What's your method of learning FRC's?

[EternalLurker]

I think the casual approachability argument is fairly self-evident and doesn't need to be addressed. The issue is this repeated claim that a high execution barrier is inherently equivalent to greater depth, as seen yet again here:

I think there should be execution requirements because it makes the game much more fun to play and adds depth; just like you could go play Warcraft 3 or a large number of other RTS games, the one that has become by far the most successful RTS of all time and continues to have a huge fan and playerbase is easily the hardest popular video game out of any genre execution-wise.

Again I point to the difference between interactive execution requirements -- tests of ability that are dependent on another player's actions -- and things like FRCs. Yes, Hellmonkey, you responded that combos are not innately interactive either, and I agree. They're necessary and they remain fun in GG because they're fairly short; go overboard with them and it does become a solo game for a while, as in Fate/Unlimited Codes. Plus, in GG there are several combo elements that do require interaction on both sides (bursting, blockstrings, staggering, etc). FRCs, on the other hand, are a solitary execution requirement just like pulling off a special move, and while the latter is so easy as not to be a barrier for anyone who expects to have any chance of playing a fighting game, the former is a hurdle the size of which no one here has yet managed to give any argument supporting. I've stated that many if not most FRCs could have significantly larger input windows without at all disrupting their basic functionality and that point hasn't been seriously refuted; unless you plan on doing so, the only defense you've given for FRCs' current input windows is "tougher execution = more depth" with which I simply can't agree.

Also lol @ the first post in this thread. This sounds familiar.

[bbq sauce]

Thanks for your input! I have a great idea, let's make an entire new game that removes most of the execution barriers by slowing gameplay down, adding 5 frame buffers on every move, and restricting movement. How's that sound?

Dohohoho.

icwatudid

[tolore]

I've stated that many if not most FRCs could have significantly larger input windows without at all disrupting their basic functionality and that point hasn't been seriously refuted;

FRCs are already an extremely powerful tool, how does making them even better add to depth?

but adding a bigger window gets into the realm of confirmability, then you can watch for what they are doing and then FRC as soon as you see them do any thing. using hellmonkeys example I could tatami, and then as soon as I see him move FRC, instead of FRCing ASSUMING slayer's going to try and punish me.

How well an opponent punishes you for things can have huge impacts on how risky you play, since opponents who can't punish with big combos or who can't apply great pressure after knocking you down (missing FRCs could be a reason for this) allow for better risk/reward options.

EDIT: You don't think Jam having an even easier to confirm starter for her wall-loop which is also ++frames on block is too good?

all of those can be applied to basically every FRC in the game.

[Zerite]

I make no claim that difficult execution inherently leads to a deeper game, but when properly implemented it creates a wider skill range to play within.

[feri]

Slashbacks might get out of / Ky corner pressure = better game already.

Do note that SSBM is a really hard game. Perhaps even harder than GG.

[Zerite]

I don't know about harder than guilty gear, but it is pretty hard. Very technical space control, and a few execution intensive techniques, like wave dashing and roll canceling.

[Hellmonkey]

I make no claim that difficult execution inherently leads to a deeper game, but when properly implemented it creates a wider skill range to play within.

A huge part of any decent fighting game is understanding the risk/reward of your different options in any given situation. This is where most of the 'depth' comes from, since the entire metagame at any decent level of play revolves around players trying to use their best risk/reward options, and the opponent trying to shut those options down.

You can't possibly argue that difficult execution doesn't have a very direct impact on risk/reward for both players?

[Zerite]

You can easily have mechanics or moves where the consequence of error far outweighs benefits probabilistically. Slashbacking is a good example of this the majority of the time. There are instances when slashbacking a move is better than any other option, regardless of the chance of error. Zappa's dog bite is a good example of this, as it is unblockable, but you can slashback it. The most matches though it won't matter. Still slashbacking adds depth, but if it was poorly implemented it would be irrelevant, and for all practical purposes add no depth. Other examples of this include things like order-sol's lvl 3 100% tension overdrive. That move is difficult to execute, but it is worse than many other options available if you're at level 3 and have 100% tension, and so adds no depth to the game. So I can argue that difficult execution does not always have a direct impact on risk/reward, mostly when there is no effective reward for that execution, other options considered.

[Kristoph]

Because that has always been a key aspect of fighting games since they became competitive? Execution requirements are all over the place in fighting games: reaction while blocking or hit confirming, delaying moves for spacing, even simply movement itself is an execution requirement in a non-restrictive system like GG's. FRCs are really nothing compared to all of those things, if someone can't overcome FRC timing when learning GG, the game just isn't for them.

I knew you would bring up these other "execution requirements" (which aren't actually execution requirements, they're just other physical aspects of the game that you're introducing for the benefit of your argument). None of this justifies FRC difficulty, though. Obviously it would be very difficult if not impossible to take a fighting game with hitconfirming, delaying moves for spacing, and movement, and to then remove those aspects of the game and somehow bandage up the remains to the extent that the game is still just as deep. Instead of manipulating the terminology to your advantage by saying that somehow "difficult FRCs" fall under the same umbrella as "every obviously-fundamental aspect of all fighting games, ever" simply because they can both be described as "execution-intensive," you should try explaining why the "difficult FRC" flavor of "execution" itself is important.

edit: yeah, basically what EternalLurker said was correct. You're pointing to one "flavor" of execution difficulty, an interactive one, and lumping it together with one that isn't interactive in FRCs. I accept that simply making FRCs less difficult would have a potentially adverse effect on the game's depth and/or balance, but you haven't given anyone reason to believe that difficult FRCs are so important that making them easier would make the game worse even if the game were properly rebalanced afterwards (and no, I'm not literally suggesting that GGAC should be modified, I'm just saying that it could reasonably be done).

[qwerty]

frcs are not even hard spend 20 minutes in training mode, stop being a little bitch and using a macro (they delay by a few frames) and man the fuck up. i played guilty gear on a pad with an iffy right and triangle button for over a year and i was able to frc just about everything without a macro and was able to do just about every johnny combo i wanted to. and to whoever said melee is hard; lol. play some more games, you don't know hard until you've played vf4:e.

[Kristoph]

I don't even personally mind high execution requirements much. The reason I hold this position is that it's correct, not that I just like to whine or whatever.

[Frank The Tank]

Everyone talking about how FRCs aren't "interactive" or aren't affected by both players is displaying a huge lack of understanding as to how they impact the way that the game works. That and what qwerty said. Man the fuck up or go play BB.

[qwerty]

frc's aren't interactive? pretty sure someone already gave the example of reacting and baiting shit with frc's. but even then, you're ignoring what frc's do for characters' combo potential and knockdown ability. if johnny couldn't frc killer joker, for example, how the hell would he land an enkasu from midscreen? and let's not even get into what it does for meter management, improving execution and reaction skills, etc. and of course, the response i know i'm gonna get for this is "well what if there were auto-frc forcebreaks? wouldn't that achieve the same thing without this oh so terrible input barrier?". and the answer is no, for the sole reason being that having anything auto-frc'd defeats every purpose of frc's to begin with (i'll give you a hint; only one of them is execution).

[Digital Watches]

Thread in a nutshell:

-Learning FRCs ain't that hard, especially on stick, a lot of people can learn them just by knowing when they are.

-Some people who don't understand how this game works think they're unnecessary fake difficulty

-There are other games you can play if you don't like difficult shit like FRCs or Defense.

Also: Completely stupid argument I heard:

"If I had my druthers, hits would automatically trigger combos."

This is dumb for a lot of reasons. First off, combos aren't some magical thing that does a bunch of damage when you hit. In guilty gear, there are a lot of games that go on between players during the combo itself, including weighing risk-reward for teching, doing different combos that favor positioning over damage, etc. Secondly, almost no one can hitconfirm every hit that could be a combo into a combo. That would be as dumb as every move taking 40 frames so everyone could block perfectly on reaction to everything (If anyone's actually in favor of that, I don't even know what to say to you). No, I don't think execution barriers need to be hard so we can have some kind of pissing contest about who's more "Skilled" or whatever, but taking human reaction time out of the equation wouldn't work for the kind of game this is. Besides, autocombos would take a lot of the emergent depth out of the game, as it would require the designers of the game to build the combos into the game in the first place, which isn't how they work in the first place, and again, anyone who thinks so is fundamentally mistaken in a way that would preclude you from playing this game at a high level in a much more immediate way than any execution barrier ever would.

Anyone object to me locking this?

[Kristoph]

Everyone talking about how FRCs aren't "interactive" or aren't affected by both players is displaying a huge lack of understanding as to how they impact the way that the game works.

that's exactly what dumb smash kids say about L-cancelling all the time.

and I don't object to this thread being locked, it's not like this discussion is really going anywhere anyway.

[qwerty]

that's exactly what dumb smash kids say about L-cancelling all the time.

probably because even dumb smash kids know their own game well enough to know how stuff like that works

kinda in the same way how we dumb guilty kids know our own game well enough that we don't really feel the need to explain frc's to each and every person asking about them

[Matt]

No, I don't think execution barriers need to be hard so we can have some kind of pissing contest about who's more "Skilled" or whatever, but taking human reaction time out of the equation wouldn't work for the kind of game this is. Besides, autocombos would take a lot of the emergent depth out of the game, as it would require the designers of the game to build the combos into the game in the first place, which isn't how they work in the first place, and again, anyone who thinks so is fundamentally mistaken in a way that would preclude you from playing this game at a high level in a much more immediate way than any execution barrier ever would.

Still I just have to say I like really high execution barriers just because of the feeling of satisfaction that one gets from finally being able to do a really hard combo or conquering a really difficult game mechanic.

Also, I do feel that difficulty adds to the game and that those who are willing to face it and overcome it will be rewarded for their efforts.

[tolore]

to be fair I think L-cancelling is retarded. The reason FRC is fine and L cancelling is not is that(to my knowledge) you should never NOT L cancel. Which means there is no choice, there is no management, nothing, it's just every time you jump and attack low to the ground you should L cancel. Which IMO is a needless execution barrier(also irritating).

[SIne]

Here are my thoughts on this thread: Some Frc's are hard (hcl 6frc6 air dash and ice spike come to mind) some are easy modo (sol's gunflame, tatami, and millia H disc and hair car) but the bottom line is that they are in the game and you have to learn them to play competitively. if you want to play CPU all day with no frc, no strategy, fine, have fun, but if you wanna win a tourney, have even more fun with the game and challenge yourself, then you need to learn it....I mean, you've seen them done in combo vid and actual matches before, what makes you think you can't do it too? just practice, there is no such thing as "too hard" only stuff thats literally impossible(like stuff made with programable stick in combo vids) for human hands and even then thats an iffy because how do you know out of all the population on earth that some human wouldn't be able to do it?... bottom line is they all require practice and effort and experience to become second nature, even the easiest ones...so learn them if you like the game and want to play seriously and expand your knowledge and win and dont if you wanna play CPU and scrub friends and have fun that way....

[woki]

You really don't even need to use FRCs to play many characters effectively

Let me quote this.

Certain characters are so effective with their FB moves that they can actually get away with not using FRCs in a match. (Ex: Slayer with BBU, Eddie with FB drill, May with FB dolphin, Millia with FB disk, etc...)

[Digital Watches]

Er, Millia needs FRCs to be effective on a HIGH level (A lot of her craziest mixup is haircar FRC). The others you listed, not so much. Anyway. In after lock.