Camel with 2 thumbs
Well-Known Member
FSD! do you agree or disagree with this statement?
"There are no good or bad characters, only good and bad players" -Some guy
- Thread starter Camel with 2 thumbs
- Start date
This.
Any character can win a fight, it's all about how that player plays them, but not everyone plays a character the same way, so a player's style may lose or win more than another player who uses them differently. Basically it's honestly how that person plays the character, no matter how bad or limited/linear a certain character is.
Technically if two players of perfect skill fought each other it would be a stalemate, regardless of character choice.
Practically do I believe certain characters give imperfect players a greater edge than others? Of course. Thus, relatively speaking, the character that gives the greatest edge is "good" and the one who gives the least edge is "bad."
Seems like an evidently rhetorical kind of question. Not sure what answer(s) you're looking for.
Practically do I believe certain characters give imperfect players a greater edge than others? Of course. Thus, relatively speaking, the character that gives the greatest edge is "good" and the one who gives the least edge is "bad."
Seems like an evidently rhetorical kind of question. Not sure what answer(s) you're looking for.
Camel with 2 thumbs
Well-Known Member
I was just curious to hear other people's opinions, I already know what my answer is, which is you shouldn't get too caught up with tiers , MU's, and wether a character is good or bad when it comes to character selection,
It's funny cause this whole conversation started when i was talking to one of my buddies who (still) plays 3rd strike. Normally he plays the undisputed best characters in that game (Chun, ken, and yun) and the most popular messages he gets when he plays is "you only won cause you used top tier, i bet you'd lose with anyone else". When this happens he'll run it back with some of the worst characters in that game (Hugo, Remy, and sean) and he'll still win. And im watching this and im like "hot dam, guess it doesn't matter what character you pick, as long as your good enough, character selection is kinda irrelevant", he's actually the guy who gave me the quote which is the title of this thread, and it got me thinking about some things, which lead to the creation of this forum post
Well yes, but a tier list is never meant to address what match-ups look like between two players of wildly different skill. Thus, the incident that incited your query has basically nothing to do with tiers whatsoever.
Besides, anecdotes are a pretty silly precedent to construct your logic upon. For example, I can beat certain players when using Hayabusa that I can't beat when I'm using Tengu. Regardless what their alleged tiers would be, I could interpret an event in which that played out as an anecdote that "Oh, well obviously character choice absolutely matters more than player skill at the game!" That would be stupid of course since the reason for that happening is that I have far more experience playing Hayabusa than Tengu. But that's the danger you run when using anecdotes to justify philosophy. It's just a bad idea.
KING JAIMY
Well-Known Member
I agree with the statement. There is plenty of evidence supporting it, such as XCalburBladez winning several tournaments with Eliot and Kwiggles winning tournaments with Phase 4. Both of these characters are considered low tier by a large portion of the community. However, in the hands of an expert, these characters are played to their full potential because XCal and Kwiggles know how the game and the characters work. This makes it so that these characters shouldn't be underestimated, since they can win tournaments.
Besides, I feel like the triangle system is too strong to classify characters as 'good' or 'bad'. Every character can win if you make good use of the triangle system, since taking advantage of Hi-Counter Throws, Holds and Strikes nets you loads of damage, regardless of which character you are using.
Besides, I feel like the triangle system is too strong to classify characters as 'good' or 'bad'. Every character can win if you make good use of the triangle system, since taking advantage of Hi-Counter Throws, Holds and Strikes nets you loads of damage, regardless of which character you are using.
TRI Mike
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Whether a character is better than another depends mostly on specific situation, especially in a game like DOA which has a llot of moves and things outside them happening like wall positions, obstacles, ceilings, etc.
Uncle_T
Well-Known Member
I believe that some characters do excel in areas that others lack in. On the other hand players who are ass at games are the first ones to go on the internet and start judging characters.
Characters who i repeatedly hear are good/broken: Nash(SFV), Akuma(Tekken 7), Vergil(MvC3), Bob(Tekken), Vegeta(J stars), Ryu and Ken(SF).
Characters who i repeatedly hear are bad: Ibuki(SFV) Zangief(SFV), Akira Yuki, Fei Long(SF4), Eliot(DOA).
From what i can tell, players jump to the conclusion that a character is good/broken or bad because the player...
1. Can't win against certain characters online.
2. Aren't using a character correctly.
3. Just flat out don't like a character.
Characters who i repeatedly hear are good/broken: Nash(SFV), Akuma(Tekken 7), Vergil(MvC3), Bob(Tekken), Vegeta(J stars), Ryu and Ken(SF).
Characters who i repeatedly hear are bad: Ibuki(SFV) Zangief(SFV), Akira Yuki, Fei Long(SF4), Eliot(DOA).
From what i can tell, players jump to the conclusion that a character is good/broken or bad because the player...
1. Can't win against certain characters online.
2. Aren't using a character correctly.
3. Just flat out don't like a character.
I agree with your sentiments. People like to bitch about what they can't beat or understand. When you see someone winning with a character constantly, it's easy for the general FGC to consider that character "OP", as opposed to taking into consideration that that player is basically just outplaying his competition. But, of course, no one wants to admit that they were legit beaten, so they just blame the character instead. Online bullshit exacerbates this too. A lot of people don't know what's truly legit or not...
As for Akira being called "bad", are you sure dude? Akira's considered 'godlike' in almost every game he appears in lol. He's top tier in VF5FS and is pretty much top-tier calibre in DOA5LR.
Last edited:
Uncle_T
Well-Known Member
I fuckin love Akira but i always hear people throw shade(Not on FSD though). I hear people say stuff like "Akira sucks, being difficult to use doesn't automatically make him good", "Akira is bad because his moves are mainly mids", "Akira is strong but he is far from a good character". The list goes on for days.
Not gonna lie, the topic heading sounds like a movie reference retooled for the FGC.
The way I see it, the proverbial Diana and Zuul have to be good to each other. But if there's somethin' weird and it don't look good, they just weren't meant to be. A character's only as good as the player willing to put the time into overcoming the matchup with not only another character, but the player behind it.
The way I see it, the proverbial Diana and Zuul have to be good to each other. But if there's somethin' weird and it don't look good, they just weren't meant to be. A character's only as good as the player willing to put the time into overcoming the matchup with not only another character, but the player behind it.
Sotherius
Well-Known Member
There are bad and good characters.
And there are bad and good players.
And there are good and bad game mechanics in place.
I'm very beginner at Dead Or Alive, and i'm not a good player in other fighters by any means, but i like to study them and learn those games as best as i can.
Street Fighter 3: 3s, is a broken game, by all means, and Chun Li and Yun are way better than Sean, or Q for that matter, but this doesn't matter that much until you reach high level, and even then, the game is so well structured mechanically (on how the parry system works in general), that a great Q player is able to win against a chun if he knows how to play that match up really well. And your friend's case, is probably just the case of he being good at 3S, and the oponnets being people like me or worse (skill-wise).
I only had a couple of real matches in DOA, and all of them had like, 5 seconds of delay after my inputs with the game running at slow motion, But even i understand that the "triangle system" and how stagger works will allow you to win if you're able to figure out your oponent.
Now there are games that even if you know what your oponent is doing, and you can predict what he will do, it is still really difficult or impossible to counter that. Like, there was some time that zoning on Injustice was impossible to get around, or some boderline infinite blockstrings on MKX, and stuff like that (not trying to jab at NRS here, but they make really broken and also not well planned fighting games).
And there is a lot more to it, if you really dig.
Like, how Bonchan, probably the top Sagat player in USFIV, got bodied by Allex Valle using Hugo, when Allex Valle is not even deep on the competitive side of the game anymore.
Sometimes you'll just find someone with a playstyle so weird that you won't be able to counter it.
So in the end, i said a bunch of useless thing, in general, just pick what you like and try to be successful doing that, if you achieve that, good, if you don't, keep doing until you reach that.
Still waiting for Ayane being tournament winner.
And there are bad and good players.
And there are good and bad game mechanics in place.
I'm very beginner at Dead Or Alive, and i'm not a good player in other fighters by any means, but i like to study them and learn those games as best as i can.
Street Fighter 3: 3s, is a broken game, by all means, and Chun Li and Yun are way better than Sean, or Q for that matter, but this doesn't matter that much until you reach high level, and even then, the game is so well structured mechanically (on how the parry system works in general), that a great Q player is able to win against a chun if he knows how to play that match up really well. And your friend's case, is probably just the case of he being good at 3S, and the oponnets being people like me or worse (skill-wise).
I only had a couple of real matches in DOA, and all of them had like, 5 seconds of delay after my inputs with the game running at slow motion, But even i understand that the "triangle system" and how stagger works will allow you to win if you're able to figure out your oponent.
Now there are games that even if you know what your oponent is doing, and you can predict what he will do, it is still really difficult or impossible to counter that. Like, there was some time that zoning on Injustice was impossible to get around, or some boderline infinite blockstrings on MKX, and stuff like that (not trying to jab at NRS here, but they make really broken and also not well planned fighting games).
And there is a lot more to it, if you really dig.
Like, how Bonchan, probably the top Sagat player in USFIV, got bodied by Allex Valle using Hugo, when Allex Valle is not even deep on the competitive side of the game anymore.
Sometimes you'll just find someone with a playstyle so weird that you won't be able to counter it.
So in the end, i said a bunch of useless thing, in general, just pick what you like and try to be successful doing that, if you achieve that, good, if you don't, keep doing until you reach that.
Still waiting for Ayane being tournament winner.
Eh, I've won tournaments with Ayane in my region, so it's only a matter of time until there are other players winning with Ayane in other regions. As for DOA5LR's balance, overall it's pretty good. The difference between "top-tier" & "bottom-tier" isn't that big. It's one of the things I love about this game.
Chapstick
Well-Known Member
Well okay then.