I stand corrected. This argument is becoming stupider then most EoEo threads.Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
Printable View
I stand corrected. This argument is becoming stupider then most EoEo threads.Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
Fine then: It's just another generic fighter which has difficult to perform combos and moves. I have little doubt that someone really good at using Akira is deserving of respect for having put the effort in - I know, I've tried using him, it's bloody hard to be competent, let alone masterful. I just don't care that someone's put the effort in beyond a cursory "Good for you".Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
I still fail to see where difficult to master, or complexity, equates to high quality.
That's because you know nothing at all about fighting games.
It's difficult to master, but when someone can master it it's so much more satisfying than a simpler game like Dead or Alive or Tekken or even Soul Calibur (which I am a rabid fanboy of).
A master at Virtua Fighter has mastered more than a master at Tekken.
:cool: Oh snap, I've been pwnd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
And... uh... I've argued this when? I haven't. In fact I've stated that I've tried using Akira, and I'm no good at all, and I recognize someone who can use him well has put in a lot of time. I have also said that I do not care that it's more difficult because I don't equate difficulty with quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Then STFU because the only gamers who can talk about actually having skills (And apparently by your logic the only people who play good games) are the people who can do ten-step DDR and complete a bullet hell game on the hardest setting with one credit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
Yes, compare a rhythm game to a fighting game. I'm sure that makes perfect sense in your mind. DDR isn't complex at all, anyway. It's incredibly simple. Step where it tells you to step on one or two of four spots on a mat.
Not that it matters since the only thing they have in common is that they're video games.
Anyway, difficulty doesn't equal quality, but in fighting games the reward for the learning curve does equal quality. Complex fighting games offer more rewards than button mashers. Deal.
Yeah okay, you just go ahead and enter a DDR contest and we'll see how much skill it takes. :rolleyes2
I'm with MILF all the way.
When you compete against other humans, it doesn't really matter if a game is "easy to get into", because even then, one of the two players will have a better knowledge on what moves do what, and when, and how fast, along with one part having better reflexes than the other. A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Even with "simple" game mechanics, the person with the firmest grasp of those simple mechanics will be the best player. Being the best in the world at DDR is just as hard as being the best in the world at VF, or any other fighter out there. Well actually, the game that's hardest to be the best at, would be the game that has the biggest number of competitors. For example, if I programmed my own fighter game, 10 times as advanced and deep as VF, it would still be easier to be the best at that game if only 2 persons in the entire world played it. Even being the world champion at Pong would be harder. More competition = harder to be the best.
I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Yes, and you're equating compexity with quality, which I don't see follows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
But chess isn't inherently any better than RPS.Quote:
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.
That's not comparable, because RPS is much more dependent on random chance than fighters are. Well, the fighters I've played are. For the record, I prefer my games to have as little random chance as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
Actually, it's very comparable. DOA is incredibly rock/paper/scissory.Quote:
Originally Posted by MirageThat's not comparable, because RPS is much more dependent on random chance than fighters are. Well, the fighters I've played are. For the record, I prefer my games to have as little random chance as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13I didn't say it didn't take any skill. I said it's simple. Straightforward. Easy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Uh huh. But the person who's won 20 VF tournaments has won a much more difficult and complex game. Someone who wins 20 chess tournaments has done something more difficult than someone who wins 20 Rock Paper Scissors tournaments.Quote:
A person that wins 20 DoA tournament in a row is as good at DoA as a person that has won 20 VF tournaments in a row is at VF.
-edit- Actually, screw that.
I disagree, it all depends on which player has the quickest reflexes and most easily see which moves are high- mid- or low. A seasoned player can see that much more easily than a random newbie who buttonmashes, and then counter him to hell and back.
Of course it's not exactly like Rock Paper Scissors. :P
Beating a more complex game means nothing.
If in order to do a simple punch you would need to hit the following sequence of buttons: Up, down, A, X, B, Z, A, A, left
and to kick: Left, Y, Z, Z, L, Up
And decent combo's involve punches and kicks linked together by one of these three linking combo's which must be entered in between each punch or kick, XXYA, XYBA, BBAY, that would be en extremely complex game.
However anyone who could become a master wouldn't be called a good gamer for learning it, but you would state he clearly had no life whatsoever to be able to easily pull off the games simplest comboes.
In conclusion, Complexity does not equal Good in any way shape or form, as this is clearly far more complex then any other Fighter in existance, but also Clearly sucks.
That's a bit of an extreme example, don't you think? :rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by corncracker
Virtua Fighter is complex in that the really juicy bits take a lot of practice and experimentation. Obviouly a punch is still one button.