In the end, Smash's ring out system would have solved a lot of problems....

#31NDgamer1122Posted 2/11/2013 6:13:23 PM
From: Prismsblade | #030
That was only an example obviously, for all SSBBs TODs its not as perfect or fun as everyone makes it out to be. And asking for this game to to a clone of that is well....silly.


If they managed to do it right and eliminate those scenarios, then it wouldn't be an issue. Probably easier said than done, though.
#32cant_think2Posted 2/11/2013 6:15:45 PM
More characters might of helped, characters people really wanted.
---
Pokemon Black 2 FC 1936-8697-3913
#33blazin640Posted 2/11/2013 6:18:27 PM(edited)
NDgamer1122 posted...
From: OhSoSly | #026
I'm saying that if there was a string of buttons that you could do before the game started that took about 3 seconds, but was very hard to pull off and resulted in you just instantly winning the game, the difficulty of it doesn't mean that it's not broken. It instantly wins you the game, no matter how hard it is, that would be broken.


...when the hell would that happen? Because that just sounds totally ridiculous and unfair.

Doesn't make my point any less valid. Don't know how it would. My point is that the game is unfairly imbalanced because of easy KCs, tipped in the wielder's favor. You're saying some insane combo that was an instant win no matter what is broken, which it would be.


Yeah you are right. HC do make it certain characters powerful. So?

What fighting game doesn't have some imbalance? Plus in competitive levels, hit confirms mean nothing. Plus they are easy to dodge and see coming.

I understand you are frustrated but we get it. Either deal with hitconfirms or don't.
---
There goes my free time
#34NDgamer1122Posted 2/11/2013 6:18:41 PM
From: blazin640 | #033
Yeah you are right? Who cares? HC do make it certain characters powerful. So?

What fighting game has perfect balance?


So, if you like using a certain character that has such disadvantages, you have to work extra hard just to keep up, and sometimes it's just never enough.

And I've heard there's a certain Guilty Gear game that's about the most balanced fighting game out there.
#35RagnoraokPosted 2/11/2013 6:25:11 PM
blazin640 posted...
NDgamer1122 posted...
From: blazin640 | #012
You didn't get the point. Plus what you said applies here as well. Dodge the hit confirms.

And you still can get killed at a low percentage. Wabam! Argument finished.


You can dodge attacks all day in PSAS, but as soon as they land a kill confirm, welp, all that for nothing. This is talking FFA and 2v2, of course.

And very few things can kill you at low percentages. Gotta be around 100% or above until most hits start getting deadly.


You still can kill them at a low percentage. There is no point in trying to justify hit confirms are worse.

You still need AP. In Smash you need to get your opponent to a higher percent.

Essentially both requires you to attack your opponent constantly to build up meter/percentage so you can finish them with either luck or a hitconfirm+ super/hit. Both even have combos into getting higher meter/percentage to finish them off.


it is not the same though. In SSB, if you are good at dodging, then a heavy attack will not knock you out when you EVENTUALLY get hit. Here, you literally only need a special to hit once. There is a huge difference for the fact that a simple hit, in PSAS can lead into a super kill. In SSB you need to constantly attack and choose which attacks are best for the finishing blow.
---
Here at gamefaqs, you are either a troll, noob, or fanboy.....choose wisely.
#36OhSoSlyPosted 2/11/2013 6:50:12 PM
NDgamer1122 posted...
From: OhSoSly | #026
I'm saying that if there was a string of buttons that you could do before the game started that took about 3 seconds, but was very hard to pull off and resulted in you just instantly winning the game, the difficulty of it doesn't mean that it's not broken. It instantly wins you the game, no matter how hard it is, that would be broken.


...when the hell would that happen? Because that just sounds totally ridiculous and unfair.

Doesn't make my point any less valid. Don't know how it would. My point is that the game is unfairly imbalanced because of easy KCs, tipped in the wielder's favor. You're saying some insane combo that was an instant win no matter what is broken, which it would be.


You <----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .---->The point

You're just proving me right. What I'm saying is that the button string that causes instant-win IS unfair, no matter how hard it is. Therefore, saying that something isn't broken because it's hard to do is completely invalid.