Because, for the most part, we were never saying that inputs needed to be difficult. We were more about how those inputs gave the moves certain properties and allowed for a certain amount of variety.
I'm pretty sure you did.... is this you changing your mind ?
Except we've seen exactly what happens when you nerf reversals to hell despite making them easy to come out. You get a game like Mortal Kombat X where offense is way too strong and the game devolves into corner carries into set play/vortex.
There's a reason that reversals need to be strong, yet at the same time difficult to pull off. You want people to have that option easily get people off their backs on oki, yet at the same tiem, you don't want something that totally slows the game down and resets it to neutral on knockdown.
And making inputs difficult is going to solve the problem of Reversal being to weak or too strong ?
I'm not here to argue balance... I'm here to argue Execution has got nothing to do with Balance... MK/Injustices Issues have nothing to do with Execution..... if theres something wrong with the reversal mechanic then fix the mechanic... its that simple.
Then all you're doing is complicating the control scheme even more, which again also adds to execution. I mean, on top of 6 normal attack buttons, you're now adding another set of buttons just for moves.
I should clarify that one of those 6 buttons would be The Fireball Button.... and before you start about losing one of your Six Normals I'd like to point that you don't need 6 of them MK did just fine with 3.... DoA is Awesome with just 2.... I'd also like to point out that the six button set up is already complicated.... complaining about adding one more is kind of a moot point.
Because, as Seth's article stated. You don't really want a balanced game since, considering as he stated, most fighting game characters "lack the complexity of a set of chessmen" (which itself isn't a good example seeing as chess in unbalanced favoring white).
Most attempts at balance end up sacrificing variety. You lose out in terms of interesting match ups and playstyles in an effort to balance. Would you really be content in playing a game where more characters were playable at the cost of those characters not actually being varied and unique. Where everyone just had the same versions of the same shitty normals and specials? I wouldn't.
Even Sirlin acknowledges the fact that tiers exist (and come on, he's an acknowledged "tier whore" who ran the best characters in some of the games he played, and also a known counter picker).
He never states that characters should be in the same tier, however what we refer as "viable" characters are more often then not those that only fall into "top tier". Very rarely do we ever see true "god tier" characters. In the case of Street Fighter, the only true example of this being Akume in Super Turbo and Sirlin's own HD Remix.
Yes we really do want a Balanced Game.... if Seth or anyone says other wise even in context then they are more than welcome to remove the Akuma and Old Sagat ban and see exactly how much they enjoy an Unbalanced Game..... those of us with who have common sennse will take the balanced game.... and feel free to look your nose down on us when we do. Thats what I have to say about "you don't really want a balanced game".... because thats just a stupid thing to say.
Moving on.... its true that most attempts at balancing the game end up sacrificing variety..... so should we leave the game unbalanced ? This is exactly the type of attitude I'm talking about.... its just an excuse for developers to be lazy and for competitors to forever have an advantage.
Sirlin wrote several Articles about what went down when he designed SFHDR.... Your answers lie in there.
"And then I had the honor and burden of improving upon what I consider the very best Street Fighter game ever: Super Turbo. Many people said it's impossible to improve upon the polished gem of ST and there were lots of obstacles to even getting this new gameplay in the game. Dozens and dozens of times people told me I couldn't do it, wasn't allowed to do it, and other discouraging things. Wayne Gretzky said, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take," so I took my shot."
I don't know how Remix turned out but atleast he had the balls to try instead of making excuses.
I never said that execution should be arbitrarily difficult. I just stated that inputs do serve certain purposes, one was which to allow for a certain amount of risk when pulling them off.
Heck, anyone who knows me knows that I've actually posted a few things on my regarding the
problems with having a high entry-level execution barrier as well as the
issues with the concept of using execution for balancing.
The problem here is that you see to be dismissing the concept of execution in itself, despite the fact, as I've pointed out, that it does serve a purpose in a fighting games competitive ecosystem. I myself have argued against stuff like 720 command motions and SNK pretzel motions, but that's it, the simpler motions sch as quarter circles, DP motions and sonic boom charge motions all have their place, outside of purely making stuff "hard to do".
1. If the purpose of execution is to increase the chances of failure just as you mentioned before then thats making inputs Arbitrarily Difficult.... thats just obvious... I don't know how you convinced yourself that it isn't.
2. I don't know you.... and I don't care if thats what you said in those other forums..... the point is thats not what you said in this Discussion.... if you want to change your position to be in line with what you said in those other forums then thats cool.... if not then I stand by what I said about you. I mean if I said something racist then you would and should call me a racist regardless of if I say the exact opposite else where.... its that simple.
3. If the reason you play Fighting Games is for execution then you have point and I wouldn't dare try to argue against it..... but thats not why I play fighting games so yes I dismiss the entire concept of execution. But obviously the technology to make that possible just isn't there.... anyway theres more to execution than just what motions you use.... my specific problem with Execution is the leniency of those motions..... so even though something like
or
is fine but if you have a less than 8 frames to do it then we are right back to square one.... pretty sure Capcom did that just to troll people who asked them to lower the execution barrier just like they did when they added the "Link Before you cancel into Super" rule in Street Fighter IV.
4. Okay then let me modify the analogy.... the sprinklers don't go off randomly... they go off every 60 Seconds..... does that suddenly make it less stupid ? I really wana know your answer.
Have I not already mentioned Persona 4 Arena. The whole reversal/DP portion of the game is, for all intents and purposes, solved. Once you put someone in a situation where they should reversal, then they just will thanks to 2 button reversals. The combined mental and physical focus required for it is so low that they can just do it. It comes to the point where in those situations, the knocked down opponent actually controls the pace of the match, which is fundamentally wrong. Compare it to something where you're required a dragon punch or flash kick motion, the mental and physical concentration required is higher, meaning that you can't just throw it out willy nilly and actually need to consider if you can/should at that specific moment.
Theres a very very very obvious concept that you just seem to be refusing to grasp on purpose.... I'm going to try this one more time.
Lets use
Street Fighter 4 as an Example.
"Another similar bug is the chain combo cancel bug. As an example, consider Sakura. Low short does cancel into special moves. But if you rapid fire the low short (do it 2 or 3 times quickly each one cancels the last) then you CANNOT cancel the last hit into a special. I'm not saying this is a problem at all, necessarily. This restriction is there for good reason: to prevent the game from degenerating into low short -> big damage stuff. It would make more sense to give players a reason to start combos with bigger moves sometimes. Guilty Gear does a great job of this by reducing your entire combo's damage by 20% for each low short. (Hey Guilty Gear players, I know I'm simplifying there.)
Ok so what's the problem, sounds good that you can't do low short, low short, special move, right? But you can do it. If you make the last short a link rather than a chain (do it slowly, but not so slow that it doesn't combo) then you can cancel it into a special move. So really, you can get around this restriction if only you have high dexterity skills. Now, this is also true in ST and SF HD Remix, but that's not so much intent as what we were stuck with. For an entirely new game, I'm surprised to see this still there. I'm even more surprised to see combos that use this in the challenge mode, meaning the developers know about it and accept that low short is really this powerful. SF4 Sakura, for example, can low short, (link), low short, ex shoryken, ultra. She can do a lot more than that, but you get the idea."
You have absolutely no reason not to do this.... for all intensive purpose this portion of Street Fighter is SOLVED. The only people who are still going to use difficult combos to get their damage is people who can't link into supers.... they are stuck using slower unsafer moves to open combos with so they can get the same damage. This also circles back to why you don't need six buttons.... people are bypassing them anyway.
I'd also like to point that you said ealier that you had problems regarding using execution to balance things out.... perhaps I can go to bed and you can argue with yourself... you already have what you need: two opposing statements.
The issue is that they give the control of the match back to the knocked down player, the one playing ukemi, not the attacking playing okizeme. Knocking down should give the attacking player a positional advantage, not allow the downed player to reset. It's like the P4 example with the guaranteed reversals.
I mean, not saying that the game should be like MKX, where getting knocked down is death. But it should put the initiative squarely in the hands of the attacking player.
I'm sorry but what you're describing just isn't very competitive... infact it doesn't even make sense. The fact that you knocked someone down IS your advantage... what you want is another advantage on top of the one you alread have..... thats exactly the very thing thats going to turn DoA into MKX when you give them no options after being downed.... I'd also like to point out the wake up kicks aren't even that powerfull anyway, you can shut both of them down by using a down attack. And you sure as hell aren't going to weaken them by changing their inputs to increase their chances of failure.
Your P4 examples are flimsy.... if the reversals are too strong then fix them... changing their inputs means only the people with Better dexterity can always do them.... the reason this scenario is solved is because the mechanic solved.... changing the input isn't going to change how long its going to take to solve it. It's alreadt solved by anybody who can do it.... you just alienated a bunch of players for litrally no reason.