"Pro" play: Boon or bane?

[Stark]

Balance is a funny old thing; the Smash guys may feel that making 'characterful' characters is more important than 'evenly balanced' ones (although this seems unlikely given who the imba characters are). In other genres (RTS and FPS for instance) whatever is new and hip and down with the street instantly becomes more powerful than tired old things (witness xm8 wank, oicw wank, p90 wank, stryker wank, etc). In a certain way it 'makes sense' for newer, or more marketable elements to be more powerful as a part of the tone of the game, at least from a sales perspective and given the conservative nature of genres.

Of course, just as often, it's just that devs are fucking stupid, like the Sins guys who spent six months claiming there was no labyrinth of mechanical problems and then pushed out a patch that makes planets invincible, capital ships far tougher, frigate guns more useless, fucks with the economy etc. Turns out devs are just regular people who don't like being told they're wrong some of the time. Kerberos, anyone?

[DPDarkPrimus]

What exactly do the complainers want the battle rifle to do that it doesn't already?

The BR in H2 use hitscan while the BR in H3 models the bullets separately, meaning a more random spread - so it's less effective at long ranges. But the pro players are whining about it and saying that it should, in essence, be a 2x scoped, burst-fire sniper rifle substitute.

There was a long, in-depth article about it on Bungie's website a while ago, I would link it if I could find it, but it got into the programming and (scientific) physical aspects of the differences between the two games and how the guns behaved. It's really quite fascinating... if you're into that sort of thing.

[Praxis]

Nintendo could easily have left hitstun in and had a much better competitive game without effecting the casual crowd. What would have been lost by this?

I'm not sure anyone can come up with any reason why hitstun and shield lag should have been removed, these are pretty basic elements of strategy that encourage players to time their attacks to exploit openings the same way a boxer times his, while also not allowing defensive players to camp against someone who is playing aggressively.

However, I'd say it's a slippery slope to give the OK to some glitches just because the character sucks otherwise. What they should have done with Diddy and other cruddy characters, or even just mid-level characters like fatass Bowser, is make them better. It seems like the Nintendo teams are just not capable of understanding the concept of balance, as they build a game that favors certain features (speed, and in the previous games, high KO moves that hit up) and then seem to lump all these features on the same handful of characters. Buffing some and nerfing others a little bit would have made more sense, since I honestly believe the most skillful play comes from overcoming a weakness and not from exploiting a strength. Seeing that aforementioned fatass Bowser tear up a match really is satisfying when it happens, but I usually get my streak ended by one of the same rogue's gallery of poor matchups. Being a permanent fan of the slow and heavy characters in every game though, I've simply gotten used to sucking compared to the speed freaks.

Except the question is, are these exploits really detracting from the game in any way? You could make the argument that wavedashing did this by adding a barrier of entry that only pro players had. I actually see nothing wrong with wavedashing, but I can understand that point of view. Character-specific exploits however- if one character happens to have a hard learning curve and difficult entry barrier, you can learn another.

In my opinion, an exploit or a glitch is only a bad thing if it overpowers the rest of the metagame. Glide tossing doesn't do that. Wavedashing? ...you could make the argument.

Many games don't have the obvious wide disparity between characters or factions or weapons or whatever that Smash does, and few game companies are so antagonistic towards the playbase as Nintendo is towards their very popular tournament crowd. By comparison, few games with as much exploit-riddled gameplay, idiotic lameness and dedicated pro-players are as open and welcoming in a tournament atmosphere as Smash tournies tend to be. In that one sense, I feel that Smash is where tournament games should head. A fun game that everyone can play, but only a few play well. I don't like playing it all that much, but I never regret playing a round or two the way you regret playing Starcraft.

I have to agree there. It's really weird- Nintendo's fanbase tries their best to turn Smash into a competitive game despite Nintendo's ideas for the game. Ironically, Smash was originally supposed to be a fighting game designed to show off analog controls on the N64, until someone got the bright idea to change it to use Nintendo mascots. The engine was designed as a competitive fighter, and then items were thrown in for a party style. Somewhere along the line, between Smash 64 and Brawl, Nintendo seems to have adopted the idea that it is a party game. I'll never understand why they spent so much development time focusing on the single player and left such glaring balancing holes (I mean seriously...a five year old can see how badly-designed Dedede's downthrow is. A set knockback that is so short you can just run and grab the opponent again? Are you kidding me?) in the multiplayer. And despite Nintendo's attempts to make the game uncompetitive (for example: TRIPPING), the Smash competitive community is easily the most welcoming and friendly one of them all (IMHO).

Of course, just as often, it's just that devs are fucking stupid,

Did you know that in Brawl, Ness' lag after sliding out of a grab is so long that almost every character in the game can walk forward and grab him again, and one character (Marth) can just grab him without moving, re-grabbing him every time he slides out while standing in place, straight to 999%?

Pretty sure the devs were just being stupid.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Remember, pro RTS players HATE World In Conflict too because it's not about "i memorised the build tree" and "i APMs you." WiC games really play much more like a multiplayer FPS with back and forth flow both of the battlespace and the score with the game not being truly over until the last minute; even when pushed back to their spawn a team can be victorious if the rally effectively and assault the enemy in a von clausewitzian combined arms push. (sorry about that)

That really was the best thing about WiC, it had the RTS element that people like, namely ordering some units around without the bullshit people hate like resource management and base building. The game rewarded intelligence and initiative rather than blind APM or memorizing the build order. Hell almost no matter what units you ordered in they where valuable on he battlefield if you used them sensibly. Helis; Rapid Reaction Force, Tanks; Armoured Penetration of the Enemy Rear Area, Infantry; Holding Ground everything had a role and rather than it being retarded rock paper scissors bullshit most units could effectively engage other units and in the event they couldnt the player had acess to TA to deal with those units. Heavy tanks under attack from helos? Pop smoke and call in an A2A TA.

[Covenant]

Except the question is, are these exploits really detracting from the game in any way? You could make the argument that wavedashing did this by adding a barrier of entry that only pro players had. I actually see nothing wrong with wavedashing, but I can understand that point of view. Character-specific exploits however- if one character happens to have a hard learning curve and difficult entry barrier, you can learn another.

In my opinion, an exploit or a glitch is only a bad thing if it overpowers the rest of the metagame. Glide tossing doesn't do that. Wavedashing? ...you could make the argument.

At the very highest level, when all players have the same wavedashing skills, the game regains it's sense of balance and tactical wherewithall, but removing wavedashing only gets rid of an artificial 'barrier to entry'--those players who can master the dash and still win against others who have equal wavedashing skills would win against everyone else too. All it does is make the barrier to entry an artificial one set by a capricious bug. Removing it from Melee may not be essential due to Melee's other horrific balance considerations, but I certainly wouldn't recommend leaving something like that in there for a normal game. It would be a horrendous outlier game-breaking technique in a different game.

My issue with Wavedashing was manifold, but it describes my opinion to a lot of stupid bugs. First of all, it was completely non-intuitive, in that you had to do something incredibly odd to make it function in a usable way, so there was no doubt it was merely a physics oversight. Secondly, it was not an egalitarian glitch. Some characters couldn't do it at all, whereas others were kings at it, making it a bug that fostered a reduction in the amount of viable characters to a slight degree. Thirdly, it dramatically altered gameplay, and I'm generally opposed to this as a rule. A bug that becomes the focus of regular gameplay mechanics either needs to be codified, documented and made fair, and a feature for everyone.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Here is the detailed article about the BR and why it's different from Halo 2 to Halo 3.

That they had to sit down and explain it in this much detail tells you how fucking tired they were of people complaining about it.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Also, a thread talking about spawns on Bungie.net has attracted several people claiming that spawn killing is "more skilled" than fighting your opponents on even ground. Keep in mind that in Halo 3 spawn killing involves exploiting the spawn points by positioning your team in specific areas on the map to force the enemy to spawn in one area - effectively creating an unbreakable killing zone where they just point and shoot for the remainder of the game.

Yes, they are insisting that this sort of thing is "pro". It's no different than them saying BXR is a legit strategy for Halo 2.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

Ah, I thought I would be something like "Its not a burst-fire sniper rifle, that sucks."

And spawn camping is not a demonstration of skill, it just means that the camper can't get a kill if the victim is able to do anything about it.

I hate those people.

[Qwerty 42]

Here is the detailed article about the BR and why it's different from Halo 2 to Halo 3.

That they had to sit down and explain it in this much detail tells you how fucking tired they were of people complaining about it.

This to me is what's wrong with competitive gaming.

Bungie: We worked on the weapons to give you a more accurate representation of what it would be like if you were a Space Marine.

Competitive Scene: BAAAAAAW

[Stark]

Yeah, it turns out to be most effective you basically ignore the fluff (which is meaningless window dressing) and focus entirely on the numbers and behaviour ingame. This really shouldn't be surprising, since it explains why many people are terrible at RTSs. They might LOOK like tanks, but they do not BEHAVE like tanks.

[Nephtys]

Yeah, it turns out to be most effective you basically ignore the fluff (which is meaningless window dressing) and focus entirely on the numbers and behaviour ingame. This really shouldn't be surprising, since it explains why many people are terrible at RTSs. They might LOOK like tanks, but they do not BEHAVE like tanks.

This is pretty much true. I cringe at RA3's gameplay model, where the mighty tanks of three superpowers behave like dressed up spearmen, running around in a mob, then standing still to throw javelins and each other. Perfectly aimed Javelins mind you, which are only capable of killing the enemy after 5 hits. Of course, the soldier with only 4 javelins transfixing him can fight at full capacity.

Sometimes, they can throw javelins while moving. But they forget to use their shields, so you have to special power buttonclick 'use shield' to block spears.

Also, everything Japanese sucks. They have the most advanced technology in being ineffectual, despite everything being 'Quantum' or 'Nano'. Guess that doesn't beat a soviet cannon in a concrete bunker.

[Oscar Wilde]

I've seen "pro" players that are people I would love to have a match with, and "pro" players I would love to punch in the face. The MLG of Halo 3 is the latter. A bunch of machismo idiots who don't realize what a broken weapon is.


Namely, the biggest issue with "pros" is the ones that only want to play with certain weapons/vehicles/none.

If you want to call yourself a pro, that means you can take any scenario and at least KNOW how to deal with it, and TRY to do so.