So what are your thoughts on VF5 now?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> it's pretty clear proof that adding options does not necessarily make for a better game.</div></div>

So I guess the argument is, then, whether the options they added enhance gameplay or detract from it. They certainly opened it up to more personal style versus having to play the "correct way" for your character. From what I see, the new options aren't abusable. (i.e. there are still checks and balances) I am still not feeling overwhelmed by these added options, and I am no prodigy. They feel to me like very appropriate and realistic additions, filling some holes from previous versions.

The huge comboing in relation to energy levels... well, if they make more ways to avoid moves, they have to increase the reward for landing them. Reward for practicing? a 100pt combo boosts your chances of winning WAY beyond what that simpler, 80pt combo does for you. It's a huge reward for practicing that shows itself in your win/loss record. How many rounds have you lost to an opponent with 10pts on his bar?

Perhaps this is really all rhetoric and it boils down to preference. Who really knows?

 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Actually, there is mixed opinion among talented and/or veteran players on VF5. For the most part, it appears to be a matter of preference. </div></div>

I'll take your word for it, but I haven't seen many disparaging posts about 5 fitting that criteria.

 

I see the point you're making. Therefore, I can admit that I may have been semantically wrong. But, are you saying that being at disadvantage provides the same number of options as having advantage or being neutral? I know that evading and sabaki-ing at disadvantage is easier, but it's not like you can't do them at any other time.

 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But, are you saying that being at disadvantage provides the same number of options as having advantage or being neutral? </div></div>

No, that's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that your hypothetical opening move only worked because you guessed correctly. You can't use hindsight to determine having limited his options. He had every option available to him and so did you. If you do this move continuously, you may limit his options to what beats your move. But, <u>you</u>have lost in this case, not your opponent, because his now limited options actually work.

You can't simply choose to put your opponent at disadvantage. What you think will be accomplishing this may not work, because at the time you do your move he may exercise one of his options which defeats the move you are relying on to accomplish the disadvantage.

The disadvantage you speak of is the result of the initial options being exercised. You are now in the second tier of the flowchart of that exchange, each with your own set of relevant options, some more than others, depending on any number of factors.

 

The best part of VF5 is that you don't have to play your character "the right way" like 7-5 said. It sucks when you pick a character and everyone else uses him exactly the same way. How much more fun is it knowing that when the round starts you don't know what your opponents tactics will be, you only know what character they use and what options they have to begin with. But when characters have 100+ it leaves a lot of openings for personal style. Personal style with your character is what it's all about. Makes the game stay fun even after 2000 matches (way more in my case). What a good game. With the update that adds rematch in player match just seals it. VF5 LIVE ARENA is the best fighting game ever on any system.

It becomes so apparent when playing mirror matches just how differently you can play the same character. I played Goh vs Goh last night and me and my opponent played so differently we might as well have not been using the same character at all. Just keeps the game feeling new and fresh forever.

 

No, that's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that your hypothetical opening move only worked because you guessed correctly. You can't use hindsight to determine having limited his options. He had every option available to him and so did you. If you do this move continuously, you may limit his options to what beats your move. But, <u>you</u>have lost in this case, not your opponent, because his now limited options actually work.
</div></div>

I think I was misunderstood, because I wasn't implying that advantage is magically gained. In fact, that opening attack is completely irrelevant to my point in the first place. It could be a sabaki, a reversal, an OM >/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/p.gif, or anything at all that provides frame advantage. I was being theoretical. Insert whatever choice you want, but my point remains that you want your opponent to have more limited options than you do.

Does that make more sense?

 

I don't think this is unique to VF5, but imho a characteristic of the VF series.

 

Oioron: agreed, but each version makes it even more so, IMO.

 

To KoD: you're definitely right that adding more options doesn't necessarily improve a game. But, much more often, problems with a given game stem from lack of options. I noticed you mentioned MvC2 in reference to your example... but that game arguably suffers from lack of options (9 tournament viable characters out of 54???, or so some people say). Just look at SC... the main complaint there is again, high levels of play devolve to a tiny subset of all the possible moves (the same can probably be said of Tekken). So, while you're theoretically right, the point in practice tends to be moot, and I haven't seen you give a good explanation of why it applies in this case.

That said, I myself have begun to suffer from conflating game design principles that apply more to "VF vs. everything else" to our current "VF5 vs. VF4" argument, which leads to some pretty worthless statements, and a general overestimation of how big the changes really are. So, for now, I think I'm going to back out until I get a more solid hold on what specific arguments need to be made. I still feel that Manji's first post really said most of what needed to be said on our side, and while many notable/veteran players seem to disagree, only KoD has even attempted to explain why, and he's been tending to do so with specific examples, rather than a reasoned summing up of the system the way manji originally did, which just doesn't appear to work as well.

 

VF5 is fucking a utter shit w/ just a pretty face lift nothing more so is future upgrades for this version. AM2 might as well just say hey we did it for the money & to attract more players from other fighting games but it backfired since there's even less consistent players compare to VF4.

Lastly this isn't a opinion it's a fact anyone else who thinks other wise like VF5 is actually better than below average compare to previous versions are in obsolute fucking denial.

 

hahahaha, I don't even know what to say....

 

I wasn't going to say anything... but in retrospect his complete mastery of spelling, grammar, and punctuation have "Obsolutely" convinced me. His clear arguments, and well-written supporting statements have shown me the error of me ways.

 

Fact? And how/when/where did you carry out the necessary research to determine said fact?

 

I have put off writing a post here b/c I thought that I would write too much. I am going to try and sum it up as best I can here.

VF5 looks awesome, but it is pretty lacking in a lot of the things that have made VF the game that I love.

My biggest gripe is character specific nonsense. In 4 or Evo or 3 you might have characters that you think are tougher than others, but generally a match was decided by which player had the better VF skills (yomi, execution, offense defense, whatever).

By giving so many characters so much unorthodox stuff, AM2 has caused the outcome of the game to often turn on which player can utilize his character's bullshit in such a way as to totally confuse his opponent.

Follow me here. I love Mario Kart. You can play with a room of people and if someone sucks, they still might win or get higher finishes b/c the game gives the players in back awesome weapons. In this way the game achieves a measure of parity at the expense of fairness. In general, I like fairness, but in the case of Mario Kart, i can appreciate the sacrifice since it allows a broader range of people to play the game and be engaged and entertained.

I feel like AM2 has injected a big dose of Mario Kart into the proceedings. It began in VF4 and in 5 it has gotten a little out of hand. It has become much harder to intuitively know the properties of whatever move your opponent just threw out. Of course there is a way to counteract that - spend a zillion hours in the dojo with a printout of frame data to inoculate yourself from the effects of character specific bullshit. That's my idea of fun!

Some characters are worse that others. In my mind (and this is a totally subjective assassment) the worst are:

1. Eileen (thank god most of the XBL people do not know how to exploit her movelist b/c it would make me very grumpy)

2. Vanessa (I have been repeatedly spanked by Vanessa players who have not played the game much, but just exploit her ranged attacks and uf k+g and DM. So frustrating!)

3. Brad (When do I have advantage? Whoa, that move crumpled me earlier, and after I just blocked it, I discovered that it is totally safe on block too. That must be fun for him. And all his moves look the same and why is he gyrating like that? Hey, I think I have advantage. He's gonna pay for all of that nonsense now...Doh! I got hit with DM!)

4. Shun (Somewhat like Lei, he seems to often be the refuge of people who don't know VF so well. His weirdness is a crutch that may keep some players from getting better at VF generally. Thank god, because when you play a patient, machi Shun who not only backs away, but then utilizes a lot of Shun's moves' backaway qualities as well...frustration ensues. And those combos with low hits at weird places...those suck too.)

5. Pai (She gets a place thanks to Bokutai and general strength. In botukai Middle hits magically whiff. She is only as tall as piece of paper you see. Stupid, I say. Her throws are also not bad. Yes only two directions do much damage, but since most of her throw opportunities come in the midst of her crazy offensive onslaughts, who escapes them? This is more of a traditional balancing question as opposed to a VF5-hijinks specific critique, but whatever.)

Don't get me wrong. I play VF5 all the time. I have a lot of really fun matches. It's just that the gameplay has moved in a direction that I do not like as much as earlier versions. I recently played VF3 with an old buddy and was reminded how awesome it was. Yeah the inputs are really strict and the graphics are bad, but the game was so focused on the core gameplay that it was just super intense and pure. There was not a single attack on anyone's movelist that was 1/10 as cheap as Wolf's DM, not even Jacky's 6p,k. Contrast that with the free-flowing, anybody-can-play ethos of VF5 and you get to the heart of why VF5, with its online and graphical awesomeness makes me a little sad.

 

I think one character you forgot there is El Blaze. How many people can say that they've played against an El Blaze player that they "know" they were better than, but only lost because the guy was using mid/low/throw mixups and then ran away? Granted, I know that it's up to you to figure out ways to deal with this kind of stuff, but it seems suspiciously easy for people to find decent mixup with El Blaze.

 

LOL! The Character BS king speaks, you are the master of character BS.

Anyway, the game sucks period. The hit detection is horrible from a realistic stand point. If you are going to name something called Virtua, at least make it somewhat realistic.

 

This mixup works for everybody. This is the core of this game.
Every figting game is about mid/low/throw mixup.

 

Your reply to Happy_Friend is exactly what I was thinking. Good to hear something so obvious being called out instead of just passed by. It is exactly a scrub mentality to not know what your opponents are doing, not want to take the time to understand it, but still expect to just walk up and beat it. It makes no sense in the world, and has never has existed in any fighting game above casual play levels.

 

I actually felt the same.

I'd comment more but didn't play other VFs enough to really warrant it, and don't know the ins and outs of frame information to contend. I will say though, that VF5 has become my favorite fighter. I don't know where I would place it if I were to match it up against the other iterations if I were to have taken them seriously as well, but as it stands, it is my favorite fighter. I'm not saying VF5 can do no wrong, or is without any problems, but none of the apparent or potential problems are severe enough to detour me from liking it as much as I do.