|
Team Liquid Player list: Add | View |
United States12181 Posts
On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are".
I think Ultra was a step back in a lot of ways. Pretty much the only good thing about it was delayed wakeup and more unblockable setup fixes. Red Focus turned out to be a rich-get-richer mechanic (it benefited characters like Akuma and E.Ryu the most), and Rolento and Elena were extremely broken. It was a classic case of trying to cram too much value into their release.
|
On March 01 2017 03:18 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are". I think Ultra was a step back in a lot of ways. Pretty much the only good thing about it was delayed wakeup and more unblockable setup fixes. Red Focus turned out to be a rich-get-richer mechanic (it benefited characters like Akuma and E.Ryu the most), and Rolento and Elena were extremely broken. It was a classic case of trying to cram too much value into their release. It certainly wasn't perfect. I really didn't like red focus because like you said, it was mostly used as a combo extension / free ultra for the characters that were already good (Yun immediately comes to mind) and almost never used for its "intended" purpose of a normal focus attack that absorbs multiple hits. But delayed wakeup was a huge fix for the strong vortex that ruled AE2012 and took emphasis off setups. I thought that was great. Rolento and Elena are a shame really because they were brand new and now they'll never see the slight adjustments they need (or in Elena's case, hit/hurtbox fixes lol...) to settle into the rest of the cast, which they likely would have gotten if the game had another year or two of competition. I think in every other respect Ultra was a solid improvement on the previous iterations. Though I will admit I don't know how much of that is due to the very high level of competition we were seeing toward the end. Many characters got a lot of love toward the end and the game was in a state where almost anyone could feel like a threat, even if there were still very clear top tiers.
I try not to be biased because I just really do not enjoy watching or playing SFV, but I think there's a lot to learn from previous versions and I think criticism is important, rather than "well new FGs just suck, that's how it is, it takes time to get it right". Believe me I was begging for SFV toward the end of Ultra, because I was just ready for something fresh and there were things about playing USF4 that I was just so tired of. But it took SFV being what it is to make me appreciate what we had, and I think there are probably others with a similar experience.
|
On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are".
You can say they should learn from earlier ones, but these games are so deep it's not rly possible to get them right. I mean, look at every fighting game series out there. They ALL take time. Capcom, ArcSys, Namco, NRS - none of them are able to get it right from the gate. Even if you look at individual series (SF, Versus, each new iteration takes time to develop)
Instead they try to have a solid foundation, to which they improve the smoothness of controls over time, add some speed, and some "craziness".
Also keep in mind, a part of it is due to developers having no idea how tech will develop over time once you have thousands of people playing daily.
|
United States12181 Posts
On March 01 2017 03:42 Duka08 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 03:18 Excalibur_Z wrote:On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are". I think Ultra was a step back in a lot of ways. Pretty much the only good thing about it was delayed wakeup and more unblockable setup fixes. Red Focus turned out to be a rich-get-richer mechanic (it benefited characters like Akuma and E.Ryu the most), and Rolento and Elena were extremely broken. It was a classic case of trying to cram too much value into their release. It certainly wasn't perfect. I really didn't like red focus because like you said, it was mostly used as a combo extension / free ultra for the characters that were already good (Yun immediately comes to mind) and almost never used for its "intended" purpose of a normal focus attack that absorbs multiple hits. But delayed wakeup was a huge fix for the strong vortex that ruled AE2012 and took emphasis off setups. I thought that was great. Rolento and Elena are a shame really because they were brand new and now they'll never see the slight adjustments they need (or in Elena's case, hit/hurtbox fixes lol...) to settle into the rest of the cast, which they likely would have gotten if the game had another year or two of competition. I think in every other respect Ultra was a solid improvement on the previous iterations. Though I will admit I don't know how much of that is due to the very high level of competition we were seeing toward the end. Many characters got a lot of love toward the end and the game was in a state where almost anyone could feel like a threat, even if there were still very clear top tiers. I try not to be biased because I just really do not enjoy watching or playing SFV, but I think there's a lot to learn from previous versions and I think criticism is important, rather than "well new FGs just suck, that's how it is, it takes time to get it right". Believe me I was begging for SFV toward the end of Ultra, because I was just ready for something fresh and there were things about playing USF4 that I was just so tired of. But it took SFV being what it is to make me appreciate what we had, and I think there are probably others with a similar experience.
Yeah I totally agree. I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of SFV either (both watching and playing), certainly not to the degree that I liked SF4.
SFV did some things that were great: no chip kills, big damage for almost every character, grey health on blocked normals, minimum scaling on supers, requiring meter for safe or invincible moves (though this one's a little more debatable).
However, there are a lot of frustrating parts: longer input delay, much slower pace, "samey" combos, wide variance in character visual quality (nitpick), a secondary resource meter (and associated generator) that feels shoehorned in, bizarrely inconsistent execution requirements (why does Karin have a just-frame version of her Tenko when combos now have input buffers?).
The rushed launch really put a bad taste in my mouth, as well. I think we'd probably be more satisfied if they kept Ultra for another year and released what they have now as SFV (this probably wouldn't have been financially feasible though since their initial revenue drove development of future content).
|
On March 01 2017 05:42 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 03:42 Duka08 wrote:On March 01 2017 03:18 Excalibur_Z wrote:On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are". I think Ultra was a step back in a lot of ways. Pretty much the only good thing about it was delayed wakeup and more unblockable setup fixes. Red Focus turned out to be a rich-get-richer mechanic (it benefited characters like Akuma and E.Ryu the most), and Rolento and Elena were extremely broken. It was a classic case of trying to cram too much value into their release. It certainly wasn't perfect. I really didn't like red focus because like you said, it was mostly used as a combo extension / free ultra for the characters that were already good (Yun immediately comes to mind) and almost never used for its "intended" purpose of a normal focus attack that absorbs multiple hits. But delayed wakeup was a huge fix for the strong vortex that ruled AE2012 and took emphasis off setups. I thought that was great. Rolento and Elena are a shame really because they were brand new and now they'll never see the slight adjustments they need (or in Elena's case, hit/hurtbox fixes lol...) to settle into the rest of the cast, which they likely would have gotten if the game had another year or two of competition. I think in every other respect Ultra was a solid improvement on the previous iterations. Though I will admit I don't know how much of that is due to the very high level of competition we were seeing toward the end. Many characters got a lot of love toward the end and the game was in a state where almost anyone could feel like a threat, even if there were still very clear top tiers. I try not to be biased because I just really do not enjoy watching or playing SFV, but I think there's a lot to learn from previous versions and I think criticism is important, rather than "well new FGs just suck, that's how it is, it takes time to get it right". Believe me I was begging for SFV toward the end of Ultra, because I was just ready for something fresh and there were things about playing USF4 that I was just so tired of. But it took SFV being what it is to make me appreciate what we had, and I think there are probably others with a similar experience. Yeah I totally agree. I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of SFV either (both watching and playing), certainly not to the degree that I liked SF4. SFV did some things that were great: no chip kills, big damage for almost every character, grey health on blocked normals, minimum scaling on supers, requiring meter for safe or invincible moves (though this one's a little more debatable). However, there are a lot of frustrating parts: longer input delay, much slower pace, "samey" combos, wide variance in character visual quality (nitpick), a secondary resource meter (and associated generator) that feels shoehorned in, bizarrely inconsistent execution requirements (why does Karin have a just-frame version of her Tenko when combos now have input buffers?). The rushed launch really put a bad taste in my mouth, as well. I think we'd probably be more satisfied if they kept Ultra for another year and released what they have now as SFV (this probably wouldn't have been financially feasible though since their initial revenue drove development of future content). Pretty much exactly. A lot of my issues lie with the fundamental feel of the gameplay and actually fighting, online and off. The lack of content and polish is just icing on the cake really, and definitely down to deadlines and rushed release. I think there's still a lot they could improve beyond just adding more for casuals to do. Which they have been working on over time, to be fair.
I agree with most of the SFV positive changes you listed. I'm not a big fan of the DP nerf, but that has more to do with the fact that it was the only good answer to some characters rushing you down on wake up. Like I said I haven't played much recently though, so I could be very wrong. Still, it's nice to see all those positive aspects in one place because you're right, there is a lot of hope for the core mechanics going forward. My biggest issues are the unresponsiveness (mostly input latency and buffer) and the stubby normals (both overall stubbiness but also hitboxes poorly matched to animations). I would probably be a lot more confident and positive about the whole game, even if I wasn't playing much, if Capcom was more consistent and interactive with feedback / keeping the community in the loop. Communication seems to have gotten worse over time and some of the character changes they've made in the last few patches have been random or too extreme, both good and bad.
|
On March 01 2017 05:42 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 03:42 Duka08 wrote:On March 01 2017 03:18 Excalibur_Z wrote:On March 01 2017 02:57 Duka08 wrote: I don't really agree with the idea of "it's new and takes time to get these things right", just because previous titles have gone that way.
SFV was coming right off the heels of USF4. I think a lot of people would say that Ultra was the best rendition of SF4, and could use it as an argument that it took what, 6-7 years to get there and make SF4 the best it could be. So it's "no surprise" that SFV is not as good at release. But I would argue that also means Capcom should have learned a lot from SF4 and the revisions it took to improve it. It was a smooth transition, there was no 5 year gap where the franchise was dead or anything. Just because it's a new game in the series doesn't mean you need to start from complete scratch.
There's no question that 2+ years from now SFV will be in a much better state. We have no idea what kind of changes could be made between now and then, and I've no doubt that I'll be playing it much more than I have over the past year of its infancy. But I don't think that's a good reason to shrug off criticism and disappointment because "that's just how new fighters are". I think Ultra was a step back in a lot of ways. Pretty much the only good thing about it was delayed wakeup and more unblockable setup fixes. Red Focus turned out to be a rich-get-richer mechanic (it benefited characters like Akuma and E.Ryu the most), and Rolento and Elena were extremely broken. It was a classic case of trying to cram too much value into their release. It certainly wasn't perfect. I really didn't like red focus because like you said, it was mostly used as a combo extension / free ultra for the characters that were already good (Yun immediately comes to mind) and almost never used for its "intended" purpose of a normal focus attack that absorbs multiple hits. But delayed wakeup was a huge fix for the strong vortex that ruled AE2012 and took emphasis off setups. I thought that was great. Rolento and Elena are a shame really because they were brand new and now they'll never see the slight adjustments they need (or in Elena's case, hit/hurtbox fixes lol...) to settle into the rest of the cast, which they likely would have gotten if the game had another year or two of competition. I think in every other respect Ultra was a solid improvement on the previous iterations. Though I will admit I don't know how much of that is due to the very high level of competition we were seeing toward the end. Many characters got a lot of love toward the end and the game was in a state where almost anyone could feel like a threat, even if there were still very clear top tiers. I try not to be biased because I just really do not enjoy watching or playing SFV, but I think there's a lot to learn from previous versions and I think criticism is important, rather than "well new FGs just suck, that's how it is, it takes time to get it right". Believe me I was begging for SFV toward the end of Ultra, because I was just ready for something fresh and there were things about playing USF4 that I was just so tired of. But it took SFV being what it is to make me appreciate what we had, and I think there are probably others with a similar experience. However, there are a lot of frustrating parts: longer input delay, much slower pace, "samey" combos, wide variance in character visual quality (nitpick), a secondary resource meter (and associated generator) that feels shoehorned in, bizarrely inconsistent execution requirements (why does Karin have a just-frame version of her Tenko when combos now have input buffers?).
Honestly, this is where it's obligatory to bring up (again) that at this phase of SF4 those same exact problems existed (as well as most new fighters). SF4 didn't even look like the same game until post-AE/2012. Longer input delay? Check, slower pace? Check, samey combos? Check. Variance in visual quality? Check. Secondary meter? Check.
SF4 was actually super clunky at release, and it's visible in videos if you look back to 2009-2010. Each iteration made the movement smoother, which made it feel and eventually become much faster of a game.
Regarding the input delay, people weren't even testing it back when SF4 was released. But this issue is blown up a bit more than it should be in SF5, simply because the frame timings were changed in order to compensate (theres videos that explain this and how recovery frames were on average 2-3 frames longer in SF5). This indicates the decision of input delay was intentional. May like it or dislike it, but in the end, it's not that you "can't react" like people imply. You have the same amount of time to react as SF4, it's just a different formula to get you there.
But in the end, the reason the game doesnt feel as fast paced, is simply because that "smooth" feeling is added to the mechanics over time. Right now , SF5 is a lot more "Take turn" feeling. But rewind back to SF4 vanilla or super sf4, and bam, you can see that same take-turn gameplay at work.
Of course this leads us back to "Shouldn't they have learned their lesson from past iterations?". But it's not really that simple when overhauling the character design. If you build a house, it's best to start with a solid foundation, and the foundation itself might be basic and might not be anything incredible to look at, but in time it could become a beautiful home.
Being completely honest, if you think relative to SF4 being released this long, SF5 is actually in a very good state (minus lack of arcade, if thats something you looked forward to). The "basic" mechanics are similar, but the balance is far and away better than SF4's was at the time, character design of the new characters is much stronger, Capcom is putting in much more work more consistently than they did when SF4 came out, online play is far better than it was in SF4 at the time, the system assists tournament play more than vanilla SF4 did.
I completely believe it will surpass SF4 in time. How long? No idea. But people really look through rose colored glasses and forgot the type of game SF4 was from release until 2011-2012. It was not regarded highly at all in those days... It boggles me that people forgot that.
|
On March 01 2017 06:26 Spyridon wrote: Honestly, this is where it's obligatory to bring up (again) that at this phase of SF4 those same exact problems existed (as well as most new fighters). SF4 didn't even look like the same game until post-AE/2012. Longer input delay? Check, slower pace? Check, samey combos? Check. Variance in visual quality? Check. Secondary meter? Check.
SF4 was actually super clunky at release, and it's visible in videos if you look back to 2009-2010. Each iteration made the movement smoother, which made it feel and eventually become much faster of a game.
...
Being completely honest, if you think relative to SF4 being released this long, SF5 is actually in a very good state (minus lack of arcade, if thats something you looked forward to). The "basic" mechanics are similar, but the balance is far and away better than SF4's was at the time, character design of the new characters is much stronger, Capcom is putting in much more work more consistently than they did when SF4 came out, online play is far better than it was in SF4 at the time, the system assists tournament play more than vanilla SF4 did.
I completely believe it will surpass SF4 in time. How long? No idea. But people really look through rose colored glasses and forgot the type of game SF4 was from release until 2011-2012. It was not regarded highly at all in those days... It boggles me that people forgot that. No one forgot that. I'm not contesting the fact that SF4 wasn't equally troubled for its first few years (which I wasn't around for, I'll admit). Watching replays of vanilla SF4 it's almost shocking how different the game looks and plays, even just between vanilla and Super. I just don't think we should have to accept such growing pains as "normal". Can you name many other genres or franchises where the initial release of a game failed to meet expectations and then after 2-3 years of revisions there was a sudden resurgence in popularity? Diablo 3 is a decent example. But most games just die shortly after release if there aren't early patches to address issues. Just because fighting games have been this way doesn't mean Capcom can't do better. Fighting games also have the luxury of a loyal fanbase that will play for the thrill of the competition even if the game is heavily flawed. The cynic in me thinks that's almost being taken advantage of (CPT with huge prize pool keeping lots of players invested in SFV even though some are quite vocal in their criticisms).
I would argue the only area it would be acceptable to have such faults in is the balance/tiers early on. But that is one of the few things I could commend SFV for. Sure there were top tiers in S1, but the gap between the best and worst characters was pretty good compared to some other fighters. Good balance and changing/introducing characters over time is the hard part of making a competitive title, and that's what we should expect to improve over time. Other things like the netcode, responsiveness, lack of content, inconsistent support for legacy input devices, loading times and matchmaking..... You can't be that surprised that people have been disappointed with SFV's first year.
Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol
|
On March 01 2017 07:54 Duka08 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 06:26 Spyridon wrote: Honestly, this is where it's obligatory to bring up (again) that at this phase of SF4 those same exact problems existed (as well as most new fighters). SF4 didn't even look like the same game until post-AE/2012. Longer input delay? Check, slower pace? Check, samey combos? Check. Variance in visual quality? Check. Secondary meter? Check.
SF4 was actually super clunky at release, and it's visible in videos if you look back to 2009-2010. Each iteration made the movement smoother, which made it feel and eventually become much faster of a game.
...
Being completely honest, if you think relative to SF4 being released this long, SF5 is actually in a very good state (minus lack of arcade, if thats something you looked forward to). The "basic" mechanics are similar, but the balance is far and away better than SF4's was at the time, character design of the new characters is much stronger, Capcom is putting in much more work more consistently than they did when SF4 came out, online play is far better than it was in SF4 at the time, the system assists tournament play more than vanilla SF4 did.
I completely believe it will surpass SF4 in time. How long? No idea. But people really look through rose colored glasses and forgot the type of game SF4 was from release until 2011-2012. It was not regarded highly at all in those days... It boggles me that people forgot that. Can you name many other genres or franchises where the initial release of a game failed to meet expectations and then after 2-3 years of revisions there was a sudden resurgence in popularity? Diablo 3 is a decent example. But most games just die shortly after release if there aren't early patches to address issues. Just because fighting games have been this way doesn't mean Capcom can't do better. Fighting games also have the luxury of a loyal fanbase that will play for the thrill of the competition even if the game is heavily flawed. The cynic in me thinks that's almost being taken advantage of (CPT with huge prize pool keeping lots of players invested in SFV even though some are quite vocal in their criticisms).
Well, any genre that is very complex and competitive. RTS is one... It's a lot of what led to the downfall of the genre. MOBA are another - none of the MOBA's shined for their first couple years of release (LoL started as a Pay2Play game that bombed...). MMO's. Survival games (hence most of them launching as early access). Sandbox games.
It's definitely not a fighting genre only thing.
Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol
Yeah, that could be said for nearly any game devs these days (ESPECIALLY Japanese ones). But lets be honest and give credit where it's due, isn't Capcom communicating more now than they ever have?
They said very little on SF4 release. MvC3 they said even less (which later we found out was due to expiring license).SFxT was a complete PR nightmare and they didn't even make any special press releases and STILL went on with the plan to release on-disk DLC after it was heavily publicized (Not that it was an uncommon practice in those days - Microsofts patching fees and rules on XBL were bullshit and most devs were doing it at the time, but the data miners in the FGC are real and people were already pissed about gems).
At least nowdays they have some community managers that actually give press releases. Before Capcom Unity got a big push, we didnt really get anything.
But one thing they have said is that they have a plan that lasts til at least 2020 for SF5 right now. So as a little bit of relief, we can be sure they won't be giving up on the game anytime soon.
|
On March 01 2017 08:37 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol Yeah, that could be said for nearly any game devs these days (ESPECIALLY Japanese ones). But lets be honest and give credit where it's due, isn't Capcom communicating more now than they ever have? They said very little on SF4 release. MvC3 they said even less (which later we found out was due to expiring license).SFxT was a complete PR nightmare and they didn't even make any special press releases and STILL went on with the plan to release on-disk DLC after it was heavily publicized (Not that it was an uncommon practice in those days - Microsofts patching fees and rules on XBL were bullshit and most devs were doing it at the time, but the data miners in the FGC are real and people were already pissed about gems). At least nowdays they have some community managers that actually give press releases. Before Capcom Unity got a big push, we didnt really get anything. But one thing they have said is that they have a plan that lasts til at least 2020 for SF5 right now. So as a little bit of relief, we can be sure they won't be giving up on the game anytime soon. Oh it's definitely a disconnect between the JP devs and the audience. The only people doing any communicating are the (western) community folks like Combofiend and such, and I feel so bad for them when it comes to some of the damage control and infrequent reveals they get to do. You're certainly right there. I guess I'm a bit spoiled when it comes to communicating right now because I'm mostly thinking of Blizzard. Even if the changes aren't always 100% well received, they a) discuss what's coming ahead of time and things they'd like to change, and b) discuss the reasoning for a change after it's actually implemented and what they hope to see come of it. It's definitely true when it comes to Overwatch, and to a lesser extent Hearthstone and WoW as well (D3's been quieter lately, but same thing there. I don't play/follow SC2 anymore, or HotS). If Capcom used a twitter or capcom unity or whatever to say basic stuff like "We're hearing a lot about Urien's st.hp and we want to address your concerns. In the next patch we're considering adjusting the hitbox so that it can't hit low profile. We think this will give players more opportunities to poke/punish their opponent if they predict when someone is looking for that st.hp crush counter. We look forward to your feedback on these changes" (pulling this shit out of my ass mostly) I think it would go a long way. There's always been a frustrating disconnect between the devs and the players, but I think that tension is worse when there are more than just balance issues that plague the game (like I said, balance actually relatively minor compared to the past lol).
It might be true that Capcom is doing more than ever, and it might be true that SFV is undergoing the same issues other games in the franchise/genre face, but I think Capcom has the resources to give us even more and rally both the casual audience and the dedicated fans. I want them to do better. I loved having that competitive outlet in SF4 and I miss having a fighting game that I kept coming back to no matter how frustrated it made me at times. I just hope they figure it out sooner than later. I had high hopes for S2 that haven't really panned out, and the character reveals/releases have been underwhelming too.
I don't know where this has gotten us as far as discussion goes. I don't want to keep rambling on forever. I'm not shitting on people that like the game. It's still got more players than its peers and it has the long term support like you said, which is great. It's only getting better from here. My only point was "[some 10 year old game] sucked at launch too" shouldn't stop people from expressing their concerns for the game.
|
On March 01 2017 09:18 Duka08 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 08:37 Spyridon wrote:Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol Yeah, that could be said for nearly any game devs these days (ESPECIALLY Japanese ones). But lets be honest and give credit where it's due, isn't Capcom communicating more now than they ever have? They said very little on SF4 release. MvC3 they said even less (which later we found out was due to expiring license).SFxT was a complete PR nightmare and they didn't even make any special press releases and STILL went on with the plan to release on-disk DLC after it was heavily publicized (Not that it was an uncommon practice in those days - Microsofts patching fees and rules on XBL were bullshit and most devs were doing it at the time, but the data miners in the FGC are real and people were already pissed about gems). At least nowdays they have some community managers that actually give press releases. Before Capcom Unity got a big push, we didnt really get anything. But one thing they have said is that they have a plan that lasts til at least 2020 for SF5 right now. So as a little bit of relief, we can be sure they won't be giving up on the game anytime soon. Oh it's definitely a disconnect between the JP devs and the audience. The only people doing any communicating are the (western) community folks like Combofiend and such, and I feel so bad for them when it comes to some of the damage control and infrequent reveals they get to do. You're certainly right there. I guess I'm a bit spoiled when it comes to communicating right now because I'm mostly thinking of Blizzard. Even if the changes aren't always 100% well received, they a) discuss what's coming ahead of time and things they'd like to change, and b) discuss the reasoning for a change after it's actually implemented and what they hope to see come of it. It's definitely true when it comes to Overwatch, and to a lesser extent Hearthstone and WoW as well (D3's been quieter lately, but same thing there. I don't play/follow SC2 anymore, or HotS). If Capcom used a twitter or capcom unity or whatever to say basic stuff like "We're hearing a lot about Urien's st.hp and we want to address your concerns. In the next patch we're considering adjusting the hitbox so that it can't hit low profile. We think this will give players more opportunities to poke/punish their opponent if they predict when someone is looking for that st.hp crush counter. We look forward to your feedback on these changes" (pulling this shit out of my ass mostly) I think it would go a long way. There's always been a frustrating disconnect between the devs and the players, but I think that tension is worse when there are more than just balance issues that plague the game (like I said, balance actually relatively minor compared to the past lol). It might be true that Capcom is doing more than ever, and it might be true that SFV is undergoing the same issues other games in the franchise/genre face, but I think Capcom has the resources to give us even more and rally both the casual audience and the dedicated fans. I want them to do better. I loved having that competitive outlet in SF4 and I miss having a fighting game that I kept coming back to no matter how frustrated it made me at times. I just hope they figure it out sooner than later. I had high hopes for S2 that haven't really panned out, and the character reveals/releases have been underwhelming too. I don't know where this has gotten us as far as discussion goes. I don't want to keep rambling on forever. I'm not shitting on people that like the game. It's still got more players than its peers and it has the long term support like you said, which is great. It's only getting better from here. My only point was "[some 10 year old game] sucked at launch too" shouldn't stop people from expressing their concerns for the game.
Yeah, expressing concerns is good. I just think things aren't quite as gloomy as people say nowdays. Relatively things are pretty good, so it doesn't make sense that there's such a negative atmosphere.
Regarding character releases, not sure if you tried Kolin yet, but she just released and feels pretty different from the rest of the cast. Hopefully she will play less underwhelming than expected for you =)
|
On March 01 2017 12:15 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 09:18 Duka08 wrote:On March 01 2017 08:37 Spyridon wrote:Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol Yeah, that could be said for nearly any game devs these days (ESPECIALLY Japanese ones). But lets be honest and give credit where it's due, isn't Capcom communicating more now than they ever have? They said very little on SF4 release. MvC3 they said even less (which later we found out was due to expiring license).SFxT was a complete PR nightmare and they didn't even make any special press releases and STILL went on with the plan to release on-disk DLC after it was heavily publicized (Not that it was an uncommon practice in those days - Microsofts patching fees and rules on XBL were bullshit and most devs were doing it at the time, but the data miners in the FGC are real and people were already pissed about gems). At least nowdays they have some community managers that actually give press releases. Before Capcom Unity got a big push, we didnt really get anything. But one thing they have said is that they have a plan that lasts til at least 2020 for SF5 right now. So as a little bit of relief, we can be sure they won't be giving up on the game anytime soon. Oh it's definitely a disconnect between the JP devs and the audience. The only people doing any communicating are the (western) community folks like Combofiend and such, and I feel so bad for them when it comes to some of the damage control and infrequent reveals they get to do. You're certainly right there. I guess I'm a bit spoiled when it comes to communicating right now because I'm mostly thinking of Blizzard. Even if the changes aren't always 100% well received, they a) discuss what's coming ahead of time and things they'd like to change, and b) discuss the reasoning for a change after it's actually implemented and what they hope to see come of it. It's definitely true when it comes to Overwatch, and to a lesser extent Hearthstone and WoW as well (D3's been quieter lately, but same thing there. I don't play/follow SC2 anymore, or HotS). If Capcom used a twitter or capcom unity or whatever to say basic stuff like "We're hearing a lot about Urien's st.hp and we want to address your concerns. In the next patch we're considering adjusting the hitbox so that it can't hit low profile. We think this will give players more opportunities to poke/punish their opponent if they predict when someone is looking for that st.hp crush counter. We look forward to your feedback on these changes" (pulling this shit out of my ass mostly) I think it would go a long way. There's always been a frustrating disconnect between the devs and the players, but I think that tension is worse when there are more than just balance issues that plague the game (like I said, balance actually relatively minor compared to the past lol). It might be true that Capcom is doing more than ever, and it might be true that SFV is undergoing the same issues other games in the franchise/genre face, but I think Capcom has the resources to give us even more and rally both the casual audience and the dedicated fans. I want them to do better. I loved having that competitive outlet in SF4 and I miss having a fighting game that I kept coming back to no matter how frustrated it made me at times. I just hope they figure it out sooner than later. I had high hopes for S2 that haven't really panned out, and the character reveals/releases have been underwhelming too. I don't know where this has gotten us as far as discussion goes. I don't want to keep rambling on forever. I'm not shitting on people that like the game. It's still got more players than its peers and it has the long term support like you said, which is great. It's only getting better from here. My only point was "[some 10 year old game] sucked at launch too" shouldn't stop people from expressing their concerns for the game. Yeah, expressing concerns is good. I just think things aren't quite as gloomy as people say nowdays. Relatively things are pretty good, so it doesn't make sense that there's such a negative atmosphere. Regarding character releases, not sure if you tried Kolin yet, but she just released and feels pretty different from the rest of the cast. Hopefully she will play less underwhelming than expected for you =) Oh she's out? That must have been recent lol. Will have to try her out.
|
United States12181 Posts
Yeah Kolin just came out tonight. There are a lot of streamers trying her out.
My main source of gloom about SFV is that we used to play SF4 every lunch break at work, then SFV came out and we played it for maybe a week or two, trained hard and competed in Hackerfight, then stopped playing fighting games altogether. SFV singlehandedly destroyed the fighting game atmosphere at my company. Nobody wanted to go back to SF4 because SFV was out (and that's what everybody else would be playing), and nobody wanted to play SFV because of everything we've talked about.
I do remember the complaints about SF4's speed when that game came out. People complained that nobody had 2f jabs anymore. There was a ton of tech discovered in that game though (most of which was probably unintentional) like frame traps, late-link combos, option selects... a bunch of stuff that sped up the game and also shaped the direction of future expansions/releases.
|
On March 01 2017 12:27 Duka08 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2017 12:15 Spyridon wrote:On March 01 2017 09:18 Duka08 wrote:On March 01 2017 08:37 Spyridon wrote:Again, I think I'd be less cynical about all if Capcom was communicating better with the community lol Yeah, that could be said for nearly any game devs these days (ESPECIALLY Japanese ones). But lets be honest and give credit where it's due, isn't Capcom communicating more now than they ever have? They said very little on SF4 release. MvC3 they said even less (which later we found out was due to expiring license).SFxT was a complete PR nightmare and they didn't even make any special press releases and STILL went on with the plan to release on-disk DLC after it was heavily publicized (Not that it was an uncommon practice in those days - Microsofts patching fees and rules on XBL were bullshit and most devs were doing it at the time, but the data miners in the FGC are real and people were already pissed about gems). At least nowdays they have some community managers that actually give press releases. Before Capcom Unity got a big push, we didnt really get anything. But one thing they have said is that they have a plan that lasts til at least 2020 for SF5 right now. So as a little bit of relief, we can be sure they won't be giving up on the game anytime soon. Oh it's definitely a disconnect between the JP devs and the audience. The only people doing any communicating are the (western) community folks like Combofiend and such, and I feel so bad for them when it comes to some of the damage control and infrequent reveals they get to do. You're certainly right there. I guess I'm a bit spoiled when it comes to communicating right now because I'm mostly thinking of Blizzard. Even if the changes aren't always 100% well received, they a) discuss what's coming ahead of time and things they'd like to change, and b) discuss the reasoning for a change after it's actually implemented and what they hope to see come of it. It's definitely true when it comes to Overwatch, and to a lesser extent Hearthstone and WoW as well (D3's been quieter lately, but same thing there. I don't play/follow SC2 anymore, or HotS). If Capcom used a twitter or capcom unity or whatever to say basic stuff like "We're hearing a lot about Urien's st.hp and we want to address your concerns. In the next patch we're considering adjusting the hitbox so that it can't hit low profile. We think this will give players more opportunities to poke/punish their opponent if they predict when someone is looking for that st.hp crush counter. We look forward to your feedback on these changes" (pulling this shit out of my ass mostly) I think it would go a long way. There's always been a frustrating disconnect between the devs and the players, but I think that tension is worse when there are more than just balance issues that plague the game (like I said, balance actually relatively minor compared to the past lol). It might be true that Capcom is doing more than ever, and it might be true that SFV is undergoing the same issues other games in the franchise/genre face, but I think Capcom has the resources to give us even more and rally both the casual audience and the dedicated fans. I want them to do better. I loved having that competitive outlet in SF4 and I miss having a fighting game that I kept coming back to no matter how frustrated it made me at times. I just hope they figure it out sooner than later. I had high hopes for S2 that haven't really panned out, and the character reveals/releases have been underwhelming too. I don't know where this has gotten us as far as discussion goes. I don't want to keep rambling on forever. I'm not shitting on people that like the game. It's still got more players than its peers and it has the long term support like you said, which is great. It's only getting better from here. My only point was "[some 10 year old game] sucked at launch too" shouldn't stop people from expressing their concerns for the game. Yeah, expressing concerns is good. I just think things aren't quite as gloomy as people say nowdays. Relatively things are pretty good, so it doesn't make sense that there's such a negative atmosphere. Regarding character releases, not sure if you tried Kolin yet, but she just released and feels pretty different from the rest of the cast. Hopefully she will play less underwhelming than expected for you =) Oh she's out? That must have been recent lol. Will have to try her out.
Yeah, she went active at 6pm yesterday supposedly, which was literally minutes from when I posted lol.
I do remember the complaints about SF4's speed when that game came out. People complained that nobody had 2f jabs anymore. There was a ton of tech discovered in that game though (most of which was probably unintentional) like frame traps, late-link combos, option selects... a bunch of stuff that sped up the game and also shaped the direction of future expansions/releases.
Yep... that's pretty much the stage we're at in SF5 atm. As tech is found, it's going to be shaping the future updates.
Sucks that your local scene died, though. I know how that is. It's hard enough to get everyone on the same game, and then once they give up on playing together it's hard to get everyone together again (if it ever happens).
That's kind of why I try to avoid the gloomy atmosphere. With SF5, everyones bandwagoning all over so many different complaints, and so much negativity, even in the media atmosphere. It makes it hard to even find good information. For example, that Infiltration interview a few months back - that was intended to express his concerns, they straight up edited the hell out of that video to make it 100% negative. He had many comparisons in that video where he was saying "But in SF5", but they never even showed the other side of the comparison, they only kept the negative comments, leaving most of what he was saying out of context & not even making sense. I have no idea what he was trying to say or what his issue was.
What's the point of all that? Well, negativity sells and gets hits. That's the world we live in today with the heavy social-network atmosphere that cares about nothing but hits. But all that negativity does a LOT of damage... it ruins the prospects of new players joining, and it ruin scenes... Which makes it a joke when a lot of the people spreading that negative media are the same ones claiming that the games need to grow.
Just look at ChrisG's rant... another great example of this. Acting like he's actually cares about the scene growing, after a rant like that. So many issues with his rant, ranging from him saying its not possible to play guile how he wants (wehn you see Du play guile that way all the time), to him complaining about "craziness" in characters when he has absolutely no room to even talk about that when hes known for MvC which is a much "crazier" game... to much of his complaints being illegitimate simply because he mains Guile... Makes it no surprise that he's not winning majors...
There's a line between expressing concerns, and simply being negative. It's gotten to a point that some people are just being negative because everyone else is - just bandwagoning. It's "cool" to hate on SF5. The community is putting in so much more work to damage the FGC surrounding SF5, rather than actually developing and building it up. If that continues, we may never seen a game as successful as late SF4 was again... Yeah there's other non-Capcom games that are amazing (such as GG, etc). But those games don't have the availability or community that Capcom has. If we lose that... then in all likeliness the FGC will not be around in the future.
|
On March 01 2017 05:42 Excalibur_Z wrote: I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of SFV either (both watching and playing)
Honestly, matches where stakes are involved/high make me feel bad for the people playing. I knew I didn't like playing the game but that was quite the realization lol.
With SHMUPS kinda the opposite thing happened, they started catering to their "hardcore audience".
Too much.
Kind of like 3s.....
kind of like Xrd potemkin (huehue)
Too much is never bueno.
|
If I meet someone I wanna spar with on the ladder in street fighter, is there a way to talk outside of the lobby text? Like add on steam or a friends list or something?
|
On March 03 2017 02:42 lestye wrote: If I meet someone I wanna spar with on the ladder in street fighter, is there a way to talk outside of the lobby text? Like add on steam or a friends list or something?
Not on Steam sadly... that is something that they need to add. I'm not sure why they haven't already... probably to try to avoid griefing or something silly. But it sucks bc some of my best training partners in other fighting games have always been found through random matches...
Until then you can try to use Discord to find others to play with.
|
I know this is the SFV thread but the general fight games thread hasn't been bumped in over 3 months (and it's called "Fighting Games 2015" lol). UMvC3 is out on PC now and it sounds like a pretty good port actually. Haven't played it myself yet, will probably see how the netplay is with friends is in a few days, but as far as performance and inputs and all that I haven't heard any horror stories yet.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/357190
Edit: maybe scratch that on the inputs. Keyboard fine I guess but controllers/sticks I'm not sure yet. Maybe only 360 sticks??
|
i played tonight and the razer panthera and madcatz te2+ worked plug and play with Steam Marvel. Super fun game!
|
How's the net code? I heard a lot of people were riding on the PC version being good since ps4 is unplayable.
|
Does the Steam versions of SF5 and UMvC3 support Xbox 1 controllers? Thinking of getting a controller for my PC and the Xbox 1 controller is the one that I like the most.
|
|
|
|