Home

Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

This is a discussion on Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic within the EA Sports UFC forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Combat Sports > EA Sports UFC
MLB The Show 24 Review: Another Solid Hit for the Series
New Star GP Review: Old-School Arcade Fun
Where Are Our College Basketball Video Game Rumors?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-26-2017, 05:41 PM   #1
(aka Alberto)
 
aholbert32's Arena
 
OVR: 44
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 33,173
Blog Entries: 8
Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

"Man I miss playing UD online and being able to pick a guy like Jason Brilz and totally give Rampage,Wand, Jones players fits with him."

This post made me think about one of the bigger debates I've had as a Gamechanger. My focus is primarily on fighter realism. I want a game where fighters have accurate movesets, fighters like Cruz moves like Cruz does in real life, Fighters have moves and skills specific to themselves. I want a game where you need to fight to the strengths of the real fighter to win.

I also want things like stats and perks to be hyper realistic. What that means is that if you an average player takes Fabio Maldonado and a equally average player takes Jon Jones, the Jones fighter should win almost all the time. Why because Jones is better skilled all around and has more powerful moves. I'm not saying that Fabio should NEVER win. I'm saying that is should be extremely hard.

When I started as a gamechanger, I assumed that everyone felt that way but I was wrong. There are many who are more concerned with balance and dont want any fighter to be considered "OP". So you could take someone like Brilz or Maldonado and have a decent chance at beating someone with Jones. It comes down 100% to your own skills and not as much on how skilled the real life fighter is.

I come from a sports game perspective so I expect the fighter to be as skilled as he is in real life. In Madden, I expect the Browns to suck and the Patriots to be great. If you choose the Browns, you are handicapping yourself and will likely lose because they suck in real life. In EA UFC, if you choose Augusto Montano its the same thing as choosing the Browns. You shouldnt be able to beat GSP with Montano consistently.

From a fighting game perspective, most fighters are viable. They arent based on real life so you can choose to have their stats and skills relatively close so that you can win with practically anyone.

The reason for this long post is I wanted to get the community's thoughts on this. Am I looking at this wrong? Should the game focus on balance and less on realistically representing a fighter from a statistic and skills perspective?

Last edited by aholbert32; 02-26-2017 at 06:30 PM.
aholbert32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 02-26-2017, 05:56 PM   #2
MVP
 
SUGATA's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,346
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Quote:
Originally Posted by aholbert32
"Man I miss playing UD online and being able to pick a guy like Jason Brilz and totally give Rampage,Wand, Jones players fits with him."

This post made me think about one of the bigger debates I've had as a Gamechanger. My focus is primarily on fighter realism. I want a game where fighters have accurate movesets, fighters like Cruz moves like Cruz does in real life, Fighters have moves and specific to themselves. I want a game where you need to fight to the strengths of the real fighter to win.

I also want things like stats and perks to be hyper realistic. What that means is that if you an average player takes Fabio Maldonado and a equally average player takes Jon Jones, the Jones fighter should win almost all the time. Why because Jones is better skilled all around and has more powerful moves. I'm not saying that Fabio should NEVER win. I'm saying that is should be extremely hard.

When I started as a gamechanger, I assumed that everyone felt that way but I was wrong. There are many who are more concerned with balance and dont want any fighter to be considered "OP". So you could take someone like Brilz or Maldonado and have a decent chance at beating someone with Jones. It comes down 100% to your own skills and not as much on how skilled the real life fighter is.

I come from a sports game perspective so I expect the fighter to be as skilled as he is in real life. In Madden, I expect the Browns to suck and the Patriots to be great. If you choose the Browns, you are handicapping yourself and will likely lose because they suck in real life. In EA UFC, if you choose Augusto Montano its the same thing as choosing the Browns. You shouldnt be able to beat GSP with Montano consistently.

From a fighting game perspective, most fighters are viable. They arent based on real life so you can choose to have their stats and skills relatively close so that you can win with practically anyone.

The reason for this long post is I wanted to get the community's thoughts on this. Am I looking at this wrong? Should the game focus on balance and less on realistically representing a fighter from a statistic and skills perspective?
I have one simple question to you: which fighter you prefer to use when you want to WIN in online?
I am sure that the many of us will answer: fighter with MAX REACH.
It means that the fighter w max reach is a 100% favorite in EA UFC 1-2.
But
IN REAL LIFE Myke Tyson dont think so.

So, the problem is not in the bringing up realistic stats and perks to the game... but in revamping game mechanics in the direction, which will allow ALL stats to take its role REALISTICALLY!

I am talking about Short VS Long reach fighters problem in EA UFC 1-2 because of fully broken stand up striking. I am writing now a new thread about this problem and how ti fix it for UFC 3.
SUGATA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:02 PM   #3
Omaewa mou shindeiru
 
Haz____'s Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: __________ The Galactic Leyline
Posts: 4,033
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Great post. Interesting question.

Im all for realism, and simulation personally.

I think the issue with simulation>balance though comes from the players more than the game itself when it comes to this argument. The frustration comes from playing the same fighters(Jones, Mcgregor, etc) over & over & over again. In hyper competitive modes like Ranked, where players want to win at all cost, there is little to no reason to pick lesser fighters. Only the best fighters with the best stats and moves are going to be picked because you need to win.

Even in quick match though you see the same fighters again & again & again.


It's really a difficult problem/ question. I prefer simulation and realism over artificial balance, but the common player habit of just picking nothing but the fighter with the best stats makes this somewhat of an issue.

Personally, id still take the realism over balance. But I can see how it gets complicated quickly.
__________________
PSN: Lord__Hazanko

Just an average player, with a passion for Martial Arts & Combat Sports
Haz____ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:04 PM   #4
Omaewa mou shindeiru
 
Haz____'s Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: __________ The Galactic Leyline
Posts: 4,033
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

SUGATA makes a great point. The game's striking mechanics don't exactly help the problem.
__________________
PSN: Lord__Hazanko

Just an average player, with a passion for Martial Arts & Combat Sports
Haz____ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:07 PM   #5
(aka Alberto)
 
aholbert32's Arena
 
OVR: 44
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 33,173
Blog Entries: 8
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haz____
SUGATA makes a great point. The game's striking mechanics don't exactly help the problem.


For the sake of this question, let's assume that EA is revamping the striking mechanics and that most will be happy with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
aholbert32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 02-26-2017, 06:21 PM   #6
(aka Alberto)
 
aholbert32's Arena
 
OVR: 44
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 33,173
Blog Entries: 8
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUGATA
I have one simple question to you: which fighter you prefer to use when you want to WIN in online?
I am sure that the many of us will answer: fighter with MAX REACH.
It means that the fighter w max reach is a 100% favorite in EA UFC 1-2.
But
IN REAL LIFE Myke Tyson dont think so.

So, the problem is not in the bringing up realistic stats and perks to the game... but in revamping game mechanics in the direction, which will allow ALL stats to take its role REALISTICALLY!

I am talking about Short VS Long reach fighters problem in EA UFC 1-2 because of fully broken stand up striking. I am writing now a new thread about this problem and how ti fix it for UFC 3.
I'm a bad person to ask this question. I play with pretty much everybody. I really dont care if I win or lose online so I just play with fighters that I find interesting.

But I agree that most people would say the fighter with the most reach.
aholbert32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:31 PM   #7
MVP
 
SUGATA's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,346
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Quote:
Originally Posted by aholbert32
For the sake of this question, let's assume that EA is revamping the striking mechanics and that most will be happy with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Real life UFC is based around Balance - I.e. Every fighter has chances to become a champion, otherwise no one will be interested in watching new events.
So the target is to bring the UFC to its most in EA UFC.
The more similar to real life UFC will be EA UFC = the more balanced it will be.
I am for more simulation, which on its perfect will be the balance.

The current game core in stand up is broken in some ways which does
Not allow to bring simulation to its fulnes.
Solutions:
1. Foot work and defense - check my appropriate thread
2. Stand up Striking - too
3. Feints - too
4. Short VS long reach fighter - one of the most IMPORTANT elements of the game which will solve MANY issues (balance, diversity in online when different fighters becomes usable, more styles of play). This thread is coming in:
- amplitude
- ways to shorten distance safely
- footsis (zoning)
Etc

Last edited by SUGATA; 02-26-2017 at 06:33 PM.
SUGATA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:37 PM   #8
(aka Alberto)
 
aholbert32's Arena
 
OVR: 44
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 33,173
Blog Entries: 8
Re: Balance vs. Fighter Realism/Sports Game Logic v. Fighting Game Logic

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUGATA
Real life UFC is based around Balance - I.e. Every fighter has chances to become a champion, otherwise no one will be interested in watching new events.
So the target is to bring the UFC to its most in EA UFC.
The more similar to real life UFC will be EA UFC = the more balanced it will be.
I am for more simulation, which on its perfect will be the balance.

The current game core in stand up is broken in some ways which does
Not allow to bring simulation to its fulnes.
Solutions:
1. Foot work and defense - check my appropriate thread
2. Stand up Striking - too
3. Feints - too
4. Short VS long reach fighter - one of the most IMPORTANT elements of the game which will solve MANY issues (balance, diversity in online snide different fighters becomes usable). This thread is coming in:
- amplitude
- ways to shorten distance safely
- footsis (zoning)
Etc
Jon Jones's physical traits, skill set and abilities make him more likely to be a champion than Jason Brilz. Thats why their stats and skills in the game should be significantly different with Jones being significantly better.

I cant really discuss the mechanics because Im aware of things that the devs may be doing to address some of the issues you identify. Thats why I said we should just assume that striking will be improved so those issues you identified wont be issues anymore.
aholbert32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Combat Sports > EA Sports UFC »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 PM.
Top -