Virtua Fighter Psychology

The organised chaos that throbs with such pyrotechnic force in every round of a Mvs.C2 match is what makes it so damn interesting to watch. Like intense anime on fast-forward. Don't hate because you've felt the wrath of the rushdown. I just kick back and enjoy the show. Hey it could be worse, it could be Killer Instinct!

 

FAILED!!!!!! Killer Instinct had Combo breakers and was far better than MVC2. I don't find that game interesting period.

Garou Mark of the Wolves, KOF98, KOF02,Samsho3,Samsho2, MSH, RBS,RB2 chill you don't what im talking about Duck King (And Your name is Duck King?)

 

The parallel with chess players doesn't quite stack up because of the important presence of draw in chess. At top GM levels, draw is always the most likely result. That just doesn't happen in fighting games.

 

I remember playing Mark of the Wolves at a pizza shop I worked at. I thought it was fun but I never looked at it as a really great game.

I agree with the chess thing to an extent. Fighting games are too fast paced to equate with chess...

 

Yeah, but it's SO true (at least for VF) that you have to ponder your every single move...

 

Fighting games don't equate to chess in so far as having a long time to ponder every single move. The parallels come in the strategy of a match. In Sirlin's article when he shows you the fighting game equivalent of each style of chess playing it still applies.

 

Yes, ha ha! I might get banned for saying this but KI2 wasn't bad. I played it on the N64 a lot and it was actually pretty good as a street fighter clone. Definitely better than MvC2, IMO.

I also liked the fatalities. Playing as Fabio and summoning that big meteor to crush the opponent was hilarious.

 

I missed out on 2 but i still watch people play and i found it to be hlarious and entertaining. The KI Series was Original and good period. In MVC2 i find myself fighting against your asist more than the actual person.

IMHO MOTW is just as strict on timing in combos as VF5. TO pull off combo's on That you have to be good and know what you are doing.

 

Yeah I played MOTW a lot but only when I was at the pizza place. I wouldn't seek it out to play it. I would buy it on XBLA if they released it though...

 

Yeah, MOTW was great and I loved it. However, I wonder... what does this thread has to do with its main topic? I think really little if anything...

 

MvC2 is one game I really wish I was good at, even if I had to resort to a mix of the upper tiers. I'm just not fast enough.

 

Yeah your right....getting back on topic. I think David Sirlin may be a Excellent SF player and just that. Comparing SF to VF5 is like night and day. The only way to make SF2 like VF(Or Tekken or DOA.) IS to have Lag on it. With lag on SF you official took the Improvinisation out of SF. With that being said to have to anticipate your opponent moves instead of reacting to it.(In VF You react to openings More often than just Dragon Punching someone out of the air. Without juggles its not a opening just a stoppage of sorts. The opponent is basically at peace when lying down.)

Anybody who play SF2 hyper fighting online knows this better than anybody. for example online you can literally create a guessing game a between a throw or a cr. roundhouse after a blocked Jumping Roundhouse. Any SF Vet will tell you that once a footsweep has not been applied on land you have to many options to get away or prepare you onslaught after a guardslide. With Lag your liable to get caught because you may have input the command but you have 80Ms lag on it that allow the action to catch you before you made your move. Very frustating

 

Not sure if it's been explained... but Sebo's post (prior to this reply by Naudin3D) was a humorous stab at a Sirlin related thread that occurred earlier this year /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif He was joking about Virtua Fighter not being accessible enough and thus not applying

 

Somebody needs to do a write up of the psychology of Virtua Fighter now!

 

You guys are missing the point. Sirlin's book is meant to work for any competitive game. His specific examples tend to be from ST or Chess, but he enters that whole player psychology section saying "I've seen these same profiles repeated in every competitive gaming scene I've looked into." (which happens to include VF) There's no point in writing an entirely seperate VF specific book anymore. You could illustrate his examples with some actual examples of VF players, but you're pretty much looking at the exact same information.

 

In other words it's all pretty obvious. If you couldn't figure
it out on your own and think it's a great piece of literature you
need to go back to school or open your eyes a LOT.

 

I beg to differ. There are things in Virtua Fighter that cannot be done in other games so yes we do need one for Virtua Fighter. Sure most of them are done in most games but Virtua Fighter has more strategies that can be employed.

 

I think it's far more useful to have kinda like the wiki strat section for the chars that have them. Lay out what different moves to and their usefulness. Maybe the range they work at and different effective ways to use them. Then the players can decide how to use that information to create their own play style. I believe that different people inherently have different stratagems that work for them in particular so it might be hard for a beast to write how to play as a machi.

 

That could be true but in this day and age fighters are so user friendly and limited that most new users will tend to mimic the higher ups effectively without learning there own style of play. I see it already in VF5. Knowing VF's system of checks and balance its easy to understand why.

 

It doesn't matter what's in VF. (Also, you're basically just wrong... Chess does not have less strategic play than VF). More importantly, Sirlin managed to cover all the large classes of player profiles you can expect to see. What is in VF is completely irrelevant, cause the whole point of the "psychology" thing is to talk about particular player styles. It's the players that are important, not the game. Someone with a particular psychological profile, will tend to adapt that style onto any game they play. It doesn't work the other way around, that is people don't learn a style from a game, unless that game somehow forbids the style they would naturally try and use.

Now, it would be valid to ask for specific VF examples to go with what he wrote if you really want them. But that stuff maps as well onto VF as any other game... turtles = machi, attackers = abare, obsessed = uh, jeffry players? (knee, knee, knee, knee), snake... well, you kind of have to meet someone in person to apply that label, one true style = konjou?