Recovery Frame Question

[Counter Punch]

Quote: Originally Posted by ApexGamerChannel

I won’t ever get better because I’m not willing to adapt to an unnatural set of rules and criteria that only applies to this poorly designed game.

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS....

The “top” players have always had a disproportionate influence in the balancing of the game post launch. These guys literally got to play a major role in shaping the direction of the gameplay for the first 5 or 6 months after the release of UFC 3. Then they turn around and throw it in your face every chance they get.

“I literally complained anytime something happened that I didnt want to adapt to until they changed it, now I don’t lose anymore”. Well no ****. The game was LITERALLY built around your strengths and playstyle. You better be in the top 20.

Meanwhile before patches 1.03 and 1.04, I went 80-15 on WiFi half drunk and stoned out of my mind the whole time, and then got so frustrated with the dramatic changes that were made to the game that I just didn’t have the motivation to “git gud”. I’ve watched plenty of ESFL fights and “high level” gameplay, and it’s so unbelievably off putting to watch. I understand that you guys have a different opinion. That’s fine. I don’t use Not being good at something as an argument for why something should be different. It’s just as invalid for you guys to say because you’re in the top 10 that you know best whether or not a change would make the game more fun for someone else.

You guys talk about “balance” as though it exists completely outside of the context of your play styles, which are pretty indistinguishable from each other at the “highest level”.

It’s not that we can’t “git gud”, it’s that we don’t want to given the current mechanics of the game. That’s entirely reasonable, and the big leaguing that takes place around here as a total substitution for an argument gets completely out of control. Saying something is “balanced” doesn’t make it balanced. And anytime I actually see any of these guys try to make a fleshed our argument about why they think something is balanced, they fall flat on their face. That’s when the big leaguing starts. It never fails.

[RetractedMonkey]

Quote: Originally Posted by Counter Punch

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS.... The “top” players have always had a disproportionate influence in the balancing of the game post launch. These guys literally got to play a major role in shaping the direction of the gameplay for the first 5 or 6 months after the release of UFC 3. Then they turn around and throw it in your face every chance they get. “I literally complained anytime something happened that I didnt want to adapt to until they changed it, now I don’t lose anymore”. Well no ****. The game was LITERALLY built around your strengths and playstyle. You better be in the top 20. Meanwhile before patches 1.03 and 1.04, I went 80-15 on WiFi half drunk and stoned out of my mind the whole time, and then got so frustrated with the dramatic changes that were made to the game that I just didn’t have the motivation to “git gud”. I’ve watched plenty of ESFL fights and “high level” gameplay, and it’s so unbelievably off putting to watch. I understand that you guys have a different opinion. That’s fine. I don’t use Not being good at something as an argument for why something should be different. It’s just as invalid for you guys to say because you’re in the top 10 that you know best whether or not a change would make the game more fun for someone else. You guys talk about “balance” as though it exists completely outside of the context of your play styles, which are pretty indistinguishable from each other at the “highest level”. It’s not that we can’t “git gud”, it’s that we don’t want to given the current mechanics of the game. That’s entirely reasonable, and the big leaguing that takes place around here as a total substitution for an argument gets completely out of control. Saying something is “balanced” doesn’t make it balanced. And anytime I actually see any of these guys try to make a fleshed our argument about why they think something is balanced, they fall flat on their face. That’s when the big leaguing starts. It never fails.

You see, this is something that no one who truly knows the game would say (specifically regarding all high level play styles looking the same). You can’t look at me, EdParker, Kenetic, Pryoxis, Jigsaw, Romero, and SwissLibax saying we all play the same. There are massive and (quite honestly) obvious differences between how we all play.

Just another point: if you don’t know the inner workings of the early build/game changer system you can’t comment on it with clarity. The gamechangers are all working toward gameplay balance and fun. I have specifically seen casual players mentioned in talks about changing things to help them without handicapping the skill ceiling. No one is saying “give us unlimited stamina because my style is pressure”. In fact, as you can now see, no one wanted stamina the way it was in the beta. Also, I didn’t have anything to do with the game pre-launch until UFC 4 just to be clear.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Supreme_Bananas]

Quote: Originally Posted by Counter Punch

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS.... The “top” players have always had a disproportionate influence in the balancing of the game post launch. These guys literally got to play a major role in shaping the direction of the gameplay for the first 5 or 6 months after the release of UFC 3. Then they turn around and throw it in your face every chance they get. “I literally complained anytime something happened that I didnt want to adapt to until they changed it, now I don’t lose anymore”. Well no ****. The game was LITERALLY built around your strengths and playstyle. You better be in the top 20. Meanwhile before patches 1.03 and 1.04, I went 80-15 on WiFi half drunk and stoned out of my mind the whole time, and then got so frustrated with the dramatic changes that were made to the game that I just didn’t have the motivation to “git gud”. I’ve watched plenty of ESFL fights and “high level” gameplay, and it’s so unbelievably off putting to watch. I understand that you guys have a different opinion. That’s fine. I don’t use Not being good at something as an argument for why something should be different. It’s just as invalid for you guys to say because you’re in the top 10 that you know best whether or not a change would make the game more fun for someone else. You guys talk about “balance” as though it exists completely outside of the context of your play styles, which are pretty indistinguishable from each other at the “highest level”. It’s not that we can’t “git gud”, it’s that we don’t want to given the current mechanics of the game. That’s entirely reasonable, and the big leaguing that takes place around here as a total substitution for an argument gets completely out of control. Saying something is “balanced” doesn’t make it balanced. And anytime I actually see any of these guys try to make a fleshed our argument about why they think something is balanced, they fall flat on their face. That’s when the big leaguing starts. It never fails.

This puts into words something that I've also felt but was never really able to express.

I think the big disconnect really is that it's related to the real-life sport of MMA, and you want to fight feeling exactly like how it happens in the real sport.

In traditional fighting games like Tekken or Street Fighter, realism doesn't really matter and balance is paramount, so the meta is easier to understand, easier to adapt to and more motivating to learn.

In the UFC games, the higher you want to get in the rankings, the more you have to adapt to the in-game meta, just like in traditional fighting games. However, I've always felt that the more you adapt to the meta in the UFC games, the more you drift away from the actual sport of MMA, which is exactly what I don't want and what also discourages me to try and get better.

[Phillyboi207]

Quote: Originally Posted by Supreme_Bananas

This puts into words something that I've also felt but was never really able to express. I think the big disconnect really is that it's related to the real-life sport of MMA, and you want to fight feeling exactly like how it happens in the real sport. In traditional fighting games like Tekken or Street Fighter, realism doesn't really matter and balance is paramount, so the meta is easier to understand, easier to adapt to and more motivating to learn. In the UFC games, the higher you want to get in the rankings, the more you have to adapt to the in-game meta, just like in traditional fighting games. However, I've always felt that the more you adapt to the meta in the UFC games, the more you drift away from the actual sport of MMA, which is exactly what I don't want and what also discourages me to try and get better.

Very valid point

I wish we could at least get a separate sim mode or online sliders.

[Counter Punch]

Supreme_Bananas,

The response you’re inevitably going to get is, “the game can’t possibly simulate all the aspects of a fight”, as thought that’s what anyone is suggesting or expecting.

It’s very difficult to talk about realism on this forum without being subjected to a carpet bombing of strawmanning, whatsboutism, and big leaguing.

For example, I guess because we can’t aim exactly where our punches are thrown with realistic precision, that we should abandon the idea of accuracy being somewhat realistic in the game. We are the players. Our role is to point out issues with the game. The developers role is to hopefully hear our concerns and do what they do best, come up with creative solutions to move the game in a better direction. I’ve been a gamer for a long time. It’s always been generally accepted that while these are certainly sports videogames, in the grand scheme of things we should be moving towards more realism.

This is the only sports gaming community I’ve ever seen where the elite core of the community seems to think realism is a dirty word and equates to “no fun”. But I guess gsming is changing. Oh well.

I genuinely don’t believe that more realism can’t be implemented in a way that is fun. It fact it makes almost no sense to suggest that’s the case, but it happens here on the daily.

EA sold out the sim community in order to appease the tryhard FGC bleedovers and the 12 year olds rich kids with access to mommy’s credit card.

We could play a game of turd dodgeball, and if we both have the same number of turds, I guess that’s balanced. But I’m honestly not really interested in playing turd dodgeball. And people can certainly say that I’m not interested in playing turd dodgeball because I’m not good at turd dodgeball, but in reality I just don’t enjoy the smell.

[Supreme_Bananas]

Quote: Originally Posted by Counter Punch

Supreme_Bananas, The response you’re inevitably going to get is, “the game can’t possibly simulate all the aspects of a fight”, as thought that’s what anyone is suggesting or expecting. It’s very difficult to talk about realism on this forum without being subjected to a carpet bombing of strawmanning, whatsboutism, and big leaguing. For example, I guess because we can’t aim exactly where our punches are thrown with realistic precision, that we should abandon the idea of accuracy being somewhat realistic in the game. We are the players. Our role is to point out issues with the game. The developers role is to hopefully hear our concerns and do what they do best, come up with creative solutions to move the game in a better direction. I’ve been a gamer for a long time. It’s always been generally accepted that while these are certainly sports videogames, in the grand scheme of things we should be moving towards more realism. This is the only sports gaming community I’ve ever seen where the elite core of the community seems to think realism is a dirty word and equates to “no fun”. But I guess gsming is changing. Oh well. I genuinely don’t believe that more realism can’t be implemented in a way that is fun. It fact it makes almost no sense to suggest that’s the case, but it happens here on the daily. EA sold out the sim community in order to appease the tryhard FGC bleedovers and the 12 year olds rich kids with access to mommy’s credit card. We could play a game of turd dodgeball, and if we both have the same number of turds, I guess that’s balanced. But I’m honestly not really interested in playing turd dodgeball. And people can certainly say that I’m not interested in playing turd dodgeball because I’m not good at turd dodgeball, but in reality I just don’t enjoy the smell.

Turd dodgeball lmao

Quote: Originally Posted by Counter Punch

For example, I guess because we can’t aim exactly where our punches are thrown with realistic precision, that we should abandon the idea of accuracy being somewhat realistic in the game

If that's really an argument being made, that looks like a perfect solution fallacy to me. "We'll never achieve 100% realism, so why bother at all?". Like you said, it's an admirable goal to strive for as much realism as possible even though it'll probably never be completely realistic.

[1212headkick]

The place where balance should be inspired from should come directly from the sport. We need to be able to say "OK I agree with that because that happens in real life"

[Phillyboi207]

Quote: Originally Posted by 1212headkick

The place where balance should be inspired from should come directly from the sport. We need to be able to say "OK I agree with that because that happens in real life"

The problem not everyone wants the game to based on real life. Even Counter Puncher admits he liked the game more when it was bobble head mania. I’m sure his 85-15 record had something to do with that.

Even the OP of this thread is talking about slips not being effective when that’s blatantly not true if you’re good at them(and the foundation for their mechanics are rooted in realism).

So even a lot of so called advocates for sim will argue against realistic changes if it helps their preferred playstyle.