Stage Select
Advanced Search

The Street Fighter V Thread, vol. 2

misterBee

By misterBee
in Fighting Game Discussion

Recommended Posts

Darc_Requiem Level 19

Darc_Requiem

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Mattatsu said:

I appreciate that lol

 

and sorry for dipping like that, I had something urgent come up (all is well). Thanks for the games though! Gave me a lot to work on.

Hey man, it's fine. I was around, you wanted to play. We are good.

 

Edit: BREAKING NEWS!!!! @GreatDarkHerohas caused the cardiac arrest of @AriesWarlockand @Skort. 

Edited by Darc_Requiem
Link to comment
Mattatsu Level 14

Mattatsu

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AriesWarlock said:

The netcode was good today?

Yeah, I tried yesterday with 4-5 bar restrictions as opposed to my normal 3-5 bars, and it was much better.

 

When they updated the netcode 2-3 years ago, they changed the bars so that the old 4 was the new 3, and I mostly didn’t have issues with old 4 bar connections, so I was okay with the new 3-5 most of the time… I was also, previously, having issues where it would take like an hour to find a 4 or 5 bar match, so I kinda had to keep at 3-5 to find anything regularly.

 

After the mess the other day, I tried searching for 4-5 bars only and found 4-5 bar matches within a minute like everytime and the connection has mostly been good (except for people I assume to be on wifi).

 

so, yeah, I’ll probably be playing this more regularly.

Link to comment
DoctaMario Level 17

DoctaMario

Posted
Posted

Would you rather have a game community that has larger numbers but more varying degrees of skill and the potential that you'd never be able to play the top players or a smaller community where moat of the layers who play are very serious and you could potentially play the top dogs? 

 

Personally I'd rather the latter. I think large communities are a bit overrated and being in that playing good players is key to leveling up, having access to the best players the game has to offer seems like it would make getting good easier. What do you think? 

Link to comment
Mr.Cipher Level 11

Mr.Cipher

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, DoctaMario said:

Would you rather have a game community that has larger numbers but more varying degrees of skill and the potential that you'd never be able to play the top players or a smaller community where moat of the layers who play are very serious and you could potentially play the top dogs? 

 

Personally I'd rather the latter. I think large communities are a bit overrated and being in that playing good players is key to leveling up, having access to the best players the game has to offer seems like it would make getting good easier. What do you think? 

 

I think that every game that has not 10 seconds of Matchmaking max and lets me stomp every opponent I get is a bad designed game with a shit community.

Also it's dead and there is no one new to fight only 10 year Veterans.

Link to comment
Mattatsu Level 14

Mattatsu

Posted
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, DoctaMario said:

Would you rather have a game community that has larger numbers but more varying degrees of skill and the potential that you'd never be able to play the top players or a smaller community where moat of the layers who play are very serious and you could potentially play the top dogs? 

 

Personally I'd rather the latter. I think large communities are a bit overrated and being in that playing good players is key to leveling up, having access to the best players the game has to offer seems like it would make getting good easier. What do you think? 

If the latter results in not being able to hop on at anytime and find matches with randoms (this making it a “discord fighter”), I’d rather the former tbh.

 

then again, I’m not reaching the top anytime soon. I just want games with people around my skill level or slightly better

Edited by Mattatsu
Link to comment
HeavensCloud Level 13

HeavensCloud

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, DoctaMario said:

Would you rather have a game community that has larger numbers but more varying degrees of skill and the potential that you'd never be able to play the top players or a smaller community where moat of the layers who play are very serious and you could potentially play the top dogs? 

 

Personally I'd rather the latter. I think large communities are a bit overrated and being in that playing good players is key to leveling up, having access to the best players the game has to offer seems like it would make getting good easier. What do you think? 

I'd rather have a large community and the ability to play the top dogs. That's currently how SFV works assuming you're able to climb the ranks. I've fought a lot of the best players in North America just by making diamond and turning on ranked mode.

 

Edited by HeavensCloud
Link to comment
delete_me Level 12

delete_me

Posted
Posted

E-iu9V4WYAgybU-?format=jpg&name=large

 

#totallynotasmurf.jpg

 

Imagine not only doing that but also picking who's arguably the best character in the game. Fucking cretin.

 

I hope I run into him again. He was better than me but not by much and played with that confident arrogance a lot of Urien players display but can be exploited. 

And after I beat him I'm going to refuse the rematch because that guy can go screw himself diagonally.

Link to comment
Shakunetsu Level 17

Shakunetsu

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Darc_Requiem said:

Wasn't sure where to put this....

I remember when SFV came out I always wanted Ken to have the SF3 parry as vskill, while Ryu should have been more into focus attack like vskill because of being lore wise like in Ryu Final and CFA.

 

Then this flicky* guy name account in mvci thread mistaken me to be a daigo fan because of defending Ryu for not having an effective projectile game in mvci due to the projectile deflection, he thought my interest of Ryu was because of seeing the daigo parry lol. I'm not even a guy that had fond memories of SF3. I know it's a great game but it's not my game or made something for the like of my demographic. 

 

I'm never been a fan of establish fictional character being rework to match a  a real life personality or a particular momentary trends that would be sooner be replace by another. I always been in the lore and started in lore then along with visual that my 2 SF4 polls was burned post. because of Sf4 boss poll anticipation like post and SF4 should be 3D visuals not sprite.

Link to comment
DoctaMario Level 17

DoctaMario

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, HeavensCloud said:

I'd rather have a large community and the ability to play the top dogs. That's currently how SFV works assuming you're able to climb the ranks. I've fought a lot of the best players in North America just by making diamond and turning on ranked mode.

 

But what are the chances of you ever getting to play people like Daigo, Punk, Wong etc? Most players will never get to play those players because the community is so large and the top players don't generally mix with the hoi polloi on a regular basis. And I imagine it would increase the skill level of the base as a whole if they had access to players of that caliber but most of them never will. 

 

12 hours ago, Pair of Rooks said:

False dichotomy, but a bigger question anyway: why bother getting good at a game few play?

It's not a false dichotomy at all. You're far more likely to get to play someone like MightyMar than you are SonicFox because of the difference in the size of the vsav and MK communities. 

 

As for your question, I don't know, because you like it? I don't understand why half the planet has to be doing something to make it worth doing and I think that line of thinking is why so many people get burned out on fighting games, because rather than playing something they really like and putting in a little effort to find games, they stick to the most popular stuff that they may not enjoy as much. By that logic, why bother getting good at American football when the rest of the world plays soccer?

Edited by DoctaMario
Link to comment
Pair of Rooks Level 14

Pair of Rooks

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, DoctaMario said:

It's not a false dichotomy at all. You're far more likely to get to play someone like MightyMar than you are SonicFox because of the difference in the size of the vsav and MK communities

It's false because top players don't silo themselves if they play a popular one. They'll have viewer battles and subscriber tourneys.   It's just a different method than your discord fighter. 

 

3 hours ago, DoctaMario said:

As for your question, I don't know, because you like it?

Your question was playing a game based on size or access, not because you like it. 

 

If you do play one you like, then size or access doesn't have anything to do with it.

Link to comment
DoctaMario Level 17

DoctaMario

Posted
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Pair of Rooks said:

It's false because top players don't silo themselves if they play a popular one. They'll have viewer battles and subscriber tourneys.   It's just a different method than your discord fighter. 

 

Your question was playing a game based on size or access, not because you like it. 

 

If you do play one you like, then size or access doesn't have anything to do with it.

You asked why someone would bother to get good at a game few people play and that would be the best reason I would think, because you like it. But having regular access the the best players makes it easier to level up. 

 

Ive heard of top players charging money to play people which, I guess if you're ok with that it's your money, but I haven't heard of viewer battles. Who does that and how many fights does a viewer get against them? 

Edited by DoctaMario
Link to comment
Sonero Level 17

Sonero

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, DoctaMario said:

Would you rather have a game community that has larger numbers but more varying degrees of skill and the potential that you'd never be able to play the top players or a smaller community where moat of the layers who play are very serious and you could potentially play the top dogs? 

 

This is a very odd question full of holes all over the place. Access to the top people is mostly dependent on how accessible they make themselves. A small community doesn't guarantee that some of the top players will help others.  Size isn't really the issue on whether or not somebody at a mid to low level gets to play somebody great.

 

 

Whether you play great players at tournaments is also dependent on how you do in them. I don't know, this is a oddly phrased question all around.

Link to comment
DoctaMario Level 17

DoctaMario

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sonero said:

 

This is a very odd question full of holes all over the place. Access to the top people is mostly dependent on how accessible they make themselves. A small community doesn't guarantee that some of the top players will help others.  Size isn't really the issue on whether or not somebody at a mid to low level gets to play somebody great.

 

 

Whether you play great players at tournaments is also dependent on how you do in them. I don't know, this is a oddly phrased question all around.

I'm just trying to stimulate conversation so I didn't really think hard on the wording, but I likely could have phrased it better. Put simply: 

 

Smaller community of highly skilled players where you'll probably have regular access to top players vs large community with a larger portion of average to below average players and less likely you get to regularly play top players. 

 

You make good points about top players only being as accessable as they make themselves but if SRK taught me anything it's that the bigger a playerbase is, it's more likely the top players will keep to each other and stop interacting with lower level players unless they have to. In my experience with both large and smaller playerbase games I haven't found that to be the case as often with smaller bases. 

Link to comment
Sonero Level 17

Sonero

Posted
Posted

There's a lot of outside factors to consider.  Small community is relevant to top tier players if that's the only way they can play their game. If it isnt, then they don't really have to interact with low level players.

 

From what I've seen, most of the heavy lifting by top players is done with other top players. If they can grind games out online rather than in person (as it happened with MTG), then they'll do that instead.

 

Motivating top players to talk to low/mid level players is the issue regardless of size. If there's no incentive for the better local players to interact, they won't.  

Link to comment
DoctaMario Level 17

DoctaMario

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sonero said:

 

Motivating top players to talk to low/mid level players is the issue regardless of size. If there's no incentive for the better local players to interact, they won't.  

I think this is definitely an issue. I remember when top players would post on SRK but eventually they stopped because they'd get scrubs who didn't know what they were talking about arguing with them and with that went a lot of potential discussion that could have helped people.

Link to comment
Sonero Level 17

Sonero

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, DoctaMario said:

I remember when top players would post on SRK but eventually they stopped because they'd get scrubs who didn't know what they were talking about arguing with them and with that went a lot of potential discussion that could have helped people.

 

Problem is that a lot of american top players have terrible attitudes. That and there's a certain amount of people who use the little they know to label themselves expert. I argued this before in the SRK SF5 lounge with unironically the "good enough players" who aren't at the top but talk like gatekeepers: top players are top players for reasons other than game knowledge.

 

A good example of that situation was the Rufus subforum criticizing Justin Wong. There was a small kerfuffle about how plain Wong's Rufus was in SF4. The issue being mostly that Wong wasn't doing a lot of stuff that Rufus could do and getting lit up for it.  Justin handwaved it away as their set ups not being good for X or Y reason. Across the length of SF4 those criticisms became very valid as Wong wouldn't learn stuff that made his offense better.

 

If you can beat 95% of the people with the same ol' same ol', why would you change it? The stuff you're going to learn from the better players is usually never going to be tech per say. It almost invariably involves approach, strategy, situational awareness issues etc. But that's also why playing FGs to get better should be done with mics so you can talk about whats actively going on in the match.

 

The one benefit to a larger community is that the odds increase that other players will fill in that whole to talk about strategy etc. As is your chance to play the top of the top of any game is low. Its way higher in the FGC than in other competitive endevours (how often are you playing top CSGO, LoL, Chess or even Basketball players).  Don't know that big or small impacts the FGC that much. Small just means your chances of running into top tier people increases at tournaments.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
  • Create New...
Stage Select
select a stage