obligations in my free time, get enough of that in real life. Play to have fun when I'm feeling up to it and stop when I don't.

Screw anyone who thinks a person playing a game for fun is obligated to perform and act in a way they see fit for their entertainment instead of just enjoying themselves. If people want someone who will hop to their desires, play the computer it will rematch and replay with you to your hearts content. People are fickle by nature, and it's not anyone's business to judge why a person didn't rematch your ass because honestly you have no clue. For all you know, the phone just rang and they found out their child just got hit by a fucking car, and here you are on the other end of the computer calling them names and assuming bullshit about them. Possibly the person just didn't want to play anymore, also completely viable and allowed.

Even if it was because the person knew they would lose and didn't want to so didn't rematch, that's in the end fine to. It's their choice. See that's the thing about playing with others, it's like a sexual relationship, entirely based on consent. It is completely and totally within a person's right to not consent to play with you, nor are they required to remain in a game session with you because they consented the first time. This whole environment of attempting to obligate people through shame to play how others want is exactly why many games don't do as well as people would like. Few people enjoy that crap or attitude. Life is busy and people play for various reasons and have various ways they have fun doing it. The conform or be shamed attitude is exactly how you chase off potential players.

Someone doesn't rematch, just shrug and move on like an adult.
 
Ardenwolf said:
Finally decided to weigh in on the stupid rematch debate,

I rematch when I rematch, I don't when I don't and I assume nothing if others don't. It's a game people. Sometimes I play for a bit, girlfriend wants attention and I leave, or I have to go do something else, or I get bored and feel like quitting. The attitude that you are under some kind of obligation to stay and rematch someone sounds a lot like work. Don't like forced obligations in my free time, get enough of that in real life. Play to have fun when I'm feeling up to it and stop when I don't.

Screw anyone who thinks a person playing a game for fun is obligated to perform and act in a way they see fit for their entertainment instead of just enjoying themselves. If people want someone who will hop to their desires, play the computer it will rematch and replay with you to your hearts content. People are fickle by nature, and it's not anyone's business to judge why a person didn't rematch your ass because honestly you have no clue. For all you know, the phone just rang and they found out their child just got hit by a fucking car, and here you are on the other end of the computer calling them names and assuming bullshit about them. Possibly the person just didn't want to play anymore, also completely viable and allowed.

Even if it was because the person knew they would lose and didn't want to so didn't rematch, that's in the end fine to. It's their choice. See that's the thing about playing with others, it's like a sexual relationship, entirely based on consent. It is completely and totally within a person's right to not consent to play with you, nor are they required to remain in a game session with you because they consented the first time. This whole environment of attempting to obligate people through shame to play how others want is exactly why many games don't do as well as people would like. Few people enjoy that crap or attitude. Life is busy and people play for various reasons and have various ways they have fun doing it. The conform or be shamed attitude is exactly how you chase off potential players.

Someone doesn't rematch, just shrug and move on like an adult.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody here was talking about whether or not you should rematch if you have something else to be doing besides playing Soul Calibur--that strikes me as more than a little bit of a strawman argument. The question is, in a given block of time in which you are playing Soul Calibur, how many of your match-ups do you rematch? Like you, I think it's beyond silly to get bent out of shape if someone chooses to leave, but at the same time, I don't think it's silly to have a preference for granting others rematches: that just feels like a simple courtesy to me, especially if I won the first match. It's a small, but not insignificant, sign of respect. I know a couple of people have in fact described a feeling of aggravation at being denied a rematch, but I don't think most people here are approaching this question in terms of "obligation" or "requirement" as you suggest--certainly not where your more serious personal or professional obligations are calling. Rather the question being debated is one of contest etiquette. You see the same thing in sports and gambling culture, yet there too, nobody expects most people don't expect you to indulge them if your significant other wants face time or you have to work in the morning.
 
Rusted Blade said:
I don't think anybody here was talking about whether or not you should rematch if you have something else to be doing besides playing Soul Calibur--that strikes me as more than a little bit of a strawman argument. The question is, in a given block of time in which you are playing Soul Calibur, how many of your match-ups do you rematch? Like you, I think it's beyond silly to get bent out of shape if someone chooses to leave, but at the same time, I don't think it's silly to have a preference for granting others rematches: that just feels like a simple courtesy to me, especially if I won the first match. It's a small, but not insignificant, sign of respect. I know a couple of people have in fact described a feeling of aggravation at being denied a rematch, but I don't think most people here are approaching this question in terms of "obligation" or "requirement" as you suggest--certainly not where your more serious personal or professional obligations are calling. Rather the question being debated is one of contest etiquette. You see the same thing in sports and gambling culture, yet there too, nobody expects most people don't expect you to indulge them if your significant other wants face time or you have to work in the morning.
Click to expand...

The problem is, it's a game owned by whoever buys it, and played at their whim in whichever mode they feel like. So it immediately falls apart when looking at things through that lens. There's nothing formal about it unlike the other things you mentioned. Most of the people online have no idea who each other are, and many don't even care. You all can bitch about people not rematching til the cows come home, talking about etiquette this etiquette that, but at the end of the day, facts are facts, is random people playing how they want, and any attempt to tell others how to play, will likely result in their annoyance, and the more they are bombarded with that annoyance the less they want to play.

So push for a thing that can never be, possibly gain traction and annoy and chase of anyone who doesn't want to play that way, or accept that random people play at random times, in the way they enjoy and move on.

Which I'm going to do right now, just felt like weighing in to give my perspective, in the end, there will always be people who have this weird idea in their head a randomly uncontrolled online game open to whoever can have some kind of silly formalized etiquette and will express such, and many will try to enforce it by belittling those who do not conform.

Then again, I'm on the other side and have just done a bit of belittling myself, but I rarely if ever speak up on it, so meh, whatever.
 
David Blain said:
Sorry, i dont know about 226 winstreak of Boom
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/339266828
Click to expand...

Yeah I dream about that too. :P

1543476231245.png
 
Ardenwolf said:
You all can bitch about people not rematching til the cows come home
Click to expand...

Ok, but again, strawman argument: nobody here is complaining about this, let alone "bitching". Ok, that first person to bring the topic up was a little annoyed in that specific context, but I doubt they intended to be taken so literally and absolutely everyone else who has discussed the topic since then has discussed it in terms of whether or not they are predisposed to give a rematch and, if so, in what circumstances. Nobody is talking about how you are a dick if you choose not to, or suggesting in any way, shape, or form that you have an "obligation" or that there is (or should be) a standard expectation. Indeed, I specifically told you that I share your perspective that people getting bent out of shape when they don't get the rematch are behaving like self-entitled nitwits. But that is an entirely separate question from whether or not we choose to extend that courtesy ourselves as a general rule. I just don't get where your feelings of imposition about this come from; in the ten plus years since this series went online (and accounting for thousands of hours of play across four games and multiple platforms) I have literally never once ever received a message or other communication from someone acting butt-hurt because I didn't rematch them. I've certainly never seen that kind of behaviour in an arcade or at a couch party. Has this happened to you a lot?
 
Last edited:
Klimat said:
I remember long before SC6 was released in one of the interviews Okubo told there were 2 concepts of new characters they considered for SC6 that ultimately didn't make the cut due to time/money constraints. One was a big, tall, muscular darker skinned woman and another one was a longsword wielding knight, inspired by "For Honor", with a move set incorporating half-swording techniques.
Click to expand...
Vergerben who made these statements, Okubo never talk openly about the available/cut characters, except Groh and Geralt. Most of his interviews were "I can't say, wait for more updates."
 
LisaK said:
Vergerben who made these statements, Okubo never talk openly about the available/cut characters, except Groh and Geralt. Most of his interviews were "I can't say, wait for more updates."
Click to expand...
Speaking of whom, he hasn’t been around here since SCVI was nearing release.

Perhaps he thought his work here was done. Kappa
 
I miss Vergeben. :(

and I wish we got more new characters besides Groh and Azwel. was kind of surprised there wasn't at least 1 new female character.

but I guess after SC V, they wanted to "restore" the missing fan favorite classic characters. Hence the quasi reboot we got with VI.
 
One of my Soulcalibur 6 creation screenshots got flagged by Tumblr as "adult content" so I'm finally boycotting. I literally posted Ivy's ass in Kainé's revealing outfit but god forbid I take a pic of one of my customs in Voldo's gear.
Screenshot_20190114-155223.png
 
Klimat said:
vacant again in SC7
Click to expand...
Im sorry, but SC5 and Lost Swords were financially unsuccessful. At this moment things of SC6 is not great.
I do not make any categorical requirements for the next part of the game, my only desire is for it to be.
And to SC6, I have only one desire - that the HD edition of the game be released on Platstation 5.
PS5 should come out soon, otherwise SONY will start falling behind its main rival of console race, the Microsoft
 
Nyte said:
When the game is so sexy that even posting in-game images can get you in trouble...
Click to expand...

I think it's more due to the fact it's Tumblr of all places that did this (though we all know Apple has Tumblr by the balls as in Tumblr had to sanitize itself if it wants to remain on Apple's app store).
 
sytus said:
I think it's more due to the fact it's Tumblr of all places that did this (though we all know Apple has Tumblr by the balls as in Tumblr had to sanitize itself if it wants to remain on Apple's app store).
Click to expand...

Apple is not the problem there; they don't remove apps to social platforms just because they feature adult content; rather, they removed Tumblr for featuring a very specific kind of pornography (the one all non-sociopaths want gone from the internet), and had every right and necessity to. It was Tumblr who made the internal decision later (either perfectly reasonable or an overreaction, depending on who you ask) to remove all adult content, because it was too much of a liability and damaging too their brand--and that decision had been contemplated by Tumblr's new parent company (a division of Verizon) for a while before the app was pulled from the app store. Apple had nothing to do with that broader decision and certainly isn't out to censor all mature material, just the types they have a legal (and for that matter, moral) obligation to prevent the spread of.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back