the problem with sc...

[BLDave]

To clear something up: If the "Dave winning with Rock" thing is in regards to his winning Biweekly 3 and having "Rock" in his character usage lineup, then you guys are mistaken. Dave used Rock a few times then but never won, but he did win the tourney with different (better) characters.

If he DID win some tourney with Rock, then I haven't heard about it and good for him. But he hasn't won a match yet with Rock that I've seen, and I run the tourneys here. Bless his heart he tries though. :)

Iv'e won quite a few tourney matches with rock. Just never in the finals, and/or using ONLY rock.

Me and Whit had a REALLY close match in one of the AA tourney finals. I was in winners and he was in losers. He won the set, but i took him to the last match of the last round using only rock :)

 

[kittianinja]

iv'e won quite a few tourney matches with rock. Just never in the finals, and/or using only rock.

Me and whit had a really close match in one of the aa tourney finals. I was in winners and he was in losers. He won the set, but i took him to the last match of the last round using only rock :)

rock ftw!!!!!!!!!!

 

[page]

Rock 4 life, son(s).

 

[crow_winters]

Iv'e won quite a few tourney matches with rock. Just never in the finals, and/or using ONLY rock.

Me and Whit had a REALLY close match in one of the AA tourney finals. I was in winners and he was in losers. He won the set, but i took him to the last match of the last round using only rock :)

If anyone does eventually do it I figure it'll be you. :)

 

[Stryker]

Soulcalibur 3 was a joke and Soulcalibur 4 sure has its share of issues. The difference is that for the vast majority of the community, SC4 is fun enough to overcome its issues; while SC3 was not.

Agree but no totally... let me read again...umm yeah totally agree, but I have to say that the vital point for SC4 to be played is the hope that never dies to see the announcement of a new patch that fix some balance issues and make great the online system. And yeah pretty damn fun all the way, but sometimes you could frustrated yourself trying to find the combination to get fun and wins at the same time.

The part about people playing in the same way maybe could be translate to "players of the same character using the same moves, mix-ups and strategies"... the problem is associated with some sort of moves in SC4 that are totally "crap" and in thousands of tries you never find how to use it properly. Its like the Amy case the players from all the whole world plays like a "twins", I mean the same moves and all the tactics, thats really lame for the fourth version of the series.

I just hope that in the next patch all the moves could be useful in great or short way but at least fun to use.

-Stryker-

 

[Enkindu]

Iv'e won quite a few tourney matches with rock. Just never in the finals, and/or using ONLY rock.

Me and Whit had a REALLY close match in one of the AA tourney finals. I was in winners and he was in losers. He won the set, but i took him to the last match of the last round using only rock :)

And the fans rejoice! This is the best Rock can do. ;/ If only he had Death Roll.

 

[SPQR]

I haven't read this thread in its entirety, mainly because it had already devolved into a pointless flame war on the first page. However, here's my two cents on the issue.

I don't think the issue is with movement, per se. The issue is more in a lack of options. Movelists have been trimmed from SC2. There's no more WL moves, many moves have been removed from stances, some moves have been removed entirely, not enough new moves have been added in.

Do I believe this means that every character is played the same at high level? No, not at all. There are numerous different styles to every different character. Herein is where I see the problem though...when you have a limited set of options, character matches devolve.

My playstyle may not be like another Voldo player's, but I guarantee you if we're both playing against a good Cassandra player, you wouldn't be able to tell us apart. Why? Because Cassandra's crouch throws punish so many of Voldo's tools. Soul Calibur has been, and probably always will be, about playing safe. It's what SC2 came down to, it's what SC3 came down to, this game, even with the addition of soul gauge, is headed the same direction.

You take a character's limited toolbox, remove all the tools that don't work against the character you're playing against, and there's not much left. It homogenizes the game. I've learned Hilde recently, and it shows when I play against Lobo locally. He plays Cassandra, and if he does a low move, any low move, he risks losing. If I jump 1A, or 1K, or FC 1B, I can land, hit him with a C3B, and he loses. The round's over if I land a single C3B.

Things are bad when what stage we get on stage select matters more than how well we play our characters. If he gets certain wall stages, I'm almost guaranteed to lose. If I get certain ringout stages, I'm almost guaranteed to win. Soul Calibur feels more like a coin flip playing my Hilde against him than it does a competition of skill. Other matchups, like my Voldo vs Kilik or Ivy, feel very similar. Did Kilik auto-GI me with two Asura Dances? I lose. Did Ivy do 214B out of frame advantage a couple times? I lose. Did I correctly guess when Ivy or Kilik was going to do those moves? I win. The fact that nothing else in the matchup matters except my ability to stop those two moves matters is, in my opinion, the largest problem with Soul Calibur 4.

 

[sleepernoob]

wow, i totally missed this, good call doom.

yea, to say that gg is somehow not a deep game comes from someone who is ignorant of the game they speak of.

but sf is only rivaled by vf5?

wow, wtf.

There's nothing wrong with this statement. VF5 is much deeper than Super Turbo. The lack of moves in Super Turbo limit your strategy to a bunch of two move 50/50s. The huge tier gap in 3S and Marvel limits you to several characters. There's a reason why people say VF is hard. It's because the game is damn deep. Very Hard to learn and Very Hard to master.

I think the problem with SC is that it's spam friendly. The game has too many safe moves.

 

[BlackDragon37]

There's a reason why people say VF is hard. It's because the game is damn deep. Very Hard to learn and Very Hard to master.

I don't think so. The game is deep, but easy to learn than people think.

The hard part is looking past its blandness.

 

[Jesster]

I think the problem with SC is that it's spam friendly. The game has too many safe moves.

Too many safe moves??? SC4 has too many UNSAFE moves. Unsafe moves reward boring, turtley block and punnish tactics. Safety rewards aggressive play, which is far more entertaining. And SC has always had plenty of tools to defeat "spam".

-=The Jesster: Gatchaba Goose=-

 

[LGInfinite]

The fact that particular characters tend to be played in very specific ways is hardly unique to SC4. Consider SFIII, where the vast majority of Yuns, Kens and Chun Lis all look quite similar. There's a reason for this: characters tend to be strong in particular areas and playing to those strengths makes them more effective. So long as moves have different properties there will always be moves that are, in general, better than others and hence will be used more often.

 

[tribaL]

The fact that particular characters tend to be played in very specific ways is hardly unique to SC4. Consider SFIII, where the vast majority of Yuns, Kens and Chun Lis all look quite similar. There's a reason for this: characters tend to be strong in particular areas and playing to those strengths makes them more effective. So long as moves have different properties there will always be moves that are, in general, better than others and hence will be used more often.

it's also the reason why i don't play sf. imo the sf series is garbage and shouldn't really be compared to anything. it's done very little in evolving the series, and what little it has done has been baby-steps. it's one thing for new installations of games to keep a basic idea and working around that to create something entirely new while still remaining true to previous iterations in some form; it's another to keep that basic idea the main focal point with a little salt and pepper added every 3-4 years.

sf was amazing when sf2 hit the scene. now, it's completely over-hyped and over-rated.

 

[iKotomi]

If its not broken, don't fix it? Fighting games haven't really evolved that much in the past 10 years, and street fighter isn't the only series that is "guilty" of this. Experience in general shows that games that try to be innovative tend to suck.

Doing something new for the sake of doing something new is stupid. If you do something new, you should do it because it makes the game more fun. Most "new" things, are just variants of stuff that were introduced by street fighter...

 

[ShinobiBrown]

Most "new" things, are just variants of stuff that were introduced by street fighter...

I'm tempted to challenge that statement.

When I think of the terms tech traps, bursts, IKs, etc. I don't think of old SF. Nor can I think of variants of those terms in old SF.

I'll admit SF is a good series. It's not a personal fave of mine, but I still enjoy them. However, I can't help but feel the series is over hyped nowadays. Capcom is the Nintendo of the fighting game developing circle. They know how to make quality titles. However, as far as moving the genre forward, they are WAY past their prime.

 

[iKotomi]

Tech traps existed in alpha, can't think of a game before that at this moment that were actually worth playing that had air techs in it (note, air block disappeared completely in SF3 because it was stupid).

Guilty gear introduced burst after 3rd strike was released. Burst for the most part would not have been particularly useful in 3s which is not as combo heavy as present day fighters. Though to be fair, Guilty Gear did a lot of things right. Even then, if it didn't come from street fighter, there's a good chance it came from guilty gear. And even then, I find that these "new" things are kind of overrated.

Instant Kill does not really bring anything particularly good or interesting to fighting games for the most part. Considering that Sf brought combos, supers, cancels, parries, most "new" things in fighting games are some sort of variant of these things. Most features that don't have roots in street fighter is because they are based off of a system that had no place in sf games, like air dash. Does lack of air dash make the game bad? Not really.

 

[ShinobiBrown]

Tech traps existed in alpha, can't think of a game before that at this moment that were actually worth playing that had air techs in it (note, air block disappeared completely in SF3 because it was stupid).

Guilty gear introduced burst after 3rd strike was released. Burst for the most part would not have been particularly useful in 3s which is not as combo heavy as present day fighters. Though to be fair, Guilty Gear did a lot of things right. Even then, if it didn't come from street fighter, there's a good chance it came from guilty gear. And even then, I find that these "new" things are kind of overrated.

Instant Kill does not really bring anything particularly good or interesting to fighting games for the most part. Considering that Sf brought combos, supers, cancels, parries, most "new" things in fighting games are some sort of variant of these things. Most features that don't have roots in street fighter is because they are based off of a system that had no place in sf games, like air dash. Does lack of air dash make the game bad? Not really.

Lulz, I had a feeling Alpha would be brought up. I've been rather ignorant to the entire Alpha series so that's my fault for not knowing.

While it's understandable why the concept of burst weren't introduced in 3s, it made no sense why it wasn't introduced in Capcom's hyper fighters IE the Versus series, which is very combo heavy. It's the number 1 reason why I hate their VS series of fighters.

Overall, it's safe to say Capcom lied down the foundation while ArcSys built upon that foundation. So much so that Capcom is kinda playing catch up at this point. (IE TvC having "Mega Crash" and "Baroque" (Bursts and Roman Canceling respectively) and SFIV having "Focus Canceling" (again Roman Canceling).)

 

[Tiamat]

I am pretty sure "running" is from the KOF series. That's pretty important I'd say.

 

[ShinobiBrown]

I am pretty sure "running" is from the KOF series. That's pretty important I'd say.

That's funny thinking about it now. Obviously, ArcSys has incorporated running with GG and BB. I don't think Capcom has yet to incorporate running into any of their fighters. Dashes only.

I need to break the habit of overlooking SNK.

 

[Impending_Doom66]

I am pretty sure "running" is from the KOF series. That's pretty important I'd say.

I think he just showed how stupid some of the above were acting. To actually say someone invented combos or parries is ridiculous.

 

[ShinobiBrown]

To actually say someone invented combos or parries is ridiculous.

How is that ridiculous? The concepts of mechanics like combos and parries don't materialize out of thin air. Someone had to develop those concepts to put into fighters. The question is who did it first and who developed it to be what it is today.

I'm rather ignorant to SNK, so I consistently forget about their accomplishments.