Posted by 3 in Using frame data to balance your game +neat excel tool. (Started by Liero August 11, 2012, 01:04:14 AM
^I don't understand how his approach makes any of that stuff not possible?
It doesn't. I just don't want some naive person coming in here and thinking they've discovered the meaning of life by learning how to read frame data. (Guess I'm the one being naive, eh?)
If you're just throwing numbers around, you lose these subtleties.
Right, and I agree. But the point is that these are subtleties; subtleties to the extent that I doubt they were ever considered at first. They were part of that organic process I mentioned. An analogy: strongly exaggerated characters often show up either at the top or the bottom of tier lists. Obviously this is because some of them are capable of taking advantage of a given game's mechanics and others aren't. Why would anyone possibly design a zoning character in a game where zoning's impossible or a character with useless normals in a footsie-based game? Evidently somebody didn't think things through. But did they not think things through because they didn't understand their own game, or did they just want to see what players could do with unsuitable tools? I wouldn't be surprised if the former was true more often than you think. Often it’s the players who work out what actually works and what doesn't; right down to the subtleties. And when all the subtleties are figured out, a game based on them becomes sterile; just routine vs routine. That's why it's important that you keep your design as open as possible.
Actually, that is PRECISELY what it is. Have you played SF2HD Remix?
Yeah, I think that, if we didn't have one before, we definitely have an impasse now. It's become a chicken-and-egg argument. You use HDR as an example of the typical design process; I say the opposite: the only reason Sirlin made the changes he did was because of the game's totally unaccommodating base design. Why else would Capcom experiment with Alpha Counters and parries and whatnot (and hell, even the SF3 priority system) all throughout the series? I think (however misjudged they might have been at times) they wanted to make their games more robust and totally avoid the matchup-specific nonsense that had to be dealt with in ST. If they'd have added some mechanic to HDR it sure as hell wouldn't be ST any more, but it'd fix the dumb things. I mean, to make my argument sound ridiculous, what would happen if every character had an anti-Guile move? And every character had an anti-Balrog move? Maybe SFII's a bad example...
Look, all that I was trying to say by that is that you should never be in a position where you have to go "character x has a move that totally shuts down character y, we need to specifically deal with this move". Your system - and the basic design of your character, way beyond specifics like frame values - should be flexible enough to deal with that eventuality, and anything related. Doing things the other way is a mark of desperation; a sign that you haven't accomodated for some cruical possibility and need to fix it by any means. If you run on that philosophy, the game'll just turn into counterpick vs counterpick and nobody'll ever be doing anything interesting. I may as well be playing one of those degenerate AoS games.
And yeah, I've noticed as well that trying to change people's mind on the internet never works. Apologies for being so exasperating. I'm glad we had this conversation, even if you aren't.