Support NeoGAF

[XS+]

They complicated the jump/duck function in Soul Calibur II. A quick tap of up and down from SC1 (to avoid/counter low hits and throws) has become a cumbersome task of holding Guard or an attack button every time in SC2. I just hate how they dumbed down the system in part for low-level accessibility (as if SC wasn't beginner-friendly enough). It's not like it was hard at all to 8wr in SC1.

Guard Impacting throws (I'm sorry I just finished a marathon SC2 session yesterday): it makes no sense to block a grab with your weapon, even in a fantasy-based game, and there's already a counter function for throws that doesn't undermine the effectiveness of throw moves like GI'ing does. Here's an idea, let's have the next SF3 game allow parry-able throws, sounds like a smart idea to me *sarcasm* I hope SC3 fixes these dumb problems that weren't taken care of in SC2.

The devastating super combos in 2D fighters. Why do 2D games rely on this age-old system when 3D games have done just fine without them? They made a little bit of sense when SNK introduced the super attack to the world (if your opponent is beating your ass, as a last resort when you're almost dead, you can input a near-impossible command to fire a powerful super that turns the round into a sudden death match), but in most fighters these days, it's easy as hell to input and has just become an alternative for a standard 2-in-1 combo attack (low fierce XX lvl3 super fireball game over). It's just there for show nowdays. I'd love to hear a decent justification for its existence, how it improves or benefits the game any.

Oh yeah go ahead and any more gripes to the list if you want, I don't care.

 

[anotheriori]

Supers are basically an extention of special moves. The benefit the game the same way specials are there for. Its a very useful tool to punish mistakes.

 

[Ferrio]

Bitching about super moves is stupid. I remember some guy preaching to me one time that all 2d fighters lost all the skill once supers were introduced.

 

[XS+]

Supers are basically an extention of special moves. The benefit the game the same way specials are there for. Its a very useful tool to punish mistakes.

But nowadays they're way too easy to execute and combo into for my liking. You ought to pay a price for working a devastaing lvl3 desperation attack into your offense (like making the commands hard to do like in the old days).

Maybe I just hate K-Sagat's combo-friendly low fireball super in CvS2..

 

[Ferrio]

But nowadays they're way too easy to execute and combo into for my liking. You ought to pay a price for working a devastaing lvl3 desperation attack into your offense (like making the commands hard to do like in the old days).

Maybe I just hate K-Sagat's combo-friendly low fireball super in CvS2..

That's a matter of balancing, and you should probably be more angry at Sagat's c.hp.

Also remember, just cause any idiot can doa super move, doesn't mean they know how to use it effectivly. Lots have tons of recover time after the move if blocked, or whiffed, so it isn't like any idiot can just them and not be punished.

It's just another tool in the game that has advantages and disadvantages, and most balancing issues in games don't revolve around a super move.

 

[XS+]

Yeah I'm talking about the effortless c.fp xx fireball combo specifically.

Must this system be a part of every 2D fighter or is it impossible for a modern game to do without super combos entirely? If SFIV got rid of super meters in favor of something practical-but-different, would you bitch about it? That would be an interesting development (almost as interesting as Capcom actually making SFIV!)

It's just another tool in the game that has advantages and disadvantages, and most balancing issues in games don't revolve around a super move.

If Chun Li didn't have such a devastating and high-priority SAII would she still be toppest-of-top-tiers in 3S? That relates to balancing in a way.

 

[Ferrio]

Yeah I'm talking about the effortless c.fp xx fireball combo specifically.

Must this system be a part of every 2D fighter or is it impossible for a modern game to do without super combos entirely? If SFIV got rid of super meters in favor of something practical-but-different, would you bitch about it? That would be an interesting development (almost as interesting as Capcom actually making SFIV!)


If Chun Li didn't have such a devastating and high-priority SAII would she still be toppest-of-top-tiers in 3S? That relates to balancing in a way.

No, if chun li didn't have a long reaching, low hitting, fast as hell, super cancelable c.mk that super would be just fine.

 

[Neo_ZX]

Probably AI that hasn't progressed much since the very first fighting game? Either CPU does way more damage, or they run a predictable pattern and read your moves if they're losing.

V-ism custom combos that always end up allowing for 50-80+% damage combos.

Lack of online play

 

[Gattsu25]

what also annoys me is when a fighting game features a female that desn't have at least 300K polys, females with less than 40 costumes each, and proper jiggle physics

something like that would advance the fighting genre into the next gen

 

[XS+]

No, if chun li didn't have a long reaching, low hitting, fast as hell, super cancelable c.mk that super would be just fine.

Oh ok let's just ignore how precise you have to be to block and parry her SAII..

 

[Ferrio]

Oh ok let's just ignore how precise you have to be to block and parry her SAII..

You don't have to parry the whole damn thing, you can parry the first hit and counter attack. And just cause it's hard to parry doesn't mean you should fucking try to, fucking block it then smash their ass.

 

[XS+]

The first hit of the SAII requires precise timing to parry, like before the screen freezes. God be with you if you're doing anything else when your opponent fires that super..

 

[Ferrio]

The first hit of the SAII requires precise timing to parry, like before the screen freezes.

Then don't parry, you don't have to and it's not a good idea to even try unless it's your last option. Then you can either wait out the whole super and counter, or wait till the last hit and parry that and counter.

God be with you if you're doing anything else when your opponent fires that super..

Well that's the general idea with any super, is to punish stupid mistakes.

 

[XS+]

Well back on topic, another thing Ferrio said..

No, if chun li didn't have a long reaching, low hitting, fast as hell, super cancelable c.mk that super would be just fine.

Are you agreeing here that at times super combos are abuseable without much effort? It appears so!

 

[Ferrio]

Well back on topic, another thing Ferrio said..

Are you agreeing here that super combos are abuseable without much effort? It appears so!

I agree some can be, but it's not the actual super move's fault. Like I said, make the c.mk not to be cancelable and it's all good. I'd be more concerned about Chun Li's c.mk and s.hp more than her SAII.

Again Super move are just another moves in fighting games, some are balanced and some aren't.

 

[XS+]

Again Super move are just another moves in fighting games, some are balanced and some aren't.

Which means 2D fighters could do just fine without them? (3D fighters have survived this long without meters, that's for certain!)

 

[rastex]

Are you trying to say that 2D fighters would fare better in the marketplace if they did away with Supers?

 

[anotheriori]

its kinda like saying blocking/parrying is cheap.

if supers were not introduced you'd get the same pattern/strategy as SF2.
shoto: fireball uppercut traps, repeated throwing and poking. I mean without a SA3 Yun is pretty useless.

Also because they're making an arcade game they want matches to go rather swiftly, supers help that because it causes big damage. It also adds the "don't do something stupid/predictable because i have an invincible super".

I agree some can be, but it's not the actual super move's fault. Like I said, make the c.mk not to be cancelable and it's all good. I'd be more concerned about Chun Li's c.mk and s.hp more than her SAII.

Yea then people would find something in its place, or Chun Li would just fall out of top tier leaving Ken to reign with his c.mk.

 

[Ferrio]

Which means 2D fighters could do just fine without them? (3D fighters have survived this long without meters, that's for certain!)

Yes but 3D fighters have lots of HIGH damage juggles, that only need one hit to start and aren't complex, so I really don't see the point. Like Iori said, you take out super's and people will just bitch about something else. It's all about the balance of the game, no one complains about Sean's SA's, so obviously it isn't the concept of super's it's each individual's implimentation.

 

[toohectic]

They complicated the jump/duck function in Soul Calibur II. A quick tap of up and down from SC1 (to avoid/counter low hits and throws) has become a cumbersome task of holding Guard or an attack button every time in SC2.

Guard Impacting throws (I'm sorry I just finished a marathon SC2 session yesterday): it makes no sense to block a grab with your weapon. Here's an idea, let's have the next SF3 game allow parry-able throws, sounds like a smart idea to me *sarcasm*

I'm not here to argue over what's better... I'm just pointing out some things. Anyway... You couldn't tap up to jump in SCI either. It still required that you hold guard and hold up, which is still slower than just hitting 8A/8B/8K. With regards to crouching, holding G to duck eliminates ambiguous inputs between step and crouch. Everyone I know that transitioned between SCI to SCII has never had a problem with this.

If throws weren't GI'able, then you would get a free throw attempt after every successful GI, hence making every character a SCI Astaroth. Post GI throws would be the best option everytime since there would be absolutely no risk associated with that option. Several things would have to be changed to make up for this. Not necessary at all seeing the system is relatively perfect as is. But I would prefer if they went back to SCI's GI system with 4 different GI's as opposed to 2. Anyway, SFIII's parry system is completely different. If it allowed you to re-parry post-parry attacks like SC, then I don't think parrying throws would be a crazy notion at all. Their system rewards parries with guaranteed damage, hence throws are one counter to parry attempts.

Like I said, make the c.mk not to be cancelable and it's all good.

Heck, just make it like DC version where it's practically impossible to get a hit confirmation before committing to the super.

 

[XS+]

I'm not here to argue over what's better... I'm just pointing out some things. Anyway... You couldn't tap up to jump in SCI either. It still required that you hold guard and hold up, which is still slower than just hitting 8A/8B/8K. With regards to crouching, holding G to duck eliminates ambiguous inputs between step and crouch. Everyone I know that transitioned between SCI to SCII has never had a problem with this.

I stand corrected, the 'hold 8' duck was removed but the jump function remains the same. And I never had problems mixing up step with crouch in SC1 (and I don't know anyone else who did either). 8+G just isn't as intuitive as just holding 8 imo. If that isn't the case with other players then more power to them I guess.

Plus I don't buy the 'nobody has a problem with' line. There were a slew of strategies surrounding FC-cancel attacks that are that much harder to do now that duck was removed from SC2 (Mitsurugi for instance was freaking neutered in SC2, or at least isn't the same character that he was in SC1).

If throws weren't GI'able, then you would get a free throw attempt after every successful GI, hence making every character a SCI Astaroth. Post GI throws would be the best option everytime since there would be absolutely no risk associated with that option.

Well if I had my way, post-GI throws would still be escapable with A or B. You don't agree that GI'able throws mutes the effectiveness of throws and throw escapes? Would you rather escape a throw or GI it? Get rid of one or the other, imo.

And yes, bring the low repels/high parrys back to SC.

Yes but 3D fighters have lots of HIGH damage juggles, that only need one hit to start and aren't complex, so I really don't see the point.

True. Thank goodness for Air Control, which complicates juggles beyond one hit. Did I already mention that Soul Calibur is a good fighting game?

 

[XS+]

Are you trying to say that 2D fighters would fare better in the marketplace if they did away with Supers?

What? No.

 

[anotheriori]

From the 3D players I know of, they say SC2 is broken... not as bad as Tekken4. General consensus is that VF4 is the best and way at the bottom is Doa.

 

[XS+]

From the 3D players I know of, they say SC2 is broken... not as bad as Tekken4. General consensus is that VF4 is the best and way at the bottom is Doa.

The rock-solid balance that was in System 12 SC1 is gone, but in terms of balance, SC2 is still only 2nd to VF4 (and who knows, maybe Tekken 5) in the 3D market. So yeah it's a 'good fighting game' like I said.

 

[toohectic]

I stand corrected, the 'hold 8' duck was removed but the jump function remains the same. And I never had problems mixing up step with crouch in SC1 (and I don't know anyone else who did either). 8+G just isn't as intuitive as just holding 8 imo. If that isn't the case with other players then more power to them I guess.

I'm not saying people mixed them up, but they are both the same input in SCI so it simply removed that ambiguity. And as a side benefit, holding G allows players to crouch for much shorter durations. (which is still also possible with the SC1 system since you can still hold G to crouch). Either system is fine. BTW, 8=up and 2=down.

There were a slew of strategies surrounding FC-cancel attacks that are that much harder to do now that duck was removed from SC2 (Mitsurugi for instance was freaking neutered in SC2, or at least isn't the same character that he was in SC1).

I assume you mean iFC (instant FC), and if so, iFC is much easier and faster in SCII than SCI. Or since you mentioned Mitsu, perhaps you are referring to Relic cancels which were all together removed from SCII. Care to mention exactly what got nerfed other than those? All of his main losses are due to system changes like techable lows, which are changes applicable to all characters.

Well if I had my way, post-GI throws would still be escapable with A or B. You don't agree that GI'able throws mutes the effectiveness of throws and throw escapes? Would you rather escape a throw or GI it? Get rid of one or the other, imo. And yes, bring the low repels/high parrys back to SC.

But you are completely ignoring the fact that if throws weren't GI'able, almost everyone would use them as their post GI option. Remember, you can't duck an immediate throw post-GI, so it's guaranteed to connect (if they can't GI them). So therefore it's a 50/50 chance they will escape. If they don't, you get damage.. if they do, you are both at nuetral adv (ignoring TER). That equals no risk (other than the risk involved in the initial GI which is beside the point). Every other attack post-GI would still have risk associated with it since the opponent could always re-GI you back. So GI'ing throws is fine as it is.

And I still don't consider SCII to be "broken". It's not the rock solid system that it was initially planned to be, but many of the new so called "broken techniques" all have counters. Several counters in fact. It's broken factor is over exagerated.

 

[tekkenmasterAC]

Hey!, you cry I get happy, I bet when you played in the arcade you were the guy that GOT PISSED at Losing, and made my gaming experience a lot better thanks!

 

[XS+]

Hey!, you cry I get happy, I bet when you played in the arcade you were the guy that GOT PISSED at Losing, and made my gaming experience a lot better thanks!

AHAHAHAHAHAHA your hilarious.

 

[XS+]

I'm not saying people mixed them up, but they are both the same input in SCI so it simply removed that ambiguity. And as a side benefit, holding G allows players to crouch for much shorter durations. (which is still also possible with the SC1 system since you can still hold G to crouch). Either system is fine. BTW, 8=up and 2=down.

Alright this is boiling down to my opinion/preference versus yours.. I like the 'hold down to crouch' method, I wish it was in SC2, The End.

I assume you mean iFC (instant FC), and if so, iFC is much easier and faster in SCII than SCI. Or since you mentioned Mitsu, perhaps you are referring to Relic cancels which were all together removed from SCII. Care to mention exactly what got nerfed other than those? All of his main losses are due to system changes like techable lows, which are changes applicable to all characters.

iFC is 2+G, any FC move, right (and you can do a FC out of SCC and some other stuff that's not coming to mind right now.. if that's not the way to iFC then pardon my lack of utter knowledge on the subject)? I don't think that's easier than SC1's (tap 4,7,8,9 or 6), *, any FC move . Maybe among the 'Soul Calibur Community' it's the preferred system but I definitely thought SC1's system was more natural/intuitive.

As for Mitsu, his missing Relic Cancel and Mist Hop, and H/FMD and False Purification changes almost made him an entirely different (for worse imo) character, do you not agree?

But you are completely ignoring the fact that if throws weren't GI'able, almost everyone would use them as their post GI option. Remember, you can't duck an immediate throw post-GI, so it's guaranteed to connect (if they can't GI them). So therefore it's a 50/50 chance they will escape. If they don't, you get damage.. if they do, you are both at nuetral adv (ignoring TER). That equals no risk (other than the risk involved in the initial GI which is beside the point). Every other attack post-GI would still have risk associated with it since the opponent could always re-GI you back. So GI'ing throws is fine as it is.

So you're saying the conventional throw escape system is useless then? I'm fine with the fact that GI'able throws makes zero real-world sense, but I don't see the point of including both techniques to avoid a throw. I'm not making any more comarisons with SF3 Parry and SC's GI, but that's akin to SFIII including air blocks along with air parrys, ie it's redundant. Plus the 50/50 guessing game of throw escaping would still remain and make the post GI game challenging/unpredictable (albeit lacking depth from the existing system, admittedly).

So I agree that the GI battle would end and render GIs in close range all but useless.

And I still don't consider SCII to be "broken". It's not the rock solid system that it was initially planned to be, but many of the new so called "broken techniques" all have counters. Several counters in fact. It's broken factor is over exagerated.

Well I agree with you there.

 

[toohectic]

iFC is 2+G, any FC move, right (and you can do a FC out of SCC and some other stuff that's not coming to mind right now.. if that's not the way to iFC then pardon my lack of utter knowledge on the subject)? I don't think that's easier than SC1's (tap 4,7,8,9 or 6), *, any FC move . Maybe among the 'Soul Calibur Community' it's the preferred system but I definitely thought SC1's system was more natural/intuitive.

Wait... are you talking iFC or RCC? Sounds like you are talking about RCC. iFC = instant Full Crouch which allows you to do full crouch based attacks instantly from a standing position. Completely opposite of that is RCC = Recover Crouching Cancel, which allows you to cancel your crouching state into an instant standing state so that you can perform 1_2_3 based standing attacks immediately after a move that recovers crouching. For instance, after Mitsu does a Mist K, he recovers crouching. If he wanted to do a followup 2KB, normally he would have to wait until he fully standed before he could perform it... thus giving up his frame adv of the hit Mist K. (If you input 2KB directly after Mist K, you'll get a normal FC 2K which is completely different than the desired 2KB.) However, to overcome this, he can RCC to cancel that crouching state which will allow him to immediately do standing 2KB. RCC (tapping any non-1_2_3 direction after a move that recovers crouching) is identical between SCI and SCII. No difference at all.

As for Mitsu, his missing Relic Cancel and Mist Hop, and H/FMD and False Purification changes almost made him an entirely different (for worse imo) character, do you not agree?

False Purification? as in the Relic Counter? It's the same other than a different input. (Now 6G or A+B+K as opposed to just G). Mist Hop is gone, but I hardly think that makes him a completely different character. I think his play style is essentially the same as his SCI counterpart. In other words, none of these things mentioned are a key part of either SCI or SCII Mitsu's play style.

So you're saying the conventional throw escape system is useless then? I'm fine with the fact that GI'able throws makes zero real-world sense, but I don't see the point of including both techniques to avoid a throw. I'm not making any more comarisons with SF3 Parry and SC's GI, but that's akin to SFIII including air blocks along with air parrys, ie it's redundant. Plus the 50/50 guessing game of throw escaping would still remain and make the post GI game challenging/unpredictable (albeit lacking depth from the existing system, admittedly). So I agree that the GI battle would end and render GIs in close range all but useless.

Again, you are missing the point. I didn't say the conventional throw escape was useless. If we look at just throws and nothing more in the SC system, then yes, it could be classified as redundant. But given the scope of the rest of the current system, GI'ing throws is necessary or else we would have an abusable post-GI option that poses no risk for the thrower. Drastic changes to the way throws work and how the GI system works in general would have to be made in order to accomodate the change of making all throws un-GI'able.

Anyway, this is my last post of the night. I'm off to sleep, so I'll check back tomorrow afternoon.

 

[XS+]

Wait... are you talking iFC or RCC?

I'm talking about iFC, RCC works just fine and the same as in SC1. iFC is tougher for me to execute in SC2 thanks to the 'hold down to duck' omission.

False Purification? as in the Relic Counter? It's the same other than a different input. (Now 6G or A+B+K as opposed to just G). Mist Hop is gone, but I hardly think that makes him a completely different character. I think his play style is essentially the same as his SCI counterpart. In other words, none of these things mentioned are a key part of either SCI or SCII Mitsu's play style.

I'm sorry but Relic Cancel was a big loss (and FMD/HMD stances/UBs are slower in SC2) and Mitsu is half as interesting and unpredictable now than he was in SC2. I'm sure other Mitsu loyalists agree. It's about the same as taking away Taki's Possession cancels (PORC, and for the sake of argument, EXC) in SC2 and saying her play style is the same as it was in SC1. But I guess when it comes down to it, Mitsu is 'essentially' the same character.

Again, you are missing the point. I didn't say the conventional throw escape was useless. If we look at just throws and nothing more in the SC system, then yes, it could be classified as redundant. But given the scope of the rest of the current system, GI'ing throws is necessary or else we would have an abusable post-GI option that poses no risk for the thrower. Drastic changes to the way throws work and how the GI system works in general would have to be made in order to accomodate the change of making all throws un-GI'able.

I can accept that point of un-GI'able throws spoiling the GI system. I stand by my take on the two options to escape throws being redundant though.

 

[mrmyth]

I've always been a fan of throws, so my gripes are all throw related. And good goddamm I hate that throws can be GI'ed in SCII. They should be escapable, with true move-sensitive escapes. Make the attacking character pay for having its throw broken on the high damage throws. But that GI shit, even though I understand the reasons, is completely annoying. I've been conditioned by VF/Tekken. When I get my throw GI'ed it tosses my rhythm out the window. I have more fun with VF/Tekken, so I won't play SCII anymore lest it recondition me.

On a similar note, throws should mean more in the DOA series. Command throws should be escapable, and chain throws should have a shorter escape window. Here, move-sensitive throw reversals would work better than escapes. Tina goes for the giant swing? If your character successfully breaks it, you should plant your hands on the ground and flip her on her head with your legs. Kasumi hops on your head to go for that suicide flip? If you break it Kasumi gets a power backdrop.


And supers are only annoying when you play against super-whores - the ones who stand off to the side of the screen doing low fierces to get their bar up and every move is just a calculated setup for the super, not necessarily the win.

 

[Oichi]

Um, no fighting game allows for damage if you have your throw escaped. There are games that allow you to have an advantage afterwards, but being punished for using an offensive move is RETARDED.

I'm talking about iFC, RCC works just fine and the same as in SC1. iFC is tougher for me to execute in SC2 thanks to the 'hold down to duck' omission.

You're in the minority then dude. iFC is intuitively a lot easier in SC2 than in SC1. All you have to do is go 2G~direction of FC move for it. It's really really simple to do it in SC2. I don't understand how you can't adapt to it.

I'm sorry but Relic Cancel was a big loss (and FMD/HMD stances/UBs are slower in SC2) and Mitsu is half as interesting and unpredictable now than he was in SC2. I'm sure other Mitsu loyalists agree. It's about the same as taking away Taki's Possession cancels (PORC, and for the sake of argument, EXC) in SC2 and saying her play style is the same as it was in SC1. But I guess when it comes down to it, Mitsu is 'essentially' the same character.

Um, Mitsu right now is 100 times more enjoyable to use in SC2 than in SC1. With all his crazy glitches and frame advantage moves, he's so damn fun to play. I don't know wtf I'd do without being able to do shit like 33B into Relic for a safe and annoying setup. Or his B~A glitch that gives him a guaranteed throw attempt.

And uh... Mitsu never had FMD/HMD in SC1. I think you're a good dude, but you gotta get your facts straight on this stuff!

Edit: also, super combos are nothing. I'd take a super combo that (usually) never dizzies over shit like redizzy combos anyday.

 

[mrmyth]

Um, no fighting game allows for damage if you have your throw escaped. There are games that allow you to have an advantage afterwards, but being punished for using an offensive move is RETARDED.

Not punished just for using the move, punished for having the throw broken. Just as a way to even the advantage in say, SCII if throws aren't GI-able.

 

[XS+]

I don't understand how you can't adapt to it.

Because I iFC'd starting with [2] in SC1 and not 2G. Didn't I explain this already? I'm dismissing Tooohectic's 'ambiguity' explanation as thin btw.

Um, Mitsu right now is 100 times more enjoyable to use in SC2 than in SC1. With all his crazy glitches and frame advantage moves, he's so damn fun to play. I don't know wtf I'd do without being able to do shit like 33B into Relic for a safe and annoying setup. Or his B~A glitch that gives him a guaranteed throw attempt.

And uh... Mitsu never had FMD/HMD in SC1. I think you're a good dude, but you gotta get your facts straight on this stuff!

Fine, Mitsu's two stances (HCB+A or B) fell under a different name than 'HMD/FMD' in SC1 (I'm not firing up my DC to find out what the names were), but the vertical/horizontal unblockables from his two stances were faster and thus more handy in wakeup games. And perhaps Mitsu fares better in SC2 than I understood him (striking my 'neutered' comment), but Mitsu is roughly as different in SC2 from SC1 as he was in SC1 from SE. Jesus Christ if nobody on GAF thinks that's a fair assessment (to compare, more techniques were added to Taki's SC1 game than were taken away in SC2). And I'm hardly in the minority in my opinion that SC1 Mitsu's game was just plain awesome in its own right.

Finally, I'll admit that my interest in and thus understanding of SC2 isn't razor-sharp, after the arcade comp scene in my neck of the woods died off since early 2003 or so. I'm relearning the game right now though.

 

[toohectic]

Because I iFC'd starting with [2] in SC1 and not 2G.

In SCI, you must start with 2, but in SCII, you can begin directly at 1_3. Faster. From a nuetral position, there is little difference, however, the timing changes drastically once you attempt iFC while being mobile. Movement to iFC is much slower in SCI than SCII. And lets not ignore iWS (instant While Standing). True iWS in SCI has to be done off of G-cancels, however that is not the case in SCII. Trust me, iWS and iFC are much faster in SCII. And I don't see how you can call my ambiguity argument thin. Ambigious = capable of being interpreted in two or more senses. In order to distinctly define a quick (short-duration) crouch from step in SCI, you must use the G button. That's a fact. Again.. I'm not arguing about which system is more intuitive. I'm sure just 2 is more intuitive... but is more intuitive always better?

Fine, Mitsu's two stances (HCB+A or B) fell under a different name than 'HMD/FMD' in SC1, but the vertical/horizontal unblockables from his two stances were faster and thus more handy in wakeup games. And perhaps Mitsu fares better in SC2 than I understood him (striking my 'neutered' comment), but Mitsu is roughly as different in SC2 from SC1 as he was in SC1 from SE. Jesus Christ if nobody on GAF thinks that's a fair assessment (to compare, more techniques were added to Taki's SC1 game than were taken away in SC2). And I'm hardly in the minority in my opinion that SC1 Mitsu's game was just plain awesome in its own right.

Yes, Mitsu's HCB+A/B unblockable stances in SCI were called HMD/FMD. In SCII, they combined into one stance and yes, they are slower... and the A version was changed from UB low (mid at some ranges) to UB high. Still not crucial to his game. He has very few good setups for them on wakeup in SCI and even then, he had more rewarding options anyway. It might have been a big part of your game, but it's not a fundamental move for Mitsu. His fundamental play style is essentially the same.

 

[XS+]

LOL, there's a little too much swagger on the internet I swear (absoutely no offense at all Reno, but really, spare me the 'Uhs' and 'Ums' next time dude). I'm not going to argue about Mitsu's playstyle anymore, because the fact is specific moves, combos and cancels/glitches are missing from his 'game' in SC2, and have been replaced with entirely new ones. Use whatever term you wish to describe those changes.

Fun discussion guys, I don't have anything new to say.

 

[toohectic]

because the fact is specific moves, combos and cancels/glitches are missing from his 'game' in SC2, and have been replaced with entirely new ones. Use whatever term you wish to describe those changes.

The term I'd use would be "new game". No character made the transition from SCI to SCII completely unchanged. And I wouldn't expect them to... in this game or any other. And just to clarify on Reno's behalf..... FMD/HMD in SCI was combined into just FMD in SCII, and SCII's HMD is for the most part completely new except for a few little things (like HMD~A, etc). Reno may have been confusing new HMD, which is not present in SCI.