Meter: Yay or nay?

Do you like how it has been implemented in DOA6 so far?


  • Total voters
    72

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#61
Fundamentally, rewarding players for failure is a bad idea. The fact that you can do more damage after you've made a bunch of mistakes is silly.
In a competitive environment, rewarding failure is the same as punishing success.

in this sense, I have to agree it is a bad mechanic. Especially if Shimbori is trying to go the Esports route like he's been talking about lately.
 

MasterHavik

Well-Known Member
Chicago, IL
Main Character
Zack
#62
@Rojikku posted another analysis of some new gameplay footage, original footage is here

Lots of scummy stuff imo. There are clear situations where someone can nail the fatal rush for free as the first hit against an opponent recovering from the rumble dangerzone. Jann lee even pulls a combo of fatal rush into break blow, kasumi goes flying into the crowd and gets pushed back, and Jann immediately does another fatal rush for free and gets a wallsplat. Kasumi had the opportunity to use break hold but again, damned if she does damned if she doesn't. Theres also more usage of raw break blow as a sabaki and you know what, it really does come out quick. It comes out like it really does function as a hold, like you punch just once into that then you're caught, theres no room to go to a low attack or free cancel to guard. It really is just a powerful hold that covers 3 of the 4 directions and has a gorillion active frames.

So far as I can tell, theres not much reason to spend the meter to escape from a fatal rush unless you know the following breakblow combo will K.O. you, cause you stand far more to gain in dealing damage either by raw sabaki or guaranteed BB after landing your own fatal rush. I guess its about having the decision whether you want your opponent to have full meter but potentially escape a death combo, or you let your opponent burn their meter on the full combo you know you can survive so then you're the one with situational-advantage of still having meter.

Pressing only one button for free mindgames though...:confused:
Fighters have gotten so easy we need to give people one button mix ups.
 

d3v

Well-Known Member
Philippines
Main Character
Christie
PSN ID
pinakaguwaping
Steam
D3vlicious
#63
So just so we're clear...
Meter needs to be strong enough that it needs meter to counter it ? Otherwise whats the point of implementing Meter in the first place ?

This reminds me of RPG Style Progression Systems... Levelling would be pointless if it didn't make it easier to kill enemies but enemies not putting up a fight made the game too easy so they could scale the enemies to your level but then theres no point in using that Progression System in the first place...
No, that's just oversimplifying it. What I mean is that meter shouldn't be beaten out just by simple pokes.

The best solution is not to use it... and just focus on making a game that isn't an Elaborate, High Speed War of Attrition. I mean if I wanted to see/play That then I'd just watch/play Star Craft or Dota.
You obviously don't understand both meter management, and the similarities in the metagames of strategy and fighting games.
The question then is... when does this go too far ? Well I would say that if Meter is the only thing that can get you out of a situation then That is anything but small.... infact its rather Large... so large in SFV that players go throught the trouble of whiffing special moves to add a couple pixels to the super bar whenever they dizzy an opponent (another dumb Relic Capcom should remove).
Again, still missing the importance of meter/resource management.
I've seen no such Data... I've seen plenty of instances when a game would be worse without it but I can't recall one where it would be better.
By saying that these would be worse without meter, you're also conversely saying that they're better with it. Especially since, for the most part, the base without meter management is simply just SFII.
So they introduced something useless that wound up being a problem then they had to include a made up problem to justify the changes they made...

The word, "Forced", Comes to mind...
And yet people are saying that people are going to Break Hold all the time instead of use normal holds.

@Rojikku posted another analysis of some new gameplay footage, original footage is here

Lots of scummy stuff imo. There are clear situations where someone can nail the fatal rush for free as the first hit against an opponent recovering from the rumble dangerzone. Jann lee even pulls a combo of fatal rush into break blow, kasumi goes flying into the crowd and gets pushed back, and Jann immediately does another fatal rush for free and gets a wallsplat. Kasumi had the opportunity to use break hold but again, damned if she does damned if she doesn't. Theres also more usage of raw break blow as a sabaki and you know what, it really does come out quick. It comes out like it really does function as a hold, like you punch just once into that then you're caught, theres no room to go to a low attack or free cancel to guard. It really is just a powerful hold that covers 3 of the 4 directions and has a gorillion active frames.

So far as I can tell, theres not much reason to spend the meter to escape from a fatal rush unless you know the following breakblow combo will K.O. you, cause you stand far more to gain in dealing damage either by raw sabaki or guaranteed BB after landing your own fatal rush. I guess its about having the decision whether you want your opponent to have full meter but potentially escape a death combo, or you let your opponent burn their meter on the full combo you know you can survive so then you're the one with situational-advantage of still having meter.

Pressing only one button for free mindgames though...:confused:
This really can't be what DOA6 is going to be...
Are we really judging gameplay based on some randoms playing at a tradeshow? I mean, most of the time, these players are just pressing buttons in each others faces. No good movement, no spacing, just trying to play rock paper scissors up close.

Also, those times that where you complain about getting another Fatal Rush out of the danger zone, would usually just result in a launch and juggle since they were already in critical stun. Not using Break Hold could simply be not knowing that they can do it at that point, or they just want to be flashy and hit their supers. Break Blows beating buttons, well that's how super move usually work. In fact pressing buttons against someone ready to use a super is a sure way to get wrecked in fighting games in general.
 

NewWestFan

Well-Known Member
Premium Donor
Loganville Georgia
Main Character
Lisa
PSN ID
NewWestFan
#64
Break Hold is the "Get that scrubby auto combo garbage out of my face" meter mechanic. It does next to no damage compared to a well timed HiC Hold and while it does give you the opponent's back I view it more as a punishment for people trying to take the easy route out. I have no issues with Break Blows as I'm sure they can be Break Held or maybe even regular held and Im excited to see the sort of combo enders we can make with them.

Yall stressing over nothing.
 
Likes: MARC531
#65
No, that's just oversimplifying it. What I mean is that meter shouldn't be beaten out just by simple pokes.


You obviously don't understand both meter management, and the similarities in the metagames of strategy and fighting games.

Again, still missing the importance of meter/resource management.

By saying that these would be worse without meter, you're also conversely saying that they're better with it. Especially since, for the most part, the base without meter management is simply just SFII.

And yet people are saying that people are going to Break Hold all the time instead of use normal holds.


Are we really judging gameplay based on some randoms playing at a tradeshow? I mean, most of the time, these players are just pressing buttons in each others faces. No good movement, no spacing, just trying to play rock paper scissors up close.

Also, those times that where you complain about getting another Fatal Rush out of the danger zone, would usually just result in a launch and juggle since they were already in critical stun. Not using Break Hold could simply be not knowing that they can do it at that point, or they just want to be flashy and hit their supers. Break Blows beating buttons, well that's how super move usually work. In fact pressing buttons against someone ready to use a super is a sure way to get wrecked in fighting games in general.

Two things.
The fatal rush is literally just one 4 hit combo that is free against standing if it connects, and it does some pretty dang decent damage for just being a four hit combo even without the break blow followup. Yea sure, the critical stun in that situation could have been prioritized with a launch and a juggle, but when you're actually doing that launch and combo, you're really engaging your experience and knowledge of the inputs to land it. You're pressing different buttons and different directions. With the Fatal Rush, that isn't even necessary. You just mash :h::P::K: and get a high damage combo completely regardless if you know how to play the character or not given its a universal mechanic. If the Fatal Rush isn't made to consume meter by using it, it definitely needs to do less damage than it does, cause it really is too good for just mashing one button.

And the problem with the raw sabaki break blow is that it can be used on reaction in lieu of a hold from idle to land a move that does more damage than a hold, while covering 3 of the 4 possible hold directions. Pretty much just need to make sure you're not seeing the start of a low attack and it will land itself for free.
Its not like a DOA4 charge or a DOA5 power move in that the person charging starts their move first and the opponent tries to stuff it, its more like the opponent tries to attack with a high or mid and the raw BB is used on reaction to catch it.

This isn't the first time a super counter has been in a game, and if any game ought to have one it is DOA, but if you imagine for a moment that a super counter might instead show up in a Capcom game, you also gotta remember those characters are usually tossing out unreactable 3-5 frame attacks where in most successful cases of landing a super counter, it's instead based on lucky anticipation rather than visible reaction as it might work in DOA6, or more aptly those 2D super counters are effective against any attack direction cause it'd be virtually impossible to intentionally reacte to a specific attack direction. Here we got a lot of reaction and recognition time in DOA, so the value of a super counter that covers against multiple directions doesn't make quite as much sense.

If you got someone down on the wire and you got the meter, initiating a fatal rush that would connect the break blow to get the victory could be escaped by the opponent's break hold, and then you still have meter but they dont and you're reset to this slight frame disadvantage situation against the opponent, but all you gotta do is just use your raw BB sabaki against their attempt to prioritize on their advantage and its like the only thing that even happened here was your opponent's meter arbitrarily evaporated and the round lasted 2 seconds longer than it should have.
 
Last edited:

Lulu

Well-Known Member
South Africa
Main Character
Jacky Bryant
#66
No, that's just oversimplifying it. What I mean is that meter shouldn't be beaten out just by simple pokes.
Fair Enough...

You obviously don't understand both meter management, and the similarities in the metagames of strategy and fighting games.
Nobody outside the people supporting these sorts of systems does... which should raise a red flag as to whether it does, in fact, make sense.

By saying that these would be worse without meter, you're also conversely saying that they're better with it. Especially since, for the most part, the base without meter management is simply just SFII.
Yeah its also better to get stabbed in the foot than to get shot in the chest...

The point I'm getting at is; meter, even when well implemented, is not the best solution... particularly if theres no problem to solve in the first place.

And yet people are saying that people are going to Break Hold all the time instead of use normal holds.
LoL.... if people stopped whining about DoA5's net code and played online more often... would that all of a sudden mean its good ?

I'm also going to use Break Holds especially if the System warrants its usage but it would be out of necessity.... like when Dark Souls makes you to grind to level up.
 

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#67
FR does fairly meh damage on its own. It's about the same as using a decent 2-in-1, and those inputs are not exactly complicated to begin with. It only really does high damage when you're at full meter and it burns BB at the end of it.

We didn't ask for 2-in-1's to be checked before, im not really seeing the problem now.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Lulu
#68
@Rikuto are you understanding how the flow of combat around the meter works in the footage? Would you change anything?
If you really think the fatal rush isn't doing much damage on its own, then imagine how much damage will be possible by optimizing a real combo instead. Fatal to BB to Fatal already does 50% damage in new footage. You substitute a real combo at the end instead of another fatal rush and you could be easily looking at 60-75% damage from hitting a dangerzone; all this damage just for connecting a single high attack in the first S of fatal rush.
 

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#69
I understand that a non-metered 2-in-1 in DOA 5 RIGHT NOW presently results in a far more devastating situation than a non-metered FR does.

And really, thats all the justification that is needed. Everything else is just environment shenanigans and that's always been high damage reset potential.

If you want to talk about BB being too stupid, that's another story entirely.
 
Likes: Lulu
#70
I understand that a non-metered 2-in-1 in DOA 5 RIGHT NOW presently results in a far more devastating situation than a non-metered FR does.

And really, thats all the justification that is needed. Everything else is just environment shenanigans and that's always been high damage reset potential.

If you want to talk about BB being too stupid, that's another story entirely.
I want to talk about whatever gets DOA back to DOA gameplay instead of being this high damage cheese shit that ends rounds 10 seconds faster than they ought to last, skipping past some quality mindgames to trade off for the visual gimmick of super attacks.
 

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#71
The thing about "doa gameplay" is that in literally every iteration, somebody has sworn "This isn't DOA", like, they are the authority on what DOA is.

When I was playing DOA 3, a lot of us said this very same thing about DOA 4 and how nothing was guaranteed. All the environment combos were gone, and sidestep was butchered. When DOA 5 launched, people started saying it wasn't DOA because they could get caught up in those guaranteed situations again, and the darker palette wasn't friendly to their tastes. That wasn't DOA either, right?

Nothing is ever DOA. The game changes every damn time. And it's fine to lobby for it to change to something else, but don't think for a moment the "This isn't DOA" thing makes any sense to me. I started with a game where one throw was instant death.
 
#72
The thing about "doa gameplay" is that in literally every iteration, somebody has sworn "This isn't DOA", like, they are the authority on what DOA is.

When I was playing DOA 3, a lot of us said this very same thing about DOA 4 and how nothing was guaranteed. All the environment combos were gone, and sidestep was butchered. When DOA 5 launched, people started saying it wasn't DOA because they could get caught up in those guaranteed situations again, and the darker palette wasn't friendly to their tastes. That wasn't DOA either, right?

Nothing is ever DOA. The game changes every damn time. And it's fine to lobby for it to change to something else, but don't think for a moment the "This isn't DOA" thing makes any sense to me. I started with a game where one throw was instant death.
Well DOA3 was fundamentally broken trash as a fighting game rife with character specific infinites and untechable loops. No offense but I never understood why anyone could profess to enjoy that game on any level but aesthetics. DOA4 functionally had more in common with DOA2U which itself may as well have been a sequel to DOA3, and I think you can or should accept that there exists more "This isn't DOA" for DOA5 than any criticism you seem to suggest you met over the other games. Your post is actually the first I've ever heard of people thinking any game but 5 wasn't DOA, and I was too absorbed in how large the online multiplayer communities for DOA2U and DOA4 were to take any criticism against them seriously. I ended up playing DOA4 for years and enjoying it, without ever knowing that anyone at all could have disliked it until DOA5 was announced and I started looking into online DOA-centric forum communities.
 
Likes: Lulu

NewWestFan

Well-Known Member
Premium Donor
Loganville Georgia
Main Character
Lisa
PSN ID
NewWestFan
#73
The thing about "doa gameplay" is that in literally every iteration, somebody has sworn "This isn't DOA", like, they are the authority on what DOA is.

When I was playing DOA 3, a lot of us said this very same thing about DOA 4 and how nothing was guaranteed. All the environment combos were gone, and sidestep was butchered. When DOA 5 launched, people started saying it wasn't DOA because they could get caught up in those guaranteed situations again, and the darker palette wasn't friendly to their tastes. That wasn't DOA either, right?

Nothing is ever DOA. The game changes every damn time. And it's fine to lobby for it to change to something else, but don't think for a moment the "This isn't DOA" thing makes any sense to me. I started with a game where one throw was instant death.
In a relevant exercise to anyone thinking of throwing shade at this point: Go play DOA 2 for about an hour then play LR and see which one is more DOA to you.
 

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#74
Well DOA3 was fundamentally broken trash as a fighting game rife with character specific infinites and untechable loops. No offense but I never understood why anyone could profess to enjoy that game on any level but aesthetics. DOA4 functionally had more in common with DOA2U which itself may as well have been a sequel to DOA3, and I think you can or should accept that there exists more "This isn't DOA" for DOA5 than any criticism you seem to suggest you met over the other games. Your post is actually the first I've ever heard of people thinking any game but 5 wasn't DOA, and I was too absorbed in how large the online multiplayer communities for DOA2U and DOA4 were to take any criticism against them seriously. I ended up playing DOA4 for years and enjoying it, without ever knowing that anyone at all could have disliked it until DOA5 was announced and I started looking into online DOA-centric forum communities.

People enjoyed DOA 3 because tactics outside of pattern recognition were involved. You could die instantly, but you had to make several mistakes at once for it to happen. For example, get hit, get caught holding, have back to slope/wall all at the same time. You had the best movement out of the entire series to help you avoid these mistakes. Lining up a kill shot while avoiding putting yourself in one was an art, and people who didn't calibrate their brains to understand that games meta hated it.

So it wasn't pattern recognition like 4 and 5 are, but it was environmental chess and it played brilliantly, minus a few busted things like Genfu's balance and the Hayate's cartwheel.
 
#75
People enjoyed DOA 3 because tactics outside of pattern recognition were involved. You could die instantly, but you had to make several mistakes at once for it to happen. For example, get hit, get caught holding, have back to slope/wall all at the same time. You had the best movement out of the entire series to help you avoid these mistakes. Lining up a kill shot while avoiding putting yourself in one was an art, and people who didn't calibrate their brains to understand that games meta hated it.

So it wasn't pattern recognition like 4 and 5 are, but it was environmental chess and it played brilliantly, minus a few busted things like Genfu's balance and the Hayate's cartwheel.
Thats a lot of words for "its okay the game had broken BS".

I think we can agree that no matter how some people didn't like DOA3 or others didn't like DOA4, neither group actually considered either game to "not be DOA". They still felt like DOA games underneath the criticism.

DOA5 feels like someone stuck Tekken up Virtua Fighter's ass.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Lulu

Rikuto

P-P-P-P-P-P-POWER!
Staff member
Administrator
Main Character
Bayman
Gamertag
Rikuto Kuronaga
PSN ID
Rikuto-san
#76
You claimed you didn't understand why people liked it, so I explained it to you.

Do you not enjoy anecdotes and personal experiences that contradict your beliefs, or did you actually just want to remain ignorant but were too shy to say so?
 
Likes: Old Bear
#78
You claimed you didn't understand why people liked it, so I explained it to you.

Do you not enjoy anecdotes and personal experiences that contradict your beliefs, or did you actually just want to remain ignorant but were too shy to say so?
I'm just gonna say that some of the bigger criticisms against DOA4 (as I've heard from FSD) from some outsider perspectives were that they didn't like how much damage holds did and how apparently free they were to land under a mindless guessing game. I'm also gonna say that DOA3 didn't get quite as much traction as DOA4, so we shouldn't disregard the idea that if DOA3 had the same opportunity in the spotlight as DOA4 did, there probably would have been just as many if not more criticisms from outsiders against it just over slope combos alone.
So to end this and get back to making sure the community can do something to insure DOA6 feels right for everyone, we should put a spotlight on how much free damage is occuring off Fatals to BB to generic dangerzone to combo, or how the raw sabaki BB does 30% as a counter-attack while covering 3/4ths of the hold directions. If outsiders shit on DOA4 for "free" holds doing too much damage without considering those holds weren't reliably catching anything without knowing which 1-of-4 had to be used, whats the opinion going to be against a raw BB that basically does as much damage as DOA4 holds but with a 3-of-4 coverage rate.

Stricter inputs, more elaborate inputs, easier string connecting, foreign mechanics like PB behind a virtual T6 Rage mechanic and VF-esque sidesteps, all culminating to imbalancing the triangle system in heavy favor of strikes over holds and throws...?
We can say it was Virtua Fighter up Tekken's ass if thats more sensible to you. All I know is that Tekken and Virtua Fighter were involved and some ass was getting fucked.
 
Last edited:

Shirataki Tsume

Well-Known Member
Southeast Asia
Main Character
Momiji
Gamertag
SlashingMean793
#79
Stricter inputs, more elaborate inputs, easier string connecting, foreign mechanics like PB behind a virtual T6 Rage mechanic and VF-esque sidesteps, all culminating to imbalancing the triangle system in heavy favor of strikes over holds and throws...?
Strangely, inputs in DOA5 felt as lenient as the previous games. I never realized how lenient DOA's inputs were until DOA5 because I can perform Izuna Drops 4 times in a row. DOA2 were the ones that had stricter inputs; inputs started to become lenient since DOA3 apparently. Did you mean the buffer system when you said about easier string connecting?
 
Likes: Lulu
#80
Strangely, inputs in DOA5 felt as lenient as the previous games. I never realized how lenient DOA's inputs were until DOA5 because I can perform Izuna Drops 4 times in a row. DOA2 were the ones that had stricter inputs; inputs started to become lenient since DOA3 apparently.
Thats strange, cause half the strings and combos I used in DOA4 for keeping the opponent guessing by utilizing delay would suddenly completely drop in DOA5 if I tried the same thing.

I guess by stricter inputs i didn't mean directional accuracy, but rather timing. DOA games have only used 4 directional check states for the longest time in a neat directional buffering concept which may or may not be intentional. It was sad to see the raijin get replaced after DOA4 because it honestly was really easy to pull off once you knew the trick, but damn you'd keep people guessing just what that trick was. Piece of shit didn't even do more damage than the izuna for how much effort it was anyway.
 
Last edited:
Forgot your password?