Most annoying things in fighting games

[Guest wildpegasus]

The most annoying thing in fighting games for me is executing manuevers that have you go up, down, left, diagonal and pressing buttons in a certain order to hit a move. 8/10ths of the time it doesn't work. I'll be trying to hit ONE move in practise and it can literally take hours to do and than after that I'll never be able to hit it again. Without a doubt the most frustrating thing to do in video game history as it takes all the fun out of the games. Than you have to mesmorise a million different attacks just to get into the game all the while knowing they'll never work when you want them to. And than if you ever want to play a new fighting game you have to do it all over again. Stupid in a lot of ways.

 

Bottom Line is this -- Nothing ever works in fighting games even when you push the buttons exactly the way you're supposed to. Extreamly frustrating.

...

 

Don't feed the trolls.

I'm not sure what you mean by that comment but I can safely say I'm not a troll. Please find one message I've ever created on this board that would give you that impression. I've played a lot of games and have beaten a lot of the legendary tough games out there so I'm just not a newbie coming in here looking for trouble. I've played several fighting games and it's a common occurance for moves to not work even when you press the buttons in the right order. I've seen it happen to other people too and it is a reason why fighting games aren't as popular as they could be.

[Thoth 0]

"While she's moving their arm to break it...

2,1,3,4,1+2"

My friend yelled something like that while I was playing Soul Calibur II. My response was "What the f*** did you just say?"

Which one of those is the Guard botton? Sounds like a Ivy combo to me.

1, 2, 3, and 4 is Tekken.

 

1 = Left punch, 2 = right punch, 3 = left kick, 4 = right kick.

 

Soul Calibur uses A, B, K, and G.

 

Often, you'll see Japanese joystick notation for Soul Calibur 2. Look at your numeric keypad on your keyboard; that should explain it. 6 = right, 8 = up, etc.

[Thoth 0]

The most annoying thing in fighting games for me is executing manuevers that have you go up, down, left, diagonal and pressing buttons in a certain order to hit a move. 8/10ths of the time it doesn't work. I'll be trying to hit ONE move in practise and it can literally take hours to do and than after that I'll never be able to hit it again. Without a doubt the most frustrating thing to do in video game history as it takes all the fun out of the games. Than you have to mesmorise a million different attacks just to get into the game all the while knowing they'll never work when you want them to. And than if you ever want to play a new fighting game you have to do it all over again. Stupid in a lot of ways.

 

Bottom Line is this -- Nothing ever works in fighting games even when you push the buttons exactly the way you're supposed to. Extreamly frustrating.

...

 

Don't feed the trolls.

I'm not sure what you mean by that comment but I can safely say I'm not a troll. Please find one message I've ever created on this board that would give you that impression. I've played a lot of games and have beaten a lot of the legendary tough games out there so I'm just not a newbie coming in here looking for trouble. I've played several fighting games and it's a common occurance for moves to not work even when you press the buttons in the right order. I've seen it happen to other people too and it is a reason why fighting games aren't as popular as they could be.

Okay, a couple things.

 

Beating a fighting game, in general, means jack all, as the computer is the easiest opponent ever.

 

And could you provide an example of what you mean by moves not coming out? I mean a specific example. I find it hard to believe that you're actually doing the move right, otherwise the move, would in fact, come out.

[Thoth 0]

And as long as I'm posting, I'd like to apologize for being nice to AndrewTS. I forgot who he was.

 

Sorry.

[MrRant 0]

Fighting Nerds are pissier than Puro Geeks apparently.

 

 

.... wait... they are the same people? Odd isn't it? Or is it?

[Jer 0]

No thanks. I beg to differ on your definition of cheap. If the method of executing the move is far easier than the method of countering the move, that's "my" idea of cheap. If it is easily abusable and does far more damage than it should, that's "my" idea of cheap. Do techniques that players commonly call "cheap" (but you would not) reward skill on the part of the person using them?

 

Your definition of cheap is just an arbitrary mess. Any efficient move is going to be easier to do than it is to deal with, otherwise what's the point? Are you saying people should only use slow, telegraphed moves that are hard to do? How incredibly, stupidly limiting.

 

People, using your definition, have called pretty much everything I've ever done in SC2 "cheap" at some point. I use X, and AAB, 3A, 1A, 3B, 22B are all cheap. So I get sick of them whining and use Mitsu. Now kB2, 2KB, 66K, anything out of mist, relic B are all cheap. So I use Sophie, and 236B, 11A, 44B, 33B, 66B+KAB are all cheap. So in short, anything that's good is cheap. Which is just stupid. So I'm only supposed to do moves that aren't good? Even then, some moves will always be better than others. Where do you draw the line? With your definition, you can't, it's just totally subjective and generally based on the definition that if it wins, it's cheap.

[Jer 0]

Fighting Nerds are pissier than Puro Geeks apparently.

 

 

.... wait... they are the same people? Odd isn't it? Or is it?

 

Meh, most of us fighting nerds are perfectly happy to just play with friends, and it's other people that start fights with us. We're the quiet humble ones, who have to constantly deal with people coming up, bragging about how good they are, and then pitching a fit when they get crushed. That's why I'm so down on "cheap", because it's almost always used in the midst of an angry, whiny rant about how I only won because I was "cheap". After dealing with that for years, it gets a little tiresome. Although by now, I'm so used to it that it's just kind of funny. I almost go out of my way to make scrubs mad, although it's still without ever saying anything.

[razazteca 0]

"While she's moving their arm to break it...

2,1,3,4,1+2"

My friend yelled something like that while I was playing Soul Calibur II. My response was "What the f*** did you just say?"

Which one of those is the Guard botton? Sounds like a Ivy combo to me.

1, 2, 3, and 4 is Tekken.

 

1 = Left punch, 2 = right punch, 3 = left kick, 4 = right kick.

 

Soul Calibur uses A, B, K, and G.

 

Often, you'll see Japanese joystick notation for Soul Calibur 2. Look at your numeric keypad on your keyboard; that should explain it. 6 = right, 8 = up, etc.

2B+K is a great counter by Cevy but sometimes I have trouble with the timing and it ends up being counter productive One of my scrub moves would be the 8A+B, 1A+B but this is a slow move so most of the time the opponet (if smart) would roll out of the way.

[Anya 0]

I never said it worked everytime. Jesus.

Actually, yes, you did.

 

"Anyone who dared used Sub Zero and that freeze crap against me got their ass promptly handed to them."

[Guest wildpegasus]

The most annoying thing in fighting games for me is executing manuevers that have you go up, down, left, diagonal and pressing buttons in a certain order to hit a move. 8/10ths of the time it doesn't work. I'll be trying to hit ONE move in practise and it can literally take hours to do and than after that I'll never be able to hit it again. Without a doubt the most frustrating thing to do in video game history as it takes all the fun out of the games. Than you have to mesmorise a million different attacks just to get into the game all the while knowing they'll never work when you want them to. And than if you ever want to play a new fighting game you have to do it all over again. Stupid in a lot of ways.

 

Bottom Line is this -- Nothing ever works in fighting games even when you push the buttons exactly the way you're supposed to. Extreamly frustrating.

...

 

Don't feed the trolls.

I'm not sure what you mean by that comment but I can safely say I'm not a troll. Please find one message I've ever created on this board that would give you that impression. I've played a lot of games and have beaten a lot of the legendary tough games out there so I'm just not a newbie coming in here looking for trouble. I've played several fighting games and it's a common occurance for moves to not work even when you press the buttons in the right order. I've seen it happen to other people too and it is a reason why fighting games aren't as popular as they could be.

Okay, a couple things.

 

Beating a fighting game, in general, means jack all, as the computer is the easiest opponent ever.

 

And could you provide an example of what you mean by moves not coming out? I mean a specific example. I find it hard to believe that you're actually doing the move right, otherwise the move, would in fact, come out.

I'm not talking about beating fighting games.

 

 

 

These are the games which I've had trouble with:

 

Every Tekken -- Probably the biggest offender

Streer Fighter II although this wasn't really too bad

Mortal Kombat

There are other games but I never played them too much.

 

Specific example? Most of the moves from Tekken I had difficulty with. Half of the time they come out. Half of the time they don't. The others don't work at all.

[Ripper 0]

I'd say most early fighters had "cheap" throwing. It's simple to execute, quite damaging, and difficult to counter. That's the criteria for "cheap" as far as I'm concerned, plus remember that there were no penalties for a missed throw and it was unblockable. Plus, the early fighters had some insane range on throwing.

 

Later SF games lessened the throw damage, made them counterable, added "missed throw" animations, for instance.

 

I can't comment in particular about original SF2 because I never played it at a good level, but in general, "throws are cheap" is the most common and most wrong statement that you see in threads like this. It's possible they actually are cheap in SF2 (high and low, unbreakable for 20% does indeed sound strong), but you also said throws were lame in Tekken and Soul Calibur the last time we argued, so you lose some credibility with me there.

 

It's an extremely lame one. As long as a game have some method of overhead attacking, it's not a problem. Ironically, MK does have a plus in its favor in that regard, because block damage is higher than it is in a typical Japanese-bred 2D fighter. In the SF games, for instance, you don't take any block damage from normal attacks.

 

If a game is designed so that turtling is actually overpowered, maybe you have a point. The problem is that a lot of people, like the original poster, equate any sort of evasive, safe play with turtling. "Omg he used 8wr to step my move, lame!". Um, that's what it's there for. Omg do horizontals instead of verticals! It's pretty safe to assume if it's some arcade guy he's not going to be step-guarding. Repeated AA equals win.

 

Just like with parries, turtling, etc., if you go too far in that direction, things get really freakin' boring and cease to be fun. That's the point the original poster had made.

 

Meh part of the fun is learning to play against people of all different skill levels and play styles. Using 8wr/step/step-guard all the time is just a strategy in SC2, knowing how to counter it and other strategies is just part of the game. Playing well with a defensive style is hard, just like playing well with an offensive style. I don't see why one is considered better than the other. Fights can just be just as interesting trying to get through a good defense as just rushing each other down.

I never said it was cheap. Read the post. that shit is BORING. If I am playing the game with someone and every damn match is ending in time ups because ALL they do is run in a circle and sit on the block button, that shit is just a chore. Like I said in the original post, I have no problem with using it for stragedy during a fight, but fucking FIGHT. Its a fighting game, not track and field.

 

And I would have even less of a problem if the person didn't claim how great they were at the game and hardly ever lose when they fight almost the whole match not using a single attack button. Like I said, I beat the ever loving shit out of him most of the matches and the only ones he won were from time ups and he had more energy but that shit was boring...which I think isn't the point of playing games.

 

The only thing I find "cheap" about SC2 is the fact that if someone EVER falls, they can take the remaining energy bar if they know what they are doing. I know how to do it but refuse to because it is just so cheap.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

See, I'm the opposite. I get the most enjoyment out of games when the people I'm playing against get frustrated and pissed off because of the cheesy bullshit I do, and when I lose, I don't care, because it's a fucking video game.

 

By far the most annoying thing about fighting games is the nonchalant way in which people refer to

I use X, and AAB, 3A, 1A, 3B, 22B are all cheap. So I get sick of them whining and use Mitsu. Now kB2, 2KB, 66K, anything out of mist, relic B are all cheap. So I use Sophie, and 236B, 11A, 44B, 33B, 66B+KAB are all cheap

 

I understand what it means, it just looks psychotic.

[Ripper 0]

See, I'm the opposite. I get the most enjoyment out of games when the people I'm playing against get frustrated and pissed off because of the cheesy bullshit I do, and when I lose, I don't care, because it's a fucking video game.

 

By far the most annoying thing about fighting games is the nonchalant way in which people refer to

I use X, and AAB, 3A, 1A, 3B, 22B are all cheap. So I get sick of them whining and use Mitsu. Now kB2, 2KB, 66K, anything out of mist, relic B are all cheap. So I use Sophie, and 236B, 11A, 44B, 33B, 66B+KAB are all cheap

 

I understand what it means, it just looks psychotic.

I haven't the slightest clue on what the fuck that meant. I just nod and smile.

[Pegasus Kid 0]

These are the games which I've had trouble with:

 

Every Tekken -- Probably the biggest offender

Streer Fighter II although this wasn't really too bad

Mortal Kombat

There are other games but I never played them too much.

 

Specific example? Most of the moves from Tekken I had difficulty with. Half of the time they come out. Half of the time they don't. The others don't work at all.

I found the compalint about Tekken interesting. If anything, that is one of the games with the least complex basic system. Everything works in a particular chain and the worst rotation is a half circle with two buttons. I'll grant you that Ten Strings (did Tekken 1 have Ten Strings?) and Chain Throws take a fair bit of time to learn and memorize (or lord the time it took me to get Eddie Gordo's Ten String down) but the basic engine is simple.

 

SF is my baby and because of that fact I can tell you that some people do have issues with the special movies. To this day, a guy like myself who plays this game on a daily basis still can't do a Standing 360. From what I understand, there are people that have issues with Dragon Punch rotations as well (I've got a good story about a bleeding left thumb, a SNES controller and Street Fighter II: World Warrior) but again, if you put in the time, you can pull it off consistently.

 

Mortal Kombat is the easiest fighting game engine you'll find short of a side scrolling beat em up so there's no solace for you on that one. The hardest thing I've ever had to pull out in that game are the 100% health combos in UMK3 and even those weren't THAT tough given time and practice. The basic combo system is a simple PP - KK - P - K system.

[Guest wildpegasus]

I actually like fighting games. It's just that this is the problem I have.

[Renegade 0]

You're backpeddling.  What's this about exploiting without ruining the game?  No, that isn't what you said.  You said if it is in the game, it's fair game.

And I stick by that point. It's a matter of whether you're willing to play it. We'll take SvC because the game is basically considered broken (at least the arcade version). The game was poorly designed, that's all there is to it. There are so many glitches and so many issues that it makes it impossible to play on a high level competitively. As such, the community elected to stop playing it on a large scale. So you see, all the glitches and issues are there and are exploited by those that elect to still play it, regardless of how "cheap" or whatever term you want to apply to this situation. It's in the game, it's up for grabs.

I have to agree with PK here. It all depends on what you are talking about. SvC is broken on so many levels because you can and will own everybody and anybody with the bosses. I have taught a total scrub how to do Geese’s infinite in less than twenty minutes.

 

Roll cancels in CvS2 however, do not break the game even though they are a glitch. First off roll canceling consistently and making good use of RC’ing is a total bitch to do. Even if you can RC doesn’t mean you will win every match. I have seen people waltzing into arcades and trying to RC everything they throw out. And I have seen them angrily walk away when they were destroyed by K and P groove users. Tiers would shift without them, but RC’ing do not break CvS despite being a flaw in the game engine.

[Guest Coffey]

The most annoying thing in fighting games? Easy answer for me. The third dimension. 2D Fighters > 3D Fighters for me.

[AndrewTS 0]

To this day, a guy like myself who plays this game on a daily basis still can't do a Standing 360.

 

did Tekken 1 have Ten Strings?

Yup.

 

Meh, most of us fighting nerds are perfectly happy to just play with friends, and it's other people that start fights with us. We're the quiet humble ones, who have to constantly deal with people coming up, bragging about how good they are, and then pitching a fit when they get crushed.

 

Suuuuure. Haven't met any around here, but website forums are littered with self-absorbed pricks who think their "skilz" entitle them to be worshipped.

 

That's why I'm so down on "cheap", because it's almost always used in the midst of an angry, whiny rant about how I only won because I was "cheap".

 

Take a look at the context: that's not what I'm talking about. People around where I live suck at fighters. That's why I'll probably not get any better at them than I am now. However, people who restrain from using certain techniques that they know can help them win are scrubs, because they won't exploit their knowledge.

 

Your definition of cheap is just an arbitrary mess. Any efficient move is going to be easier to do than it is to deal with, otherwise what's the point? Are you saying people should only use slow, telegraphed moves that are hard to do? How incredibly, stupidly limiting.

 

Now, where did I say that? My belief is that for every move there should be a counter or some sort of defense, no single move should be too damaging unless there's a degree of risk attached to it. If there's no risk, no chance of being countered, and no defense--that kind of throws normal gameplay using the lower moves/combos out of the window, doesn't it?

 

People, using your definition, have called pretty much everything I've ever done in SC2 "cheap" at some point

 

Use a more familiar example, since I don't play SC2 regularly. Those combos can be blocked, correct (at the first hit, natch, not after--they are combos, after all)? Even if some are high/low you can block them if you know the pattern, correct? Unblockables aren't so quick that there's literally nothing you can do about them, correct?

 

Then there should be no problem. Besides, Soul Calibur is always a lousy example referring to damage because the rounds are so quick, even the basic moves and combos are so damaging, it doesn't matter. Even playing defensively, you play more rounds/fights in less time, and things even out. Hell, that's the way the makers want it to be, because in a region where lots of human players challenge each other, it eats more money.

 

Where do you draw the line? With your definition, you can't, it's just totally subjective and generally based on the definition that if it wins, it's cheap.

 

I have no idea where you drew THAT point from.

 

Also, by definition, when some one states up front that something is their opinion...GUESS WHAT?! BY DEFINITION, IT'S SUBJECTIVE!!

 

Although, thinking outside of fighting games, what's the definition of cheap? It's paying very little and getting a hell of a lot more out of it than what you paid in. However, the very use of this term seems to offend some people.

 

Roll cancels in CvS2 however, do not break the game even though they are a glitch. First off roll canceling consistently and making good use of RC’ing is a total bitch to do. Even if you can RC doesn’t mean you will win every match. I have seen people waltzing into arcades and trying to RC everything they throw out.

 

Okay, so we have a disagreement on one of those issues.

 

Ren, what about the infinites in the Vs. games? You agree those should be fair game, or not?

 

To resolve some things I said earlier, probably universal techniques that every fighter has at his/her disposal can't really be cheap as long as, say, one person's normal throw does 3 times the damage as a normal throw (and it is a non-boss character). Probably some people here would disagree.

 

----

 

However, let's try to summarize:

 

Nothing in a fighting game is ever cheap...except sometimes a game is "broken," and only fighting game experts are qualified to determine when that is the case--otherwise, all other players have no right to criticize a game on that basis, ever. If you dare, you're a whiny scrub. The point to where this brokenness gets that far is nebulous and even some of those really good players disagree on them.

 

Character character imbalances aren't something to complain about, and it seems expert players don't even care for companies to try to balance things out. If certain characters have major advantages over other ones--well, ITTG.

 

Infinite combos and 100% combos aren't cheap. Apparently gets the jump on the other player and pulls it off is really skilled, or something, because that's what the tournament peeps do.

 

The only thing I find "cheap" about SC2 is the fact that if someone EVER falls, they can take the remaining energy bar if they know what they are doing. I know how to do it but refuse to because it is just so cheap.

 

 

It isn't cheap! IITG! Exploit it! You're a whiny scrub if you don't exploit it.

[AndrewTS 0]

It's exactly like the first season of Survivor. Richard Hatch formed a four person alliance to vote everyone off, and everyone screamed and bitched that it was unfair.

 

So, Karl Marx was a whiny scrub because he was against capitalists exploiting the "proletariat?"

[Thoth 0]

It's exactly like the first season of Survivor. Richard Hatch formed a four person alliance to vote everyone off, and everyone screamed and bitched that it was unfair.

 

So, Karl Marx was a whiny scrub because he was against capitalists exploiting the "proletariat?"

He wasn't a scrub because he did something about it. The whiny bitches did not come up with a counter-strategy until it was too late, and Richard Hatch won.

[DangerousDamon 0]

I never said it worked everytime. Jesus.

Actually, yes, you did.

 

"Anyone who dared used Sub Zero and that freeze crap against me got their ass promptly handed to them."

Oh well SORRY. So friggin nitpicky.

[Jer 0]

Suuuuure. Haven't met any around here, but website forums are littered with self-absorbed pricks who think their "skilz" entitle them to be worshipped.

 

Most of those people are still scrubs, and the very same people that get so pissed if you beat them. Just because you post on a forum about a game doesn't mean you're good at it. Most truly top players I've met have been very humble and are nice guys. But I can only really speak for the SC2 community, admittedly.

 

Now, where did I say that? My belief is that for every move there should be a counter or some sort of defense, no single move should be too damaging unless there's a degree of risk attached to it. If there's no risk, no chance of being countered, and no defense--that kind of throws normal gameplay using the lower moves/combos out of the window, doesn't it?

 

Well, but the things you're using as examples don't fall into that category. King's multiparts have any easy defense, just duck and punish. That means there's risk, if you throw it out and you get ducked, you're at major disadvantage. The throw can also be broken when it hits, or at several points thereafter. Throws were your big example, but they're breakable and punishable on whiff in almost every game, so there's risk, defense and a chance of being countered. How, then, are they cheap?

 

Really, there are very few moves in any tourney game that fit your definition of cheap as you put it above. Maybe some shit in Marvel, but that's about it. If it was indeed true that games routinely featured auto-win moves, then they would indeed be cheap, but very few games have stuff like that. Just because some people might think something is auto-win doesn't necessarily mean it is.

 

The only thing I find "cheap" about SC2 is the fact that if someone EVER falls, they can take the remaining energy bar if they know what they are doing. I know how to do it but refuse to because it is just so cheap.

 

See, now this is a perfect example. Apparently, unbeknownst to me and the entire SC2 tourney community, the game is full of instant-win techniques! Or, maybe it's not, and the people this guy is playing against just have no idea how to stand up correctly after knockdown. I've seen people lose to Nightmare's 3B over and over again because they keep getting hit with it on wakeup, but that doesn't mean it's an infinate. Those guys whined that it's "cheap", but all they need to do is hold guard after getting knocked down.

 

Nothing in a fighting game is ever cheap...except sometimes a game is "broken," and only fighting game experts are qualified to determine when that is the case--otherwise, all other players have no right to criticize a game on that basis, ever. If you dare, you're a whiny scrub. The point to where this brokenness gets that far is nebulous and even some of those really good players disagree on them.

 

Well, in short, yeah. I mean, who is more qualified to determine if a game is broke, the people who play it for hundreds of hours against top level competition and know it inside out, or some guy who messes with it for a few hours in casual? You're saying that when magazines call T4 King, who is bottom tier and has had little to no tourney success, broke, because they still can't deal with his multiparts even with the simplified breaks, that they're qualified to do so? I would certainly disagree. They're losing to King only because they don't have a decent understanding of the game, and until they get that understanding, anything they say is just useless whining. You don't have to be a national champion to criticize a game based on balance, but you certainly have to be more than just a casual player.

 

I'm not as much of a purist as some people. I do think banning obvious, detrimental glitches like Lizardman's 214B+K throw is good for the game, and I do think games like MvC2, where out of 50+ characters you only see about 7 getting any play, are kind of lame. But in general, I think most whining about cheapness is unjustified, and in general, you're not qualified to whine about cheapness until you're fairly good at a game.

[Thoth 0]

The problem with Tekken 4 is that it's Jin, and then everybody else.

[Jer 0]

Agreed, I don't think T4 is balanced. I was just using that as an example, because King is so bad in T4 and yet lots of people still used him as an example of why the game is broke.

 

T4's getting better though. Miharu and Steve apparently are supposed to have an advantage on Jin, so he's not as unstoppable as he used to be. Too bad the game's already dead here.

[AndrewTS 0]

It's exactly like the first season of Survivor. Richard Hatch formed a four person alliance to vote everyone off, and everyone screamed and bitched that it was unfair.

 

So, Karl Marx was a whiny scrub because he was against capitalists exploiting the "proletariat?"

He wasn't a scrub because he did something about it.

Actually, he just bitched about it. It was in print from, but that's still the same thing. It was a call for others to do something about it. He didn't actually physically lead a revolution.

 

I don't get if that "sorry for being nice" thing was a typo, insult, or what.

 

Jer: I never talked about Tekken 4 King. I was talking about Tekken 2 King which requires you to have a photographic memory or insane amounts of play time to remember all those sequences to break out.

 

Once you're stuck in the multipart, you have to know the right break to do at the right moment, and while you might get lucky if you don't know the breaks in 3/4, in 2, forget it.

 

Throws were your big example, but they're breakable and punishable on whiff in almost every game, so there's risk, defense and a chance of being countered. How, then, are they cheap?

 

Uh, I corrected myself on throws already in my previous post. In the newer Tekkens, every throw is breakable and King's multiparts are simpler to bust out of. Many of my gripes were archaic, I'll admit.

 

You don't have to be a national champion to criticize a game based on balance, but you certainly have to be more than just a casual player.

 

 

That's what I'm talking about, obvious imbalances.

 

Also, I think we've established the fact that game magazines are pretty much shit these days, and even most "strategy guides" are glorified move lists except for the ones that had experts involved in making it (the Brady Alpha 2 guide, for instance).

 

I'm not as much of a purist as some people. I do think banning obvious, detrimental glitches like Lizardman's 214B+K throw is good for the game, and I do think games like MvC2, where out of 50+ characters you only see about 7 getting any play, are kind of lame. But in general, I think most whining about cheapness is unjustified, and in general, you're not qualified to whine about cheapness until you're fairly good at a game.

 

Hey, no disagreement here.

[Pegasus Kid 0]

Nothing in a fighting game is ever cheap...except sometimes a game is "broken," and only fighting game experts are qualified to determine when that is the case--otherwise, all other players have no right to criticize a game on that basis, ever.  If you dare, you're a whiny scrub.  The point to where this brokenness gets that far is nebulous and even some of those really good players disagree on them.

If there's ever a person to determine when a game is broken, you would figure it would be the people that have taken the time and energy to learn a particular game inside and out. There's a big difference between what's hard to swallow but acceptable (MvC2 Infinites & AHVBx3) rather than a game that is ubsurdly broken (like SvC). I was even acknowledged by the fine developers of SvC that the game wasn't properly tested before release. They're aware of the broken nature of the game and made changes in the home release to overcome the issues.

Character imbalances aren't something to complain about, and it seems expert players don't even care for companies to try to balance things out.  If certain characters have major advantages over other ones--well, ITTG.

Strong players will never complain about character imbalances. They'll go one of two routes. They'll either adopt the stronger characters and work to improve on them or they'll take a character that isn't considered top tier and work on that character to the point where despite the game not having true balance, the players skill determines how well they do. For someone like me, I fall into both categories. I couldn't find using mid tier teams in MvC2 so I adopted Sentinel/Storm/Commando to be competitive. On the other hand, my main game is CvS2 but I use Guile/Kim/Vega and never bothered to learn RC. It puts me at a disadvantage in that Guile is only mid tier without RC, Kim is considered low tier and Vega is considered top tier. I could use Cammy/Blanka/Sagat like so many others. It's just a matter of choice.

Infinite combos and 100% combos aren't cheap.  Apparently gets the jump on the other player and pulls it off is really skilled, or something, because that's what the tournament peeps do.

Infinites all take skill to pull off and that's why they're acceptable. Even within the realm of the Infinite, the players decide whether or not they think it's skill or not. You can take the Magneto Infinite which takes a lot of work to learn or you can take the Geese Infinite in SvC which is literally a 5 - 10 minute learning curve before you have it down cold and see why one is adopted as acceptable and the other just shows they didn't work the kinks of the character as well as they should have. If I get hit with a Magneto Infinite, I blame myself for being in that position to begin with. I know how it starts and it's my own poor play that got me there.

[AndrewTS 0]

I was even acknowledged by the fine developers of SvC that the game wasn't properly tested before release. They're aware of the broken nature of the game and made changes in the home release to overcome the issues.

 

Ren told me the PS2 Japan version of it was still broken. He hear incorrectly?

 

There's a big difference between what's hard to swallow but acceptable (MvC2 Infinites & AHVBx3) rather than a game that is ubsurdly broken (like SvC).

 

Even the "hard to swallow" ones get criticism from some decent players, often because of a technique or combo lost from a previous game, "watering down" one of their favorite characters. I can see having one or two characters that are weaker to use for bragging rights, but why have a game where the characters are all over the map? It would be a nice change of pace.

[Renegade 0]

I was even acknowledged by the fine developers of SvC that the game wasn't properly tested before release. They're aware of the broken nature of the game and made changes in the home release to overcome the issues.

 

Ren told me the PS2 Japan version of it was still broken. He hear incorrectly?

Geese's infinite has a different timing, otherwise its just visual improvements.

[Jer 0]

I was talking about Tekken 2 King which requires you to have a photographic memory or insane amounts of play time to remember all those sequences to break out.

 

You can still just duck the throw.

 

T2 had strong stuff all over the place, everything did much more damage. You had to deal with true mid WGFs that could do 80% on hit, hell sweeps with no trip stun, deathfists that did 60% on counter. It was just a different environment. Namco realized how hard to deal with some of that stuff was and nerfed a lot of it, but within the context of the game King's multiparts weren't broke.

[Anya 0]

You can still just duck the throw.

Yeah...all this talk about King's linking throws is nonsense considering you shouldn't get hit with the beginning throw in the first place. He does that crouch dash before them, it's not like the opening throws are low risk attacks.