posted 08-07-2002 08:38 PM               

quote:

---

You are making a prime scrub mistake. "This game is easy to win if you use <insert name>" or "this game is easy to win if you abuse <insert tactic>."

If that is true, prove it! Funny that the people who say that are NEVER the people who actually win!

---

Incase your blind, the game is much easier to win with Magneto or Cable.

And it's already been proven. Look at a match between Ken and Cable/Magneto. Since Magneto/Cable are more of distance and speed/projectile, Ken doesnt have much of a chance. In the old games Ken could just about take out anyone.

quote:

---

If you think Blackheart sucks prove it. Proving it does NOT mean beating your friend. The other day I beat a friend in Chess and I was playing Black. Does that mean White sucks? No. "But gee, my friend is good at Chess." Says who? Me? Compared to what?

---

I'm sure your still thinking of these high level tournaments to prove that Blackheart sucks. It more helps to show someone who thinks otherwise. By showing my friend that Blackheart isn't THAT great he doesnt talk smack about how godly he is in battle. Most ppl who say Blackheart are good is just because they saw a tournament video and saw he was in the winners team, plain and simple.

And how the hell can you compare a fighting game to chess? That doesnt make any sense that White is better than Black. You can't base an argument about the 2 billion year old colors of chess. That was a usless statement.

quote:

---

This is like the people who say "anyone can win in SF3, just 'Poke n Parry.' Yet those people never won anything." Or the people who say Marvel games are just beams, or block damage, or keepaway, or pixies, or dashing short - none of those people can actually win using those strategies or ANY strategies

---

Well seeing as i have no interest in SF3 i've no comment about it.

But those examples you gave about Marvel games arent really good. Dashing short isnt a big deal, pixies?? huh??? Keepaway apparently on these tournament videos those "pro's" seemed to be doing that, block damage is more evident than ever in MvC2 thats why ppl use Dr.Doom, beams are for Cable, and where would Cable be without a 3xAHVB?

quote:

---

Well, if what he's saying is true, then the actual truth is that MvsC2 sucks, and you guys shouldn't be playing it. I suspect he's grossly exaggerating, and its fairly well balanced. As long as they keep bringing back Cammy, I'll keep playing

---

It doesnt suck its just totally out of sync from how it used to be. I never said nobody should play it. And these arent exaggerations their pretty much true. Its far out of balance. Balance is when every character stands an equal chance at winning. Thats not the case in MvC2. Hey Cammy was a nice addition too, but in all these lame tournament videos, ppl seem to only use her for her assist. I possibly possess more skill with Cammy than these so called "experts".

quote:

---

know for a fact that the Bloody Roar games suck pretty bad, after playing both the first 2 for a long, long time. The throws in those two games are hideously overpowered - and happen often because it is very difficult to defend against a player who's charging at you, so you use a block - so a popular tactic becomes just run right up to the player and throw him. The game is seriously broken, as this throw is really really powerful, and so are the charge attacks, so basically charging a player is paper/rock/scissor, since I've never seen anybody actually with the reflexes to react to a charge properly.

---

posted 08-11-2002 11:44 AM               

I found this interesting, as it reneged on the basis of the article - that us scrubs should stop our damn whining and just play the game for blood. It seems obvious from the main text that the top players should just all play Akuma vs. Akuma every match - at least according to the reasoning of the rest of the article. However, that acknowledgement of exception proves that house rules are a necessary evil in even tournament play. In fact, most tournaments have meta rules about the conduct of the game. While most of them cover things outside of the game play itself (no backhanding your opponent in real life) often features in the game require some house rules to keep the tournament competitive. For example, even though Quake allowed configuration of the game client, some con figs were deemed illegal in tournament play by the PGL (keymaps that macro features, changing the view angle, etc).

This anything for victory attitude strikes me as uncomfortable close to the rational that the map hack users in Warcraft or boosted Diablo players used: "if they don't like it, they should do the same thing". Your example of banning Akuma shows that you don't fall on that side of the fence, but the attitude towards scrubs was the same one the cheaters have for rule abiding players of online games: "they suck because they don't hack like me". (I have personal experience with these people being a programmer who used to write MUD code, and they are more common than one would hope or expect.)

In short, the attitude to scrubs was painfully similar to that of cheaters to their victims. The emphasis on tournament play was admittedly because decision makers supposedly influence the purchasers, but I would have to ask: where is the tournament "The Sims" (the highest unit sales moving product of all time) or Roller Coaster Tycoon (which also stayed at the top for months on end). What about Myst (ack, sorry I mentioned it) which sold millions of units with no "play to win" spirit required.

posted 09-06-2002 09:28 PM               

--Sirlin