-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Fighting Games should do more to make being on the receiving end of attacks more engaging.
- Thread starter Kalmakov
- Start date
I would have said this but 5 and now 6 has fallen to juggle hell lately. I can't play the games anymore. DOA used to be my favorite fighting franchise for awhile until it turned to this style of play.
I love your KI example. Truly the most under rated fighting game of the decade. Killer Instinct is engaging in almost every moment whether your on offence or defense. My biggest problem with Tekken Tag 2 was how easy it was to caught in a huge juggle combo that would deplete like 70% of your health bar. Just 1 mistake was so punishing and you just had to sit and watch as your health bar is depleted while not being able to respond. Then when the string is over you had to hope you wouldn't get trapped by okizame mixups as you get off the ground.
People claim that there are too many defensive options in MK11 but I really like having the ability to do something besides eat a combo and then immediately have to block after wake up while my opponent continues their offense with a meaty attack.
The person who posted about DI is right in that it never completely takes away control from anyone. Watching a single player combo+super for 10-20 seconds is not fun.
The biggest problem is that the way they're implemented lead to some real busted option selects. Since the tap forward or tap down input is non-commital you have a bunch of cases where you'll almost always want to tap forward before committing to a poke or attack, just in case the opponent does something first.
Since there's no recovery to the input, you run very little risk and it allows you to cover two wildly different options at once. For example, in 3s it doesn't make sense to get hit by a crossup unless it's during the recovery of your move (IE a time when you can't block). If you go for an ambiguous crossup and I block forward and you land behind me, I block. If you land in front of me, I parry. If you empty jump I'm at no frame disadvantage. It's a risk free option that shuts down some basic strategic elements.
Or another example is if I'm thinking you might go for a low or a throw, I can input down+lp+lk. If a low comes out, I parry, if you throw I tech the throw, if you don't attack I throw you. The nature of how they're implemented means that they're artificially risky (the idea of moving in to an attack) but really there's no risk to tossing them out, and can cover up for the need for decision making.
1. I think number of defensive of options is kind of a red herring; it's more about the defensive options you do have both being strong and naturally pushing the game back to a neutral state if you can defend successfully. In something like SFII, you just have blocking, but pushback being insane means once you block one or two attacks, you're back to neutral. Defense in marvel 3 mostly revolves out pushblock, but pushblock allows the defender agency and causes interesting mind games with both the attacker and defender participating.
2. Shortening combo length is a better way to reduce player frustration without bloating the game with additional mechanics.
3. I personally don't even really mind longer combos. Sometimes they give you a chance to relax and consider your next move (I think this is why I was able to play crazy long sets of marvel 3 w/o getting burnt out lol)
4. I don't think instant blocking is a solution. IB just means you have to practice and memorize IBing a bunch of specific multi-hit moves and sequences, learn twice as many punishes as you would have otherwise, etc. At high levels, you end up with players IBing practically everything anyway, so every move has to be balanced with IB in mind.
5. In addition to the issues others have already mentioned with parry, another issue with the 3S implementation was you can OS parries constantly for no real cost. Gonna stick out a poke? Tap forward right before you do in case they stuck out a button. Daigo misses a bunch of 'parries' before Justin final decides to super:
I think people have this idea that every parry they see was a specific read the defending player made, but very often that's not the case.
edit: +what vulva said
2. Shortening combo length is a better way to reduce player frustration without bloating the game with additional mechanics.
3. I personally don't even really mind longer combos. Sometimes they give you a chance to relax and consider your next move (I think this is why I was able to play crazy long sets of marvel 3 w/o getting burnt out lol)
4. I don't think instant blocking is a solution. IB just means you have to practice and memorize IBing a bunch of specific multi-hit moves and sequences, learn twice as many punishes as you would have otherwise, etc. At high levels, you end up with players IBing practically everything anyway, so every move has to be balanced with IB in mind.
5. In addition to the issues others have already mentioned with parry, another issue with the 3S implementation was you can OS parries constantly for no real cost. Gonna stick out a poke? Tap forward right before you do in case they stuck out a button. Daigo misses a bunch of 'parries' before Justin final decides to super:
I think people have this idea that every parry they see was a specific read the defending player made, but very often that's not the case.
edit: +what vulva said
Blocking and seeing what my opponent is doing is enough engagement for me. I say this as someone who would get put into super long corner blockstrings in GG while I was learning the game.
So I see people don't seem to like 3S's parry system. So how do people feel about Tekken 7 or Smash Ultimate's parry mechanic out of curiosity?
Personally, I'm a fan of both. In both cases there's a big risk-to-reward ratio; if you go for it and get it, you get a big punish, allowing you to get your own combo in for free, especially on Tekken. But if you miss, then you're going to get opened up and eat big damage more than likely.
Though I admit I'm not quite as skill at Tekken than I am at Smash, so perhaps someone with more skill can speak on it better than I can.
Personally, I'm a fan of both. In both cases there's a big risk-to-reward ratio; if you go for it and get it, you get a big punish, allowing you to get your own combo in for free, especially on Tekken. But if you miss, then you're going to get opened up and eat big damage more than likely.
Though I admit I'm not quite as skill at Tekken than I am at Smash, so perhaps someone with more skill can speak on it better than I can.
In games going forward, if they do include a parry mechanic it doesn't have to be the same as 3S. They could make fireballs unparryable (how do you parry a ball of plasma?).
They can do a lot with the mechanic to not stifle the common strategies.
Even just making fireballs unparryable would be good. Normals>throws>blocking>fireballs>parries>normals
Parries are just interesting because the more you play, the better you become at reading and performing them and then capitalizing on them. It has a learning curve adjacent to learning combos and match ups and such.
Vulva and Zissou have summarized why the parries are a lil whack in 3rd strike. I think the strongest points against are how, if you know you can OS parries and use them safely despite them allegedly meant to be "risky"
Tekken low parry is weird. I feel like it's basically there to call out hellsweeps lol
I think smash ones are fine because they require you dropping shield to get it, right? So the shield drop time is like 7 frames, thats effectively a whiff animation or cooldown for missing a parry. So I think it's alright. You have to consciously go for it. You can't just fish for a parry with some kind of dirty option select (that I'm aware of... anyway)
Tekken low parry is weird. I feel like it's basically there to call out hellsweeps lol
I don't even know if I think that's a bad thing, especially when people have this weird perception that parries are some super difficult thing to do. Trouble is when you try to tell people that parries are fairly easy to do, they don't believe you.
Besides the issue of killing of zoners like Sagat. My personal issue with SF3 parrying is that I'm a little old fashioned and have always felt that jump ins were supposed to be a commitment. If you read your opponents jump in correctly and and answer with an anti-air then that's good on you, you deserve that damage.
Parrying kinda flips this on its head since your well timed anti-air can in fact be punished if they parry it, leading ton situations where the preferred option might be to just let them jump in. This wouldn't be an issue if parrying didn't leave you at such an advantage but unlike say teching a throw, the person who made the last minute defense is now in a advantageous position.
Parrying kinda flips this on its head since your well timed anti-air can in fact be punished if they parry it, leading ton situations where the preferred option might be to just let them jump in. This wouldn't be an issue if parrying didn't leave you at such an advantage but unlike say teching a throw, the person who made the last minute defense is now in a advantageous position.
Never been a fan of how the Combo Breaker system was implemented to be honest, but I do think stuff like break shots from Real Bout or Guard Cancel Rolls from KOF are a lot more interesting and balanced when it comes to defense mechanics.
Yeah you have to drop the shield to do it, which can be really risky depending on what moves you're trying to do it on.
So like you could fish for it on any slow moves with a ton of start-up frames (e.g., Falcon Punch), but trying to fish on most normals or combo strings is going to cost you, especially against fast characters.
I'm kind of on the same page. I think philosophically, I like when defensive options are strong, but using them successfully resets the game to neutral rather than completely 180ing things in favor of the defender.
Something real world fighters do is go defensive to purposefully tire out the aggressor.
I can think of 3 ways already of implementing this.
Just to give 1 example someone in block could dial in the combo they think the opponent is doing. The more correct guesses they make the more tired their attacker gets which translates into wider frame timings for their future combos.
I can think of 3 ways already of implementing this.
Just to give 1 example someone in block could dial in the combo they think the opponent is doing. The more correct guesses they make the more tired their attacker gets which translates into wider frame timings for their future combos.
Wow I didn't think of it that way. You're right that sounds pretty busted. I only played 3S once in a barcade and it was pretty fun but I actually did find myself pressing forward before a poke because it seemed effective.
Eh, hard no. If you're in my block string/or combo you stay there because you got caught in the first place. With regards to blocking. Learning how to block and being good at it can be a thrill in and of itself. One of the things I was most proud of through my fighting game days.
I'll be clear in that a game can exist with it, but it's a hard pass for me.
I'll be clear in that a game can exist with it, but it's a hard pass for me.
Cinematics and supers can go past that. You can easily hit 20+ with something like S Broly.
So I see people don't seem to like 3S's parry system. So how do people feel about Tekken 7 or Smash Ultimate's parry mechanic out of curiosity?
Personally, I'm a fan of both. In both cases there's a big risk-to-reward ratio; if you go for it and get it, you get a big punish, allowing you to get your own combo in for free, especially on Tekken. But if you miss, then you're going to get opened up and eat big damage more than likely.
Though I admit I'm not quite as skill at Tekken than I am at Smash, so perhaps someone with more skill can speak on it better than I can.
Ultimates Parry system is kind of janky. I don't really like it. Tekkens low parry is fine.
Hey at least I didn't come in and say most of these burst mechanics are just knock-off SamSho Rage Explosions or something. ^^
Even if it's true.
🙃
Oh shit, you are right. Forgot SamSho 4 came out around 96-97...
Combo breakers suck.
If I hit you, then I want my damage.
Give me pushblock, alpha counters, invincible reversals, and good movement instead. I'll even take parries if they actually require a real commitment.
I get not enjoying the "1-player game" of long combos, but then you can just play games with shorter combos.
Combo breakers in KI work more like parries than "lol, you outplayed me but it doesn't count now" buttons. You have to break with the correct input relative to the attack you were hit with, and even if you read or guess right, the attacker can do a string that will punish your break any way.
I'm aware that the combos are shorter, but that's not changing my point that not every game needs more defense. If you added more to SF2 it wouldn't necessarily make it a better game lol. That game has some nasty zoning and footsies some characters have to overcome that can overwhelming in its own way which can simulate that inability to play or "have a turn" like long combos can, but I just think there's more to it than just the number defensive options and should be considered on a per game basis when deciding what tools to give someone. The homogenization of fighting games is making the genre more bland for me personally.
It can be annoying for spectators to watch but DBFZ's defensive options are all extremely strong and often lead to good reward. You don't know what you're talking about in regards to this.
Pressing buttons can lead to a TOD, A f1 reflecting can often lead to a 2M starter, various tech options with delays, OS tag, guard cancel are all extremely strong.
Blockstrings being long =/= defensive options being bad.
And as others pointed out, your example had the defending player scared when he actually could have done multiple things on reaction to get out of the situation.
Last edited:
I've always liked MOTW's just defend mechinic as it feels more natural than say 3rd strikes parry system. That being said SNK always had some unique stuff for defense play, in pretty much all of their fighting games now that I think about it. Last blade has a button dedicate to counter attacks, Samurai showdown has like weapon disarming and parrying mechanics. Even KOF has rolling or dodging mechanics depending on which games you play. Or even from like KOF 96-98 if you were knocked "dizzy" you could actually call one of your characters on your team from the background to prevent someone getting a larger combo off you.
DBFZ will have players stuck in blockstrings until being opened up into a really extensive punish to the point where you can sit there and sip your coffee while watching it go down. I know people love flashy combos and supers but that game broke me.
You want to know why so many new players rage or give up on these games, im guessing part of it is because half the time their control is completely taken away from them for extended periods of time.
It's all reactable. I said blockstrings are a bit too long in DBFZ, but almost everything in DBFZ is reactable outside of certain 50/50s with assists or fuzzy stuff.
Regardless my point is that the defensive side of DBFZ is engaging due to having a lot of options, and most new or inexperienced players will not be able to see this due to lack of knowledge. Reflect is an extremely good defensive tool.
They also added sparking during blockstun in a newer patch so if people don't want to block for too long, you can do that as well.
Last edited:
I like the parry mechanic in Rivals of Aether. There is actually no block/shield button in that game. You either dodge roll, air dodge (or directional air dodge), or parry. The game is so fast-paced and extremely combat heavy that timing a parry is very rewarding if you can capitalize on it. When you parry someone, they're temporarily immobilized and you have the opportunity to punish them.
Also, being a Smash Bros. clone, it also incorporates direction influence (DI) to help escape combos and early KOs.
Also, being a Smash Bros. clone, it also incorporates direction influence (DI) to help escape combos and early KOs.
I feel like the new KI was really good about not having combo breakers be a sort of trump card; the presence of counter-breakers adds a further layer of mindgames that translates super nicely into enjoyment for both players and viewers. Shadow counters are pretty cool too, as far as increased defensive options go.
I know, its just so disproportionate and often turns into a single player execution test and cutscene demo for longer than most.
Most games have an interesting neutral exchange but quickly throw that aside to let one player have all the control for extended periods of time.
Dead or Alive lets you counter attacks. Depending on the combo you're in, you can even counter mid-combo.
I don't think arguing the philosophy of blocking in DBFZ really gets you anywhere— the ultimate result of the game mechanics is that players are highly incentivized to block for nine years and tech the inevitable throw and get back to neutral. Most people don't like experiencing or watching this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well, they're true combos if you anticipate/condition the DI. The thing that makes it constantly engaging is those games advantage states ie. being offstage vs edgeguarding, executing a combo vs attempting to escape, being on stage vs being on the edge. You're always interacting regardless of the scenario.
I agree, I just think that's due to the lack of offensive options for the most part making blockstrings and offense very same-y, not the defensive options, lol.
I don't consider something a true combo if it only works in specific DI situations because if they DI'd another way, it wouldn't have worked, even if some other combo could have worked there. There are many situations where you can cover every option but true combos are rarer. At that point I guess it's semantics though.
And yeah, that's what I was getting at re constant player interactivity. There's no point where your inputs don't matter unless no one is approaching or you're getting wobbled.
KI combo breakers are pretty unique in that you have to hit the same button strength as your opponent to break and that they in turn can also counter that breaker by predicting you would do it and inputting breaker at the same time.
This means unlike most breakers that just equate to having meter equals I'm gonna break a combo you still have to make reads when being comboed in KI. If you input medium punch and medium kick hoping to predict the opponent inputting a medium attack for a breaker and he instead hit Heavy your breaker fails and you are locked out of Breaking for awhile. In KI this is devastating because that means they are free to input a shit load of heavy attacks in the combo at non risk. Those are usually easy to break because heavies arent fast so using a bunch means you usually get broken and dont get your combo to finish. Since combos not finished with an ender dont convert potential damage to actual damage you lost most everything...but if someone is locked out go crazy and do all heavies and max out the damage.
This is why KI combo breakers are engaging and normal breakers are not. KI breakers require proper reads or they result in more damage than ever.
Plus players on offense can predict a breaker attempt and counter breaker that to go to neutral to try and keep it goin. Both players have to make reads when on defense or during a combo. It's never flowchart training mode combo reels that repeat in ki because samey combos get broke.
KI breakers are fine...others generally are not and require loading players with meter systems and extra mechanics to balance breakers like baroque cancelling to avoid a mega crash knockback in tvc to turn a breaker attempt into an easy reset.
This means unlike most breakers that just equate to having meter equals I'm gonna break a combo you still have to make reads when being comboed in KI. If you input medium punch and medium kick hoping to predict the opponent inputting a medium attack for a breaker and he instead hit Heavy your breaker fails and you are locked out of Breaking for awhile. In KI this is devastating because that means they are free to input a shit load of heavy attacks in the combo at non risk. Those are usually easy to break because heavies arent fast so using a bunch means you usually get broken and dont get your combo to finish. Since combos not finished with an ender dont convert potential damage to actual damage you lost most everything...but if someone is locked out go crazy and do all heavies and max out the damage.
This is why KI combo breakers are engaging and normal breakers are not. KI breakers require proper reads or they result in more damage than ever.
Plus players on offense can predict a breaker attempt and counter breaker that to go to neutral to try and keep it goin. Both players have to make reads when on defense or during a combo. It's never flowchart training mode combo reels that repeat in ki because samey combos get broke.
KI breakers are fine...others generally are not and require loading players with meter systems and extra mechanics to balance breakers like baroque cancelling to avoid a mega crash knockback in tvc to turn a breaker attempt into an easy reset.
Ironically that's the exact reason I don't play smash enough, lack of true combos turns me away from the series.
