I've never actually played those. I'm thinking king of fighters or guilty gear for example.
-
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.
What Daigo Expects in SF6 (wants to get rid of comeback mechanics)
- Thread starter Bob White
- Start date
I've never actually played those. I'm thinking king of fighters or guilty gear for example.
I think people are misinterpreting what I'm saying or perhaps I'm not stating it correctly. First and foremost Diago's comeback is legendary because of the parry, into combo, into super/ultra. Very few people have the skill and since we're in the fgc we all know how many people tried unsuccessfully.
My point is that at the end of the skillful pary into combo, he finished it off with a super. I consider super a comeback mechanic. If you don't then obviously that's where we differ but I'd never try to diminish the skill and execution that went into creating that iconic moment in SF history.
Supers are still very commonly used in King of Fighters though.
Especially in XIV since MAX mode still lets you use a level 1 super without spending more meter.
How is super a comeback mechanic when meter gained for that resource is mainly through offense, and not getting your ass beat?
Exactly.
Naw Tekken rage is fine. Rage Arts are all super unsafe and they don't have armor until the 8th frame. The person with rage is taking a huge risk if he chooses to use them. They only ever hit on the HARDEST of reads.
Rage Drives are more like combo extenders or a 1 time mixup tool since they give plus frames on block. You use it and then you lose it. Compare that to a lot of SFV triggers where an activation means 100% to 20% because they're on a timer and often grant multiple mixups even after a knockdown.
Yeah then you clearly dont. The comeback is that he's making basically multiple frame perfect parries and then completes a combo into Super. Super, a thing SF and most FGs have had for a long time. He used his skill to parry and get the combo to win here.You don't see the trigger/super?
If that isn't a comeback mechanic I don't know what is.
A comeback MECHANIC would be him pressing a button and then suddenly, Ken can parry any attack thrown at him for a duration of time which then allows him to combo into something else.
Jesus christ, the super meter is not a comeback mechanic. You can gain super meter by hitting your enemy, get hit and even by doing special moves even if they whiff. Ultra meter in SFIV was a comeback mechanic because it only filled if you got hit. I also think it was fine in the way it was implemented in SFIV because of 3 things:
-They were very unsafe if you blocked/dodged them
-They didn't add stun, so there is no risk in getting dizzy and eating another combo
-Even if you land it, your enemy will gain an Ultra at one point in the match too
I personally think they are fine if implemented like this because they can change the momentum and add another layer of depth to the game but I wouldn't mind if they removed it.
-They were very unsafe if you blocked/dodged them
-They didn't add stun, so there is no risk in getting dizzy and eating another combo
-Even if you land it, your enemy will gain an Ultra at one point in the match too
I personally think they are fine if implemented like this because they can change the momentum and add another layer of depth to the game but I wouldn't mind if they removed it.
I'm fine with Rage in Tekken 7, that's as far as it should go, though. Rage Arts are mostly punishable and Rage Drives generally give you one single opportunity for damage and offense. I am baffled by some Rage Arts being safe, though.
Well the first and most obvious reason is that parrying limits the types of characters 3 had. There are no characters in SF3 that revolve around zoning or long range pokes. There isn't even a reason to throw a fireball in 3S unless you want to bait a parry or link one done from close range into super. Can you imagine how low tier a character lie Sagat/Menat/Vega/Dhalsim would be in 3S? Controlling space just isn't a particularly easy thing to do in this game unless you're Chun Li. But I guess game mechanics debilitating certain styles of play is for some reason only a bad thing when SF5 does it
That's just one example, but there are several things I don't like about SF3.
Is a V-Trigger a comeback mechanic when you can build your offence around increasing it? I don't see how it's different from Super's that build when you take hits.
V-Trigger is built by getting hit, using v-skill, and performing crush counters. Some characters can build v-meter offensively through v-skill, but most can't. Obviously how many crush counters someone can get in a match isn't guaranteed either.
I wish it would work like that, but building it is very limited to certain characters and playstyles. But yeah, Karin can do it, for example.
The resource is still mainly gained through receiving damage. Another iffy part about V-Triggers is that some characters have V-Skills that are more useful for gaining V-Gauge than others, so they gain access to what is ostensibly the comeback mechanic faster than others.
Thinking like that, it's also odd how you gain meter for the comeback mechanic when you crush counter somebody.
But outside of cases where someone builds V-trigger really quickly because of multiple CCs and good V-Skill use and they're at 80%, you'll usually see a character pop it when they're lower on life. Also lends to that perception because of how explosive some are.
Some characters can get it super quickly, but others like Menat or Abigail now only get V-meter when they're on death's doorstep. V-Triggers vary so wildly from character to character.
Yeah, pretty much. While, I think pro players opinions can be useful, I don't think basing design decisions on what the top 0.1% of players like is a good idea. Top players are gonna want a game shaped to their strengths. Just because someone is amazing at fighters doesn't mean their design choices would be best for the game and bulk of the audience.
V-Trigger is a better system than Revenge. In SF4, you can get revenge meter from being hit, but applying the Ultra somewhere in the match? You might never get to use it except wake up Ultra.
You can still build V-gauge from your V-skill or getting crush counters and you don't need to be hit for it. That itself makes it better.
That being said, there's always nice tweaks to be made like generating way less meter from being hit and tilting the meter generation to offense. I get what Daigo is saying but these mechanics can always be balanced if Capcom wants to.
These games need extra mechanics to stand out and be innovative, otherwise, might as well just do a 3D remaster Street Fighter II.
You can still build V-gauge from your V-skill or getting crush counters and you don't need to be hit for it. That itself makes it better.
That being said, there's always nice tweaks to be made like generating way less meter from being hit and tilting the meter generation to offense. I get what Daigo is saying but these mechanics can always be balanced if Capcom wants to.
These games need extra mechanics to stand out and be innovative, otherwise, might as well just do a 3D remaster Street Fighter II.
SFV is particularly bad since it has V-trigger and you can't die from chip damage, unless it's a super.
Comeback is a rare thing that is pulled of only by the very skilled. When they changed to the point that anyone can recover, then the match stop being interesting.
Just because it's a hot take doesn't mean it's wrong.
It's actually really cool from a certain perspective. Especially when one is introduced to the game, parrying is so simple and intuitive and satisfying. But in the long run, it has such a huge effect on the game that it contributes to three feeling like not actual street fighter.
An important thing in Street fighter is that either a character has a fireball or they don't. a fight with two characters that have no fireball is going to be different than a fight with only one character that has a fireball will be different from a fight with two characters with a fireball. The parry messes that up. there's other problems, too but that's a good example of how the Perry plays havoc with the game's balance.
Heeeeeellllll yeah!
Yes. Yes. And I want to add why I think the rage arts are good too.
Beginner and especially casual fighting game players can find the classic double fire ball super motion difficult. Particularly under pressure. I've run into my share of frustrated noobs who can do a fireball all day but are having trouble pumping out two before hitting the button. They feel like they can't do their most damaging move and they feel like an incomplete player.
The single frame input of the rage drive lets everyone do their super whenever they like. That is nice for accessibility, but my point has to do with what follows from that as a player new to fighting games in general learns.
The brand new player encounters super-itis immediately. You can see this on the bottom ranks online. New players will mash out that rage art the moment they get it. But players in a slightly higher rank will hold that meter for a tiny bit. They are still going to do it any second, but you see they've learned a little restraint. Probably from getting their rage art blocked and eating the opponent's rage art right after.
This consistent pattern inplayer behavior is what led me to believe the rage arts are helping players learn. The new player has got 1 shot at a big damaged move. They can't spam it so it has to count. And they soon learn that if that rage art gets blocked because they can't keep their rocket in their pocket, they are going to get fucked up big-time. They learn to hold on to that meter, and try to launch the move more carefully. Thid immediately improves their game in a way that is clear and obvious to them and they go up a rank or two.
So they get easy access to not just the super, but the experience of building your strategy around carefully landing and unsafe move that leads to big damage. if they continue to improve, this experience will translate directly to trying to land a launcher as they learn combos. And that's a big part of the basic game.
That's my hypothesis.
But the inputs are too complicated so I can't do them right. 😗
Capcom wants to make a game that is fun to watch and has elastic band mechanics like Mario Kart to help casual players eke more wins. These moments of defeating a stronger player are very memorable and key to long-term player engagement.
Now Street Fighter has no random items so it uses hurt meter mechanics like ultras and v-triggers instead. Those are much fairer than the likes of Mario Kart (no randomness involved), but they still don't address the frequently monotonous nature of high level games where players only use 10% of their character's total moves and combos because the rest are non-optimal.
I have a solution that addresses both complaints. Hear me out:
Use damage scaling to discourage repeated moves. The same way we do now with combos, except on a match-wide timeframe.
Think about it: in real life (and in anime) once you've seen one of your opponent's moves, you will better know how to mitigate damage from it, and should take less damage from it, like a boxer who moves his head back as he's getting punched will get less damage than one who doesn't move it.
In the lower levels, this will reward newbies who are exploring their move-set (spamming random moves :p) and punish those who repeat one "annoying" move over and over. (Note: i'm not judging. Using one annoying move is a valid strat that i've used many times. I tick tick throwed like a mofo)
In the upper levels, it will reward top players who know their move-set intimately and know a wide variety of combos and punish those who are looking to exploit an OP move as much as possible, something that is perfectly legal, but boring to watch.
Cross levels, it would increase the amount of move interactions dramatically since both players will be using more moves. This might increase randomness and let lower ranked players be able to win against slightly more skilled players than they otherwise could have. It would also let higher ranked players make dramatic comebacks and win when they are almost dead against an overconfident lower player.
This would also compress the tiers more, and increase player variety in top 16 and top 8, which is a huge plus as those televised events serve as advertising for the game (since you want the maximum number of characters and styles to be shown. Ideally, the top 16 finalists would each play a different character for maximum entertainment and advertising value at Evo.)
And best of all, this doesn't reward losing.
I hope Capcom is taking notes. I hereby proclaim that ya'll can use this idea for free as long as I get my name in the first 20 seconds of credits. I'll let you pick the title.
Now Street Fighter has no random items so it uses hurt meter mechanics like ultras and v-triggers instead. Those are much fairer than the likes of Mario Kart (no randomness involved), but they still don't address the frequently monotonous nature of high level games where players only use 10% of their character's total moves and combos because the rest are non-optimal.
I have a solution that addresses both complaints. Hear me out:
Use damage scaling to discourage repeated moves. The same way we do now with combos, except on a match-wide timeframe.
Think about it: in real life (and in anime) once you've seen one of your opponent's moves, you will better know how to mitigate damage from it, and should take less damage from it, like a boxer who moves his head back as he's getting punched will get less damage than one who doesn't move it.
In the lower levels, this will reward newbies who are exploring their move-set (spamming random moves :p) and punish those who repeat one "annoying" move over and over. (Note: i'm not judging. Using one annoying move is a valid strat that i've used many times. I tick tick throwed like a mofo)
In the upper levels, it will reward top players who know their move-set intimately and know a wide variety of combos and punish those who are looking to exploit an OP move as much as possible, something that is perfectly legal, but boring to watch.
Cross levels, it would increase the amount of move interactions dramatically since both players will be using more moves. This might increase randomness and let lower ranked players be able to win against slightly more skilled players than they otherwise could have. It would also let higher ranked players make dramatic comebacks and win when they are almost dead against an overconfident lower player.
This would also compress the tiers more, and increase player variety in top 16 and top 8, which is a huge plus as those televised events serve as advertising for the game (since you want the maximum number of characters and styles to be shown. Ideally, the top 16 finalists would each play a different character for maximum entertainment and advertising value at Evo.)
And best of all, this doesn't reward losing.
I hope Capcom is taking notes. I hereby proclaim that ya'll can use this idea for free as long as I get my name in the first 20 seconds of credits. I'll let you pick the title.
Last edited:
Comebacks are a very common thing in SFV. It's a system designed well with good intentions, but man does it lower the skill barrier and most importantly the thought process of playing a game of chess.
SFV has solid mechanics and it's one of the biggest disappointments this gen for me. Loads of potential and they just killed it with this V-trigger stuff. The uniqueness of each character in SFV is ultimately to its detriment as it's impossible to ever truly balance.
Just pick up Smash, once your ok at the game you can play with like half the cast. Trying playing Guile and then going to Akuma and then Menat to Zangief. There needs to be a more uniform system to the game.
He has to do his out of a stance, the only character that has this limitation so I think it's pretty fair. You can also in theory side step it so it isn't perfectly safe. Even still his Rage Drive is a waaay better use of his Rage anyways.
Also damn we need to loop in Scrubquotes on half these posts lmfao
It doesn't even matter if you were talking about how global warming is real, anything you say after this means nothing.
Admittedly I'm not too good at Tekken 7 so whenever I play a Hworang player, it's mostly of case of getting hit by moves I have no idea how the fuck he does it and feeling like his pressure never ends.
So on the rare chance that I somehow manage to win in neutral or something and get him down to rage levels and still can't punish his rage art if I bait it out, it has left me so salty that I would rather work my way towards a degree in neuroscience than bother to learn how to beat Hwoarang in tekken 7 because I'm just so fucking salty.
Guile instantly low tier. This would only cause high level players to have even more homogeneous playstyles. People would just find the optimal number of times to press each button and use each move. By doing this you not only decrease combo variability, which is already a problem in SFV but you also decrease the variability of what happens in neutral.
So characters like Guile who's special-moveset is just two moves would get fucked over?
No offense, but this sounds like someone who doesn't play fighting games giving their opinion on how to improve the genre, i.e. it's very misinformed.
Things that are only there improve things for newer player almost always negatively impact the game existing players. It's incredibly frustrating to see a mechanic thrown into a game which aids someone's who's gonna move on in a couple weeks while leaving a worse game for the person sticking around.
I believe that's by design. One of the concerns about SFIV that Capcom brought up was that some characters couldn't use a universal mechanic like Focus Attack as well as others. The point of the V-System was to create mechanics unique to each character.
After seeing this on Scrubquotes, I had to track down this thread.
Super moves were originally intended as a comeback mechanic by Capcom when they were added in SSF2, as a way for a less experienced player who may not know combos to do a lot of damage at once. Supers have morphed over time into combo/round finishers with the comeback aspect de-emphasized.
I don't think there is anything impertinently wrong with V-Triggers and comeback mechanics as a concept. If you're beating your opponent, but fail to watch their comeback gauge and aren't able to recover when your momentum is halted, well that's on you. That said, I think what a lot of people here and probably Daigo are thinking of are stuff like G or Balrog's V-Trigger, where a player can turn a single hit in neutral into a 40-60% life loss. In my mind, a comeback mechanic should give the losing player an extra tool to reverse momentum into their favor, not single-handedly close out a round.
Super moves were originally intended as a comeback mechanic by Capcom when they were added in SSF2, as a way for a less experienced player who may not know combos to do a lot of damage at once. Supers have morphed over time into combo/round finishers with the comeback aspect de-emphasized.
I don't think there is anything impertinently wrong with V-Triggers and comeback mechanics as a concept. If you're beating your opponent, but fail to watch their comeback gauge and aren't able to recover when your momentum is halted, well that's on you. That said, I think what a lot of people here and probably Daigo are thinking of are stuff like G or Balrog's V-Trigger, where a player can turn a single hit in neutral into a 40-60% life loss. In my mind, a comeback mechanic should give the losing player an extra tool to reverse momentum into their favor, not single-handedly close out a round.
The moves would only be penalized after they hit, and chip damage will not be affected.
in this scenario, Guile's opponents could block a hundred sonic booms and they would do lots of chip damage. Guile's first 2 or 3 combos would still do a lot of damage and he would win the first round just as easily if he jumps or hops in to attack. His Sonic booms would still cause stun and allow him to jump and kick at the same time they hit, so even if their damage is a bit reduced, his kick/punch jumping combo, or standing Fierce, or sweep, or whatever else will still deal full damage.
The second round, however, he might be at a 20 or 30% DMG handicap overall if he re-uses all the exact same moves and combos. He would have to change tactics to keep maximum DMG output. This is something players already do against different characters so it's negligible extra effort. Mathematically, it is exactly the same effort as having one extra character on the roster added to the roster.
Also, don't forget. The other player, spamming hadokens or whatever is also affected, keeping things fair.
Also, this means the player that hits the other the fewest times will have a slight edge in damage in the 2nd or 3rd round.
there is literally nothing wrong with designing a game centered around having to know the ins and outs of your main.
Comeback mechanics aren't going anywhere. At best, they should be reserved for a flashy super that beginners can mash out on wakeup or in neutral (Ultras, Rage Arts, Fatal Blows). Although I love V-Triggers in SFV, they're way too good which impacts intermediate and expert play.
Sounded really good on paper. But then you realise that they locked a lot of the fun stuff behind a V-Trigger and that "V-Trigger activation" is still a universal mechanic that benefits some more than others.
Like...I kinda like the idea, but the implementation is the problem.
I have ben playing street fighter since 1987. I have two arcade sticks and an SRK account. I know I am advancing something new and radical, that may need extensive tuning, but I wouldn't say I don't know or play fighting games.
In Guile's case, his moves would only be penalized after they hit, and chip damage will not be affected.
in this scenario, Guile's opponents could block a hundred sonic booms and they would do lots of chip damage. Guile's first 2 or 3 combos would still do a lot of damage and he would win the first round just as easily if he jumps or hops in to attack. His Sonic booms would still cause stun and allow him to jump and kick at the same time they hit, so even if their damage is a bit reduced, his kick/punch jumping combo, or standing Fierce, or sweep, or whatever else will still deal full damage.
The second round, however, he might be at a 20 or 30% DMG handicap overall if he re-uses all the exact same moves and combos. He would have to change tactics to keep maximum DMG output. This is something players already do against different characters so it's negligible extra effort. Mathematically, it is exactly the same effort as having one extra character added to the roster.
Also, don't forget. The other player, spamming Hadokens or whatever is also affected, keeping things fair.
Also, this means the player that hits the other the fewest times will have a slight edge in damage in the 2nd or 3rd round, giving them a slightly higher chance of come back, but they'd have to work for it.
But if you wanted to implement all of this for a comeback possibility, wouldn't it just even out after a few hits? I get you down to 30%, my damage is reduced. So now you hit harder than me, but when I'm at 30%, your damage is reduced. Do you know what I mean? I feel like it wouldn't change much except force people to play a certain type of style, which is never good in a fighting game.
And, you know, the people who need a comeback mechanic are usually not more knowledgable than those that beat them up in the first place, would be my guess.
I agree. This is what I was talking about with Tekken 7. The rage art is great for new players, then they get more experience and start seeing the advantages of using the rage drive instead. Not a perfect system, but simple and clever.
Obviously some characters would need to be [re]designed to turn their V-skills [back] into special moves.
E.g., Cammy's classic spin knuckle was turned into a V-skill in SFV, after all; it's not beyond reason to make it a special move again.
I think there's a few issues here:
1. This hurts characters disproportionately who do a few big moves for big damage (Zangief) over characters who are fast and do long combos (Karin).
2. You mention that this scaling activates on hits. This unintentionally makes certain moves like hadokens better as their strength is in zoning and spacing, not damage. Jab anti-airs weren't good in V because of the damage, they're good because of the oki you gain from the move.
3. The real-life examples you use are people making a choice, like headslipping a punch, whereas the game would be making the choice for you.
I'm not entirely against the idea but I don't think players who play the game optimally if this scaling didn't exist should be penalized. The player who uses a variety of moves should get a super meter increase, kind of like how you gain meter faster in GG for playing aggressively.
IMO V-Trigger's main issue isn't the comeback factor its that for a lot of characters their best tools are locked behind it and so for long periods of the match you are playing w/ half your character damn near. This was probably done in an attempt to make it so it was easier to learn your character but IMO it mainly made a lot of the cast kinda boring. It feel like a lot of the game overcorrected SFIV's flaws in a sense instead of refining them.
I'm new to fighting games in general, so I'm wondering if stun needs to exist in street fighter? Isn't stun + v-trigger a bit too powerful
So many times I watch high level street fighter 5 and literally 2 openings off the initial v trigger hit you're stunned(basically off two guess combos or one v-trigger combo,another combo, then grab)
Once you're stunned you are dead or very close to dead.
Street fighter 5 is at its best imo, when it's more neutral heavy, but as soon as v-trigger activates I can't lie, I kind of loathe watching it, because once again, some v-trigger are too good. Especially last season
So many times I watch high level street fighter 5 and literally 2 openings off the initial v trigger hit you're stunned(basically off two guess combos or one v-trigger combo,another combo, then grab)
Once you're stunned you are dead or very close to dead.
Street fighter 5 is at its best imo, when it's more neutral heavy, but as soon as v-trigger activates I can't lie, I kind of loathe watching it, because once again, some v-trigger are too good. Especially last season
Guessing wrong because of ambiguity and getting stunned after an onslaught of offense isn't a SFV thing or a v-trigger thing.
The real problem comes from SFV having -2 situations every other second and barely any defensive options, making you have to guess more than usual. Half the time it's better to just block and take a throw.
Turning it into a V-skill made sense, it was usually a pretty crappy move (not in SFV), and you usually only used one strength of it in most games.
The thing I don't like about V triggers is the install nature of them, that's what leads to comebacks that are too easy to do. Throw in ease on confirmation into trigger into combo that gave oki, and it was even easier. I think the real issue with SFV is how oki-reliant the game ended up being. They backed off of that in S3 some, but didn't make the neutral more interesting.
I guess what I'm getting it as that the fundamental issues with SF5 were a boring neutral game, and V-triggers being able to steal rounds too easily, they were too good for the most part.
If SF6 had better projectiles (keep anti-projectile good too though, maybe improve that some too), less advantage on light attacks, and more blockstun, I think that would solve a good number of things.
Yes. I first played SF1 in arcades back in 1987 when it first came out which means I'm old AF. And having 2 arcade sticks means i'm OG and hardcore AF.
I didn't want to flex so I tried to put it in more subtle terms, but you left me no choice.
Anyways, I'm not that good. Just Gold. I don't have as much time to play nowadays, with my old person responsibilities and whatnot. But I will forever remain a master of theory fighter. Wish that could be my tag on Era TBH.
Our definitions differ here. I mean I've had the upper hand in several SF's and lost to a wake up super lol. I've always viewed supers as comeback mechanics, at least that how it's been used, especially online, but if you define it differently then that's ok too.