Street Fighter III - Third Strike Online Edition-released

UberPrinny_Baal

Dreddybajs wrote: »

If others are pointing out informal fallacies in Ramza's arguments I feel like I may as well point out stuff like blatant arguments from authority in the people arguing against him.

You're quoting me here, so I should probably reply.

My point here wasn't "The internet says this, therefore this is true"

Rather

"As a non-player, looking for information about the top 3S metagame, this is the impression the internet has given me, so any aspiring new player would probably come to the same conclusion"

All the top match up results seem to be C/Y/K, the tier wikis all show them at top (with chun li having viciously disproportionately positive matches VS everyone else) and the most famous 3S video in the universe, is Chun VS Ken.

You can tell me I'm wrong, and that's cool, but unless you can find and reassure every new person that this isn't the case, it will probably be an off-putting factor in a purchase decision.

As another example, I know nothing about MvC2, but all I hear about it on the internet is how broken Magneto/Cable/Sentinel/Storm are.

That was enough to put me off buying it, but I'll probably pick up MvC3 'cause it ain't broke yet.

So no arguments from authority here, just a layman's view of things.

Dreddybajs

If there were no top 4 in Marvel, the 4 characters that are the closest analogies to them would be top 4. They just happen to be the best of the character archetypes in that game.

In 3rd Strike, the top characters benefit hugely from the parry system and the other systems of the game (Chun and Yun especially, but Ken also does well from the meter system). With parrying specifically, their power comes from the options this sets up for them (Chun being the most obvious with her SGGK, but other characters have great option selects due to parrying also).

The best characters in the game, in general, benefit hugely from a parry, and the worst characters don't really benefit all that much. There's not much you can do in terms of rebalancing to fix this without completely changing the character designs. If you instead nerfed the top characters, the same thing would happen as with mvc2 - the next tier of characters with similar abilities would replace those at the top (using Chun's SGGK as an example - though it's not nearly a full example of what makes her good - Gouki may well be near the top due to his SGGK).

In MVC2, you have a definite top 4, but another 6-8 viable tournament characters beyond that (and of course a lot of viable teams). You can use lower tier characters/teams if you like, but honestly, you're probably just using a crippled version of a better team archetype.

In 3s, you have a definite top 3, but many top players have proven you can dominate with pretty much any character. Name a character and it's probably fairly easy to find a top level Japanese player who will dominate mid-high Chun players.

In ST, you have a definite top, with O. Sagat (ignoring Akuma), and then probably another three characters defined below that (Claw, Sim, Boxer), and a bunch of characters close to that also (Ryu and Chun come to mind but I'm not gonna spend more time writing this out as ST is largely matchup based anyway). Again, you can use most characters and do fine. Once you watch a team of 2 O. Hawks ripping up Xmania (at a time when O. Hawk wasn't considered very good), you realise how strange ST is when it comes to that kind of thing.


Basically, I don't care if new players look at a video of the best player in America vs a high level Japanese player and dismiss it because it's Chun Vs Yun. Nor do I care about anyone not buying a game because there's a clearly defined top tier. Pretty much every fighting game I respect has a clearly defined top tier. If that's an off-putting feature to purchase the game, it's only so for scrubs imo.

Ramza

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

You can tell me I'm wrong, and that's cool, but unless you can find and reassure every new person that this isn't the case, it will probably be an off-putting factor in a purchase decision.

As another example, I know nothing about MvC2, but all I hear about it on the internet is how broken Magneto/Cable/Sentinel/Storm are.

That was enough to put me off buying it, but I'll probably pick up MvC3 'cause it ain't broke yet.

So no arguments from authority here, just a layman's view of things.

Why would you call it quits before even playing the game? Taking somebody's word for something and saying the whole C/Y/K thing is completely real and unstoppable is silly and people are getting in a bunch over nothing to be honest

The game is eleven years old what can you do? If you like the game enough you'll learn your character and be the better player. I can't sympathise anymore because that viewpoint is outlandish imo that people would be put off by the whole C/Y/K think. Again that's their loss. A simple nerf to Chun and Yun might help but all in all you need to be willing regardless.

From my experience the C/YK thing comes from players who aren't geat/lazy and who don't play :pac: (not to say people who do play don't feel the same or feel its annoying but you get me)

That's silly, no offence, that you were discourage from buying a game based on what you heard. This is the mindset I feel people have. Did you want to learn MVC2?

I'm bored of people using the C/Y/K excuse as a cop out (not saying you are). It gets old

UberPrinny_Baal

@ both of you

It's simply a matter of finite money and finite free time.

There are a LOT of fighting games, and I don't really know how I much I'm going to like them until I drop serious time into them, and fighting games take an enormous time investment.

I can't play them all, it's a physically impossibility.

So yeah, I'm going to have a look online and see if I like how the metagame looks. If I don't I'm not going to buy the game.

I don't think that's unreasonable and I doubt I'm alone.

Poor show to Dreddy though for this line though

Pretty much every fighting game I respect has a clearly defined top tier. If that's an off-putting feature to purchase the game, it's only so for scrubs imo.

Respect AND Scrub within one line of each other.

Ramza

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

It's simply a matter of finite money and finite free time.

So yeah, I'm going to have a look online and see if I like how the metagame looks. If I don't I'm not going to buy the game.

I don't think that's unreasonable and I doubt I'm alone

^ This

This is what I've been saying all along. Bringing it to PSN/XBL will offer people accessibility. Don't knock it before you try it. 3s is like any other game it just takes patience and time. You can learn anytime as long as you got the time. The game is not insanely broken nor is it perfect. But it's grand Which is why in terms of a rebalance I was disregarding people's opinions who don't play properly.

Is there anything wrong with that way of thinking?

Dreddybajs

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

Poor show to Dreddy though for this line though



Respect AND Scrub within one line of each other.

By respect I mean respect the development of the game due to the character design/systems involved in it. And yeah, I do think looking and seeing if there's a top tier, and then not playing the game because of that, is scrubby. That's an absolute joke of a way to decide whether to play a game. I play games because I think they're fun.

edit: I have no idea what "poor show" in that regard by the way. I have respect for plenty of development decisions in fighting games, from 0 frame throws to clever burst systems, they're what provide real depth to the games. If you're saying "poor show" because I used the word "scrub" to describe maybe the scrubbiest reasoning I've ever heard for not playing a game, so be it I guess.

Scavenger XIII

I can't help it, I just have to argue this bull.

You don't seem to be clearly informed on the matter and like I said it's easier to follow the herd and complain than open your eyes and see what's really there or try and work against it.

I'm poorly informed and following a herd for stating that the vast majority of competitive players play top tier? That is a simple fact, they do. "What's really there?" What is really there? These guy's aren't actually all playing the same characters? How do you figure that one? Sounds like you're spouting canned responses to nothing in particular.

Pushing for a rebalance for something not broken/wrong, which you and loads other say is, rather than easily work against it in your gameplay is silly

I at one point use the term "unfair BS" without referencing anything in particular, yeah, I think some stuff in 3S is pretty unfair. Did I say I refused play the game because of it or refuse to learn to counter it? No, and neither did anybody else.

You make out that everyone is bawling their eyes out for a rebalance and whining hardcore (SRK style!) when they are simply stating some valid points on why it might be a good idea.

I'm saying you should have no expectation of winning against someone who is clearly better than you.

Who here asked to be able to beat people clearly better than them? Nobody that's who.

This is where the cries of "rebalance" are coming from.

Is it? Glad somebody could clear that up, I wasn't sure why I thought balance changes would be nice but now that you've peered deep into our collective psyche and pulled that gem out we know now, eh?

But so what, people are playing because they like those characters and it's not tier whoring like in a certain game

More examples of your amazing psychic prowess, you should start your own religion. Chun, Yun and Kens playstyles are just SO goddamn intriguing that at least half (being generous here) of competitive players use them? None of those guys are just tier whoring? Not one? And you intuitively know this?

A rebalance isn't needed again in this case. People are talking and not doing I'm afraid. It's easy to say "I can't learn 3s because it's too late/too hard, give me a rebalance". It's harder to actually get up and do it

I don't even know what to say about this, what are you even getting at? Sounds completely irrelevant to me.

I'll probably be HUNG for saying this but it seems to me like the standard has really been lowered lately in FGs.

Indeed, be glad we're arguing over the internet. The standard for what exactly has lowered? I think the standard of debating a point has lowered, to be frank. That's a great way to make your point, "people are disagreeing with me, I should, without any real basis, suggest that everyone else sucks such that they will consider agreeing with a a clearly superior specimen such as myself".

---

People are saying a rebalance could refresh the metagame, making the game more interesting to new players, and also help reduce the beating they take as top players may have to take a little time to rethink their strategy somewhat. If new players are putting the effort in the learn the entire game, the least these paragons of men can go is adjust their game slightly and pick up some new tricks, if they can't do that then tough, they aren't top players after all then are they?

You know, I don't really give a damn about balance changes anymore, so you win on that regard. Just please stop making bloody sweeping generalisations, putting words in other peoples mouths and countering arguments that no-one is even putting forth.

This whole post probably sounds really bloody agressive, but this **** is really getting under my skin.

I'm sure you will have a long winded rebuttal to this constantly citing how I don't play much 3S so I couldn't possibly point out the fallacies in your argument, but that's half the point. I didn't type all this because I feel strongly about 3S balance issues. I did because I can't stand your method of debating, for the reasons mentioned above.

Probably sound like an asshole now, but I had to get that off my chest.

UberPrinny_Baal

Ramza wrote: »

Is there anything wrong with that way of thinking?

Erm, pardon? I'm not even 100% sure what we're talking about anymore, and I'm about ready to hang up my hat on this discussion.

We seem to be rehashing a lot of the same points over and over.

"You can learn anything as long as you got the time" is true, but my point was that I have to budget my leisure time, and I don't believe I have enough to be able to enjoy 3S at a high level in it's current form.

@ Dreddy

Poor show. As in opposite of good show. As in not "Let's fight like gentlemen".

Ramza and I have been hammering this out for nearly 2 full pages now, and not one of us has resorted to name calling or deigning our respect. But you were in there like a flash.

So yes, poor show.

To end on a lighter note, has anyone noticed the top 4 on the regular (not representative) 3S tier list is Chun, Makoto, Yun and Ken?

CMYK!

The colour format for printing!

Conspiracy?

I think so....

Dreddybajs

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

@ Dreddy

Poor show. As in opposite of good show. As in not "Let's fight like gentlemen".

Ramza and I have been hammering this out for nearly 2 full pages now, and not one of us has resorted to name calling or deigning our respect. But you were in there like a flash.

Still don't understand what you mean. Do you not think that someone has a scrubby attitude to a game if they look at a tier list (and not even one that makes sense since Marvel only works in the context of teams) and decide not to play based on the fact that there's a clearly defined top tier?

UberPrinny_Baal

I've put quite a lot of detail and explanations into my posts on this matter. If you're going to draw a line in the sand, and say stuff on this side you "respect" and stuff on that side you think is "scrubby", I'm not going to bother trying to move that line for you.

Dreddybajs

That's not what I said at all, please don't put words in my mouth. I said that I respect certain game development designs, and unrelatedly, that I thought your reasoning for not learning a game was a scrubby one. I in no way meant to draw a line in the sand between the two. I do think it's a terrible way to judge a game and I'd like to hear why that would put you off (especially when I know several other games that you play and presumably enjoy which all have clearly defined top tiers [to my knowledge, could be wrong]).

edit: typo

GorySnake

Ramza said something about SF4's easy learning curve, I'll admit, its annoying as hell playing ST after SF4 and not being able to DP/360

UberPrinny_Baal

I don't want to learn EVERY fighting game. I can't.

The FGs I still play now are all games I was into when they were new. There are a lot of FGs I played when they were new that I DON'T play now because there was something about them I didn't like. Only the ones I loved stuck.

If a FG is old and I never played it when it was new. The deck is automatically stacked against it. Why would I want to get into the scene of a dead/dying game?

I would need to think I was gonna ADORE it!

This wasn't the case for 3S or MvC. For a number of reasons.

I really don't care if how I spend my free time/money gives me a shaky placement on the Dreddy respect/scrub chart though.

Ramza

Scavenger XIII wrote: »

I'm poorly informed and following a herd for stating that the vast majority of competitive players play top tier? That is a simple fact, they do. "What's really there?" What is really there? These guy's aren't actually all playing the same characters? How do you figure that one? Sounds like you're spouting canned responses to nothing in particular.

I at one point use the term "unfair BS" without referencing anything in particular, yeah, I think some stuff in 3S is pretty unfair. Did I say I refused play the game because of it or refuse to learn to counter it? No, and neither did anybody else.


You make out that everyone is bawling their eyes out for a rebalance and whining hardcore (SRK style!) when they are simply stating some valid points on why it might be a good idea.


Who here asked to be able to beat people clearly better than them? Nobody that's who.



Is it? Glad somebody could clear that up, I wasn't sure why I thought balance changes would be nice but now that you've peered deep into our collective psyche and pulled that gem out we know now, eh?



More examples of your amazing psychic prowess, you should start your own religion. Chun, Yun and Kens playstyles are just SO goddamn intriguing that at least half (being generous here) of competitive players use them? None of those guys are just tier whoring? Not one? And you intuitively know this?



I don't even know what to say about this, what are you even getting at? Sounds completely irrelevant to me.



Indeed, be glad we're arguing over the internet. The standard for what exactly has lowered? I think the standard of debating a point has lowered, to be frank. That's a great way to make your point, "people are disagreeing with me, I should, without any real basis, suggest that everyone else sucks such that they will consider agreeing with a a clearly superior specimen such as myself".

---

People are saying a rebalance could refresh the metagame, making the game more interesting to new players, and also help reduce the beating they take as top players may have to take a little time to rethink their strategy somewhat. If new players are putting the effort in the learn the entire game, the least these paragons of men can go is adjust their game slightly and pick up some new tricks, if they can't do that then tough, they aren't top players after all then are they?

You know, I don't really give a damn about balance changes anymore, so you win on that regard. Just please stop making bloody sweeping generalisations, putting words in other peoples mouths and countering arguments that no-one is even putting forth.

This whole post probably sounds really bloody agressive, but this **** is really getting under my skin.

I'm sure you will have a long winded rebuttal to this constantly citing how I don't play much 3S so I couldn't possibly point out the fallacies in your argument, but that's half the point. I didn't type all this because I feel strongly about 3S balance issues. I did because I can't stand your method of debating, for the reasons mentioned above.

Probably sound like an asshole now, but I had to get that off my chest.

I was just talking **** there :pac

A lot of people in this thread gave the notion they do and new players would feel the same

I'm not saying it's a terrible idea I just think for the most part it is silly. Also I argued those points because I felt they were generic and came from people who don't play the game properly. I did give my two cents on what changes I would like

People were complaining about the game but when I said why can't you learn the game and, even in a rebalance learn the game. If there is no opposition towards not being able to win then that's fine, people can play 3s as is so

C/Y/K however annoying you may feel all take skill. You can't just whore with them. That's how I know and because most top players who use them have great track records and use other characters too

I didn't say anyone sucked but just that the missing link to me seems like people are not interested enough in the game to take it seriously hence they don't play a lot hence they are not very good

Strategies wont change I'm afraid if a rebalance is made. A better player will still stop you. Footsies can't change. Skill can't change. Being outplayed won't change. A rebalance will not remove fundamentals or stop someone from playing some better than them losing. I don't see your point

New players can do it and of course everyone can play the game. New players need to take pace is all, it seems like everyone wants instant results. You don't become exp. by playing for a day. A rebalance wont change this trust me. Adding nerfs doesn't make it easier for anyone to get better

If anyone was being a little assholeish it may have been me towards you in that post and I do apologise if anything I said offended you

Ramza

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

If a FG is old and I never played it when it was new. The deck is automatically stacked against it. Why would I want to get into the scene of a dead/dying game?

If an FG is old and I really like it I will play it and learn it regardless of who plays. Thankfully with GGPO and hopefully 3s for XBL/PSN, it will become more accessible

So I have to ask how would a gameplay rebalance effect things if the game is dead/dying? Isn't it just the same thing I was saying? As it stands now nothing is stopping someone learning now

Dreddybajs

UberPrinny_Baal wrote: »

I don't want to learn EVERY fighting game. I can't.

The FGs I still play now are all games I was into when they were new. There are a lot of FGs I played when they were new that I DON'T play now because there was something about them I didn't like. Only the ones I loved stuck.

If a FG is old and I never played it when it was new. The deck is automatically stacked against it. Why would I want to get into the scene of a dead/dying game?

I would need to think I was gonna ADORE it!

This wasn't the case for 3S or MvC. For a number of reasons.

I really don't care if how I spend my free time/money gives me a shaky placement on the Dreddy respect/scrub chart though.

That's fair enough, for the record though I think you're looking at the wrong elements of the game in deciding whether you think you'd like it or not. Personally in looking at a new game I look at pace, how the combo system works, the level of character diversity (meaning accomodating different playstyles even if balance-wise one character clearly beats the rest), how rewarding the pressure game is (so frame advantage and the throw system pretty much), etc. If you're not going to play a game because there's an established top tier of characters, then I dunno how you're ever going to get into any established fighting game.

For the record also, I don't think you're a scrub (though in this particular part of how you think about fighting games, I think you're looking at things from the wrong angle). I'd hesitate to ever judge anyone on a single example, especially on such a small issue as this. From playing with you I think you're a decent player and definitely seem willing to improve. Apologies if any condemnation of your personality was perceived, that's not how I meant it at all.

K.O.Kiki

You can whore with Chun.

Chun is easy-modo.

Anyone who says otherwise is a liar and a whore.

:pac:

animaX

Ramza wrote: »

Ken is Tin's main in 3s, contrary to popular belief.

Dreddybajs wrote: »

This is nonsense, he plays Ken in every solo tournament, he plays Ibuki in every team tournament.

Genuinely didn't know that. I always thought he had a thing for ibuki.

Jesus, don't you lads sleep at all! I just woke up to 3 pages of tl;dr

Placebo

animaX wrote: »

Jesus, don't you lads sleep at all! I just woke up to 3 pages of tl;dr

end this thread with a grudge match in chunkis' hotel room at SVB.

Doctor DooM

Placebo wrote: »

end this thread with a grudge match in chunkis' hotel room at SVB.

Playing the ultimate game, primal rage.

Scavenger XIII

Glad I managed to vent that **** without making some enemies.

Now, to hell with this stupid argument, let's go play some 3S. :pac:

Doctor DooM

Scavenger XIII wrote: »

Glad I managed to vent that **** without making some enemies.

Now, to hell with this stupid argument, let's go play some 3S. :pac:

You play Remy too?

Little emo prick.

(Yes, I am going to say that every time I have to say his name)

Scavenger XIII

Sure do, if I started playing 3S again (which I might since I just set up GGPO but I don't know if my port setup is correct and functional yet) I'll probably pick up Yang again on the side, used to main him back when I played on a DC pad.

Yes he's also a bit of an emo, he can't help it, his asshole brother is top tier. :P

K.O.Kiki

Your asshole YOUNGER brother, who also happens to be the boyfriend of the girl you fancy (though her sister fancies you).
SFIII stories are silly.

I'm starting to use Yang again. He's more fun than Elena tbh.

Orim

Get rid of parries, all problems solved. Simple.

Sairus

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

SFIII stories are silly.

What are you talking about? Remy's made complete sense.

Scavenger XIII

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

SFIII stories are silly.

Sure are, frankly, "I want to prove I'm stronger than my brother who's always being a dick" is one of the more sensible and believable reasons to be in a fighting tournament.

"Punk-ass Illuminati stole my wheels!" :pac:

Placebo

Orim wrote: »

Get rid of parries, all problems solved. Simple.

then how wud i take screenshots of such nice animations then



when i daigo'd ramza

game is ****in beautifullllllllllllllllllllll

Dunjohn

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

SFIII stories are silly.

Don't tell me you've never destroyed an international cabal just because its leader owned the car that once belonged to your father and which he actually bought legally.

GorySnake

Rebalance them storylines.