Sneakman Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 ^Calamity Trigger > Continuum Shift 1. Quite true.
BladeOfJustice7 Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 What? CT was fun Valid point. ^Continuum Shift 2. Fixed.
Agni Posted September 18, 2012 Posted September 18, 2012 ^Calamity Trigger. Calamity Trigger wasn't that bad unless Nu, Rachel, or Carl entered the field. Then it was BS, but what first installment of an FG series wasn't BS? Just look at P4A, damn newr every character has some kind of ridiculous BS (Titsuru's greatness, Chie's mixup, Yu's Oki, Naoto's SMP Loop, Kanji's "Lol I touch you once with a command grab, get ready to eat a 60% combo", every goddamn thing about Liz) but it's what makes the game so much fun.
BladeOfJustice7 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Cheap tools that are uniquely accessible to cast members are what makes fighters fun. However, too much cheap stuff and the game becomes random and stupid, and you end up having wonky matchups like 8-2. But if there isn't cheap tools, to make it fun and add greater depth, then it becomes boring homogeneous and in my view shallow. I could name one or two fighters that I disliked because it was too homogeneous or too heterogeneous.
redsilversnake Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Fixed. wut? CS2 was the best iteration of the series. You crazy.
Mightfo Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) BB has never been bad. bbct/bbcs's dumb mechanics(guard libra, overpowered instant block, lol ct burst, lol chickenblocking, smaller trm window) and stupid/unfinished characters(ct nu, bang in both versions, rachel in both versions, tager, etc...although, cse tsubaki feels "unfinished" compared to cs2 tsubaki :/...) say hi ct was only fun at the time it came out and if you were someone who was relatively new to fighters. going back to it is like going back to pre-xx guilty gear. most of the bad associations people have with BB are because of ct. dem nostalgia goggles Edited September 19, 2012 by Mightfo
BladeOfJustice7 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 wut? CS2 was the best iteration of the series. You crazy. For a sane hakumen player it was a shitty version. bbct/bbcs's dumb mechanics(guard libra, overpowered instant block, lol ct burst, lol chickenblocking, smaller trm window) and stupid/unfinished characters(ct nu, bang in both versions, rachel in both versions, tager, etc...although, cse tsubaki feels "unfinished" compared to cs2 tsubaki :/...) say hi ct was only fun at the time it came out and if you were someone who was relatively new to fighters. going back to it is like going back to pre-xx guilty gear. most of the bad associations people have with BB are because of ct. dem nostalgia goggles Mightfo with the best post with regards to the discussion again. Good ol' Crescent Slash overhead for Ky in GGX :3, in case you didn't see the move coming Ky yelled the fuck out of that attack so you KNOW to mash him out of that move lol. Part of me wants to try and play GGX again, and part of me is afraid to at the same time, along with CT. And Tager is still unfinished imo.
redsilversnake Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 For a sane hakumen player it was a shitty version. For a sane Tsubaki player, it was the best in the series so far. And I don't remember Hakumen being that bad. Then again, I don't really know anything about him between CT and CSE, so enlighten me if you wish. And Mightfo, how could you include Bang but not Litchi, who essentially just needed to press random buttons to win?
Mightfo Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 And Mightfo, how could you include Bang but not Litchi, who essentially just needed to press random buttons to win? i am not going to make an exhaustive list especially since my memory could be foggy and my knowledge is lacking(i know jack shit about tao ct/cs1 lol) also i actually played ct/cs1 bang, did not play cs1 litchi until the very end of it and i was bad
toanenadiz Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 ct was only fun at the time it came out and if you were someone who was relatively new to fighters. going back to it is like going back to pre-xx guilty gear. most of the bad associations people have with BB are because of ct. dem nostalgia goggles I can still have fun with GGX as well...
Mightfo Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) I can still have fun with GGX as well... but can you go in hard on it for a long period with skilled players and not go "fuck this" it is not hard to squeeze fun out of most not-completely-shit games but this is the fgc we're talking in the context of, not just random play :x Edited September 19, 2012 by Mightfo
Agni Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 but can you go in hard on it for a long period with skilled players and not go "fuck this" it is not hard to squeeze fun out of most not-completely-shit games but this is the fgc we're talking in the context of, not just random play :x I dunno man, people still play the shit out of Marvel and enjoy it competitively.
toanenadiz Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 but can you go in hard on it for a long period with skilled players and not go "fuck this" it is not hard to squeeze fun out of most not-completely-shit games but this is the fgc we're talking in the context of, not just random play :x I don't think I can play any fighting game without thinking "fuck this" for any long amount of time. So it doesn't really matter if it is an older version and doesn't stop me from enjoying it in the end. A new version coming out doesn't change my enjoyment of an older version. It isn't like I didn't know what was wrong with the old version before the new one came out. Once the new version, I don't go "Fuck you" to the old one (provided I actually liked it) since the new version will have issues also and I will enjoy it all the same. Not sure if I was able to articulate what I what I exactly mean though.
Mightfo Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) I dunno man, people still play the shit out of Marvel and enjoy it competitively. that is a very simplistic view of why people tolerate marvel's craziness. assists and super absurd mixup and neutral and loads of ridiculous tech are also silly, yes, but are fundamentally different in how they are silly/enticing than bbct/old ggs I don't think I can play any fighting game without thinking "fuck this" for any long amount of time. So it doesn't really matter if it is an older version and doesn't stop me from enjoying it in the end. i am talking about play a fighter "seriously" at meetups/tournaments over time, not the eventual "alright that's enough" that comes after playing a lot in one sitting and i meant giving up on a game as maining/subbing it, not never playing it again even for dinking around Edited September 19, 2012 by Mightfo
BladeOfJustice7 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 For a sane Tsubaki player, it was the best in the series so far. And I don't remember Hakumen being that bad. Then again, I don't really know anything about him between CT and CSE, so enlighten me if you wish. And Mightfo, how could you include Bang but not Litchi, who essentially just needed to press random buttons to win? Not in the mood to get into the discussion again over it. SO I'll just post something mAc said. > 2a nerf not significant welp Well, I wonder if Giga played Hakumen. He seems to be familiar with his different versions. But his perspective is skewed. CS2 Haku wasn't bad; it's just that all of Haku's rough (good and bad) edges were sanded down. He didn't have any glaring unsafe normals, etc., but he didn't have anything great either. He was just average. You could grind out lower damage combos safer and win, whereas in CT it was more like, doing high risk high reward stuff. CS2 felt more like, low risk low reward. But the problem is that the character doesn't exist in a vacuum. A lot of characters had high reward stuff compared to him, especially up close, which suddenly made things high risk for you since the opponent could get a lot more out of each situation than you could. If you have a low reward and they get a high reward, then suddenly it becomes high risk for you. This pushed me more towards zoning in CS2, keeping away from areas where I would lose out on risk/reward, but then you only do a little damage with your pokes, and then they get in on you and make up for all the damage and more. But really, I always felt like with Hakumen if you played on point, you could make up for his deficiencies in every version and win. Even CT (except Arakune :3). It just requires to be flawless, but I like aiming for that. A bit nebulous but still covered the points of what was wrong with cs2 hakumen. I personally felt the game was limited in what you could do compared to all the other versions of the game. it felt too rigid for my taste. I can still have fun with GGX as well... I miss Aeces High but can you go in hard on it for a long period with skilled players and not go "fuck this" it is not hard to squeeze fun out of most not-completely-shit games but this is the fgc we're talking in the context of, not just random play :x This is true. I dunno man, people still play the shit out of Marvel and enjoy it competitively. How do they sleep at night? I enjoy watching it but playing it is another story due to how much it irritates me lol I don't think I can play any fighting game without thinking "fuck this" for any long amount of time. So it doesn't really matter if it is an older version and doesn't stop me from enjoying it in the end. A new version coming out doesn't change my enjoyment of an older version. It isn't like I didn't know what was wrong with the old version before the new one came out. Once the new version, I don't go "Fuck you" to the old one (provided I actually liked it) since the new version will have issues also and I will enjoy it all the same. Not sure if I was able to articulate what I what I exactly mean though. Just because you buy play a newer version of said fighter, does not mean you spitefully toss aside the previous version due to it's faults that the new one has "seemingly corrected". And are willing form time to time play that previous version of said game from time to time. This is somewhat the opposite for me lol.
mAc Chaos Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) I don't think I can play any fighting game without thinking "fuck this" for any long amount of time. So it doesn't really matter if it is an older version and doesn't stop me from enjoying it in the end. A new version coming out doesn't change my enjoyment of an older version. It isn't like I didn't know what was wrong with the old version before the new one came out. Once the new version, I don't go "Fuck you" to the old one (provided I actually liked it) since the new version will have issues also and I will enjoy it all the same. Not sure if I was able to articulate what I what I exactly mean though. Yeah that's pretty much how I look at it. I don't think of each sequel as automatically obsoleting every game before it, but just seeing it as another separate game out there. For instance, I always liked Soul Calibur 2 and not really any of the later ones. Same with SF2. Why should I move onto the next version just because it came out if the older version is more fun or better. This was easier in the pre-internet days, when your community was right there, and you didn't have to depend on moving with the online crowd or getting left behind. A bit nebulous but still covered the points of what was wrong with cs2 hakumen. I personally felt the game was limited in what you could do compared to all the other versions of the game. it felt too rigid for my taste. lol I wasn't sure if anyone understood what I was getting at with that. Edited September 19, 2012 by mAc Chaos
redsilversnake Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Not in the mood to get into the discussion again over it. SO I'll just post something mAc said. [snip] A bit nebulous but still covered the points of what was wrong with cs2 hakumen. I personally felt the game was limited in what you could do compared to all the other versions of the game. it felt too rigid for my taste. Looking at the post you quoted, I can see where you're coming from concerning Hakumen, but I disagree about the game in general. I suppose you could say the game was stiffer than CT and CS1, but by the same token, it was, as certain people said at the time, "more legit." Basically, it was overall a step in the right direction, even if it didn't treat every character well. lol I wasn't sure if anyone understood what I was getting at with that. Really? It seems rather simple (albeit relatively lengthy) and straightforward.
toanenadiz Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 i am talking about play a fighter "seriously" at meetups/tournaments over time, not the eventual "alright that's enough" that comes after playing a lot in one sitting and i meant giving up on a game as maining/subbing it, not never playing it again even for dinking around If the people I played against most of the time played older games, I would still play older games. I play the newer games because that is what everyone else plays. There isn't much point in maining a dead game and playing by yourself
BladeOfJustice7 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Yeah that's pretty much how I look at it. I don't think of each sequel as automatically obsoleting every game before it, but just seeing it as another separate game out there. For instance, I always liked Soul Calibur 2 and not really any of the later ones. Same with SF2. Why should I move onto the next version just because it came out if the older version is more fun or better. This was easier in the pre-internet days, when your community was right there, and you didn't have to depend on moving with the online crowd or getting left behind. lol I wasn't sure if anyone understood what I was getting at with that. If people could look past your corner resets, it's obvious you're an intelligent person and knowledgable. Looking at the post you quoted, I can see where you're coming from concerning Hakumen, but I disagree about the game in general. I suppose you could say the game was stiffer than CT and CS1, but by the same token, it was, as certain people said at the time, "more legit." Basically, it was overall a step in the right direction, even if it didn't treat every character well. Agreed, very well balanced, a few mistakes here and there, and a bit rigid in terms of what you can and can't do. If the people I played against most of the time played older games, I would still play older games. I play the newer games because that is what everyone else plays. There isn't much point in maining a dead game and playing by yourself Agreed.
Lord Pwnge18 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 There isn't much point in maining a dead game and playing by yourself And then Toan looked over at Arcana Heart and took a deep, heartfelt sigh
SolarMisae Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 http://i.imgur.com/qqel9.jpg?1 Was this posted anywhere else? I dunno. But it's got pictures of people getting hit by Amane's astral.
kenja0 Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 And then everyone was nerfed in BBCP anyway... with some characters nerfed so hard, they don't exist any longer.......................
Koopa_Klawz Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 http://i.imgur.com/qqel9.jpg?1 Was this posted anywhere else? I dunno. But it's got pictures of people getting hit by Amane's astral. I'm more curious about the Ragna and Tsubaki arcade dialogue.
SolarMisae Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Any translations possible from such a blurry image would definitely be welcomed.
Recommended Posts