>In ranked matches, you can see the opponent's name before the
>match and kick them or reject the challenge. This allows you
>to cherry pick who you fight and negates the entire purpose of
>a ranked match.

I agree. This is dumb. The whole going into certain matches system is dumb. I wish it was like HDR.

>In ranked matches (well, all matches) there is no double blind
>character select. This means the optimum strategy is often to
>wait until the opponent chooses first so you can counter-pick.
>This is a very annoying situation.

Eh, this is what the arcade is like. I'm ok with it not being double blind.

>When lag inevitably happens in an online fighting game, there
>are different ways to handle it. Some SF4 matches I played had
>large input delay, maybe as high as 15 frames. This is the
>time between your button press and seeing the effect happen.
>Adding input delay is really the worst way to handle lag.
>GGPO's amazing netcode shows that avoiding input delay and
>hiding lag in other ways is the way to go. That technology has
>been readily available for years, so it's disappointing to
>feel input delay in an online match.

I've had some absolutely horrid matches in HDR. The in game experience in 4 has been much better, but I see what he's saying. Still, for actually fighting, I prefer 4 over HDR if only for the lack of glitches (black screen, life bars etc.)

>The button config screen is "the wrong way." The right way is
>for the screen to list functions, then you press the buttons
>you want to assign. The wrong way is to list buttons, then you
>scroll through lists of functions to assign. The reason that
>one way is right and the other way is wrong is pretty clear
>when you watch people try to configure buttons. I've had to
>watch what must be thousands of people do this over the years
>in all the tournaments I've helped run (not to mention local
>gatherings). When the config screen says "Jab" and requires
>you to press the button you want, you just press the upper
>left button on your stick (or whatever button on your
>gamepad). This is a one-step process. But if the screen lists
>"X" and then requires you to scroll through functions until
>you find jab, it requires a two step process. You have to know
>which button on your controller is labeled "X." When this
>screen is the right way, no one has to know if the upper left
>button happens to be X or A or B or whatever else.

Yup. I agree with this one.


>On to gameplay issues. The jumps have strange acceleration to
>them. While that's subjective, look at Zangief's jump that
>seems to have the acceleration of a flea.

That is kinda subjective

>(Incidentally, why
>does his splash not stay out the whole time in the air?).

OMFG, I know!!!! I hat that shit!


>Also, getting hit out of the air is extremely floaty, which
>means it takes unusually long to get back to a state where you
>can actually move again. This "moving in jello" feel is
>reinforced by many throws that have dead time at the end when
>it seems like you should be able to move (see Vega's for
>example).

Yeah.

>The size of the stages is extremely large relative to the size
>of the characters. This helps runaway tactics.

Hadn't noticed this.

>Optimizing for the 1% rather than the 99% case. There's two
>examples, the first is tech recover (quick get up from a knock
>down). 99% of the time, I want to get up fast, but this is the
>action that requires button presses. Why not admit that
>getting up fast is the intent and make it default, unless the
>player holds down some buttons to get up slow? That's how it
>works for Robo-Ky in Guilty Gear, by the way. Incidentally,
>don't the two kinds of get up timing only lessen the
>importance of knockdown by allowing you mess up the attacker's
>timing a bit? Like the decision to have large stages, this
>seems not to favor offense.

I like this the way it is.

>Next is the 2-button throw, a bad idea in fighting games with
>2D gameplay. 3D Fighting games are different beasts, so they
>are excused here, but note that even Dead or Alive offers a
>macro to turn its 2 button throw into a 1 button throw...and
>maps that macro to a face button by default. Anyway, 2 button
>throws solve a non-problem that no one has ever actually had.
>That's the problem of accidentally throwing and being sad
>about it. Street Fighter 2, Guilty Gear series, and Street
>Fighter Alpha 2 all demonstrated that 1 button throws work
>just fine and don't actually create any problems. Adding a
>second button press just adds complexity where it's not
>necessary, and helps nothing. (Edit: it does add a throw whiff
>which could be a good thing, but simpler is still better...)

I agree. Don't like this one bit.

>Other non-problems we might solve in 2D fighting games would
>be to make blocking 1 button and jumping 1 button (each are
>traditionally zero buttons). We certainly could add those
>button presses, but it would make more sense to reduce the
>button presses to as few as possible: zero to jump, zero to
>block, and one to throw.

Disagree, and I don't like his idea at all.

>Edit: I forgot to mention two more things. First, the unlocks.
>I'm very surprised to see basic functionality of the
>multiplayer game--the characters--locked behind tedious 1p
>tasks. I had to pay a tax of fighting the computer on easiest
>for long time just to get the core features of the game. (I
>did this picture-in-picture while watching episodes of
>Frasier.) I'm fully aware that casual players love unlocks,
>and that's why non-essential content like costumes, movies,
>icons, and titles are all perfectly fine to give as rewards
>for playing 1p content. But the *characters*? This steps on
>the toes of those wanting to play the multiplayer game by
>making our first experience with the game a very boring one. I
>wanted to hire a MMO gold farmer to do this for me.

100% agree on this part.