[Xrd] News & (Theoretical) Gameplay Discussion

[Errol]

I think it's pretty reasonable to assert that a certain amount of balancing is reflected in their decision to give certain attacks certain commands. I doubt Potemkin Buster would still be a three-frame command throw if it had a 214 input instead of a 632146.

or would it. Kanji's command throw is 214 input and 5 frames (jab speed)

[Digital Watches]

Sure, but that's an example that has side effects. 632146 as a motion requires 7 frames from neutral at minimum to execute. That has implications other than difficulty of input, and the move is pretty strong anyway, because buffer tricks exist to make the motion not matter in most cases. If difficulty of input were the only issue, there would be no functional difference to how the tool is balanced if it were easier.

Ninja edit: And you see it reflected in high level play. Potemkin is a very strong character in some iterations of GG. Having that command grab is a big factor in why that is, but FAB's likelihood of screwing up a 632146 input is not a factor at all.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Digital Watches

[Circuitous]

or would it. Kanji's command throw is 214 input and 5 frames (jab speed)

Last I checked 5 frames isn't 3 frames, so...

Sure, but that's an example that has side effects. 632146 as a motion requires 7 frames from neutral at minimum to execute. That has implications other than difficulty of input, and the move is pretty strong anyway, because buffer tricks exist to make the motion not matter in most cases. If difficulty of input were the only issue, there would be no functional difference to how the tool is balanced if it were easier.

Fair enough.

[Errol]

I guess there is little to no point mentioning Persona since they specifically lowered execution without changing balance in plenty of areas.

[Hecatom]

Except that it doesn't balance the game in any way. The options available to players are still there, and if they're overpowered, they're still overpowered. Making them harder for beginners to do doesn't make them less overpowered, it just makes low-level play look less like high-level play in that you will see that specific overpowered thing get used less. To cite an extreme case for the sake of making a point, let's say someone discovered that Sol has a touch of death combo that's burst-safe, resets into itself, and can be confirmed from almost anything on any character. The catch is, it involves a ton of one frame links and tough buffer tricks that require precise timing and complicated motions. Almost no one can do it right off the bat, there's just this one japanese player (at first) who can do it consistently. If he lands a hit, he pretty much wins the round. Is that reasonable? Should that stay in the game? After all, it's super hard to do. Almost no one can do it. That makes it legit, right?

Lol, your combo example is not related at all to what i am trying to point out. As for keeping it or not, it all depends, if the game devolves on everyone trying to make it, then no, but if you have watched the outstanding combos, there are a lot of "infinites" on GGAC that are prohibitively possible for a human, they were "allowed" to stay on the game and it never became an issue.

As for the rest, let me ask you, how much do you think that everything needs to be simplified for the sake of the new players without starting to fuck the risk reward ratio.

First of all, i am not saying that i am against making things simplier, but that doesn't mean that i think that everything needs to be simplified.

New players will be always have problems not matter what, there are people who struggle on making 236, while others don't have problem with it but can't do 623 or 360 consistently.

Despite of that we have not made stuff like the SRK of Ryu on SF or VV of Sol on GG a one button thing, and yes, i know that P4A has 2 buttons SRK's but the game was designed that way, where those moves have very different properties, if they simplify them, they will need their properties changed, and that would make them other moves altogether.

Ninja edit: And you see it reflected in high level play. Potemkin is a very strong character in some iterations of GG. Having that command grab is a big factor in why that is, but FAB's likelihood of screwing up a 632146 input is not a factor at all.

My problem with bringing high level play, is that you are complaining about people who puts work on being able to use their tools consistently.

New players will be always struggle at anything, it doesn't even matter how simple or hard the activity is, look at shooters, there is a huge evidence on who is a noob and who is a top player, and this is despite that playing a fps is technically very simple as walk and aim.

The fact that Pot Buster is 632146 input is not done because they wan't you to have a chance to screw it up, is because it limits the situations where do you can use it, you don't have the advantage to input it from any direction like witha 360.

You also need to stop defending in order to do the motion, and there is a minimum time that it takes you to do the move, give the PB a 236P motion or heck 6P without changing anything of its properties and you will see how a move that is strong but not OP becomes totally unbalanced.

I guess there is little to no point mentioning Persona since they specifically lowered execution without changing balance in plenty of areas.

Actually they did, of course they made the game with simple motions in mind, but they also give certain properties of their moves in a way to keep with the balance reward ratio, that is why you don't see 214C of Kanji being free of hitbox, or 214D being instant, look how Elizabeth one button Persona throw takes some time to land.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Hecatom

[Klein]

This argument is ridiculous. We've been over why GG is the way it is, how to improve it, and how similar mechanics work in other games. Arguing in circles is foolish, and the cards are all on the table, so there's nowhere else to go.

The trailer for Xrd looks sexy, and I can't wait to see balance and mechanic changes. Hoping it favors how I like to play, and if it doesn't I'll stick with +R or find something new for fun.

[Orrax]

I agree with Circuitous that difficulty can add to the balance of a game, but I don't think it's a reliable way to do it. Mainly because it's usually temporary (currently thinking about #R Eddie's execution barrier and Ogawa's dominance in the game by the time of it's second SBO appearance). Something that is 1-frame timing adds a degree of balance because no matter how good you are, I don't think you're going to hit a 1-frame timing 100% of the time; but it's still not a reliable way to balance a game and depends a lot on the person playing.

I also think P4A's two button DPs are a good example of potentially simplifying things too far. Or maybe I just think being able to hold down-back and block while mashing DP is dumb. Simplification that changes the metagame warrants a lot more skepticism. But I don't think those are the changes Digital Watches is talking about.

On the topic of the trailer, a part of me wants Xrd to actually just be like a rebalanced version of #Reload. Is that so wrong?

Edited May 23, 2013 by Orrax

[Digital Watches]

The likelihood of inputs getting crossed up is another great example of a side effect of changing a motion to be easier. As I have been saying all along, I'm not in favor of making changes that have other implications for gameplay in the name of making things easier for beginners, nor am I advocating any specific changes in particular. I'm making the point that there is no inherent value added to the game because something requires practice to do, and that any time we can eliminate mere brute-force memorization without having other effects, we should do that.

As for infinites you can get from programmable pads, those are a great example of why infinites in and of themselves aren't that bad for GG. We have guardbar-based damage scaling and bursts that refill over time, making it irrelevant that there are infinites. Eventually you're doing one damage per hit and they can burst at any time, so even if someone figured out how to do it consistently, it wouldn't have a serious effect on the gameplay unless they could make them burst-safe and re-confirm them afterward. You'll notice that in games without those things, infinites that are discovered tend to ruin the game, even if they're hard to do. In the first MBAC, I remember that one year, the winner of SBO got a little ahead in life and then did an infinite that RAN OUT THE GODDAMN CLOCK, leaving no recourse for their opponent. Over and over again. I don't care how hard that is to do, if it exists, the game is broken and needs fixing. None of that has anything to do with how hard the combos are to execute. For stuff that legitimately would ruin the game, but can't be executed (Like that fly-into-the-sky trick with I-No's j.D FDC), I would say that the fact that no one can execute that consistently doesn't make it a good thing that it's in the game. You can't expect developers to figure out every edge case before release though, so until we have a patchable GG, it's understandable that that kind of thing will sometimes happen, but it's still a bad thing.

I agree that high level play will always look different from low level play, and that's definitely a good thing. I agree that certain changes made in the name of making the game easier for new players (like a 1-button DP) would be bad. If you don't disagree with what I'm actually saying, why are we arguing?

[Hecatom]

Zato's top tierness doesn't have anything to do with balancing him through making it difficult to use.

Actually for the type of character he could be say to be simplier to use, sine lil eddie specials are mere button releases.

[Digital Watches]

Zato's top tierness doesn't have anything to do with balancing him through making it difficult to use.

Correct.

[Hecatom]

Correct.

I want to know, do you have read what i posted or i am wasting time writing mini walls of texts?

[Digital Watches]

I want to know, do you have read what i posted or i am wasting time writing mini walls of texts?

Actually, I'm completely illiterate, and can neither read nor write. I'm just mashing my face on the keys and hoping something legible comes out. The fact that my arguments seem to directly respond to things that you've said is a testament to the human brain's ability to interpret patterns in random noise.

[destruction_adv]

On an unrelated note, I'm wondering if Heavy Day is the new Launch out, or if it'll be the new Noontide.

[Gespenst Ritter]

You think?

You will be surprised the amount of shit that people think should be simplified, always bringing high level play, like if what they want is to even the field of what the top playes do after practicing to do what they do and what they (the people arguing about simplifying something/everything) can't

Whenever this type of topic comes up, I always imagine some old man shitting his adult diaper in rage every time someone reminds him that kids these days can just use emails to send letters instead of walking to the post-office.

Execution is a balancing factor, but not in terms of its difficulty. A reversal move stipulating that you can't use it from a blocking position? That's a legitimate balancing factor. A quickly-activating move with little recovery requiring a charge period so that it can't be always used on command? that's a legitimate balancing factor. A powerful super requiring a pretzel motion with no input leniency? That's just pointless execution. There is no good reason as to why that move would need such a complex input. That's just a result of poor and lazy design choices. Difficulty for difficulty's sake serves no purpose: GG wouldn't be a better game if the gatling system was replaced with links, now, would it?

Contrary to what you might believe, many players just want to be able to use their basic tools and mechanics out of the gate: just a short time after they first start playing. And FRC is in fact a basic mechanic of the game. Sure, you don't need to use it at low-level play, but that's a non-argument since you can say the same thing about supers, or specials, or basic fundamentals. A hold-button system in which the FRC comes out on the first appropriate frame doesn't damage the game at all. And besides, being able to perform a move or technique isn't the same as being able to really make use of it. I can execute all of Carl and Nirvana's attacks, but I sure as hell can't integrate both of them into combos and pressure effectively. That's getting into emergent difficulty, which is what high-level play is really about, and these "dumb down the game" people that you like to talk about actually want and expect emergent difficulty.

[Klein]

I r smart because I can be a smart-ass, see? Calm down guys, take a breather and analyze without being assholes to eachother mmkay? It's the best bet here.

Edit for above post: Links and gatlings do make a difference in gameplay more than just links being harder for some, and easier for others. For instance, Slayer's late gatlings and links allow him to confirm and think about his options for longer instead of having to use a jab buffer, or commit to an action instantly.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Klein

[Digital Watches]

Eh, arguments on the internet do tend to get stupid and I apologize for my part in that. As awesome as the trailer was, it doesn't really convey a lot of information, though, so it's not surprising we've gone off on tangents here.

[Kitsoru]

On an unrelated note, I'm wondering if Heavy Day is the new Launch out, or if it'll be the new Noontide.

My guess is it'll be an opening song (like Feedback/Launchout) a la Blazblue's vocal OP's, and fighting themes will continue to be (mostly) lyric-less.

...That's my hope anyway, because I don't really like vocal themes while playing.

[Hecatom]

Actually, I'm completely illiterate, and can neither read nor write. I'm just mashing my face on the keys and hoping something legible comes out. The fact that my arguments seem to directly respond to things that you've said is a testament to the human brain's ability to interpret patterns in random noise.

Lol, my bad, some of your posts were not showing on the crappy android browser, so i didn't see them until now that i am on my pc.

Whenever this type of topic comes up, I always imagine some old man shitting his adult diaper in rage every time someone reminds him that kids these days can just use emails to send letters instead of walking to the post-office.

Execution is a balancing factor, but not in terms of its difficulty. A reversal move stipulating that you can't use it from a blocking position? That's a legitimate balancing factor. A quickly-activating move with little recovery requiring a charge period so that it can't be always used on command? that's a legitimate balancing factor. A powerful super requiring a pretzel motion with no input leniency? That's just pointless execution. There is no good reason as to why that move would need such a complex input. That's just a result of poor and lazy design choices. Difficulty for difficulty's sake serves no purpose: GG wouldn't be a better game if the gatling system was replaced with links, now, would it?

And if you had read my posts you will see that in no way i am advocating for making stuff difficult for the sake of it, just the contrary, so i don't know why in the hell are you posting what i already said.

Just for the record while i see the pretzel moves as unnecesary, notice how every move with them are way more powerful compared to their counterparts with easier moves

Contrary to what you might believe, many players just want to be able to use their basic tools and mechanics out of the gate: just a short time after they first start playing. And FRC is in fact a basic mechanic of the game. Sure, you don't need to use it at low-level play, but that's a non-argument since you can say the same thing about supers, or specials, or basic fundamentals. A hold-button system in which the FRC comes out on the first appropriate frame doesn't damage the game at all. And besides, being able to perform a move or technique isn't the same as being able to really make use of it. I can execute all of Carl and Nirvana's attacks, but I sure as hell can't integrate both of them into combos and pressure effectively. That's getting into emergent difficulty, which is what high-level play is really about, and these "dumb down the game" people that you like to talk about actually want and expect emergent difficulty.

because is like no one reads

FRC are not a bad execution barrier, they are deliberately done that way because the powerful options that they bring to the table, think of them as the tool that the developers give you to break the rules that were already strablished (startup and recovery frames).

Also, it was already explained why some of those windows are quite narrow, in order to increase them you have 3 options

Change the frames of the move to wide the window, which can fuck the move.

Chage the window which will make the outcome be less predictable.

Add an input buffer ala Blazblue (which i think is reasonable).

Make them Forcebreaks (but they wouldn't be roman cancels now)

For example, in an hypothetical move that has 6 frames of startup, lets say that the the first 2 the character is on the ground, the next 2 become airbone and the last 2 he gains forward momentum.

Depending on what you want to let the player do with the frc, you have little space to assing the frc window.

If you want the character to be able to stay on the ground and do a throw mixup you can only make the window within the first 2 frames.

If you make the window the first 3 frames you end with a frc that has the possibility of not working as intended if the player hits it in the last frame, sure it gains a high low mixup, but it screws the relayability if he wasn't prepared or wasnt what he was looking for.

The same happens if you want to make the frc on the middle 2 frames to give an air mixup to the player, make it the first 3 and if he lands it on the 1st 2 he will be on the ground, make it from frame 2 to frame 4 and there is still 1 frame of chance of landing it on 1 frame where he is still on the ground.

Lets say for the sake of the example that the momentum gained puts the character on a position where his air normals whiff if the opponent is crouching, so if you make it the frc from frame 3 to 5 or the last 3 and you have a frc window where the player will end fucking up if he doesn't land it between frames 3 and 4 anyway, so now you have a frc window that is lenient but puts the player in a bad situation if he is still not precise anyway.

People need to understand better how the FRC works and why it works like that before criticizing them imo.

Just because you don't like them, it doesn't mean that they are bad.

As you see i point 2 ways of making FRC's easier, i also explain why they are hard to do, not because they want to put an arbitrary execution barrier like many think, but because the mechanic as it is in inception and intended use is limited to small windows on the confines of the moves where they assigned, remeber that those moves also need to be balanced with the frcs and without their use in mind.

Eh, arguments on the internet do tend to get stupid and I apologize for my part in that. As awesome as the trailer was, it doesn't really convey a lot of information, though, so it's not surprising we've gone off on tangents here.

I don't mind going on tangents as long as the discussion is entertaining.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Hecatom

[Digital Watches]

Entertaining is one thing, but I think we're beyond the point of saying anything productive.

[Circuitous]

Agreed. For anyone still wanting to argue: Bottle up all your thoughts on this topic and wait until we know how Xrd might play.

[Gespenst Ritter]

And if you had read my posts you will see that in no way i am advocating for making stuff difficult for the sake of it, just the contrary, but at the same time, so i don't know why in the hell are you posting what i already said.

Largely to address your perceived notion that people who want to "dumb down the game" (which I think is a completely stupid term that trivializes an incredibly important concept of game design) want to be instant masters of high-level techniques.

Just for the record while i see the pretzel moves as unnecesary, notice how every move with them are way more powerful compared to their counterparts with easier moves

Which is a lazy and archaic design decision that becomes trivial at higher levels of play. Fortunately, game designers have realized this.

[Digital Watches]

So the real question I'm sure is on everyone's minds is: Were those spots where they listed the voice actors rendered in-engine? Do we expect to see stuff like that in-game?

[destruction_adv]

I wonder what the new HUD will look like. I'm guessing it's either not done, or they just didn't want it in the video. I hope we don't get a burst meter that looks hella ugly again.

[Digital Watches]

I wonder if part of the "new era for ArcSys" is going to be more implicit and intuitive conveyance methods than HUD-like elements where possible, as have become prevalent in other genres of game. They already play a lot with conveyance techniques in terms of hitconfirming (Red lines) and other highly recognizable visual effects, and now that they have actual rendering to leverage instead of having to animate everything by hand, we might see some interesting choices, HUD-wise.

[Hecatom]

So the real question I'm sure is on everyone's minds is: Were those spots where they listed the voice actors rendered in-engine? Do we expect to see stuff like that in-game?

It seems that way (i am actually sure that they are), which means that we could see a more indepth story mode and cinematic IKs on the future

Largely to address your perceived notion that people who want to "dumb down the game" (which I think is a completely stupid term that trivializes an incredibly important concept of game design) want to be instant masters of high-level techniques.

Again read my posts and see how i am not against simplifying stuff, i am only against simplifitying too much, that and how i explain that FRC's are hard for more reasons than just for the sake of it.

I only brought the high level play because Digital Watches kept bringing it up and seemed that way with his insistance that at high level play x or y became irrelevant.

Which is a lazy and archaic design decision that becomes trivial at higher levels of play. Fortunately, game designers have realized this.

I never said otherwise, just pointed how funny was that they tried to justify those inputs by making them really powerful.

I wonder if part of the "new era for ArcSys" is going to be more implicit and intuitive conveyance methods than HUD-like elements where possible, as have become prevalent in other genres of game. They already play a lot with conveyance techniques in terms of hitconfirming (Red lines) and other highly recognizable visual effects, and now that they have actual rendering to leverage instead of having to animate everything by hand, we might see some interesting choices, HUD-wise.

What do you have in mind?

Edited May 23, 2013 by Hecatom