Xtra_Zero

I mean, perhaps it has some benefits, but it reduces the number of interesting interactive states the game has at high level (if you don't compensate somewhere, like adding more moves), which in my opinion is more important than balance. A similar observation can be made between BBCT and BBCS.

I'm not convinced. That really just makes it easier for the first character who gets a hit to win. Look at P4U. Just about every character can kill everyone else in one combo, and being in the corner is a fucking nightmare, but certain characters still totally dominate because their neutral game and mixup is so much better. It was still really good.

You know, I'm totally fine with ASW removing air comboability if it removes the silly confirm-into-corner-carry-juggle/loop that every damn character seemed to gain in AC. I don't think it was beneficial to the game at all and homogenized the gameplay.

This is actually a brilliant idea

ES said that the cutscene is pretty short, shorter than SF. No news on "Danger Time" that I know of.

In most of the screenshots, despite knowing that it's 3D rendered I STILL can't tell! My eyes tell me 2D! Gat dayum.

Regular Roman Cancel and Rapid Cancel were always basically the same thing.

I think he's just highlighting that you can also RC projectiles and whiffed normals because you could always RC some whiffed special moves and landed normals.

Daaaaaaaamn I bet it's gonna be even worse Saturday :/ Maybe I should just go to Kobe instead. I think by button "type" he means "configuration"? It says there's a BB-type and a P4U-type, so I'm thinking there are 5 different layouts to choose from.

Gross. Does he kill them with cancer?

I'm also a SC4 lover. Mechanically it was the most sound, the most balanced (lol Hilde. Algol's not even that bad, it's Sophitia and Amy you should be mad about.) and had the least bugs. The armor gauge induced panic but wasn't overwhelmingly powerful either. Single player sucked, but it had pretty good online so w/e. I like 5, but some of the mechanic choices just don't make sense, like parry taking meter and the ridiculous amount of just frame attacks in the game and random clean hits. Three though. Three was so frustrating because it had the best everything outside of gameplay. It had the best single player, the best music, the best stages, arguably the best CaS, that worthless-but-still-fun-for-some-people Soul Emblem campaign, and the most characters and alternate costumes, but the gameplay was riddled with problems. There were so many stupid, frustrating bugs in that game I swore off Soul Calibur entirely for years after trying to play that game seriously. The dumb throw infinites weren't even the worst thing. At least those were consistent. It was simple stuff like my sword going clean through the opponent during a critical moment and nothing happening that pissed me off. This didn't happen in 4 at all, but came back a little bit in 5. That said, I'm looking forward to this.

I hope the IK system either stays the same or is removed entirely. No astrals plz.

Interesting. The portraits in the PDF look like in-game shots. I'd guess that's a better example of what the characters look like.

Venom lost D pool ball D:

Huh? IMO supers in GG are way more useful than BB supers, because they're actually useful moves that work best outside of combos as reversals and during neutral. Supers as extra combo damage is a bad design choice, as are all moves that are only useful for combo damage. (I'm looking at YOU, Sidewinder)

Force Breaks aren't really a mechanic. Like, the "force break" part is just a sound effect and a loss of meter. Removing FBs doesn't necessarily remove any moves or even any properties other than meter drain. IMO the Force Break concept was dumb and I'm glad it's gone. As for RC slowdown, I'm not really sure what they're trying to accomplish with it. It seems ... unrelated. E: Like, of all the ways to implement this slowdown mechanic, why tack it onto RC? What? Why? And then the example they gave was to combo it? Huh?

Sign me up for GG. Name's Mike.

Ok so, Chronophantasma at AX: Mutsuki or no Mutsuki? I'll be flying over on Saturday and I want to know whether I should be getting my hopes up or not.

This is basically GG as it currently is. This is a bit less like GG because the guard bar mechanic throws a wrench in the consistency of things. Occasionally, what you do in the game will give you the opportunity to do an easy combo that does a ton of damage. On the whole though, it's pretty consistent to what you're describing, or at least it was pre-AC. AC did some weird things that made harder execution combos more rewarding and thus more important, or at least it seemed to me. Still pretty good about this compared to something like BB though, where long ass combos are do-or-lose.

God I miss Melty Blood.

The only thing other than the different card is that some places have RingEdge instead of Nesica and vice versa. Many have both, some have only one. Also, for the record, the GG super input (632146) is easier than 236236 for me.

Obviously the "fundamentals" between games is going to change, and the "fundamentals" is going to change a lot more if we're talking about different genres. Usually when I hear the term, it's used to refer to mechanics that are generally consistent across all fighting games. Stuff like spacing, advantage, blocking, reversals. Basically stuff from SSF2, mostly because that's what most fighting games are built off of, and those tactics are still usually very effective even in more complicated fighting games. This is why someone who has played SF2 extensively and jumps into Guilty Gear cold will most likely body someone who has never played any fighters, despite the amount of experience they have with that specific game being the same. Of course it kind of depends what the person is implying, too. You could change the definition by implying that you're talking about airdashers, or the Marvel series, or 3D fighters. For example, most people here would consider understanding the basics of chain combos pretty fundamental, but lots of Street Fighter players might not, especially if they didn't stray into airdashers. However, we can both agree that special/super cancels are fundamental, because they're common between our games. It really depends on the scope of people you're talking with.

I think you'd have a better chance of not getting taken down if your designs were more like the I-NO one, since it's way less obvious that it's a sprite copied from the game. Just sayin'

While I agree it's not particularly hard to tech (It's pretty obvious after even a small amount of play when you should try and you should usually be getting it with a single plink), I can't think of any negative effects that hold-to-tech brings, despite it feeling wrong.

Lol yeah kinda. The key to GG's guard bar is that it's actually a damage scaling/tech time bar. It is literally a visual representation of how much scaling the next move's damage will have and how much untechable time the opponent has. The bar doesn't actually affect your guard at all. The bar normally stays at neutral (50%) and as it goes down (as the player gets hit) the player takes less damage. If the bar is below 50% when the player recovers, the bar is immediately reset to 50%. Above 50%, damage isn't increased, but it takes longer for the bar to drop below 50%, and thus longer for damage scaling to kick in, and thus a more damaging combo IF you get hit. Above 75% or so, all hits that land are treated as counter hits, so not only do you get that unscaled damage, but you have the potential for some really wacky 2+ CH combos that utilize the extra properties of counter hits. The bar slowly moves back toward 50% if it's above 50%.