DoA5 and the Split of online players

[Akumasama]

As far as the "split" goes a PC version would solve nothing, just add another third platform on the market.
The only thing that could solve that is cross-platform multiplayer but we all know it's not going to happen.

On a smaller scale, TecmoKoei should have done something to solve the split within the same platform, which is preposterous.
Reducing the number of variables you can set on ranked matches could be a good start.
Allowing people to rematch your current opponent once a fight is over (at least once?) would also make it less frustrating becuase at least, once you finally manage to find an opponent, you know there's a chance to have a couple of matches against him and you won't have to go back looking for opponents for 15 mins.
Also adding an "Any" option to the Game Type.
I hate Tag games, but I'd rather be playing a Tag match than not playing at all.


Really, adding Tag as a completely separate ranked thing in Ultimate was a really stupid choice. How could they not think about it? How could they not realize it would only have made the split worse?
The only reason I could think of is that they never realized there actually was a split and that it was the biggest factor into what currently makes online games for DoA5U frustrating: you cannot find people to play against!
And this is not because there not pepople playing, but because of weak planning on their side, which makes the thing even more irritating, imho.

 

[tokiopewpew]

As far as the "split" goes a PC version would solve nothing, just add another third platform on the market.
The only thing that could solve that is cross-platform multiplayer but we all know it's not going to happen.

Well, I forgot to mention that a switchover to the PC would only work on future games/developments, when TN does not offer them for consoles too (that will surely not happen due their tradition). However, in this case, they would be present on the plattform almost everyone is using.

Really, adding Tag as a completely separate ranked thing in Ultimate was a really stupid choice. How could they not think about it? How could they not realize it would only have made the split worse?
The only reason I could think of is that they never realized there actually was a split and that it was the biggest factor into what currently makes online games for DoA5U frustrating: you cannot find people to play against!
And this is not because there not pepople playing, but because of weak planning on their side, which makes the thing even more irritating, imho.

I don't think that they introduced the tag mode completely without doubt, I rather think that seperating it in ranked was necessary in their point of view due the technical differences (e.g. gravitiy for juggles) and the additional knowledge (e.g. combos) players need to have compared to the solo mode.

 

[Stikku]

TeamNinja thinks DOA5 is a lot more popular than it is. And it really hurts.

Or maybe it really is popular in japan, and that's why they're trying to get back into the arcade scene.
Either way, from one viewpoint to another - they're either not expressly aware of the division of players from the filters, or they think it's so popular that the filters don't matter.

PC DOA would be nice. But a consolidated player base is the least of DOA5's issues, and that's assuming it would consolidate and not just create a third split. It's much different from the previous games and many fans would rather seem to play DOA4 online.

I'll never understand why DOA4 was bad mouthed so much on this site. It literally was the single most influential fighting game of the past decade, and it was superb.

 

[Brute]

I'll never understand why DOA4 was bad mouthed so much on this site. It literally was the single most influential fighting game of the past decade, and it was superb.

what?

 

[Argentus]

what?

okay, this should be taken to the casual discussion, but I'll put my word in on it.

DOA is what basically created the modern online fighter back with 2u. Before that fighters were very few and far in between, then DOA4 was like, the ONLY Online fighter for the longest time.

Since DOA4 we've had other online fighters come in, and none of them did anything to be influential, really.

We got SF4, which was just SF again, nothing influential from that other than the rabid fanbase. (Though SF4 desperately tried to pretend that charge moves were something new lol.)
We got Soul Calibur/Tekken, which did do the character creator/customization, so I give it that.
Then we got all the flashy anime spazz seizure fighters like MvC3/Skullgirls/Blazblu/P4A, which also added nothing, so no influence there, since they were just rehashes/sequels to older fighters MVC2 and GG.
Then what we have besides that is the arena/anime fighters, like DBZ/Naruto/Jojo. DBZ has been getting shallower since Raging Blast, losing any influence it might have had, Naruto is all about the visuals, not the mechanics, and I haven't played JoJo yet, but seems to be in the same boat as Naruto.
Then Mortal Kombat had the great story mode cutscenes, though that's hampered by the story itself sucking bad. And the fact that the actual Kombat was as hilariously stiff as ever.


Looking back at all the big name fighters of the past 10 years or so...DOA4 was the most influential. It was the only real ongoing fighting series, basically kickstarted online fighters, real environmental hazards, was THE online fighter for the LONGEST time, still the most fluid fighter, etc.

Only "influences" from others would be
SF4 - More remix editions that unfortunately is a trend DOA5 is taking after
SC/Tekken - Character customization. Which was actually bad because it wound up just being constant cosplays.

and that's about it.

 

[Akumasama]

Either way, from one viewpoint to another - they're either not expressly aware of the division of players from the filters, or they think it's so popular that the filters don't matter.

I don't know what to think.
Given the changes they made in DoA5 classic after a few patches (they reduced the amount of filters, trying to "standardize" a bit the ranked matches) you'd be leaning to think they were aware of the issue.
They even removed some info from the displayed sheet before you choose wether or not to accept the match.
Was it enough? Probably not, but it was a sign they at least acknowledged the issue.
Then Ultimate came out and we're back to square one.

This also gives me a chance to speak about the removal of some displayed information.
In Ranked matches now you can't see any longer which character your opponent picks up and you can't see his win/lose record.
These both sound stupid to me. The first is very common among ranked matches in other games, but it makes little sense to me. It's not an official international tournament with glory & money for the winners.
It's a fucking online ranked mode of a videogame. Why do they need to pretend they want to get so serious? The only thing you give players is the annoyance of not being able to see what your opponent is going to pick.
Same for the win/lose data. Most of the time it counts way more than seeing the rank letter which, alone, doesn't really matter more.

I only see lack of coherence in their actions. First they try so hard to make people realize that DoA isn't only tits & asses but has a serious fighting game engine underneath. We all remember the core message of their PR at start. "I am a fighter", no more titties but fighters.
Ooookay, and how did that ended up? 2000 new bikini costumes and a plethora of female fighters.
Riiiiiight.
They tried so hard to give an aura of "seriousness" to the game that they went as far as splitting ranked and not ranked games (which is a standard in most fighting games, it just was NOT in DoA) and putting a lot of stuff which really are of no use to the player (they just hinder and annoy) but enforce this aura of "oooh look how serious we are about this".
I dunno, maybe this attitude DID work for them? I can't tell. I can only talk about myself and I didn't like it at all.
I'm all for making the ranked system a bit more serious than in the past, but if this is the compromise I have to accept for more "seriousness" then I'd rather make things work as they did before.
Is it just me? DoA5 online is a pure mess, period. I've seen it worse of course, especially many years ago, but consdiering the legacy of previous DoA titles this was unnecessary and totally unexpected.

and that's assuming it would consolidate and not just create a third split.

Imho? At this point in time it would be a further split. Maybe a small one, but a split for sure.

I'll never understand why DOA4 was bad mouthed so much on this site. It literally was the single most influential fighting game of the past decade, and it was superb.

FreeStepDodge, and other "serious" fighting games website, have an opposite hyperbole for DoA games.
Exalting DoA3 more than necessary, bashing DoA4 more than necessary. There is a perfect explanation for this.
At the end of the day it's just a double opposite hyperbole (in sociology it's called "law of retaliation", at least in my language), but there is a lot of truth behind.

DoA3, aside from the crappy 3-directions hold system, had a very solid fighting engine underneath. Nobody gave it credit for that, so when someone showed it to the world (Tom Brady?) it *shocked* the audience. When something good comes totally unexpected, it's bound to look even better than it would have otherwise.
DoA4 instead was a bit of a disappointing title because of some unbalancements in the engine (high hold damage, too good low holds, too much of frustrating stun game). Because of this the game got kinda bashed (ritghtfully) by competent players, because of its problems which mainly come out in competitive and high level games.
Everybody else, like sheeps, followed what the high lords of gameplay said.
Was it right? Was it wrong?
Personally I think there is a lot of truth underneath, at high levels DoA4 really had some serious problems and DoA5, if anything, only make them even more noticeable.

STILL, I think it's very unfair to get rid of DoA4 with just that. It had an awesome online game, awesome solid menus and options, a good online community and, in spite of all its issues, it was *FUN*. Something that Tecmo forgot about, at least in some aspects, in their rush for "omg we need to be seriouuuus!".
I like more seriousness, but when it comes at the cost of entertainment then they should better think twice about it.

Just my two cents.

 

[tokiopewpew]

This also gives me a chance to speak about the removal of some displayed information.
In Ranked matches now you can't see any longer which character your opponent picks up and you can't see his win/lose record.
These both sound stupid to me. The first is very common among ranked matches in other games, but it makes little sense to me.

...
The only thing you give players is the annoyance of not being able to see what your opponent is going to pick.
Same for the win/lose data. Most of the time it counts way more than seeing the rank letter which, alone, doesn't really matter more.

I bet my underwear that showing win/lose data and the selected character would make finding opponents on ranked matches even more difficult. People would decline fights if they see that their opponent has a win percentage about 70% and/or 2000 fights more as themselves. Furthermore, people who can see which fighter their opponent is going to use will probably pick his worst match-up (if they know it and can play the character), what will lead to less variety.
I already see this nearly every day when I'm playing against randoms in lobbies. If they've lost one or two fights against my Kasumi with there main, they're going to pick Helena or Christie or Alpha, which are known as good/nearly equal match-ups because of their speed/stances.

Alternatively, even if they would accept some rematches in ranked after they've lost against you before, as soon as they see that you are going with the same character you are winning with every time, they wont fight you longer as let's say three times.

Hiding the win/lose rate and the character is a really good thing to keep up the exertion about the fight you're going to accept and prevents the result of a ranked match of getting even more predictable before. Therefore, the new throw-down system the've introduced in Ultimate is a good thing imo. You don't know whats coming when you are accepting a incoming request for a fight (except if you already know the name of your opponent), it can be good or bad, and that is what is making you to try it again when you get the next request, even if you have lost the matches before.

 

[Brute]

People would decline fights if they see that their opponent has a win percentage about 70% and/or 2000 fights more as themselves.

Ironically, much like rank, win/loss ratios don't really represent skill.
But yeah, 99% of people in ranked wouldn't recognize that.

I already see this nearly every day when I'm playing against randoms in lobbies. If they've lost one or two fights against my Kasumi with there main, they're going to pick Helena or Christie or Alpha, which are known as good/nearly equal match-ups because of their speed/stances.

I never rally got that. I mean, I know people do it all the time, but with the exception of RARE circumstances, you're almost always going to have the highest chance of winning with your main or perhaps alt/secondary. Deliberately choosing favorable MU characters is going to have you losing skill in the transition unless you happen to be adept with them, too (or they're totally braindead).

I bet my underwear

What an odd thing to wager.

 

[Akumasama]

I bet my underwear that showing win/lose data and the selected character would make finding opponents on ranked matches even more difficult.

Given the current situation yes, it was probably an annoying but wise choice.
It's a bit incoherent though when on one hand you remove some data to increase the odds of fighting people, and on the other hand you increase the number of options/variables in the search system (basically decreasing the odds of finding other players)

Also I've always wondered... why the Figher's List? It was clunky in DoA5 but had some use (barely...). In Ultimate it looks like completely useless to me.

Furthermore, people who can see which fighter their opponent is going to use will probably pick his worst match-up (if they know it and can play the character), what will lead to less variety.

I don't see how this is a problem.
I actually find it a pro. Now it doesn't really apply to me since I barely know how to use one character in Ultimate so 99% of the times I would always pick that one no matter what my opponent chooses.
But I still find it annoying I cannot see who he picks, what to expect and so on.
Match ups are good imho, not something that should be discouraged.


The Throwdown system is a cool idea but with a very clunky implementation.
Works fine in Training Mode I guess, not so much if you're doing something else (in Ultimate there's only a couple of game modes you can play while keeping it on anyway)

 

[tokiopewpew]

What an odd thing to wager.

xD

I was forced to bring in something odd because I needed something to show how surprised I am about the fact that Akumasama is now complaining about things that prevent the issue he is criticizing in this thread (the difficulty to find opponents in ranked matches) for getting even worse.

I never rally got that. I mean, I know people do it all the time, but with the exception of RARE circumstances, you're almost always going to have the highest chance of winning with your main or perhaps alt/secondary.

True, using your main offers you the best chances in general, of course. However, it's not about the chance of winning. I'm sure people would do more often and that could make those who are trying to play ranked serious with the expectance for interesting, varied fights losing the interest faster (because they get bored of seeing always the same MU's).

= less chances to find an opponent

 

[Akumasama]

Ironically, much like rank, win/loss ratios don't really represent skill.
But yeah, 99% of people in ranked wouldn't recognize that.

I wouldn't go as far as to say "they do not represent skill".
More like they are not enough, but most of the time they give an approximate idea. Especially if you can pair both info and "spot" people with new accounts.
In ultimate it's harder to find an U+ player who's completely shit, compared to how easy it was to find noob SS in DoA4.
Of course it's not a coincidence that atm on XBL at least, the number of players with that rank is very very very small. So small that if you wanted you could probably learn all their gamertags.

This is probably a good thing. If they wanted to make "reaching max rank" less trivial than it was in the previous 2 DoA games they succeded completely and I can define myself happy about that.

But was the "cost" we had to pay with it worth it? I'm not really sure myself that it was, honestly.


@ToKyo PewPew
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you're really exagerating the matchup issue. Check DoA4 and DoAU and original vanilla DoA5 too.
Yes MU do happen, but I'd say they're more the exception (not that rare maybe, but still an exception) rather than the norm.
And they can happen even now, especially if people judge your main by your "profile image" (the character image that appears on your sheet before you choose wether to accept or refuse an incoming fight) or on second /third rematch.
Many times I've had people change their fighter after losing to me the first time.
And since I pick the same character 99% of the time it's bound to happen.

I don't really think this is an issue though. I'd rather being able to see who my opponent picks and have a slightly higher % of MU than having that annoying blind selection screen.
MUs are part of "battle strategy" imho, they're a good thing, not something to be childishly discouraged with the silly hidden menus.
I seriously seriously doubt they have any sort of noticeable impact on the split of players that we're talking of. (whereas you were totally right about the win/lose rate of course)

 

[Brute]

I wouldn't go as far as to say "they do not represent skill".

I have about an 85% win record and I suck ass.

 

[Akumasama]

I have about an 85% win record and I suck ass.

Depends on how many total fights you have. Me too I had 100% win rate for the first 80 fights or something, but as the number increased my win rate obviously went down until reaching ~70% or slightly less. Talking about Vanilla DoA5 here. In ultimate I'm at 68% win rate on XBL I think, or a bit higher.

Of course if the total number of fights is small you can't really tell much from that, but the higher it goes, the more relevant it becomes.

Also, I'm not really sure you suck ass. Maybe you think you do, but maybe you just have very high standards and judge yourself worse than other people would do

 

[tokiopewpew]

... and I suck ass.

He is lying, I experienced it personally xD

 

[Akumasama]

Knew it

 

[Brute]

Depends on how many total fights you have.

Nearing 2k, iirc.

He is lying, I experienced it personally xD

I was having a good day. xD

 

[tokiopewpew]

@ToKyo PewPew
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you're really exagerating the matchup issue. Check DoA4 and DoAU and original vanilla DoA5 too.
Yes MU do happen, but I'd say they're more the exception (not that rare maybe, but still an exception) rather than the norm.

No, I think you are right. It just was what came to my mind as I was reading your post, especially because I've noticed these things since I'm playing on PSN.

I've never played DOA4 and DOA5 vanilla only for a short time, so I can't do any valid comparison to the ranked match system we have now. Therefore, I believe you are right when you are saying that I am exaggerating this issue, alone by the fact that you have more experience with it.

 

[just_me]

Well I think the only filter criteria for Ranked Matches should be... connection quality. Setting a region is just another pre-filter for connection quality (or does anyone really care where the other guy/girl is from, as long as the connection is decent?) and the Match Making System should make sure that you only face "worthy" opponents, so no need to set a Rank range either.
And if the system actually finds a match... you fight. Period. I honestly don't see any reason to display info prior to the char select screen. (The connection quality criteria was matched after all... the issue that a 4 bar connection suddenly drops to 1-2 during the actual fight still remains, but the option to cherry pick, does not solve the problem either. Wonder what they are doing... If I had to guess, I'd say they determine the connection quality to the server that returns the peers and if both players have a good connection to the server, it is assumed that the player-to-player connection is good as well... which might, or might not be true)

Don't think anyone picks Christie, Helena and Alpha for MU reasons (especially since there is no generally agreed upon Tier List/Matchup Chart to begin with)... they get picked, because the are Lag Monsters and everyone knows it

I personally think the win ratio is more of an indicator how much "scrub bashing" you do, instead of anything else... especially, if the % is really high. Hard to believe there is not a single player on the respective networks, that you do not beat 9-1 all the time...

(Oh... and people should play "Tournament" more often in larger Lobbys imo... higher chance to play different opponents and makes waiting for your turn less tedious imo)

 

[Akumasama]

Well I think the only filter criteria for Ranked Matches should be... connection quality. Setting a region is just another pre-filter for connection quality (or does anyone really care where the other guy/girl is from, as long as the connection is decent?)

Bull's eye!

and the Match Making System should make sure that you only face "worthy" opponents, so no need to set a Rank range either.

Ad Again! If someone too-weak or too-strong comes out, you can always turn him down pressing B/Circle instead of accepting it.
The match making itself should prioritize people with ranks close to yours, if it can find anything then people stronger/weaker.

I honestly don't see any reason to display info prior to the char select screen.

It was like that in original DoA5 Vanilla, but I think this is a necessity.
What you're saying would work in an idealistic world but in reality there are several other issues.
Like an issue which was very present in original DoA5 Vanilla (partly solved in successive patches) and that came back again with Ultimate, is the randomess of the connection quality checks.
Sometimes someone checks as a blue (5 bars) but when the fight starts it's 1.
Some other times you have laggy fights with 3 bars, some other times you have laggy but totally playable 1 bars matches.
DoA5 Ultimate really sucks at that.
At least you get a chance to turn down someone you've already played against who you knows has a bad connection agaisnt you, or maybe someone you don't like because of his attitude or his playstyle? Whatever?
Giving the chance to accept/deny is good imho.

Also, it's not that bad. What really makes the current system frustrating is that you go on even for THIRTY MINUTES without a single possible opponent showing up.
If a lot of people showed up you'd get the "feeling" (placebo?) that a lot of people are playing, and it would feel way less frustrating than the current situation feels.

but the option to cherry pick, does not solve the problem either.

It does not solve but it still is useful.
Might not work on the first time you fight someone but if he shows up again you will just deny him and that's it.

(Oh... and people should play "Tournament" more often in larger Lobbys imo... higher chance to play different opponents and makes waiting for your turn less tedious imo)

Absolutely agree with that.
In general I hate lobbies bigger than 4-5 people. But if you're making a big lobby then Tournament is the way to go!

 

[UpSideDownGRUNT]

I have about an 85% win record and I suck ass.

cool. I have a 14% win ratio.

OT, it's almost pointless trying to play online on Xbox unless you play with friends. Random lobbies and ranked is just abysmal in terms of numbers, where as on PS3 due to CF you have alot more fights but you're less likely to come across people who are worth a challenge. And you fight alot of Ninjas lol