Fighting Engine Concerns
User Icon
Rank
Posts19
Likes0 received
0 given
Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:09 PM EDT
Is anyone concerned about this version of Mortal Kombat not being accepted as a legitimate tournament caliber fighter in the same vein of SSIV?

I have seen multiple postings about graphics, exclusive content, etc...how about concerns about balancing, fighting engine, etc. These things will determine whether the game is ever fully accepted as a legitimate tournament caliber fighter. If it is not, the overall popularity may die in the same way previous MK games have in the past

I would love to see MK recieve the same level of respect as other tournament caliber fighters....this respect guarentees that this version of MK will have limitless replay value and a high level of competion within the online community for both systems (Xbox, PS3).

What are your thoughts?
Knowing is not enough you must apply.....willing is not enough, you must do.
User Icon
  • CanadaCanada
Rank
Posts1112
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:11 PM EDT
Ed Boon said time and time again about how they DID focus on the balancing and all that i nthis particular MK.
User Icon
  • Trinidad and TobagoTrinidad and Tobago
Rank
Posts985
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:22 PM EDT
They'll be talk about gameplay and the fighting engine when the game's out.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts319
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:28 PM EDT
MKO as a whole isn't solely concerned with gameplay...that's why you're more likely to see rants about hair and not as many concerns with balancing haha. It's what makes this site so interesting...it's a diverse group!

There are many that are gameplay people though, and if you look deep enough I'm certain there are threads about gameplay, tiers, balancing.

So far it looks like this MK will deliver on a balanced, tourney-worthy game, but until it's out and in our hands, there's just no way to say what we'll be getting. The demo was pretty decent, fun, and as deep as a 4 character demo can be.

I have high hopes for this game!
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts881
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:29 PM EDT
If the demo is anything to go off of then you got no worries. The gameplay is amazing
User Icon
  • AustraliaAustralia
Rank
Posts670
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:31 PM EDT
uyrnihssi Wrote:

I have seen multiple postings about graphics, exclusive content, etc...how about concerns about balancing, fighting engine, etc.


The MK community has always been more focussed on the aesthetic side of the game rather than the gamplay element. So that is nothing new.

The team have said they did get some tournlevel ament players playing some test versions of the game to make sure it's up to decent standard and weed out anything that could break the game.

To my knowledge that is the first time they've done this, so hopefully it pays off.

I'm not a high level player by any stretch, but I know making sure the game is solid is better for everyone in the end, not just the hardcore players.
User Icon
  • AfghanistanAfghanistan
Rank
Posts1876
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:43 PM EDT
I was concerned at first when I played the demo. But as we moved along, I saw more and more things about the gameplay that I liked and I think its safe to say that this game can be played at tournament level.

The thing I still don't like about the fighting engine, or more specifically, the combo system, is that you can't create your own custom combos on the ground. Only as juggles. The ground combos are all pre-determined. This sucks.

Will this game be a tournament fighter? I think so. Will it be anywhere near or as competitive as SSFIV? No fucking way in hell. The gameplay is deeper than the previous MK games and all that, but it is still fairly easy to graps and aims more for casual gamers than pro gamers. It is a good start as a competitive fighter, at least.
Avatar is part of fanart created by Esau13
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts329
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:45 PM EDT
The game is already at EVO, so we'll see.
User Icon
  • Holy See (Vatican City State)Holy See (Vatican City State)
Rank
Posts11981
Likes2 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:48 PM EDT
Moved this to the strategy zone

And from the demo it looks like this is the real deal.
User Icon
  • BrazilBrazil
Rank
Posts385
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 03:49 PM EDT
I'm not concerned.

I know it will be good, but even if it wasn`t tournament level good, I don't care. I like the game and I don't give a crap to the tournament scene. But if that's what they are aiming for, I hope they succeed.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts1375
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 06:06 PM EDT
I'm not too concerned, because a big focus of the game is the gameplay.

Balance doesn't scare me either. They can always patch it. I think the people who will bash balance are just capcom fanboys. They will always say that there games are so perfect because of balance, but games like Super Street Fighter 4 AE is really unbalanced and it was made that way. Nobody dares bitch about that shit, because its capcom and they have perfect fighting games.

User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts245
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 07:49 PM EDT
SubMan799 Wrote:
Moved this to the strategy zone

And from the demo it looks like this is the real deal.



Huh?Really? Based on the pros, the demo is not playable at a competitive level. Even I myself find this so. The frame mechanics are kinda screwed up right now.
User Icon
Rank
Posts1407
Likes1 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 08:19 PM EDT
Balance is overrated.

That is all.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts245
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 08:34 PM EDT
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
Balance is overrated.

That is all.


So true.

"Balance does not make a great fighting game, playability does." - clockw0rk

Hence why the demo sucks, b/c it is not playable lol
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts1545
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/06/2011 11:53 PM EDT
blackl0tus Wrote:
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
Balance is overrated.

That is all.


So true.

"Balance does not make a great fighting game, playability does." - clockw0rk

Hence why the demo sucks, b/c it is not playable lol


Why? Scorpion, He's manageable and punishable. The only really retarded thing about the demo is the fucking jab infinite.
jbthrash Wrote:
I'm not too concerned, because a big focus of the game is the gameplay.

Balance doesn't scare me either. They can always patch it. I think the people who will bash balance are just capcom fanboys. They will always say that there games are so perfect because of balance, but games like Super Street Fighter 4 AE is really unbalanced and it was made that way. Nobody dares bitch about that shit, because its capcom and theiny have perfect fighting games.

People shit on Super Street Fighter 4 on SRK and various other sites all the time.I watched a tournament streamed on iplaywinner and the commentators were even crapping on the game.
Demon_0 Wrote:
I was concerned at first when I played the demo. But as we moved along, I saw more and more things about the gameplay that I liked and I think its safe to say that this game can be played at tournament level.

The thing I still don't like about the fighting engine, or more specifically, the combo system, is that you can't create your own custom combos on the ground. Only as juggles. The ground combos are all pre-determined. This sucks.

Will this game be a tournament fighter? I think so. Will it be anywhere near or as competitive as SSFIV? No fucking way in hell. The gameplay is deeper than the previous MK games and all that, but it is still fairly easy to graps and aims more for casual gamers than pro gamers. It is a good start as a competitive fighter, at least.
You are aware that there are canned combos in SSFIV
Sig by MINION
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts245
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 12:30 AM EDT
Joe-Von-Zombie Wrote:
blackl0tus Wrote:
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
Balance is overrated.

That is all.


So true.

"Balance does not make a great fighting game, playability does." - clockw0rk

Hence why the demo sucks, b/c it is not playable lol


Why? Scorpion, He's manageable and punishable. The only really retarded thing about the demo is the fucking jab infinite.
Because the frame mechanics are kinda bad right now. Blockstun lasts too long. Move recovery is very fast. Put those too together and you have a bad combination.

User Icon
  • Holy See (Vatican City State)Holy See (Vatican City State)
Rank
Posts11981
Likes2 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 01:28 AM EDT
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
Balance is overrated.

That is all.


Do elaborate
User Icon
  • AustraliaAustralia
Rank
Posts670
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 01:55 AM EDT
NIMHARD Wrote:
I'm not concerned.

I know it will be good, but even if it wasn`t tournament level good, I don't care. I like the game and I don't give a crap to the tournament scene. But if that's what they are aiming for, I hope they succeed.


That's fine that you don't care, but it's not going to make your experience any worse if the game was a tournament level fighter. In fact it will just make it better.

That is part of the problem with the MK, there just isn't enough interest in the game from a high level play perspective, everything is based towards the casual player.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts1545
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 02:00 AM EDT
blackl0tus Wrote:
Joe-Von-Zombie Wrote:
blackl0tus Wrote:
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
Balance is overrated.

That is all.


So true.

"Balance does not make a great fighting game, playability does." - clockw0rk

Hence why the demo sucks, b/c it is not playable lol


Why? Scorpion, He's manageable and punishable. The only really retarded thing about the demo is the fucking jab infinite.
Because the frame mechanics are kinda bad right now. Blockstun lasts too long. Move recovery is very fast. Put those too together and you have a bad combination.



Thank you, I wasn't trying to be a dick or nothing, but please elaborate when you say somethings wrong with the game for us dullards. I want to understand why the games fucked up rather than just be told the games fucked up.
Sig by MINION
User Icon
Rank
Posts1407
Likes1 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 08:22 PM EDT
SubMan799 Wrote:
Do elaborate


In the sense that sacrificing interesting things in FGs for the sake of balance can lead to homogenized, boring gameplay and that some of the greatest FGs of the '90s would send some people today into shock if they saw what a usability disparity between certain characters really used to look like (Like say, Talbain versus Anakaris in VS). You better believe I'd like for every character to be viable, and that it's something devs should always strive for, but over the last couple of years--maybe even the decade--people have been so hung up about balance specifically that it can out prioritize the fun and interesting stuff like say, Rose's U2 in AE, and really, a lot of the really lame nerfs in AE.
That's pretty much the opposite of what I want for future MK games. I mean, take cable in MvC2: What if Capcom had the means to nerf AHVB in its infancy? The dude would be ass. Like seriously, you saw some of the people in that awful thread about Ono right? People were complaining about the most elementary tactics in SF4. There's always a good chunk of players will complain about the silliest things because they can't be bothered to deal with it, and I'd really like for NRS to pay them no mind, unlike Capcom, who keep fucking up my boy Blanka's rolling attack because some people won't jab his green ass out of it or block. I'm a pretty firm believer in buffs over nerfs, and I certainly wouldn't care if NRS wants buff any character any time they want, but I think nerfs should be a last resort for truly OP shit that wrecks everyone's face. But don't get me wrong, I really do want every character to be viable. The problem I have is this warped definition of balance that a number of people have. What I'm trying to say is this: Long live Ermac's UMK3 Tele-Slam.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts522
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 10:34 PM EDT
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
SubMan799 Wrote:

Do elaborate


In the sense that sacrificing interesting things in FGs for the sake of balance can lead to homogenized, boring gameplay and that some of the greatest FGs of the '90s would send some people today into shock if they saw what a usability disparity between certain characters really used to look like (Like say, Talbain versus Anakaris in VS). You better believe I'd like for every character to be viable, and that it's something devs should always strive for, but over the last couple of years--maybe even the decade--people have been so hung up about balance specifically that it can out prioritize the fun and interesting stuff like say, Rose's U2 in AE, and really, a lot of the really lame nerfs in AE.

That's pretty much the opposite of what I want for future MK games. I mean, take cable in MvC2: What if Capcom had the means to nerf AHVB in its infancy? The dude would be ass. Like seriously, you saw some of the people in that awful thread about Ono right? People were complaining about the most elementary tactics in SF4. There's always a good chunk of players will complain about the silliest things because they can't be bothered to deal with it, and I'd really like for NRS to pay them no mind, unlike Capcom, who keep fucking up my boy Blanka's rolling attack because some people won't jab his green ass out of it or block. I'm a pretty firm believer in buffs over nerfs, and I certainly wouldn't care if NRS wants buff any character any time they want, but I think nerfs should be a last resort for truly OP shit that wrecks everyone's face. But don't get me wrong, I really do want every character to be viable. The problem I have is this warped definition of balance that a number of people have. What I'm trying to say is this: Long live Ermac's UMK3 Tele-Slam.


I'm with you; I don't want them to take all of the interesting moves/combos because they may imbalance the game, but at the same time MK has had some CHEAP a** stuff in its history. I think everyone in this forum is really pulling for MK to become a bigger part of the tournament scene, so that it gets more support. That is why I think everyone is harping on balance so much.

I think that players that play mostly offline with friends, family, etc. prefer for the game to have more interesting moves, and wouldn't want to sacrifice the fun for balance, but I think that is because your buddy isn't going to do Cage's infinite poke string (or maybe he/she would but that would make them a dick--lol). For the people who do not have anyone to play with locally, they rely on the online community to have their fun, and they most likely prefer balance because they don't want to play a thousand matches in a row where someone just keeps doing a cheap a** infinite. And if there are easy cheap infinites, many, MANY people will use them online.

I see your point, but I think that for everyone to be happy that this game needs to land somewhere inbetween "crazy super fun moves" and balanced. Myself, I tend to lean towards wanting balance, but I certainly understand opposing argument.

User Icon
Rank
Posts1407
Likes1 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/07/2011 10:46 PM EDT
Well, I'm in no way opposed to taking away stupid infinites like Cage's jab string. Shit like that is why I hated MKT. What I mean is that some people's definition of balance or broken falls more into the realm of "This gives me trouble, ergo, it's broken." rather than "There is no practical counter to this tactic, so there's no point in me doing anything else." and that the more weight developers give to the former, the more boring a game will be. I don't want to get jabbed to death by Cage just as much as the next guy.
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts423
Likes65 received
169 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/08/2011 07:07 AM EDT
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
SubMan799 Wrote:

Do elaborate


In the sense that sacrificing interesting things in FGs for the sake of balance can lead to homogenized, boring gameplay and that some of the greatest FGs of the '90s would send some people today into shock if they saw what a usability disparity between certain characters really used to look like (Like say, Talbain versus Anakaris in VS). You better believe I'd like for every character to be viable, and that it's something devs should always strive for, but over the last couple of years--maybe even the decade--people have been so hung up about balance specifically that it can out prioritize the fun and interesting stuff like say, Rose's U2 in AE, and really, a lot of the really lame nerfs in AE.

That's pretty much the opposite of what I want for future MK games. I mean, take cable in MvC2: What if Capcom had the means to nerf AHVB in its infancy? The dude would be ass. Like seriously, you saw some of the people in that awful thread about Ono right? People were complaining about the most elementary tactics in SF4. There's always a good chunk of players will complain about the silliest things because they can't be bothered to deal with it, and I'd really like for NRS to pay them no mind, unlike Capcom, who keep fucking up my boy Blanka's rolling attack because some people won't jab his green ass out of it or block. I'm a pretty firm believer in buffs over nerfs, and I certainly wouldn't care if NRS wants buff any character any time they want, but I think nerfs should be a last resort for truly OP shit that wrecks everyone's face. But don't get me wrong, I really do want every character to be viable. The problem I have is this warped definition of balance that a number of people have. What I'm trying to say is this: Long live Ermac's UMK3 Tele-Slam.


Haha this ^^. The number one things that I actually hate about SF4 that capcom fanboys keep harping about wanting in this game is the extremely UNBALANCED Health levels between characters. SF4 (any of the versions) isn't balanced AT ALL because the stamina ratings give huge advantages to certain characters and make some others nearly unplayable. You can only win with characters with low health like Chun Li or Akuma against even moderate health characters like Ken (let alone the high health chars) unless you completely and utterly outclass your opponent in skill level. Proper "Balance" would mean it shouldn't matter which character the character you pick is paired against if you are of equal skill level you should be on something close to equal playing fields.

Some characters will always be better against certain others but that should be a difference of tactics or special moves like one having a lot of projectiles (like Sagat or Akuma) and the other being really good up close so they have difficulty getting at projectile users (like Zangief or T. Hawk). They always have a move that helps them do this but they are still at a slight disadvantage. You have to adjust gameplan and tactics to win. But you aren't going to lose because your character has 1/3 of the health the other person has so if you get hit more than once you are screwed, lol. Like Phoenix in MvC3. Good moves... but NO HP. Stronger, damage dealer characters can kill her in one or two super moves, no sweat, and there isn't a whole lot she can do about it besides resurrect herself which requires Level 5 super meter and there is nothing keeping them from just blasting you to death easily a second time, lol.

I don't want to see an MK game where unless you completely and utterly ECLIPSE the other player in skill level a character that would probably have low HP like Kitana, Kung Lao, etc. is at a just plain unnecessary level of disadvantage against Jax, Sheeva, etc. even before you look at the more important things like moves, play styles, or anything born of legitimate strategy as opposed to a bad "match-up". They may not be a muscle bound juggernaut but they are still a veteran bad ass and should be able to take a better hit than a straw dummy made to poorly simulate an opponent with the fortitude of a 5 year old child!

Small variances in HP to represent tougher or frailer characters I am fine with... just not to the ridiculous margins that Capcom takes it in their games.
User Icon
Rank
Posts451
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/08/2011 10:47 AM EDT
So are you saying that in chocolate sf4, Zangief and T. Hawk are top tier while Cammy, Akuma, and Chun Li are bottom tier (or have no hope against an equally skilled Zangief or T.Hawk player)?
User Icon
  • United States of AmericaUnited States of America
Rank
Posts245
Likes0 received
0 given
RE: Fighting Engine Concerns
04/08/2011 12:24 PM EDT
Bloodfang Wrote:
StatueofLiberty Wrote:
SubMan799 Wrote:

Do elaborate


In the sense that sacrificing interesting things in FGs for the sake of balance can lead to homogenized, boring gameplay and that some of the greatest FGs of the '90s would send some people today into shock if they saw what a usability disparity between certain characters really used to look like (Like say, Talbain versus Anakaris in VS). You better believe I'd like for every character to be viable, and that it's something devs should always strive for, but over the last couple of years--maybe even the decade--people have been so hung up about balance specifically that it can out prioritize the fun and interesting stuff like say, Rose's U2 in AE, and really, a lot of the really lame nerfs in AE.

That's pretty much the opposite of what I want for future MK games. I mean, take cable in MvC2: What if Capcom had the means to nerf AHVB in its infancy? The dude would be ass. Like seriously, you saw some of the people in that awful thread about Ono right? People were complaining about the most elementary tactics in SF4. There's always a good chunk of players will complain about the silliest things because they can't be bothered to deal with it, and I'd really like for NRS to pay them no mind, unlike Capcom, who keep fucking up my boy Blanka's rolling attack because some people won't jab his green ass out of it or block. I'm a pretty firm believer in buffs over nerfs, and I certainly wouldn't care if NRS wants buff any character any time they want, but I think nerfs should be a last resort for truly OP shit that wrecks everyone's face. But don't get me wrong, I really do want every character to be viable. The problem I have is this warped definition of balance that a number of people have. What I'm trying to say is this: Long live Ermac's UMK3 Tele-Slam.


Haha this ^^. The number one things that I actually hate about SF4 that capcom fanboys keep harping about wanting in this game is the extremely UNBALANCED Health levels between characters. SF4 (any of the versions) isn't balanced AT ALL because the stamina ratings give huge advantages to certain characters and make some others nearly unplayable. You can only win with characters with low health like Chun Li or Akuma against even moderate health characters like Ken (let alone the high health chars) unless you completely and utterly outclass your opponent in skill level.

I stop reading here. Actually, maybe I went further than I should have.
Fatal Friday
05/14/2021 08:00 PM EDT
Sunday School
05/16/2021 08:00 PM EDT
User Poll
Round 1: FIGHT!
61.1%
Scorpion
38.9%
Quan Chi