*Nine* months in, how do you rank Soulcalibur VI relative to the rest of the series?

If pressed for a choice, where would you rank Soulcalibur VI as an entry in the franchise?

  • The best there has been

    Votes: 6 12.2%
  • Tied for first

    Votes: 11 22.4%
  • Second best

    Votes: 13 26.5%
  • Tied for second

    Votes: 2 4.1%
  • Third best

    Votes: 8 16.3%
  • Tied for third

    Votes: 5 10.2%
  • Fourth best

    Votes: 2 4.1%
  • Fifth best

    Votes: 2 4.1%
  • Sixth best

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Seventh best or below (yikes)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    49

Rusted Blade

[10] Knight
I mean, I'm not discrediting your opinion but I think for a lot of people this feels a lot better than SCIV and V. Entries that could easily by a lot of people who enjoyed past games be called boring or not so enjoyable with their peculiar choices at times. Something that started at SC3 in particular.
Well I'm not nonplussed, but mostly because I don't see how that point would be discrediting of my own opinion, since that was in essence the same argument I advanced. If you review my post I think you'll find that I every explicitly say this is a middle of the pack game, and that's consistent with at least a handful of games in the franchise being worse, regardless of whatever subjective/idiosyncratic crtieria one uses to rank the games. Now personally, I don't think SCIV is remotely in the same class of "disappointment on arrival" factor when compared against SCV. Though honestly I grew to begrudgingly respect even V as a legitimate entry (albeit the favourite of just about no one).

As to SCIII, it's a difficult case, isn't it? Do we count only the best features of the console and arcade variants with their drastic differences in content and balance? The PS3 version was packed with more content than arguably any other game in the sequence, but was fundamentally broken with regard to basic mechanics, bugs, and balance, while the System 246 edition was fundamentally as clean and well-balanced as any final tournament-worthy edition in the series, but cut the lion's share of the console version's content. Do we create a combined standard with scores in each category that reflect the peaks achieved by each game, or do we just weigh each version individually. And it's not an academic question either: if we treat it like essentially one game, imagining an ideal version that had all of SCIII:CE's content, combined with the technical standard of SCIII:AE, it would unquestionably be the best game in the series, but if it we just have to choose the better of the two games (that is SCIII:AE), it's another game that's just in the middle of the pack.

The only thing that feels like a chore in SCVI to me is spammers, something that happens in any game known to man so I wont complain. Its about as rinse repeat as any fighting game will get in my opinion, its kind of what you sign up for in a sense.
This seems like a bit of a false analogy to me: not all games are equal in terms of how risky spamming is, in even the remotest sense. As to the specific assertion that this is not a particularly "rinse and repeat" experience for a Soul Calibur game or a fighter generally, I can't think of a single statement regarding this entry I would disagree with more--SoulCalibur has never been more expressly (as in, literally as described by the devs) more engineered towards casual and online play. Features like RE discourage new players from learning and utilizing the traditional rock-paper-scissors dynamics that constitute the fundamentals of the gameplay in this series, which is just one factor which clearly leads to more spamming. However such issues would be somewhat trivial--it's really the mediocre netcode and truly awful matchmaking system that make the issues a hundredfold worse. My friend, no one signs up for that! ;)

I wish there was a single player mode that used the main characters however other than Soul Chronicle because I personally loathe CAS creations unless they're the main characters altered. (I admit to enjoying humor creations personally though.)
Well, the creation feature is doing a lot of the heavy lifting to keep the franchise afloat, I think, so live with it and let people have their little cosplay models. :) As for single player--good lord dude, you think the game needs more single player content? It is already unbalanced in that respect, after two over-long and boring-as-shit modes, the resources for which are the precise reason the other features you discuss immediately below are lacking. The game is in my opinion broken probably more in this respect--that is, the relative amount of time and resources put into the campaign modes vs. other fundamental components--than any other. You can't have it all--they had/have a tiny budget for this game.

I just want more variety, characters, maps and such as for me I've haven't enjoyed an entry like this in a long time.
Well as to those features, they are my priorities too, but that's one reason I am underwhelmed with SCVI. The roster is limited and the stages are--there's just no way around it--the worst selection in the franchise history. A smaller selection than any game since SoulEdge, and static, bland, uninspired design for most. Now I do believe, at least as far as rosters go, I do think this game could go from being lackluster to the best game in the series (and indeed, I sad as much previously). But as to content generally, I don't think a richness of the features is a well-fitting argument for SCVI's virtues, as its actually incredibly skimpy right now in every dimension except the length of the single player campaigns--and even then, to say that those modes are padded and dull of cookie-cutter design and an underwhelming story would all be an understatement. Everything else--roster, stage selection, number of non-campaign single player, number of multiplayer and online modes, and every other form of auxiliary content, is about as spartan as any game in this series has been since SCII onward.

The gimmics aren't so terrible either, I mean you're on your toes for what the next character each time really which adds to it, you're not constantly approaching the fight in the same exact way each time. Something that I felt personally kind of happened mostly in SCIV/V. Viola and Zwei in a sense kind broke this and I'm glad the characters are more unique now. The enhanced movement has also emphasized this even more heavily since fast or acrobatic characters can have much more influence. SCIV/V just kind of shut down ways to play in my opinion.
In SC4 I never would have thought much about how Talim or Taki would approach me. SCV was an improvement despite the GI change.
I understand people being averse to, Soul Charge, Critical Edge and Reversal Edge since they've never been in the series like this before and people preferred the past simplicity.
Well, I'm not sure I follow your arguments there in places, but as to the first statement, I mean...it's gimmicks on top of gimmicks on top of gimmicks. It's gimmicks all the way down, homie! What drives me nuts is that they are actively courting the casual audience with features like the RE panic button--again, not in my opinion, the devs are very much on the record as to their objectives and design decisions here, and I respect that they are at least being transparent/upfront about it--but then behind this first layer of gimmicks supposedly there to make the learning curve a little more manageable for newbies, they make this game bar-none the most convoluted game in the series. I mean hoooly shit, is there so much to keep track of, even by SoulCalibur standards.

And I'm not just talking about the huge movesets you reference above (bigger now than ever because of the new Soul Charge) and the effort of setting characters apart in that respect--I'm all for that, 100%. And I'm not even talking about learning to study frame data (which we fans are still expected to reconstruct ourselves because we supposedly "enjoy it"!?!) and studiously investigating match-ups, which are basically required for competent play at this point. But in addition to increased moveset options and variations on returning features like the guard gauge and impacts being connected to it, the lethal hit system is just plain tediously idiosyncratic, not only making some just absurdly narrow in application, but also just becoming a bit of a chore to memorize and work into one's repertoire. "On every third counterhit following a round you lost to a male or neuter character, results in guard crush--except upon first and third Tuesdays and weekends in month numbering less than 31 days, in which case, shifts to Hyperbole Stance."

I mean, yeah, an exaggeration, but honestly not by much in terms of how situational some of this stuff is. Which, alright fine--it's going to greatly prolong the task of balancing the game as people become more knowledgeable and consistent with them, but fine, let's just call that more depth. If I, as a die-hard fan who has been playing these games for more than two decades now, am finding this all to be a lot to tackle and integrate into a competitive strategy, how do the newbies feel? And why is the perceived solution "Oh, I know, more panic button options they can hit to omni-block incoming threats and slow down the game for a minute, whatever it does to the overall pacing and flow."? This game just has something of an identity crisis going on right now, I feel. The features often times work at cross-purposes and just throw the experience out of whack, I feel. Which is why we are seeing such drastic changes to core features in recent patches.

Now clearly the poll suggests I may be in the minority in my assessment even among the hardcore crowd, since I do think this board is more hardcore than casual in character (although clearly we have a mix of fans). But I stand by my assessment: SCVI is a capable entry and a step in the right direction. But for me, it is very much middle of the pack overall.

I respect the way you do see it however and don't disregard it at all. The best I can say however is at the very least Soulcalibur VI is signalling a much brighter future for the series by the looks of it than what SCIII/IV/V did we can only hope things get better, which I hope they do.
I agree things are on looking generally positive for the first time in a while, but for me SCII-SCIV is the most impressive arc of the series, so I suspect we just have different priorities in what we expect from a SC game.
 
Last edited:

Starringrole

[08] Mercenary
I want to avoid getting awfully verbose so I'm going to try and be as quick as I can. (Not trying to be rude, I just genuinely don't want to write to the point its repetition on my end, a bad habit I feel I do have.)

Well I'm not nonplussed, but mostly because I don't see how that point would be discrediting of my own opinion, since that was in essence the same argument I advanced. If you review my post I think you'll find that I every explicitly say this is a middle of the pack game, and that's consistent with at least a handful of games in the franchise being worse, regardless of whatever subjective/idiosyncratic crtieria one uses to rank the games. Now personally, I don't think SCIV is remotely in the same class of "disappointment on arrival" factor when compared against SCV. Though honestly I grew to begrudgingly respect even V as a legitimate entry (albeit the favourite of just about no one).
I meant in the capacity that I didn't wish to devalue your opinion, nothing quite in depth, I simply didn't wish to come off as pushy or rude.
As for Soulcalibur IV however, disappointment on arrival may not be high, but in the long term that game has certainly shown its fair share of problems. Which an audience that value the fluid movement of Soulcalibur would still be more satisfied from a purely gameplay stand point at the very least with SCV. I might prefer the content of SCIV, and have been disappointed with V, but it was a lot more fun to play even if the improvements were minor or just outright awkward. Soulcalibur VI has tried quite hard to return to this movement factor.

As to SCIII, it's a difficult case, isn't it? Do we count only the best features of the console and arcade variants with their drastic differences in content and balance? The PS3 version was packed with more content than arguably any other game in the sequence, but was fundamentally broken with regard to basic mechanics, bugs, and balance, while the System 246 edition was fundamentally as clean and well-balanced as any final tournament-worthy edition in the series, but cut the lion's share of the console version's content. Do we create a combined standard with scores in each category that reflect the peaks achieved by each game, or do we just weigh each version individually. And it's not an academic question either: if we treat it like essentially one game, imagining an ideal version that had all of SCIII:CE's content, combined with the technical standard of SCIII:AE, it would unquestionably be the best game in the series, but if it we just have to choose the better of the two games (that is SCIII:AE), it's another game that's just in the middle of the pack.
To be quite blunt, we count the game for what it was delivered as and quite frankly terrible is what that game was. A game shouldn't be delivered that way. SC3 has many qualities I respect about it however. The damage with SC3 was irreparable so the arcade version which was honestly vastly superior failed with what it could have been. Back then was not like nowadays where developers could be given critique and then push out an update for free. SC3 was definitely a thing at the time to not exactly be enamored with no matter what version we consider, the circumstances left it in a bad place.

I had played SC3:AE to my memory there was still glitches however,my mind may be deceiving me. I will say in general though it was much more fun to play and its balance naturally had made the game more fun to actually play. It had obviously had a lovely selection of characters and a variety of stages that would make anyone swoon had the game been released in its ideal state. Should the game be released again in a perfected state I would say it could go for top three at the very least. It most certainly isn't bad in that ideal state. I agree with you completely in that sense. But these ideal circumstances never did play out for SC3 leaving it as a game that wasn't entirely satisfactory and sat badly with some people, one of them being me. I will always respect SC3 for its amount of content and separately the arcade edition fixes. But sadly we have yet to see this ideal circumstance play out. One which I'm not sure we'll ever even have the pleasure of seeing as it could detract from SC6. It would also have the series past simplicity so it would sit well with more traditional fans, I admit it, I would definitely try this game again with an open mind.

This seems like a bit of a false analogy to me: not all games are equal in terms of how risky spamming is, in even the remotest sense. As to the specific assertion that this is not a particularly "rinse and repeat" experience for a Soul Calibur game or a fighter generally, I can't think of a single statement regarding this entry I would disagree with more--SoulCalibur has never been more expressly (as in, literally as described by the devs) more engineered towards casual and online play. Features like RE discourage new players from learning and utilizing the traditional rock-paper-scissors dynamics that constitute the fundamentals of the gameplay in this series, which is just one factor which clearly leads to more spamming. However such issues would be somewhat trivial--it's really the mediocre netcode and truly awful matchmaking system that make the issues a hundredfold worse. My friend, no one signs up for that! ;)
Games certainly are not all the same with spam, but in all games spamming comes in the same form and recognizable fashion for a reason. SC6 isn't a game I've witnessed where spamming is at an all time high, well at least on a personal level I haven't. Others probably have.

While I defend RE for being new, and I see myself as a traditionalist with Soulcalibur I wont disagree with you at all. But I have yet to get to a point where RE is all I'm doing in a match. I agree that RE defeats the spirit of Soulcalibur in way. But I can't really view SCIV/V as less rinse repeat than SCVI. Yet again, I never would have really considered the approach of other characters it all just felt more the game. Now you can actually think about each character individually. Not that it was so bad they all felt the same, but SCIV/V killed a lot of approaches making it much more bland. I am willing to say that perhaps the disappearance of RE could be healthy for the game however, its the feature I'm most averse to as it can be an interruption to the experience. I've had moments where I disliked it. But I just don't think I've ever felt it in a capacity that it ruins it all or is repetitive.

However it is the feature that should most certainly be considered for removal, I don't like the fact that characters have moves built into it as an example as I feel it encourages a character to actually use it. I like it more as something completely on the side.

Well, the creation feature is doing a lot of the heavy lifting to keep the franchise afloat, I think, so live with it and let people have their little cosplay models. :) As for single player--good lord dude, you think the game needs more single player content? It is already unbalanced in that respect, after two over-long and boring-as-shit modes, the resources for which are the precise reason the other features you discuss immediately below are lacking. The game is in my opinion broken probably more in this respect--that is, the relative amount of time and resources put into the campaign modes vs. other fundamental components--than any other. You can't have it all--they had/have a tiny budget for this game.
I personally think all the work it does helps go hand in hand with ruining the game. Not to be rude to people who play the game casually as its far from my intent as I'm not exactly some hardcore pro (by casual I just mean not playing the game a lot or not having a huge interest in the genre or series), but things like CAS in my eyes definitely appeal to someone more casual or new to the franchise who doesn't care as much for any of the games functions, arguably why a more simple feature like RE would exist and Libra of Soul. I personally feel the CAS attraction is a big problem for this series.

Also please don't get me wrong, a casual player can be into the game and actually care for its mechanics, but I just mean every year we go forward and with internet something like CAS comes off more as one of one time fling for people who wont really care too deeply for the rest of game. Its more of an evolution that caters in my eyes a bit to a different audience is my point.

As for me wanting more single player content, of course I do. I never asked nor wanted a mode where I have to play a custom in a story tailored for them. I wanted the main story and then things like survival mode just like its always been, not much of a surprise is it?
I'm aware this game has a tiny budget, but its just another way of how I see CAS being a waste rather than other better things personally. Ideally I would have also loved a sort of tag mode for this game too which could be applied online. Its the reason why I'm not too fond of CAS.
Since their inclusion this series been having odd behaviors, SC6 being the first time some sense has been knocked in since.

I may be wrong directing my feelings towards CAS, but I do frankly think they cause more problems than they're worth. Just like how guest characters are potentially attracting people who wont stick. I understand its for money etc, but I think some of this long term has had a negative influence on the franchise.

Well as to those features, they are my priorities too, but that's one reason I am underwhelmed with SCVI. The roster is limited and the stages are--there's just no way around it--the worst selection in the franchise history. A smaller selection than any game since SoulEdge, and static, bland, uninspired design for most. Now I do believe, at least as far as rosters go, I do think this game could go from being lackluster to the best game in the series (and indeed, I sad as much previously). But as to content generally, I don't think a richness of the features is a well-fitting argument for SCVI's virtues, as its actually incredibly skimpy right now in every dimension except the length of the single player campaigns--and even then, to say that those modes are padded and dull of cookie-cutter design and an underwhelming story would all be an understatement. Everything else--roster, stage selection, number of non-campaign single player, number of multiplayer and online modes, and every other form of auxiliary content, is about as spartan as any game in this series has been since SCII onward.
I think this game will be fine (with DLC) roster wise. I however think the stages problem will never be fixed. I think we'll get two at best. I do not however think the stages are boring or ugly at all. They're actually very nice in my opinion, I just think they all have a focus on being quite neutral being the problem. We've lost specifics in this game a bit like a traditional raft stage. I think the gameplay in this game is its a high point completely, nice aesthetic and pleasant overall.

Well, I'm not sure I follow your arguments there in places, but as to the first statement, I mean...it's gimmicks on top of gimmicks on top of gimmicks. It's gimmicks all the way down, homie! What drives me nuts is that they are actively courting the casual audience with features like the RE panic button--again, not in my opinion, the devs are very much on the record as to their objectives and design decisions here, and I respect that they are at least being transparent/upfront about it--but then behind this first layer of gimmicks supposedly there to make the learning curve a little more manageable for newbies, they make this game bar-none the most convoluted game in the series. I mean hoooly shit, is there so much to keep track of, even by SoulCalibur standards

And I'm not just talking about the huge movesets you reference above (bigger now than ever because of the new Soul Charge) and the effort of setting characters apart in that respect--I'm all for that, 100%. And I'm not even talking about learning to study frame data (which we fans are still expected to reconstruct ourselves because we supposedly "enjoy it"!?!) and studiously investigating match-ups, which are basically required for competent play at this point. But in addition to increased moveset options and variations on returning features like the guard gauge and impacts being connected to it, the lethal hit system is just plain tediously idiosyncratic, not only making some just absurdly narrow in application, but also just becoming a bit of a chore to memorize and work into one's repertoire. "On every third counterhit following a round you lost to a male or neuter character, results in guard crush--except upon first and third Tuesdays and weekends in month numbering less than 31 days, in which case, shifts to Hyperbole Stance."

I mean, yeah, an exaggeration, but honestly not by much in terms of how situational some of this stuff is. Which, alright fine--it's going to greatly prolong the task of balancing the game as people become more knowledgeable and consistent with them, but fine, let's just call that more depth. If I, as a die-hard fan who has been playing these games for more than two decades now, am finding this all to be a lot to tackle and integrate into a competitive strategy, how do the newbies feel? And why is the perceived solution "Oh, I know, more panic button options they can hit to omni-block incoming threats and slow down the game for a minute, whatever it does to the overall pacing and flow."? This game just has something of an identity crisis going on right now, I feel. The features often times work at cross-purposes and just throw the experience out of whack, I feel. Which is why we are seeing such drastic changes to core features in recent patches.
I mean I'd say in nearly everything you said we do pretty much agree to be quite honest. I'm probably one of the people that's less averse to all the new changes, but I'm also completely happy with them going all the way back because I quite loved the simplistic nature of everything.
What I really respect is the movesets and character unique strengths that are more prevalent in this entry which you seem fine with. Its my main love for this. Also 8wayrun being much better making combat much better and characters who excel with it being stronger.

I remember when the game was first announced and I found out moves were being put behind SC I was quite against it. I suppose I've just kind of accepted it. I'm not bitter nor incapable of enjoying it, I obviously love this game as I've implied. I will admit however, as silly as it may sound lethal hit something I tend to not pay attention to, as I feel it can just be more trouble then its worth even thinking about, other than RE lethal hit overall sits with me as a pointless addition for Soulcalibur, you have actually brought that to my attention. I might like it less than RE honestly.


Now clearly the poll suggests I may be in the minority in my assessment even among the hardcore crowd, since I do think this board is more hardcore than casual in character (although clearly we have a mix of fans). But I stand by my assessment: SCVI is a capable entry and a step in the right direction. But for me, it is very much middle of the pack overall.
I wouldn't really call it a case of being in a minority even if the poll turned out to be some sort of gospel truth. If they released SC3 and for whatever reason did a perfect rendition of it that they have yet to do I would probably play that along side SC6 so I could have more variety assuming SC6 never solves its lack of stage problems and also imagining SC3 is properly fixed up. At the end of the day I'm in for both SC6 has the new things I love and SC3 done properly would have only the traditional side. SC3 may have introduced some of the things I began to dislike but that game should be salvageable in some capacity.

I agree things are on looking generally positive for the first time in a while, but for me SCII-SCIV is the most impressive arc of the series, so I suspect we just have different priorities in what we expect from a SC game.
Thankfully, I just hope they tackle the future cleverly. Though I doubt it will ever I happen I hope one day we get a perfect release of SC3, I reminded that game's amount of stages and characters really could have made it something that lasted had it had been released correctly. In hindsight a missed opportunity for a perfect traditional experience.

TLDR; (Just read quick version long one is boring and takes too long to get the point across, I failed at being quick)
I agree quite a bit, looking at it now I think SC6 lethal hit is actually an addition I don't care much for.
SC6 is definitively lacking content, CAS and guest characters are detracting from Soulcalibur in my opinion in the long term.

SC3 AE release with home content in a remaster with online would be a perfect traditional experience with any further fixes required. I'm honestly obsessed with this idea now.
 
Last edited:

Rusted Blade

[10] Knight
@Starringrole: If I had more time just now, I'd highlight all the things I agree with there, but I'll just focus on one for the moment: I'd happily pay $120
for Soul Calibur III: Comprehensive Edition. I fear that's unlikely to ever happen, but there is an obvious design path forward that would not be super easy for development, but would not be a monster chore either. Simply keep the original release game stages, modes, creation and all of the rest of the sprawling console version content, but use the basic mechanics and movesets from the arcade edition for all combat and styles that were represented in SCIII:AE. For the fourteen "bonus characters" who were not one of the three (Amy, Hwang, Li Long) translated into a deeper style for AE, allow them only for certain single player modes, so their relatively underdeveloped movesets won't be a balance issue but people can still dink around with them/base CaS on them, if they care to. Add multiplayer with decently well-developed lobby and matchmaking options and netcode, and give the visuals the HD treatment, and voila: instant masterpiece. I have to tell myself it will never happen, but I too think about this fictitious game far more than is pragmatic. :)

Oh, and since everyone is doing the exact ranking, my own (somewhat flexible/non-committal) hierarchy goes something like this:

SCII ≈ SCIII/AE ≈ SCIV/BD > SE ≈ SCI ≈ SCVI ≥ SCV >>> SC:LS

...with each game judged partially on the merits of how enjoyable it is as a complete experience even until today, and partially on what it accomplished and how groundbreaking it was upon release.
 
Last edited:

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
Are you sure you're just not stuck in your ways here? I mean I understand some stuff needs refinement and the luck base mingame Reversal Edge has no place in a competitive fighting game but your complaints about Soul Charge and Guard Meter just seems a personal dislike rather than garbage mechanics. As someone who went competitive with SC6 and then looked back at past games like SC2 being played competitively I honestly don't see the appeal of them anymore apart from a few mechanics that were abandoned and I personally don't want to see safe step in this game or future games.

I won't deny you know your stuff though, love watching you play at tournaments, you play a solid Sophitia.
THANKS. YEAH, I'VE GIVEN SC6 A SERIOUS CHANCE COMPETITIVELY AND PLAYED IT FOR 700+ HOURS OVERALL. THE LUCK FACTOR BEING RIDICULOUS CANNOT BE EMPHASIZED ENOUGH. I'D RATHER PLAY ANY OTHER SOULCALIBUR COMPETITIVELY THAN SC6.

AS PER YOUR COMMENT ON STEP, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE THAT SAFE STEP IS A BAD THING. SAFE MOVEMENT IS CRUCIAL, IN MY OPINION. WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER IF YOU WANT.
 

sytus

[13] Hero
AS PER YOUR COMMENT ON STEP, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE THAT SAFE STEP IS A BAD THING. SAFE MOVEMENT IS CRUCIAL, IN MY OPINION. WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER IF YOU WANT.
We can if you want to, though with you being a much bigger veteran than me when it comes to competitive play with my competitive play experience being strictly limited to SC6 I get the feeling that you might find my opinions kinda unsatisfactory on the details but if that doesn't bother you then go right ahead and make your case as I'm willing to make mine.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
We can if you want to, though with you being a much bigger veteran than me when it comes to competitive play with my competitive play experience being strictly limited to SC6 I get the feeling that you might find my opinions kinda unsatisfactory on the details but if that doesn't bother you then go right ahead and make your case as I'm willing to make mine.
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST SAFE STEP ALWAYS SEEMS TO COME FROM PEOPLE WANTING TO PUNISH STEP OVERTLY, AND THE IMPLICATION IS THAT THE OPPONENT WILL MOVE MINDLESSLY UNLESS STEP IS RISKY. THIS LINE OF THINKING IS UNIRONICALLY ARGUED BY PEOPLE WHO NEVER SEEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MUCH OF THE UNSAFE STEPPING THAT GETS PUNISHED IS DUE TO SHEER COINCIDENCE. WITH UNSAFE STEP, NEITHER SOFT READS NOR HARD READS ARE REQUIRED TO PUNISH STEP IN MANY INSTANCES.

IN SC1-2, NO ONE COMPLAINED THAT STEP WAS SAFE. THEY COMPLAINED THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF HORIZONTAL ATTACKS WHIFFED THROUGH SIDESTEP, WHICH IS TRUE, AND THIS WAS ONLY FIXED TO A LARGE DEGREE BY THE TIME SC5 RELEASED. ALSO, MOVEMENT IS TECHNICALLY VULNERABLE FOR 1 FRAME IN TEKKEN GAMES, YET IT IS ONLY IN MODERN SOULCALIBUR THAT SAFE MOVEMENT IS SOMEHOW CONSIDERED OUTRAGEOUS.

WHIFF PUNISHMENT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BIGGEST THREAT THAT COMES FROM SUCCESSFUL MOVEMENT WHEN MOVEMENT IS SAFE. PERHAPS MORE THREATENING IS SIMPLY NOT KNOWING WHAT THE OPPONENT IS INTENT ON DOING WITH THEIR ATTACK PATTERNS AFTER RESETTING THE NEUTRAL GAME. I SPECIFICALLY THINK SAFE MOVEMENT IS CRUCIAL BECAUSE IT RELIABLY ALLOWS THE PLAYER TO DELIBERATELY CREATE UNPREDICTABILITY IN THEIR POSITIONING AND OVERALL INTENT. UNSAFE STEP DESTROYS A HUGE DIMENSION OF THE GAME AND TRAPS PEOPLE INTO FEELING LIKE THEY MUST TAKE RISKS EVEN WHEN THEY DO NOT WANT TO, PARTLY BECAUSE GUARD BREAK EXISTS AND PARTLY BECAUSE HORIZONTALS CATCH STEP EVEN WITHOUT READS INVOLVED. TAKEN TOGETHER, THIS ALL MAKES FOR POINTLESSLY CHAOTIC OUTCOMES.
 
Last edited:

sytus

[13] Hero
@MONEYMUFFINS

The issue I have with safe step is that it's too powerful so it limits your options to only a handful of moves much like Tekken neutral game does. It works in Tekken because when you've been launched you don't have air control like you do in Soul Calibur so the big payoff for punishing your opponent like that isn't there. This make Soul Calibur and insanely poke heavy game with a handful of moves which I think limits your options and creativity. I mean sure you can say that this is what Soul Calibur is best for, a tug of war poking through each others defence but to me it makes for a dull ride when it's just that which is why I'm glad Soul Calibur moved away from it. I think a concession can be made though by having the step/back guard frames reduced a little (under a i10) so you can use a handful of moves for frame advantage then okizeme them when your opponent side/back steps taking away the abuse of the insanely powerful step guard. To add to this there's also something that I think should be brought back from SC2 to SC6 and that's shuffle guard. This would give you the ability to still move forward and backwards if you want to move and guard at the same time plus you can use your opponents attacks to push you out further by holding back compared to holding neutral which would only move you back a little while holding forward wouldn't move your position at all. I think that this is the best way to deal with the complaints you have, hitting that sweet spot of free movement but not overpowered, I mean that is your biggest issue in that it's too dangerous to move in SC6.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
@MONEYMUFFINS

The issue I have with safe step is that it's too powerful so it limits your options to only a handful of moves much like Tekken neutral game does. It works in Tekken because when you've been launched you don't have air control like you do in Soul Calibur so the big payoff for punishing your opponent like that isn't there. This make Soul Calibur and insanely poke heavy game with a handful of moves which I think limits your options and creativity. I mean sure you can say that this is what Soul Calibur is best for, a tug of war poking through each others defence but to me it makes for a dull ride when it's just that which is why I'm glad Soul Calibur moved away from it. I think a concession can be made though by having the step/back guard frames reduced a little (under a i10) so you can use a handful of moves for frame advantage then okizeme them when your opponent side/back steps taking away the abuse of the insanely powerful step guard. To add to this there's also something that I think should be brought back from SC2 to SC6 and that's shuffle guard. This would give you the ability to still move forward and backwards if you want to move and guard at the same time plus you can use your opponents attacks to push you out further by holding back compared to holding neutral which would only move you back a little while holding forward wouldn't move your position at all. I think that this is the best way to deal with the complaints you have, hitting that sweet spot of free movement but not overpowered, I mean that is your biggest issue in that it's too dangerous to move in SC6.
AIR CONTROL IS PART OF WHAT MAKES SOULCALIBUR SOULCALIBUR. IF YOU FIND SAFE STEP TO BE SO POWERFUL AND FEEL THAT A HUGELY REWARDING WHIFF PUNISH IS THE ONLY WAY TO COMPENSATE FOR IT, THEN THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR OVERALL STRATEGY OR FUNDAMENTAL SKILL SET. SOME CHARACTERS ARE SIMPLY LACKING IN MIXUP TOOLS; NONETHELESS, MOST PLAYERS DO NOT TAKE THE PROPER AMOUNT OF INITIATIVE TO UTILIZE OFFENSIVE TOOLS ON THEIR OPPONENTS. IN GENERAL, I DO NOT THINK ANY CHARACTER SHOULD BE DOING MORE THAN 25% LIFE FOR ANY TYPE OF PUNISH, BUT THERE SHOULD PERHAPS BE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS DEPENDING ON HOW CONDITIONAL THE SITUATION IS. ALSO, POKE FESTS AREN'T A DIRECT RESULT OF SAFE STEP AS MUCH AS FAULTY CHARACTER DESIGN. FOR EXAMPLE, SC2 SOPHITIA HAS AN AMAZING VARIETY OF POKES TO THE POINT WHERE SHE OFTEN DOESN'T EVEN NEED KNOCKDOWNS. MEANWHILE, SC2 CASSANDRA HAS A MUCH HEALTHIER BALANCE OF KNOCKDOWNS AND POKES TO MAKE FOR A STIMULATING FIGHT.

I REALLY DO NOT THINK ANY SORT OF COMPROMISE OF MAKING STEP VULNERABLE FOR 8 FRAMES OR WHATEVER MIDDLE NUMBER IS APPROPRIATE. THE ORIGINAL VISION FOR SOULCALIBUR WAS TO HAVE SWIFT MOVEMENT AND EASY INPUT EXECUTION, UNLIKE TEKKEN, IN ORDER TO BETTER FOCUS ON READING THE OPPONENT ABOVE ALL ELSE. AT THE END YOU SEEMED TO BE REFERRING TO ADVANCE/RETREAT GUARD. I PERSONALLY HAVE NO USE FOR MOVING WHILE IN SUCH A GUARDING STATE AND I THINK IT'S AN EXCESSIVE NUANCE THAT OVER COMPLICATES BLOCK/WHIFF PUNISHMENT.
 
Last edited:

sytus

[13] Hero
AIR CONTROL IS PART OF WHAT MAKES SOULCALIBUR SOULCALIBUR.
I'm not complaining about air control in Soul Calibur, I'm just pointing out that Tekken balances it's poke heavy neutral game by having consistent juggles for it's big punishment game.

IF YOU FIND SAFE STEP TO BE SO POWERFUL AND FEEL THAT A HUGELY REWARDING WHIFF PUNISH IS THE ONLY WAY TO COMPENSATE FOR IT, THEN THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR OVERALL STRATEGY OR FUNDAMENTAL SKILL SET.
My point is that fundamentals shouldn't be the only game in town for Soul Calibur. I've seen this enough times in Tekken where you use only a handful of moves because they are the best moves in the game, take out juggles and the game becomes incredibly boring both spectating and playing.

SOME CHARACTERS ARE SIMPLY LACKING IN MIXUP TOOLS;
Doesn't really matter when you will pick out the fastest high, mid and low attacks, you just end up avoiding your huge pool of moves making characters less dynamic with you only going into those moves if you want to show off.

NONETHELESS, MOST PLAYERS DO NOT TAKE THE PROPER AMOUNT OF INITIATIVE TO UTILIZE OFFENSIVE TOOLS ON THEIR OPPONENTS. IN GENERAL, I DO NOT THINK ANY CHARACTER SHOULD BE DOING MORE THAN 25% LIFE FOR ANY TYPE OF PUNISH, BUT THERE SHOULD PERHAPS BE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS DEPENDING ON HOW CONDITIONAL THE SITUATION IS.
I agree some combos (and even some moves in general) do obscene damage though SC6 is "still" a work in progress and you should give it some slack when there are moves in SC2 for example which are completely broken.

ALSO, POKE FESTS AREN'T A DIRECT RESULT OF SAFE STEP AS MUCH AS FAULTY CHARACTER DESIGN.
I disagree, SC2 safe step locks you down to a hand full of moves, it's over powered.

I REALLY DO NOT THINK ANY SORT OF COMPROMISE OF MAKING STEP VULNERABLE FOR 8 FRAMES OR WHATEVER MIDDLE NUMBER IS APPROPRIATE. THE ORIGINAL VISION FOR SOULCALIBUR WAS TO HAVE SWIFT MOVEMENT AND EASY INPUT EXECUTION, UNLIKE TEKKEN, IN ORDER TO BETTER FOCUS ON READING THE OPPONENT ABOVE ALL ELSE. AT THE END YOU SEEMED TO BE REFERRING TO ADVANCE/RETREAT GUARD. I PERSONALLY HAVE NO USE FOR MOVING WHILE IN A GUARDING STATE AND I THINK IT'S AN EXCESSIVE NUANCE THAT OVER COMPLICATES BLOCK/WHIFF PUNISHMENT.
We will have to agree to disagree then. This is why I say I think you might be stuck in your ways, you're not even prepared to entertain the idea of making the stepping safer without it being SC2 OP, you dismiss it without even testing the idea. Perhaps at some point in the future when modding of the mechanics in SC6 becomes a possibility you will be able to test out what I've proposed.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
This is why I say I think you might be stuck in your ways, you're not even prepared to entertain the idea of making the stepping safer without it being SC2 OP, you dismiss it without even testing the idea.
HOW HAVE I NOT TESTED OR ENTERTAINED THE IDEA WHEN I'VE LITERALLY DEALT WITH SAID THINGS BY COMPETING IN EVERY CALIBUR GAME? EVEN UNTIL THE END OF SC5 I COMPETED IN THAT AS OFTEN AS I COULD.
 

sytus

[13] Hero
HOW HAVE I NOT TESTED OR ENTERTAINED THE IDEA WHEN I'VE LITERALLY DEALT WITH SAID THINGS BY COMPETING IN EVERY CALIBUR GAME? EVEN UNTIL THE END OF SC5 I COMPETED IN THAT AS OFTEN AS I COULD.
Because my idea has never been implemented in a Soul Calibur game. SC2 Step guard has 0 frames while SC6 has what 12 frames. You said 8 frames wouldn't be appropriate yet you don't have experience of a 8 frame step guard to prove that. It's got nothing to do with your skills as a Soul Calibur player, I've already said you're excellent as I've watched you in tournaments playing a solid Sophitia.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
Because my idea has never been implemented in a Soul Calibur game. SC2 Step guard has 0 frames while SC6 has what 12 frames. You said 8 frames wouldn't be appropriate yet you don't have experience of a 8 frame step guard to prove that. It's got nothing to do with your skills as a Soul Calibur player, I've already said you're excellent as I've watched you in tournaments playing a solid Sophitia.
COMPLETELY FALSE, THE VULNERABILITY IN STEP HAS VARIED BETWEEN GAMES QUITE A BIT. IN SC3 SIDESTEP IS -9, IN SC4 IT IS -11, IN SC5 IT IS -20, AND IN SC6 IT IS -12.
 
Last edited:

sytus

[13] Hero
COMPLETELY FALSE, THE VULNERABILITY IN STEP HAS VARIED BETWEEN GAMES QUITE A BIT. IN SC3 SIDESTEP IS -9, IN SC4 IT IS -13, IN SC5 IT IS -20, AND IN SC6 IT IS -12.
Well I apologize I didn't know that as I've only recently started to get invested into the frame data but also vanilla Soul Calibur 3 was a completely broken game so how would you know it doesn't work when broken stuff would be overriding it? I mean for example I'm aware that you could do combos that you weren't supposed to (watched a 3 hour Aris video on the borken shit in that game) so I don't think a 9 frame guard step had a fair chance at being put to the test.
 

Rusted Blade

[10] Knight
IN SC1-2, NO ONE COMPLAINED THAT STEP WAS SAFE.
Uhh, loooots of people bitched about step-G in SCII. Plenty of people (indeed, probably more) also defend it as perfect for that game--a bug that just happened to balance well against the other mechanics of that entry. Personally, I think it's a tough thing to judge in an empirical, objective fashion and I'm kind of agnostic on the whole question personally, aside from to say that I think SCII deserves its reputation as a well-balanced game in the aggregate, however vexing step-G and 2G could be. But it's far from accurate to say that "nobody complained" about it; step-G was highly divisive from the start--shit, some people still bitch about it to this day.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
Uhh, loooots of people bitched about step-G in SCII. Plenty of people (indeed, probably more) also defend it as perfect for that game--a bug that just happened to balance well against the other mechanics of that entry. Personally, I think it's a tough thing to judge in an empirical, objective fashion and I'm kind of agnostic on the whole question personally, aside from to say that I think SCII deserves its reputation as a well-balanced game in the aggregate, however vexing step-G and 2G could be. But it's far from accurate to say that "nobody complained" about it; step-G was highly divisive from the start--shit, some people still bitch about it to this day.
I WASN'T EQUATING STEP-G WITH SAFE STEP IN THAT STATEMENT. THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY THE SAME THING.
 

MONEYMUFFINS

[13] Hero
Well I apologize I didn't know that as I've only recently started to get invested into the frame data but also vanilla Soul Calibur 3 was a completely broken game so how would you know it doesn't work when broken stuff would be overriding it? I mean for example I'm aware that you could do combos that you weren't supposed to (watched a 3 hour Aris video on the borken shit in that game) so I don't think a 9 frame guard step had a fair chance at being put to the test.
THE SC3 TOURNAMENT SCENE, LIKE THE REST OF THE CALIBUR GAMES, KEPT THE GAME ALIVE WITH MAJOR TOURNAMENTS UNTIL THE RELEASE OF THE NEXT GAME. SC3 WAS WHEN I FIRST TRAVELED TO MAJOR EVENTS SO I HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH IT. STEP WAS BARELY SAFE IN SC3, SO THE MOVEMENT WAS A BIT NEEDLESSLY CLUNKY.
 

Rusted Blade

[10] Knight
I WASN'T EQUATING STEP-G WITH SAFE STEP IN THAT STATEMENT. THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY THE SAME THING.
True, but the mere existence of step-G does the heavy lifting in making SCII the most step-safe game in the franchise, even if they do technically represent different metrics. Or more to the point, of the people inclined to view step-G as a broken feature, I bet most view stepping as massively too safe in SCII--indeed, that's the very core of the complaint against step-G, for such parties.
 
Last edited:

Starringrole

[08] Mercenary
Because my idea has never been implemented in a Soul Calibur game. SC2 Step guard has 0 frames while SC6 has what 12 frames. You said 8 frames wouldn't be appropriate yet you don't have experience of a 8 frame step guard to prove that. It's got nothing to do with your skills as a Soul Calibur player, I've already said you're excellent as I've watched you in tournaments playing a solid Sophitia.
With the way SC6 flows with certain characters or circumstances I would say there is some need for step guarding to be safer than it is in my eyes.
I don't much pay attention to frames so I wouldn't know what would be best but I do think it would be a good approach. I doubt 0 would be the best for SC6's atmosphere but certainly safer at the very least.

I never really thought about it, the developers should actually experiment with it.
 

Heniek

[12] Conqueror
THANKS. YEAH, I'VE GIVEN SC6 A SERIOUS CHANCE COMPETITIVELY AND PLAYED IT FOR 700+ HOURS OVERALL. THE LUCK FACTOR BEING RIDICULOUS CANNOT BE EMPHASIZED ENOUGH. I'D RATHER PLAY ANY OTHER SOULCALIBUR COMPETITIVELY THAN SC6
Oh so I am not alone with the feeling of randomness in this game