That tweet about how SF6 lacks player expression compared to SFV is sure something. Time really is a flat circle, because only a year ago people complained how SFV lacks player expression. Now suddenly it has all the expression in the world.
my biggest issue is drive rush its scrubby and it enhances the casino effect of sf6 also the fact you rarely get to stop drive rush such an awful mechanic
Like right?? It still feels like yesterday when people were ranting about how "you can't do anything" in SFV. Now people are saying SF6, the most open ended SF game possibly of all time, has less you can do??
I agree wholeheartedly w/ your assertion that strong player expression requires strong defensive tools. Not just bc it makes defense expressive, but bc it prevents specific offensive tools from being overcentralizing. Fighting games are at their best when your opponent is good enough that they use their defensive tools to call out your strongest offensive tools, so you have to dig deep to find something that can trip them up. You're forced out of your habitual rut and have to improvise. That, to me, is gaming at its most expressive.
I'm going to connect this to one of my FAVORITE characters to play in ASBR for a second. Part 1 DIO is just fucking fun. His counters are amazing, his grabs are cool, and he even has unique gimmicks with his vampire powers. What ISN'T good or fun, however, is fighting against STANDS with him. He has no defensive options against Stands. all his specials are melee, which, while fun, countering an enemy by freezing them for a second, but needing a second to get to him if he had his Stand on sucks. He can get absolutely WRECKED by Stand users. It feels awkward having JUST the reach to get a counter in, but the guy has a stand that can absolutely STOMP it. It's smooth to execute, but really clunky when it can't actually hit. Good, universal, defensive options don't just allow for good mixups, they also allow for WAY smoother gameplay.
Player expression in the modern era means something different than in the past, because of the pro scene and the inescapable presence of social media. Pros will always play optimally, and because they advertise their tech as a means of brand building; or you can watch them in a competative environment because tournaments are now live streamed as a matter of course - defined metas now emerge within months, whereas in the past it might have emerged over years, because the FGC wasn't as interconnected as it is now. As a result, games get figured out almost instantly, so therefore people just have to copy what works and build off of that. In a way, player expression does exist, but differently than in the past, and much more "centralised". A top player might figure out how a character works optimally - like Punk did with Cammy in SF6 - and everyone just copies that, because why wouldn't they? Then their indivisual "quirks" might manifest on top of that, but only in micro deviations, because they're essentially playing Punk's interpretation of the character (Sako was legendary for this in SFIV). KOF players figure out a new patch in marathon streams for all to watch, and within a week or two the defined new meta (with regards to character picks) is pretty much cemented. For me personally perhaps the most striking example of player expression in the modern era is Punk basically developing the meta of SFV all on his own. Is there an instance in fighting game history of one player being so instrumental in the way a game is played? That is pure player expression if ever there was, but again, on a macro level. Where player expression still matters a great deal is in the utilization of underpowered, or low tier characters. Since lower tier characters are almost by definition far less jacked into the meta of a game, players have to make macro decisions a lot more than with high tier characters, so you're far more likely to see recognisable play styles manifest. In short, wanna express yourself in away that is easily recognisable? Go low tier, because then it's virtually all up to you to chart a winning path. That's kind of the appeal of low tier characters in the modern era - they're the avenue by which players claim an identity for themselves removed from defined metas and such.
This is why I don’t watch my main. I don’t watch nuckledu, imstilldadaddy or dieminion so I can develope my own style. Which also means I get bodied all the time. Pick ya poison
Fam, using pther people strats and tech is simply adding to the play style you should already be working on building. If you trt to just copy pros at a certain point you will becom predictable and lose.
@@ShawnWeeded510 The most efficient way to play the game and use characters will always emerge, and that will decide the dominant meta. It is an inescapable reality of modern fighting games - especially since so many games have similar central mechanics these days. Everything else is just micro deviations, or micro expressions. That's why I specifically mentioned underpowered and underutilized characters: because they aren't jacked into the flowchart meta of the game in the way the dominant characters are, there is more room for expression there, because you have to chart your own sustainable path to victory; but most people - especially "pro players" - are too chickenshit to rely on their own ingenuity to win. They want to rely as much as possible on the game effectively playing itself, and just make micro decisions in between; that's why so many games these days are on rails. I played Lucia in SFV - a character hardly ever seen at pro level, and I know all about the joy and misery of relying on your own wits and ingenuity in charting a path to victory.
I think fighting games are the most similar with playing an instrument. Each character is a new or variable of a certain instrument. You have to learn all the notes and string before you can creat your own music.
Yet a lot of modern FGs go the route of "choose your character and go into training mode for 20 minutes and you have all the tools and their application at your disposal." I think that's a major downside due to devs not only reducing tools but also streamlining them and making them so straightforward in their application -while a new player might appreciate that- you immediately lose the "sondbox" like feeling of discovery over a long period of time with your character. To go with your analogy: every instrument only has five notes. But since that applies to any instrument, you can win music competitions way more easily as there is simply less to learn.
I've seen the exact same statement about the Devil May Cry franchise, which honestly made more sense as there is no second musician, who simultaneously is playing music with you and is tring to beat you on the head with a saxophone. I need to get to the bottom of this shit.
@@nomaschalupas2453 ai is dumb and can't adapt. After 100 hrs into the game you get hit only if you are messing around a little bit too much or if you mess up mechanically. Meanwhile in FGs there's always an opponent who tries to trick you into making a mistake by any means possible, and even if have them figured out after a while they can completely change their playstyle to throw you off your guard.
After a single watch-through, I have to say this felt like watching 3-4 different short video essays rather than a long essay with a main point. You talked about a lot of things, but through much of the video I was lost as to how what you were talking about connected back to the main topic of player expression.
That's kinda the point. What people call "player expression" is so vague that all of these points need to be addressed. From it's definition, to how games evolve, and then the people who play the games, being the ones who make it. All of these things play into what we view as "expression".
I believe by player expression, people mean they don't want the same character to be played the same way all the time. They just like choices or seeing something new or different. The same reason we have more than one character in a fighting game
This is definitely at the core of most of the arguments I think, yes. But as is, so many of the games being complained about already have this. Lots of people, when they compare a game to an older one, seem to mostly miss very specific things
That's not really what the video is about, it's intended to demonstrate that the medium of the expression has changed but the nature of it has not. Unless you were just bringing up a point and not a counterargument.
@@qmanchu Well, yeah, I also don't think the old ones have an advantage over new games when it comes to variety I think combos are a good comparsion, cause devs back then didn't yet developed the combo theory. In SF2, combos heavily linear, and SF3's meta was heavily reliant on multi-hit moves or supers to rack up tons of damage. While the old Guilty Gears were TOD cities with tons of excessively long repetetive combos/infinites That's why I admire SF6 and the recent patch of Guilty Gear Strive. All of their mechanics serve to keep the combos fresh and knockdowns even fresher
Thanks for this video, my life goal is to become a game dev, and make a great fighting game. This video made me decide to have a playlist of videos to use as reference for what it is i want in a game, instead of doing it all on my own. Basically, your video bouta be the first chapter in my fighting game design bible
Whoa! That's high praise and I wish you nothing but luck! I'd recommend checking out Masahiro Sakurai's videos on stuff like this because it's great insight into the things directors look at when making decisions. Thanks for watching
I think when people talk about player expression they always limit it to be combos/execution and set ups. When its really so much more, people ragged on SFV for not allowing player expression and couldnt tell the difference between players without the names. Yet when I played a smurf account against people from my local scene they all instantly knew it was me because of the play style
Yeah this is at the core of what I think people meant about 5 specifically. 5 was an interesting game in that you mostly expressed yourself in abstract ways since there weren't too many options in way of combos for most characters. And that was my favorite thing about 5 acrually
@@qmanchu Yeah definitely I think part of it is because SF4 had such like wild skill gaps execution wise for optimal combos compared to 5. In 5 pretty much all the damage optimal combos every one could do pretty consistently and weirdly enough a lot of the harder execution stuff in 5 was really sub-optimal. I did enjoy the more abstract aspect of 5 with player expression a lot of it specifically in the later seasons highlighted a lot of the abstract aspect of player expression in 4 with neutral I enjoyed as a viewer
14:52 - I would actually argue that parry in 3S DID significantly cause SF to break away from what it traditionally was. The fighting is mostly done at point blank range instead of from neutral range (the imbalanced cast may have something to do with this), opening up many new mix up opportunities. In that vein, I’m hoping SF6 evolves in the same manner, where players will stop playing SFV’s mixup/block string pressure game and go ham on close range setup after setup. This was an interesting video essay! Thanks for making it!!
Oh yeah gameplay wise it's very different! I should've been more clear, when SF3 was in development early on, it wasn't a street fighter game. That's what I was alluding to but that wasn't clear at all lol
@@qmanchu Oh hey, no worries! Maybe I misinterpreted what you said. :D All good! I didn't know that about 3S! I'll have to do a deep dive into SF/3S lore, lol.
@steamyrobotlove nah that was on me, it wasn't even remotely clear that that's what i meant. Sometimes when doing research for these things I come across so much information I forget not everyone knows the development processes for every SF title lol
I care about player expression in games. I care about it in fighting games, I care about it in minecraft, I care about character customization, and I care about skill expression. To some extent I might even care about combo expression. This doesn't mean that any of these must be my reason for playing or not playing a game. If I feel like I can't express myself in a game, I might choose not to play it. This encompasses a lot of different ways of expressing myself, such as customization of the looks (Tekken, Soul Calibur), choosing assists or a team (UMvC3), custom moves (smash 4, absolver), a lot of combo expression (Yomi Hustle), builds (League of Legends), or many choices in neutral (insert game here). But there's more options in single player games. Pacifist runs and (casual) speedruns are a great way of expressing myself in a game. Skill Expression is very important in games too, and I would count it as a type of player expression.
Vortexing is fun because it forces the defender to look for patterns in the opponent's offense but the best part is that it teaches the defending player to use active defensive measures to prevent the vortex from happening in the first place. It helps to build context to the neutral game which I think is really cool! Talking about the player expression specifically, player expression is a combination of what someone values in combos (damage, meter, set ups), how the player likes to condition their opponent or play neutral (low risk options(ex. fireballs) vs high risk options (ex. combo starters)), and the character that they play as.
I feel like the expression debate in sf6 would die immediately if they just adjusted how combo scaling works. As it currently is you'll make some neat combo route and optimizing to get in more hits while also dealing less damage and getting a worse knockdown than the default bnb. Love the game but it can feel pretty demoralizing for experimentation with combos.
Yeah this is my main issue with modern fighting games in general, there's no return on investment for higher execution costs most of the time. Why do 20 hit combos when 10 hits does double the damage?
I felt this testing combos in fighterz and gg strive I love when you try to squeeze every single posible input to do a combo but nowdays damage scalling completely screws it over Some will say that is to stop people from doing very long boring combos but those games allow for looping certain sequences so the result is even worse
"Limitation breed creativity" People love to hype up the old NES type era and how developers used the limited hardware as a way to get creative with implementing mechanics or especially music. However, when players have to do that themselves they throw a tantrum. Or you have Tekken where people meme that out of 500 moves a character had you only use 5 of them anyway xD
When people complain about player expression I feel its usually tied to a game they don't actively play or follow. I can understand the minute decisions made in fighters i play and watch all the time. But if I were to watch a game i rarely play or watch, like Tekken 7. I'd have no way of differantiating two players in a mirror match
I've have an extreme amount of time in granblue and love the game a lot, but I'm gonna have to say the game does lack player expression. Vs lower levels yeah I can be goofy and do stuff the show off. At higher levels, not at all. Its not really a matter of playing optimally. Its just the vast majority of my tools don't work against a skilled opponent outside specific situations. Situations that its just the only answer. Only thing I'm doing is playing my opponent, with my characters deck of cards vs theirs. I'm playing fundamentals and at a higher level the way I fight them with one character is mostly the same with any other. There isn't any real calling cards or key things that make things nuianced. Sure somethings maybe better or worse for one character but they don't define how I play into doing something else non fundamental. The new defensive tools talked about in the video imo aren't a healthy form of expression, because offense imo hasn't evolved into a state that demands them. In every modern fg patience is the only defensive tool I need. And playing stronger players patience is the tool that keeps them alive too. Offense needs to take risks and defense calls them out to counter. Until offense doesn't need risks until the opponent dies to chip from full life once they set up their assault, defense doesn't need any more tools. When say running up to reset pressure you can stop short and attack early to attempt to stuff out and counter a check. Which better defensive tools, that becomes your check. You remove that option on offense because the risks normally are the same. Reward tends to not differ strongly either but even if it wasn't, getting out easier is often worth a damage cut for the defender. Using defensive tools in neutral sure can be expressive but versus what? What tools are your opponent using that demands such options? Could you not use a proper whiff punish move? Premptively strike to stop them before hand? Use movement or a moves hurtbox shifting to evade? What i'm saying as these tools are unneeded. We have good enough defensive options. They just demand you use them with more nuiance and the same degree of decision making. And lastly defense really isn't expression imo and the modern modes of offense aren't much either. I've often only got 1-2 viable options at any given window on defense. I just pick the one I think will work for my opponent not because its the thing I'd want to do ignoring my opponent. Offense too. One could argue for combo expression and sure, but end of the day i care more about 2 things: am I getting the ending situation I want with the most damage I can for the resources I'm willing to spend? And can I actually execute this combo? Sure I can say "well i got 4 combos that will kill. I'm gonna do the really hard one that looks cool just because" but i doubt that is a strong genuine argument here. Doing combos is a fun aspect of the game but not an expressive element in how you play it. Why? Because ita a 2 player game. If defense is where I only chose the option I guess will beat my opponent and offense is where I go for the specific ender I want (sure you could argue that also is expression but my rebuttal is, you tend to chose based on how you expect your foe to get hit again next. In granblue for example if you expect your foe to have good defense might blow all your resources since you won't be getting another hit soon anyway and by then cooldowns will be back up. If you think they won't then save one to start the next combo. In games where ending with an air reset is a good idea that can be a trip up to your opponent to get the next hit. To me its less expression and more picking the right tool for your opponent.), then what do i think is expression in fgs? Getting the hit. See neutral is where you contest with your opponent with the multitude of options that ideally are high enough you can't quite reasonably account for them all unless they are linear or very formulaic. Which is my issue with modern fgs. There aren't enough viable vectors in neutral to allow you freedom to claim your advantage however you see fit. And if games prolong that struggle longer you'd see more of it too. Most modern fgs have honest footises. But without the flaws samsho has systematically (not flaws of the game just flaws inherit to every action and risks) that make doing risky things more viable. Since everything carries risk for the most part. And unless someone has a hard call out it goes on for a good while like this. Most modern fg have safer neutral, but when you screw up or happen to get hit, you end up in a pressure situation and take a good chunk of damage. This means safer neutral, less risky tools cause punishment is way higher and in general your tools are more limited. There is little variance in how to play the characters. There is little room in many areas as to what option to use when and how to play neutral based on your opponent. Basically you can only make one worth while flowchart in these games. Now not gonna act like older games didn't struggle too with this but modern fgs take it to the extreme. Sf6, gg strive and granblue are all basically the same game to me fundamentally. They have the same core and same issues from it. Thus I stick to granblue because its the one I like best. Compared to say arcana heart or kof where the flow of the games are distinct enough to give me itches to play one over the other.
There's some truth to the idea that most oldheads complaining about player expression complain about options that prevent offense, but I think it's fair to point out that offense was generally harder to run in a lot of older games. It's not just that combos were harder, Fireballs and anti-airs were stronger, meterless reversals were common, and pushback on block was high. Getting in on good players was risky and difficult, and staying in was pretty much impossible without the corner or multiple successful mixups. The combos and vortexes were hyped up because they were somewhat rare at high level play. Strong offense was a reward for good fundamentals and reads, much like how faster routes in classic Sonic games were rewards for good platforming. Most modern games aren't like this. A plurality of players don't want to put in any significant amount of effort to have fun, and while I agree that this doesn't necessarily make modern games worse, I also don't think it's fair to frame people that think they are as boomers high on nostalgia. Modern games do have fewer viable playstles and less combo variety, and old heads were/are better at certain things than modern pros. It's fine to think modern games are just as good or better than the legacy titles. In some ways I agree. But I hate constantly being gaslit about old games and being told they weren't as good as I remember.
I think there's room for both expressive offense and expressive defense. Part of what keeps Third Strike going all these years later is the fact of the parry system: Massive risk for massive reward. Blazblue CF has burst, barrier, and just frame block on defense, so - yes - the majority of expression comes from the offensive side, but deciding when and how to use burst is a huge skill as is managing the barrier gauge as is learning matchups to the point that you can just-block reliably against certain strings. But all of this misses out on an extremely important self-expression mechanic in fighting games which HAS been consistently dumbed down since the old days, and that's movement. Melee is what it is due to movement mechanics as are a lot of old Capcom fighters (MVC and Dark Stalkers, most notably). With movement becoming more predictable and less expressive, there are fewer ways to play with offensive and defensive expression. Yes, it's nice to have direct defense mechanics like DI or Burst, but expressive movement allows for more ways to retreat, approach, corner-escape, mixup, continue combos, evade projectiles, and more. Movement is what separates a good fighting game from a great one.
Movement, or a sharp removal thereof, is easily the main reason I don't have as much fun with Strive as I do with earlier GG games, or even BBCF, though given the subject of the video was mainly SF6, I'm not surprised movement wasn't brought up beyond footsies.
In my opinion, Smash Bros. Melee has the best player expression ever in any video game. I can tell who is playing immediately within the first minute of watching, and I’m not even high level player. I can tell apart Cody, Leffen, and Mang0’s Fox without a question.
On paper, what you said, I think I agree with. But because of how vague the term "player expression" is, I feel as though I'll never be sure we are thinking the same thing haha. But yes, Melee is awesome
DI is a defensive mechanic that a defender can use on most every hit of a combo, which is why truly centralizing offense (do a 50/50 with X anime character) doesn't really exist in the game. TBH, if Smash had made DI more transparent/reliable/intentional in it's balancing, I think we would see more mainline fighting games take on similar systems.
You could argue that defensive player expression is even more important than offensive, because statistically speaking one player will always need to be engaging in defensive mechanics in 100% of games, and the act of being on the defending side is inherently more stressful and patience draining than being the attacker. In a lot of highly curated modern games, there usually is "the one answer" to something when you're defending, and that's probably part of why expression doesn't feel as strong. If you're playing Guilty Gear Strive and Sol is mashing far Slash, what are your options that end the pressure? Literally only FD. A game where the defensive options are limited to having "the" answer instead of multiple possible answers is not only bad for player expression, but it also makes retaining players harder because someone would need to lab it out or do research to find "the" answer if it isn't something that they found out instinctively - and a lot of players don't want to do that and it makes advancing your skill beyond a certain level feel like it's just restricting you to find that there's only one answer to various situations you find yourself losing against.
Honestly, it just sounds to me like you haven't played many older fighting games. To say that active defense is a good way to express yourself as a player, then turn around and suggest that games like Strive haven't reduced expression and are just different in the same breath, leads me to believe this is the case. Strive has less defensive options than XX and Xrd not just on paper, but in practice, as well. I honestly can't fathom how you can try to argue this in good faith unless you have just not played prior GG games. Even your example about SFIV being a vortex heavy game, while rooted in some amount of truth, comes across as disingenuous. "Think about what you gained in later games": like throw loops (which, contrary to what some are now trying to say, did NOT exist in most fighting games for over 20 years)? Or the loss of meterless reversals? Or the loss of 0f throw even, something you entirely neglected to mention? While I can appreciate your approach in some ways, and admire you not wanting to take what the FGC says at face value (much of it is half baked and half true), you don't seem to be equipped with the proper experience to really dissect it. I actually agree with the title of your video, that most people don't actually care about player expression (or want to play a game centered around footsies, or play a high execution game, etc), but for seemingly the opposite reasons you argue here. The modern playerbase simply doesn't know any better because the process of removing meaningful variety from these games started so long ago now that it's all most people know anymore. This genre has been in an "accessibility" fueled death spiral from a mechanical design perspective for so long that you'd basically have to be a crusty arcade rat to know it. Lowering skill ceiling and meaningful variety (not necessarily the same thing, but with the way most FGs are designed, they may as well be) has created the volatile games people say they hate, yet the moment you suggest reversing this trend in any way, those same people will reject it on its face. Which is why we're stuck with metered reversals, two button throws, and all these other things that overwhelmingly favor offensive play: because most people who play these games today don't understand how or why these games became this way in the first place.
It isn't that I haven't played older games. It's why I mention you can just play the older ones. I have no issue with modern games and love older ones like CvS2 and I guess Marvel 3 is pretty old now too haha. But my point is that with every new generation of games, this trend continues of people saying they want so and so attribute from the old games. My whole point is that games have changed and will continue to do so. But we also have resources to play those old games in ways we never have before with parsec and fight cade. I love fighting games in general and I'd hate to see them stagnate because developers become afraid to try new things. This video is specifically a response to the hate sf6 is getting so it didn't make much sense to dive that deep when all we have to do is go back 2 generations of games to see people making the same exact complaints.
@@qmanchu But fighting games have stagnated as a result of these changes is the thing. I don't think there's ever been a period of time where these games have been so blatantly and obviously homogenized as they are now. Every game has some flavor of Roman Cancel/FADC now, every game has some flavor of DI/Focus Attack now, etc. The distinction between airdash and SF style games (even 3D games now) has never been blurrier and it's not for reasons of artistic integrity, either. These devs see that there's a limited amount of interest in these games, so they're done trying to generate it and have now moved on to trying to vulture the playerbases of other fighting games. I think you are viewing this phenomenon backwards. Our FGC forefathers have admittedly failed us on this too because they have not done a good job of explaining why fighting games got to where they are. But the truth is, the period of experimentation already happened a long time ago now, and we're currently at the phase where the devs are doing their best to appeal to a specific target audience as much as possible. You say that people were complaining about games becoming more streamlined two generations ago with SFIV. That's because in some ways, they were right. I actually think SFIV was relatively conservative in this regard though and BlazBlue was actually the far more forward thinking and influential game, all things considered. But that game also faced heavy (warranted) criticism at the time for how much it had taken away from the core formula of airdash games. It's easy to say that people have always complained about change, but you really have to understand how and why these changes occurred with FGs, otherwise it just sounds like dismissive hand waving. Unlike most other multiplayer games, these games have actually gone so far out of their way to achieve mass appeal that it's not just a matter of people being upset that they can't win anymore. If you go back and watch BornFree's interviews with top SFV players when the game first launched, most of them were doing just fine in tournaments, but also lobbed legitimate and widely agreed upon criticisms towards the game. If some of them sound similar to what's being said about SF6, ask yourself if it's because SF6 is either continuing a trend or just barely improving upon these aspects. I think most people agree that SF6 is much better than SFV was, especially comparing the state of each at launch. I think it's better myself, but I'd also be lying to you if I said SF6 fixes all the problems people have with modern FGs. Part of why the old scene finds throw loops so offensive for example is because they bypass not just what were once sacred cows of fighting games, but because they also create a highly accessible and replicable scenario where guessing wrong once on defense can end the round. Even the unblockables in SFIV, messed up as they were, were incidental and required some momentum to set up most of the time. Throw loops are seen as a simpler, less rewarding, but far more accessible version of this, and it rubs people the wrong way because so much of the game gets pushed to the side in favor of this simple yet rigged scenario. And there's no shortage of examples of this happening in SF6 or other modern games, either. It's all part of these games reaching the point where no dev is willing to rock the boat anymore because they all want their slice of the pie.
THANK YOU! This qmanchu guy doesn’t fully understand what we’ve had prior to this new age formula of FGs. I absolutely love how everyone brings up vortexes with SF4, failing to acknowledge that throw loops and instant 50/50 mixups are not much different than those vortexes, especially with meterless reversals on the rise. And when that’s all there is to the meta of the game, it stagnates and becomes so reductive compared to its former glories of yesteryear. And qmanchu thinks this invites player expression? Absolutely not…
You show SF4 vortexes as a bad example of expressive defense, and then later you show GO1 blocking a long series of mixups as a good example, but these are the same thing, GO1 just defended successfully.
They're not the same example.... GO1 has all of his options available and the round resets to neutral MULTIPLE times. There's no neutral in the vortex clips, it's all advantage state
@@qmanchu The round reset to neutral because he defended correctly, if in the Tokido clip Chris G had defended correctly, it would have looked the same. Like I understand that version of SF4 had strong okizeme and unblockables, but its reductive to ignore all of the defensive options you have in that game, while claiming that this somehow isn't the case in newer games.
@@qspec2002 literal unblockables are gone with the implementation of delayed wakeup in ultra. player expression on offense in SF4 is pretty good, there are a LOT of varying playstyles in the characters, and ways you can use each character based on how you want to play. for instance, i was a claw player back in the day, and i particularly liked trying to run safe jump setups into high/low mix, even though that's not what the character is "best" at. however, on defense your options are: block, jump, backdash, forward dash (sometimes) focus attack and let it hit, focus cancel backdash, focus cancel forward dash, or red focus +/- forward/back dash (almost forgot about that one!) unless your character has some sort of reversal. but the big problem here is that NONE of them are options you have AFTER you have gotten hit. the lack of defensive self expression once you get hit is kind of a big deal imo. because the whole point of it is that you are never just watching yourself get beat up helplessly. a few starting points for how to address this: killer instinct has combo breakers, which gives you its own RPS of lockout, manuals, and combo breakers. to me it functions as an interesting minigame that you play every time you either hit your opp or they hit you, so you aren't *just* getting beat up. or in the case of MBAACC, you have reduce, which lets you press an input within a few frames of being hit to take less damage. one of them is higher risk, higher reward, while the other is relatively lower risk and reward, but each of these systems both allow and reward you for trying to learn how to defend yourself, and i think that's a good thing. what i don't necessarily think is a good thing is having more neutral defensive options and no once-you-have-been-hit options. it's like, sure, having "take my turn back because you threw out a poke" is cool, but i think it's super polarizing and doesn't actually solve the core issue of not playing the game when you are getting hit. hell even real fights aren't like that. you should almost always be able do SOMETHING.
Maybe people forget that these games are competitive by nature and therefore can only have so much variety to begin with without throwing balance out of the window? I can imagine just having characters dedicated to specific playstyles (grappler, zoner etc.) being a nightmare to balance as is. Expression can work in other genres like RTS where you not only have different playstyles (races/factions) but also specializations (strategies/commanders) but I can't imagine it in fighting games outside of the aforementioned types.
Note that another thing I consider that informs the player (and therefore expression) is the drive gauge on itself. You can manage it in different ways. You can risk empty parries or blocking. You can burn yourself out for damage because you believe the opponent will go down in the next guess, you can play it safe and hold onto the gauge to have EX options. You can burn it to extend a string or combo because you intent to burn the other person out.
As long as a game has rollback netcode and some kind of mechanic like the heat system that makes it easier for newbies to pickup it helps grow the player base I started playing fighting games when if you couldn't drive across country then a game would be dead a few months to a year after release regardless of how good it was. I love these new changes it gives vets new systems to work with and makes it easier for newbies to feel less like they shouldn't even try
You rase a very interested point about armored establishing tools. I wonder if this could be the birth of new genre staple mechanic, like super meters or modern throwing.
It feels quite different from game to game, WA while comparable to drive rush for most characters, only has the armour for the white version on the heavies, so its a specific node/tool the developers can design around "this character gets red so they can convert well off of long reaching pokes, this character has blue so they can set up terrifying pressure and this character gets white because they struggle to get around marge hitboxes" as opposed to sf6 where the system mechanics are completely universal and a lot of movesets and interactions are designed with these tools in mind such as pokes like chun li 5hp and manon 5hk being godly pokes that lose to random DI being a big weakness that holds those large pokes in check.
I’m sorry but this video is just a word salad, opinion piece of someone who has never played the older SF games to truly understand why people say there’s no player expression in modern SF. When we say player expression, we mean two things: 1. Being able to express ourselves through neutral. 2. Being able to express ourselves through our character’s moveset. I talk about player expression through neutral because the neutral is the silent crosstalk communication that exists between both players. When there is a properly established neutral in place, it allows for players to express themselves in the trinity of the neutral: poking, spacing, and whiff punishing. When this trinity is disrupted, you disrupt the neutral. In older SFs, for example, this trinity was established whether it was ST or Alpha or 3S. That’s why regardless of the unique or busted mechanics each game had, they all relatively retained that neutral SF “feel” to them. However in SF6, raw DR bypasses neutral entirely, usually placing your opponent in an instant 50/50 situation. When everyone can reap instant benefits like this, why even play neutral? Because let’s face it, aside from execution, neutral is another FG aspect that is hard to understand and to play. Most people will clearly jump on the chance to bypass this because they don’t wanna do the dirty work of feeling their opponents out. I think it says something when Dhalsim’s rushdown is more effective than his zoning in SF6. Or we can use SF5 where everyone abuses +2 normals, low forward kicks, and crush counters for neutral because that’s what yielded the most results. The priority system further complicates things by reducing the game to crush counter poking. Then you have vtriggers which was in some ways, a prototype version of DR in SF6. Poking and whiff punishing were strong. Spacing? Not so much when everyone is in your face with plus normals due to there being hardly any pushback on block for normals let alone specials. This granted easy-peasy 50/50s that anybody could pull off…and everybody did. Why? Because that was the easiest way to get damage and exact offense. So the game devolved into a specific kind of way you had to play in order to win, lessening creativity and reducing the amount of moves that were viable in your character’s arsenal to express that creativity. And speaking of character moves, let’s talk about point #2. In older SFs, you had moves that your character excelled with and moves that went untouched. However, there were always players you encounter that used these moves completely differently and had people rethink bad moves that might actually prove useful. For example, Ken’s roll in Alpha 3 is understood to be a shell of its former glory from A2. Not many Ken players use it in A3 because it’s unnecessary. However, every now and then you get Ken players who use the roll as a reversal to get out of deep crossup situations or as a left/right mixup after a knockdown. But pulling the timing off was DIFFICULT which is why most players didn’t bother, hence the variety in player expression. Those with the execution and timing to pull it off could do so. Those without, found their wins through other ways. Sakura’s lk tatsu is pretty unsafe to most cr.mks and some sweeps. However, the move recovers very quick and could hop over all these lows and punish them, landing a knockdown. The timing for the punish must be quick. If spaced correctly on block, it became more ambiguous and harder to punish. So it was at your own risk if you wanted to use the move or not. Or Karin (my Alpha 3 main) who is able to use her rekkas to get in and pressure her opponent while keeping herself relatively safe with her slide, palm, or hop kick enders if spaced correctly. Fast forward to her SFV self and NONE of her rekka enders are safe except the backdash option which costs more meter than the others. I don’t think I have to explain, but this clearly reduces player expression by limiting players to use these unsafe moves only in combos instead of being used freely at your own discretion. In fact, many special moves in older games were able to be made safe if spaced correctly which incentivized its use and created more variety. In SF5 or SF6, about 80-90% of the special moves are for combos only because it’s THAT unsafe to use in the neutral. In ST and Alpha, shotos could air tatsu to cover more ground to make up for their poor walking speeds or to get out of the corner quickly. They could still be punished but with the way tatsus worked back then, it required some careful thought on your end as they land. That’s nonexistent in SF6 because the game doesn’t reward that kind of creativity or else you’ll get punish countered with the quickness. Imagine Ryu in SF6 doing tatsu to close the distance. I would be excited because that meant a free punish counter for me and I get to exact my offense afterwards. By limiting viable options in a character’s movelist, you are effectively reducing player expression and creativity, devolving players into using the same moves and same strings to reap rewards needed to exact offense, and essentially making the game look homogenized and “same-y” as a result.
I never would have expected to see a clip of modern Freestyle Skateboarding in a video about fighting games, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't appreciate it!
Regarding 6, I disagree that we have just different ways of player expression because what V Triggers allowed can't be equated to DRush solely because V Triggers were not universal in function, which allowed the audience to see different tools whenever different characters were played. With the system mechanics so dominant in 6 on top of the game giving everyone and their mother an oki vortex, everyone start to blend together outside some quirks. In V, it was more like UMvC3 in the sense that what you pick even before the match gave people some identifiable characteristic. SF6's defensive options don't feel like tools of expression because they are just a part of the guessing game you're put into most of the time. So, they feel like something you're supposed to do rather than you choose to do. Getting a Perfect Parry on Dragon Lash is merely an expression of skill, not creativity or lab work or playstyle, which are all elements you can see in both neutral and defense in UMvC3, funnily enough, despite its ridiculous offensive focus, and I think it's because there's great customizability in what tools you go into the fight with in the first place. Essentially, you don't have any way of making a "build" in SF6 in any way besides picking a character, and characters don't feel as different from each other as they do in most other games due to usage of system mechanics being the decisive factor in most matches.
I’m sorry but V-Triggers DEFINITELY were universal in function in that it allowed for unsafe moves to be safe and allowed for extended combos when activated mid-combo
@@bartdude82 V Trigger has a universal function only during activation. Off the top of my head: Urien's mirrors gave him pressure and mixup. Ibuki got resets and mixups. Menat and Oro got new links, frame traps and conversions. Gief got an anti-fireball and whiff-punish tool. Juri got FSE or a way to bypass her already unique mechanic. Guile got insane buffs to his neutral gameplan. Laura got a vortex or a dodge... Edit: Formatting.
I enjoyed this video, but I will say I haven't really heard gripes about expression in 6 (at least not on fgc twitter). Mostly just gripes about it being scrubby/inconsistent, which isn't really the same thing.
@@qmanchu I think you could go a little harder on when it comes to making your case. I'm not super into FGC Twitter, but I do watch a lot of SuguarPunch, Core-A Gaming, Maximillian, etc. So I enjoy it when a video like this pops up in my feed but I'm always a little out of the loop.
Depends on how one defines player expression. I personally think being able to do something only you can do or is willing to do that differentiate you from other players is the expression. For example, in SF4 without know who is playing, you can already tell its Sako doing the 1f links Evil Ryu combos, because its extremely hard that most pros would never opt to do in tournaments. Well yes, SF4 is broken, the vortexes, the unblockables, option selects and the wakeup FADC crap. But because of those things, it made the game super defensive, players tend to play safe and not rush in blindly because 1 knock down leads to an massively unfavourable situation that may cause you the game. And thus, you get to see players do things differently, their footsie patterns, their baits, their turtleness etc. Which is why we see Umeshoryu... Daigo literally walk up and did delayed DP to open up players that are too defensive and tries to delay tech. These are expression we don't get to see anymore from SFV onwards. One of the reason we lose those expression is because Capcom made combos easier, the hardest link in SFV is 3f compared to 1f in SF4. Everyone in SFV literally are doing the same combos because the hardest combos are easy and tournament viable. The other big reason is that they balanced the game with universal mechanics. In SFV its the V reversal and V shift, in SF6 its the drive mechanics of drive impact, rush, reversal and parry. The solution to specific scenarios are universal to most characters. If you see a incoming, drive impact, you counter drive impact regardless of what character you are using. Against fireballs you parry. Everyone plays the same way because of the universal mechanics being too dominant and meta. These things made the game super balanced, however, players don't get to express themselves, they start to play more and more optimized until everyone plays the same. You'll never see a DJ or Juri not do raw drive rush and you'll never see a Ken not do tatsu corner carry combos or drive rush behind a fireball. Whereas in SF4, each character plays and feels extremely different because the only universal mechanic is focus attack and it is not the answer to everything. Most things depends on the character's own unique tools, you can play Ryu as a zoner or as a rush down character. Likewise you can play Chun Li as a defensive wall or rush down with her. And because the combos are difficult, players use different combos in matches. Imo, the game with the best character expression is Marvel vs Capcom 2. Because its even more broken than SF4, even if only a few characters are considered viable, everyone plays them different because the skill ceiling is too damn high. The execution required to control Magneto is very hard, there are some players that can maneuver him well some just do basic stuffs. Same with Sentinel, some would do high difficulty refly combos, some does moderately difficult fast fly combos and others would just do basic and the easiest air combos. What i hope is fighting game developers don't resort to lazy designs like universal mechanics. And instead design characters that are unique from one another. Yes, that would make it really hard to balance but it'll be a game where players get to play different from one another. More importantly, increase the skill ceiling. Make combos hard, like super hard. And make the gameplay revolve around fundamentals. No stupid modern controls and no drive rush skipping neutral. I literally see master players in SF6 playing like scrubs, playing with flowchart from start to finish with no consideration for reactional play. There is a reason why the top 8 players in SF4 tournaments are consistently the same players whereas in SFV onwards, its random players one after another appearing at the top.
@@luisbo3 Dude, i'm talking about the players within the same generation of the game. In SF4 it was always players like Daigo, Momochi, Tokido reaching the top 8, and when new contenders like Poongko, Infiltration, PRBalrog, GamerBee appears and reached the top, they are consistently at the top. In SF5, players in the top 8 are typically different group of people with a few consistent names. New or old players can do well in a tournament reaching top 8 and not making top 32 or 64 in the next. The biggest reason is because of the lower skill ceiling in SFV. Core-A-Gaming has a video that covers exactly that topic. The game is designed in a way that there is more randomness and easier to play that players of lower skill level can take out pros in tournaments at a higher rate compared to SF4. Its very hard to random out your opponent in SF4 in a first to 2 or 3. But in SFV and 6, its very possible. I used to play with Xian in the Singapore arcades during the SF4 era and i could barely win 3 games out of like 40 games. In SFV & 6 i could suddenly win 3 out of 10 when i match him online. There is a massive jump in win rates. The story is also true vs my less skilled friends, who couldn't win even 1 game against me out of 10 in SF4 but suddenly could win like 3-4 in SFV and 6. I've not heard that players do better against higher skilled players in SF4 than in SFV. SF4 maybe broken and boring, its a much harder game to play than SF5 and 6 because its a super consistent game with fixed wakeup timings, option selects and FADC cancel. It will always lead back into neutral and footsie play, which is a test of fundamental skills. In SFV you literally have wakeups of different timing, after scoring a knockdown unless its a hard knockdown, you cannot apply pressure or meaty consistently because opponents can randomize the wakeup timing depending on the wakeup option they choose. If you mess up your meaty because of it, you can be punished. Mashing jab is actually a legit strat in SFV because of that. In SF6 you have neutral skipping options like DR or dragon lash kicks or spinning knuckle where players can get oki pressures very easily which leads to guessing more than reactional play. There is a difference between balance and skill ceiling, SF4 is broken af, but the skill ceiling is incredibly high. SFV and 6 is lower but balanced because of that.
@@skychaos87 are the recent top 8s not pros? I get it, this is another fgc boomer dissertation as to why everything after 4 is not a real fighting game and “if it was an old game i could beat ya grrr!”.
Well, of course! You see, that's the truly beautiful thing about "video essays" -- the real product is just the video title, the duration, and following the formula! Seriously, the title's the most important bit for this kind of thing. See, you gotta put a title that really, really riles someone up when they see it! Because that's how you start getting those nice views coming in! Remember, you gotta get views, that's the whole reason we're here! Stop thinking about anything else, that's bad! Views! Huh? The content itself? Don't worry, as long as you follow the formula, that doesn't matter, silly! You can say whatever you want! Anything!! Is your point only 3 minutes long? That's okay! Just include whatever topic you think is even just tangentially related to pad it out, just go for it! You can even talk about Avatar Battle; literally *no one* on the planet has ever even once claimed Avatar Battle represents the death of player expression in fighting games, but you can use it to say something really powerful sounding at the end of your video! It'll make your argument about the core game seem really persuasive, don't worry about it not making any sense or even sounding knowingly disingenuous! But how do you know if you're right about your opinion? Isn't that hard? Like, I'm someone who develops games as a career and I'd still be really embarrassed to talk in a really ultra confident way like this, even if I was right. But no, it's actually really easy to know: did you like the game? Did your audience like the game? Then just act like the game did whatever thing right! Just go with your emotions here! It's okay if there's weird stuff like, "so much of the time spent in this game involves someone simply attempting to blind guess their way out of a perfectly loopable simple strike/throw situation, but SF4 is different because everyone had to blind guess their way out of perfectly loopable situations instead! Remember?" Always remember, almost no one's paying attention to what you're *actually* saying, they just wanna hear someone talk about games they like, especially if it vaguely and superficially sounds aligned with an opinion they probably maybe had when they read someone's tweet that they didn't like last week. So just go for it, you can do it! It might seem like people have more useful things to do with their time -- and you're right, they do! But because of your title, they'll be compelled to click and watch anyway! A ton of people can't help it! They feel and believe that they're in control, but really it's quite hard! Many people have serious compulsive or even addiction-like problems with their consumption of videos like this; sometimes they meant to do something else important and valuable in their life, but get caught by this and instead give you and others nice views for hours! I mean, I'm here, right!? lmao What??? What do you mean -- of course it's not opportunistic. It can't be! It's just a video lmao, everyone does it! You don't know? So no, no one will think this, they'll actually praise you instead! You're really just constructing this weird Skinner box money printer, but they'll think you're a really wise expert saying important things, even though you're a person just like them just saying what they feel! People might even start repeating stuff you say! You'll basically become a really cool person; imagine your self-esteem after that! And when someone points out any of this, don't worry, it's just funny! Everything's on your side here, so they'll only look silly and you'll always win, so have no fear! Okay, so maybe you *might* end up with a video talking about video game discourse that in itself is quite ironically an execution of the most damaging problem that modern video game discourse has, but the people who understand that are still gonna click your video anyway! Because that title you made is so aggravating!! Aren't video essays so cool and informative?
As a grappler main, player expression is very important. But only when it comes to gameplay style. I love slow, big armored characters. But grapplers have been changing lately making them fast. Which I don't like.
The intention and idea of this video are all over the place, especially pitted against the title. There are so many arguable and one sided points, that this would have been a MUCH better topic for two people to discuss. Well produced video, but all over the place lol. I say so respectfully, as a fan of the channel
I think the initial definition you put forth isn't really a definition. It's more so a sentiment regarding the discourse. Like player expression is simply 'the variation in defensible player choice'. It refers to their being meaningful decision-making where multiple options are situationally optimal. Being able to recognize a player is just a result of the player's habits that favor particular options in said scenarios. It's the specator perspective but, not the definition by itself. It's an aesthetic criticism of the game's(and metagame's) allowances. Okay I'll admit I have not watching the video yet so I might add on something here after.
Yeah my purpose isn't necessarily to define it with clear boundaries but rather that the boundaries are actually quite vague, even when you get specific. I agree that it's more a sentiment than anything, even later on the video for that reason.
@@qmanchu fair enough although I do think people want non linear player expression. The element of personal preference plays a role in where they want the choices to be though. It's very similar to character variety: most people want it but everyone has something that they don't want to deal with.
@evilded2128 I agree! And I still think many of these games still have that. SF6 does a great job of it, but it's made out to be a very linear game. At the highest level, I could maybe concede that for some characters but as an overall package, in SF6 is in no way more limiting than SF5
The way I think of player expression is rather simple-if there's at least a handful (let's say 3-5) of "correct plays" that you can make in all standard gameplay situations, then the game has good player expression. Solved games like Tic-Tac-Toe or Connect 4 are terrible for player expression, because there is only one correct move for all game states. If the best move for any situation is subjective and comes down to personal preference alone, that's good player expression. That being said, I don't think player expression (in the way that I think of the term) is in any danger, and that Street Fighter 6 is an pretty expressive game. I play Chun-Li, and every Chun-Li I play against seems to have a slightly different idea on how to play the character, and that's really cool to me. So, of course I care. I just think of the ability to express myself through my character as icing on the cake. The cake is that the game is equal parts fun to play and competitively invigorating, and I think SF6 has a solid foundation in these regards as well, although there's obviously tons of room for improvement.
The amount of player expression isn't the issue, the real issue is that it's not NECESSARY. Like why ever do a complex combo, or exploit an obscure interaction when a super armoured dash attack into super does triple that damage
I think maybe that's an issue with the super attack then. Nobody wants to be caught in a cutscene, whether it be a combo or a real true cutscene like a super in Street Fighter. The moment you take away somebody's ability to PLAY your game, you've failed. Player expression goes further than just a string of combos. It should be every aspect, from offense to defense, combos to footsie, and I think too many people get caught up on "but muh 600 hit combo"
The idea that sf6’s defence is encouraging “player expression” more than other sf games is insane. I don’t see how losing in sf6 by one interaction in neutral and one wrong guess in the corner is somehow better than getting vortexed in sf4. Both are bad but at least in sf4 you have more opportunity to guess right and the combo may actually have a bit of execution to it unlike sf6 meaning not everyone can just do it. Sf6 is a great game in its own right and will get better over time but you can’t claim sf6 give you more player expression on defence when in reality it’s just giving you more ways to guess. Player expression in neutral and how different players tackle a characters tools and develop their own unique play style around them was barely even touched on this video as well which is what most people are talking about when they say player expression
I exist more in the "recognisable playstyle" camp of player expression. If you can have 10 people play the same character in a unique fashion from one another, imo you have a well designed game. I care for the viability of creativity first and foremost.
I've always looked at player expression against archetypes. Characters have "best tools" (SPD, Dhalsim limbs, Bison pressure button in whichever game) but the way they use their "good" tools to get to those tools tends to define the players, especially when it comes to risk. In SF4 Itazan loved the big read, Snake Eyez would just walk forward with 10 seconds left and Hagejin would make love to sLK and all 3 were top level players. Supporting your defensive claims, in S1 of SFV we had Momochi who rarely dp'd and Eita who frequenelty dp'd with Ken, then they nerfed a defensive mechanic and expression was very obviously reduced. To be honest, mixups and vortex are where the least amount of expression can be found.
Fighting games are about doing what you **have** to do and not what you **want** to do. Some FGC people have this weird need to feel ‘original’ or to ‘innovate’ because they’ve tied the sense of worth and their egos (and their livelihood) to playing a video game made for teenage children. There are no ‘Style Awards’ at EVO, the only thing that matters is getting a W. If you wanna ‘express yourself’ by moving AWAY from your opponent as Zangief and hoping they will come to you, you’re DEFINITELY playing unlike anybody else but no one is going to be praising you for doing that. The same people who preach about how sacrosanct player expression is always seek to solve a game by finding the optimal punishes/combos/strategies and then call others trash or unoriginal for using said established strategies WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY calling others trash or scrubs for NOT using the established optimal combos. Follow the rules, or you’re ‘playing random’, but if you do then you’re unoriginal and ‘the game has no player expression.’
Don't let Smash players hear that this is a debate in the FGC, we'll be -insufferable- if word gets out Because yeah Smash is what you're looking for if what you want is player expression. Analog moves (drifting during a jump, charging attacks, recoveries with 360 different angles, directional influence, dash dancing, etc...) tend to result in that sort of dynamic appearing. But don't let us yuck your yum, fighting games are great for different reasons
Smash is a great example because I don't like ultimate much and I prefer Sm4sh over any other iteration. I like that way that game let's me express myself so I still play it
Yeah, everyone getting Heat in Tekken basically gave everyone a free,"Gimme my turn" move. I use it to continue pressure or extend combo damge. Not a fan of some of the new overpowered moves. Wish there were more defensiv3 options because it seems like most game only wanna focus on developing offensive mechanics for each fighting game.
Combo-oriented players want a game where their opponent is just the training dummy. Round resets if they drop the touch-of-death combo they memorized from a talented labber, if they pull it off they win. Winners of tournaments are whoever can achieve the agreed upon best combo the most times in a row. If you want to perform ceaseless perfect execution, look into some rhythm games. To me a good fighting game offers at least 3 chances of interaction in a round where players have to think about what the opponent will do or react to what the opponent is doing in order to win.
for a while I thought smash was losing that as well starting with brawl-4 we lost so much advanced tech that brawl or melee had and it felt less expressive, then I moved to ult and rivals down the line, and my issue with ult is defense felt too simple, offense as a result to me felt too simple, so I craved that depth and moved to rivals, but I could feel those differences from melee that made it feel too simple defensively as well. These days I’ll play pretty much anything of course, but I understand ult still has a lot of player expression even if it lost defensive expression from 4, rivals has offensive and defensive expression melee doesnt have and vice versa, dbfz to marvel, sf6-sf4 and so on, these days though I mostly play duelists of eden or megaman battle network because it has the manner of player expression I always wanted, the ability to choose your moveset, I am much better at figuring out a game’s level of player expression these days because I’m better at understanding and weighing options than I used to be, which lets me see the depth more easily laid bare. I hope people will one day learn to chill out and learn first before judging
The truth is that I have not seen much player expression, I mean the vast majority always go for the same combos, and attacks, only a few moments can I say that there really is "player expression"
I'm pretty much on the same page with you, except for that analogy at the end bro. No players making mods is not like the company coming out with a new game worst analogy ever Great video though homie
It's literally the process the current dev team of SF6 mentions they went with for SF6 lol. It's not something I pulled out of my ass. They mention that they had new ideas to mess with from playing old SF games in terms of mechanics and art direction.
@@qmanchu Yeah I saw that part of the video. And I still think that's nothing at all like players making mods. Reminder though I totally agree about everything else
I think you're right about sf6, but I don't know anyone who said sf6 lacks player expression. I heard about people complaining about the balance of sf6, but from what I heard, sf6 brought back all the player expression that was missing in modern fighting games. You can't compare it to strive by saying that modern fighting games are about defensive expression. guilty gear was always about expensive defensive mechanics as well, and strive took a lot of the defensive expression as well. You're conflating people complaining about modern games being scrubby and complaining about the lack of player expression. There's something to be said about modern games losing their experimentation in favour of refinement. Luckily, the newer games seem to go back to the more creative and experimental times. Strive is hated for being too sterile, sf6 is hated for not being sterile.
I admit my personal "skill gap" is part of why I do this, but I don't use Gold Burst much in GGXXAC or Roman cancel AT ALL. I play Anji by Chaining Guard Point moves to bait a Kou/Sou/KCFG I play Venom with Agressive Trick Shot Setup Would love to know how that would go online but when I had a chance and tried I waited over 20 minutes busying myself... So I went back to Survival Roguelite XD
That's actually quite easy to tell. See if I win a lot, the game does not lack skill expression; If I lose a lot, then clearly it's because the game is scrubby and lacks skill expression. It's like in a MOBA, I'm always the best player in a match; And if I lose it's because "X" diff or lag. FGs are single player; So that means, if it's not lag, then the game itself is making me lose. The game should be tailored to me, to how I play.
I saw the Caba/Uzura EVO clip at 5:45 live! I remember thinking: this is the ultimate expression of SFV. OK, I got caught up in the moment a bit, but it was definitely hype and unexpected. The whole set was really great. Uzura Ryu was keeping up in the projectile war against Caba Guile making great use of VS1. And for those who don't know, Uzura changed his tag to Kakeru for SF6, so there was some real life foreshadowing going on there.
Which are the games with actual footsies, and how do I find them? The big fighting games today are either glorified hacky sack or diddling the controller to climax.
Footsies is a great game with rollback netcode. And part of the point is everyone has a different definition of what footsies even actually is. Some people say footsies peaked with KOF98 others say it peaked with SF4 vanilla! It mostly comes down to just play whatever game fits how you wanna express yourself lol
I play alot of Mobas/lol and when ever I hear the words "player expression" simply replace them with "I want good high movement flashy moves that look good when I press the buttons" and usually it gets wrapped up in some sort of weeb aesthetic ala the wind shitter twins, riven or irelia. I always thought that if people wanted "modern neutral" with "good honest footsies" they would play games like ssb brawl, For Honor or mk11. In brawl outside of throws/chaingrabs there is very little to no hitstun for combos meaning every interaction becomes a neutral interaction where you are only slightly at advantage or disadvantage but both players can still control their fighter, for honor(1v1 duels) is similar. Mk11 has just block defense which makes predictable extended offense very punishable and delayable meter burns gives will they wont they type mind games. In these games outside of the bs like tripping(which you can turn off) or fatal blows, when you make mistakes you really did get outplayed and when you get in you really did earn those exchanges but people don't really want that; they want flashy op moves that make it look like they did something even when they were messing up the entire time. Games that spectators can have fun watching but players wont have much fun playing.
First off, where’d you find that remix of Yun and Yang’s stage? The arguments about player expression always kinda rang hollow to me (partly because people tended to conflate more elaborate/variable combo routes with player expression, which begs the question of why don’t they just go play Skullgirls then.) I play a pretty decent variety of games, from 90s titles with fairly simple system mechanics to games with multiple sets of mechanics to choose from. In all of them I can still get a sense of my opponent’s playstyle. Player expression comes exactly from that - the player’s expression of their choices, not solely from what the system allows or restricts. I don’t like Street Fighter 6’s mechanics, but there’s not much I can say to tear them down except that they don’t feel good and they reward a style of play I don’t enjoy. And that’s fine, there’s games out there better suited to my taste. Using my own distaste to call SF6 a lesser or shallower game would be disrespectful to the people who are passionate about it. Great video, will definitely share it around.
Yeah my main thing is that most of these talking points don't actually mean anything. FGC twitter is strangely political in this way. You just need to find the game that let's you express yourself the way you want is mostly what it is.
Neither is DI. It guard crushes, just like wild Assault. Most people don't really know the difference so I end up not splitting hairs when it comes to things like this
number of options to interact with IS player expression...it's not ALL of it, but it absolutely is. I'm not gonna use tremolo from squigly in skullgirls because it's useless & unless you dont know, it's great in the corner for otg for max damage but thats pretty much it. if im understanding correctly.
1- I do consider customization as part of player expression, just along with gameplay. 2- f you think SF5 has top character customization in fighting games, you just forgot a lot of fighting games. 3- Player expression is hard to implement, because it doesn't link to winning directly, but both can interfere. It should run in a paralel line, where efficience allow character expression, but doesn't break the rules or becomes unfair. 4- More moves do allow more player expression. But this don't need to directly become more viable strategies. Ideally, they should just become more routes for the same strategy. Optionally, they dont need to even be truly useful: just having them around is enough to introduce variance, even if they aren't even close to optimal. 5- Player expression is something the game must allow, but the ones actually responsible for doing it are the players. A solid meta may discourage player expression, but it doesn't erase it. A good game will have a meta flexible enough to encourage it, but the choice is always there. 5.5- Corolarium for 5: Expressive players don't play meta. They choose lateral estrategies, not conventional characters and suboptimal answers just for the sake of expression. This is valuable because it is fun. 6- Most expressive games are those that don't punish sub optimal choices too hard, allowing a very loose constellation of alternatives for use in movement, neutral, combo and also very diverse gameplans, at least in intermediate levels of play. Tekken is top in this usually, but SF6 is a great example of low estructural complexity with huge sintactic complexity: lots of expression with few elements.
Two of the most expressive games imo were from Namco with Tekken and Soul Calibur. Post T5 they became flow charty, where you STILL have "options" or you have what works. Which is where expression becomes a problem. WHn you setup things to just work, why have so much bloat that doesn't? Which is how I felt with MKX/11 it was messy with how many movesets were just ass. Which really creates Metas since when you realize something was MADE to be bad. Especially when how they're showing frame data more and more. It'll make you think they'll avoid making moves to just exist to be trash.
On the face of it I agree considering the SF games that had THE ULTIMATE "player expression" Alpha 3 and Capcom Vs SNK 2 barely ever have 30 and 20 concurrent players respectively on fightcade fuck sf6
@@ExeErdna Even now. I've played someone who played the same character and ism as me and I'd mainly try to stay outside their effective range poking etc, whereas he would do everything he could to constantly be on me
i think you are right, i think games are more expressive than ever, and in current year we have means to play.. whatever we like... for the most part. my only problem with fighting games in the modern day is that while sure, modern FG's do not appeal to me AT ALL. i can log onto FC and play what i actually like. this is relegated to street fighter and arcsys stuff the most. if you want to play boomer tekken where movement is THE core mechanic.... too bad. your topic on player expression is spot on. the more expression the more "scrubby" stuff exist in a game. which leads the game to a cross roads. do they continue to focus on player expression at the cost of their simple fundamental core. or revert back and have their game be called 1 dimensional. well the FG space currently has picked the former and in regards to e-sports it's probably the better choice as much as i don't like it. but again thanks to community efforts we can still go back to the older titles. i just wish the devs themselves did more for their legacy. especially namco
People who say SF6 lacks player expression are bitches who smoke crack. However I believe SF6’s design is actually a large step away from where the last generation or so of fighting games have been heading. I know that you said this video is primarily about SF6 but I disagree with Strive being lumped in with games that just “Switch Some options out for others” since the grand majority of Strives changes from previous entires have been pure subtractions with the only thing filling their absence being damage which leads to straight up less interactions made between players than before. ( which leads to less opportunities to express yourself and actually play the game.) Where with Street Fighter 6 not only did they buff every characters move list (thank god) but every new system mechanic operates in a way where the player is given an absolute metric shitload of opportunities to make plays and gain an advantage over their opponent through several different avenues on Offense AND Defense that synergize and lead into one another. (Health, Drive Meter, Corner, Damage). Whereas with games like Strive and SFV the additional mechanics that surround their core don’t really build off of one another and just compound the very basic gameplans that those games are designed for.
Yeah…let’s tone down the exaggerations. “Every new system mechanic operates in a way where the player is given an absolute metric shitload of opportunities to make plays and gain an advantage over their opponent…” This paragraph is problematic because not only is there more to player expression than just system mechanics, but also the way the mechanics are balanced and implemented. The way you describe the mechanics in SF6 is how you can describe any FG with mechanics. Alpha had Alpha Counters, multiple supers, and A/V/X-isms; EX2+ had Excel Custom combos, guard break, and super cancels; Tekken Tag had the unique tag mechanic. System mechanics are very important for player expression but that’s only one piece of the puzzle. What about a strong, well-balanced neutral in place? Unique combo routes with that actually took skill and hard work to pull off? Freedom to use a character’s full moveset instead of certain moves/special moves being delegated to specific combo use only? SF6 falls short in answering these questions. And in fact, you are not given an “absolute metric shitload!1!1!!” of options when there’s an obvious power imbalance in those options. Drive Rush is abused to the ground, being the focal point of the meta. Drive Parry incurs too much reward with not enough risk. Drive Impact incurs too much risk compared to its reward. Drive Reversal is useless because why use a potentially UNSAFE Drive Reversal when you can Drive Parry? These mechanics make the game feel same-y because while the game gave players both offensive and defensive options, they are not balanced equally. And furthermore, with their intent on balancing the game around these universal mechanics, you further lose player expression when everyone does the same thing in a given situation. Fireballs coming at you? Just parry. Want to start your 50/50 offense? Just raw/cancel DR. My opponent wants to DI? I’ll DI back or neutral jump in return. You’ll never see a DJ or Juri not DR. Or Ken DR into st.hp for instant strike/throw guessing time. The answers to these situations are universal AND optimal for damn near the entire cast, which forces players to play a specific kind of way. And when you force players to play a specific kind of way…you forgo player expression (*shocker* 😱) Focus Attack in SF4 didn’t have this problem. It was the main focal mechanic but it wasn’t a one stop shop answer for most situations. Unique character tools that were mostly free to use at any time without penalty (at the player’s discretion) and varied combo routes with a diversified tier in difficulty (cancels vs links or a combination of both) heavily incentivized player expression. This comment reeks of someone who argues “theory fighter” instead of someone who has experience with a wide range of FGs.
@@bartdude82 It sounds like rather than actually looking for new and alternative ways to counter the situations you talk about (Fireballs, DI, DR to Start Offense) you just seem to immediately give up and double-hand deep throat the “Meta” options, I main Ryu (widely considered the most standard character in the game) and I know for a fucking fact I have more options than Parry Fireballs, Counter DI, and DR in to start my pressure. For Fireballs unless I’m full screen away I can use an EX Fireball to instantly win the exchange and gain more ground and usually Oki on my Opponent. For Defending Against Drive Impact a thing I love to to is constantly bait and poke my opponent with a quick normal into a plus on block special only for them to try Drive Impact and I cancel into super to immediately shut them down and get Oki. Why not counter DI? Because what if I don’t want to use the meter to DI? What if it would put me into burnout? And do you know why I don’t always drive rush on Offense? Not only to conserve meter but to throw off my opponent they made walking fast in this game for a reason, I highly doubt you actually get much out of brainlessly DR in on a player with any amount of game knowledge. At around an intermediate skill-level the game puts you in these situations and gives you several options to solve each one, and if you arent being put into these situations it sounds like the skill-pool your playing in is not very high. I only discovered those new options the better I got at the game and started to understand the systems better. I love to say that it sounds like a Skill Issue from your end.
Generally whenever im around people that start talking about player expression the first thing i do is ask. What do you mean lol. Because its such a vague statement. On top of that persons personal preference. Alot of people get player expression confused with personal preference. Because at the end of the day how can they say a game lacks player expression when in alot cases they are barely playing at a level where player expression should even be in the conversation. I think player expression is experienced at different levels and depending on there actual skill level it really explains what expression means to them as a player. And so we end up in this..odd situation that no one really gets the point across because we are at different levels of skill so it's like we are playing two different games and having totally different experiences, so our conversations are drastically different. We are playing the same game and they swear the game is lacking all these things but fail to realize they lack the skill to take advantage of the deeper parts of the game. They have no hit confirms, they cant barely do bnbs let alone a consistent optimal combo. Cant block for crap. Yet complaining about how there's no gatlings or there stand D doesn't combo into 214C or somthing lol. They cant even punsh a DP and crying about a attack thats not in the game anymore. that they used to spam in middle school. Like...bruh. So this convo is really tough to have. And in most cases it just ends in me recommending other games for them to play because usually its just not the game for them. Or the game they still wanted it be. And that leads to other things i could say but..this is enough. Good vid man.
@shutup1037 what? Clearly didn't read. Do you even know what true player expression is? Sounds like somthing someone would say when they have no idea. what should be vs what they want. What is this. "True player expression" you speak of. Please tell me.
System mechanics in SF6 are marked by wild, randomized splashes of paint. That's no coincidence. You're trying to say we don't value expression just because we don't want to watch the fighting game equivalent of someone splashing paint all over the canvas?
Player expression is the most buzzwordy of buzzwords. Sf is popular for a reason To prove it let's count buzzwords in this video: 2:36 2:40 3:41 4:13 4:27 6:06 we made it bois. 6 minutes into the video 6:09 6:51 6:58 7:46 11:02 that's so true it hurts 12:40 14:48 15:08 argument from the author is never good 16:35 As I missed a several we can safely conclude the rate of more than 1 buzzword/minute
The issue that I have that DI and Parry is that they are both turn steal defense mechanics, they're essentially just a counter attack mechanic that's named something else. There are so many tools like different wakeups or mechanics that push the opponent away that would be more interesting overall. DI makes it so that the game has to be played with ones finger on a button that's a completely boring game mechanic. That said, well thought out and interesting video, I gave you a like for the effort, even though I disagree mostly.
That's what it's all about baby. I'm not exactly saying DI and PP are fantastically implemented either. I mostly respect the developers trying new things. I like the idea of being able to defend your way out of any situation but honestly, for consistency sake, maybe that shouldn't exist. Only time will tell.
Perfect parry is still ass though to be honest. If you go for parry you should have to commit to it, but fishing for parry is really easy and not skill based, just throw it out and even if you don’t get the perfect parry u don’t get punished.
@@qmanchu I agree with that, pro players will just fish for perfect parry all the time with absolutely no risk, but normal players don’t use it like that
What 3S did right was make it so parrying has risk. You mess up, you eat a combo. SF6 makes it too easy. I think PP is a terrible example of defensive player expression.
Lmao I swear it's just a click bait title don't take it personally! Most of us do. I just think everyone defines it slightly differently. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that. We've just gotta keep open minds to that fact
Maybe its just a fact of getting better at the genre myself, but I do miss the feeling of older fighting games where I felt like I could watch the gameplay and know who was playing based on their gameplay alone.
@@evilded2 lol how good do I got to be for opinion to be valid? Tbh idk why I prefaced that option with the fact that I've gotten better. I just recognize optimal play when I see it and that tier of play is more accessible than ever due to simplified execution requirements and social media making optimal play more known.
@@DragynFyre12 don't worry this is a thing people get wrong a lot, it's why I'm writing a paper on it. I don't know if you're familiar with optimization problems but, essentially there is a relationship between 2 or more variables where they are all dependent on the others. This produces a curve of optimal outcomes where all points along the curve are valid. I like to use combo structure when explaining because it's much simpler than having to talk about asynchronous decision making and risk reward in neutral. When people say that a combo is optimal they are probably actually referring to a combo being DAMAGE optimal. But, of course you can optimize for any variable that effects outcomes such as positioning and meter usage. Different players even when playing optimally will inherently prioritize different outcomes. This advanced decision making is constantly happening in all points in a fighting game. Even two players playing the same character in the same way are uniquely Identifiable as a collection of habits. While executional difficulty is an easy way to tell one player from another there are many more subtle queues that are present in all deterministic, skill based games with asynchronous actions.
@@evilded2 I'm not trying to flex or anything, but I think I'm good enough to be aware that combo routing is a thing lol. I think most top players tend to route similarly because there is a general strategy that feels optimal (if not meta). A lot of the time that feels pretty obvious in modern games because of their design. I guess I'm more interested in talking game design because at that point it gets into why ppl route the way you do. Yeah you route for corner carry vs dmg but in modern games, the corner is so strong, you just route towards that. Plus I think player expression has is a lot more than just decision making. It's attitude. It's patience. It's mind games.
I think this video is, more or less, on the money. Anyone complaining about modern Street Fighter not playing like Street Fighter, who then uses SF4 as an example of a "proper" Street Fighter game, always loses me instantly. When your Shoryuken can be blocked, and you can just say "Nah" and take it back with an FADC, you aren't playing Street Fighter, bruv. When you have an option select that completely nullifies throws, giving you the optimal result every time, you aren't playing Street Fighter, my guy. I get it, it was the game that revived the franchise. I loved SF4, and played it for years, but man, I am so happy to have moved on from that shit. Give me Crush Counters and Drive Rushes any day of the week.
Great video. I think a lot of the current narrative around SF6 is being driven heavily by players who were really good in SFV and now they're still good but they are frustrated because the way they thought things should work has changed. It's been happening forever in Street Fighter, a lot of the SFV players used to laugh at the SF4 players for doing exactly the same but History is doomed to repeat itself.
Script sounds like it was made by chatGPT ngl. I'm no expert on fighting games but they seem like the more skilled you are, the less playstyles become available to you since fighting games are much more "solved" than other genres like MOBAs or shooters.
That tweet about how SF6 lacks player expression compared to SFV is sure something. Time really is a flat circle, because only a year ago people complained how SFV lacks player expression. Now suddenly it has all the expression in the world.
My exact thought! I saw Oroboros eating its own tail
my biggest issue is drive rush its scrubby and it enhances the casino effect of sf6 also the fact you rarely get to stop drive rush such an awful mechanic
@@alexmaganda5827skill issue
@@bulkbogan6235 i found the bronze guys
Like right?? It still feels like yesterday when people were ranting about how "you can't do anything" in SFV. Now people are saying SF6, the most open ended SF game possibly of all time, has less you can do??
I agree wholeheartedly w/ your assertion that strong player expression requires strong defensive tools. Not just bc it makes defense expressive, but bc it prevents specific offensive tools from being overcentralizing. Fighting games are at their best when your opponent is good enough that they use their defensive tools to call out your strongest offensive tools, so you have to dig deep to find something that can trip them up. You're forced out of your habitual rut and have to improvise. That, to me, is gaming at its most expressive.
I'm going to connect this to one of my FAVORITE characters to play in ASBR for a second.
Part 1 DIO is just fucking fun. His counters are amazing, his grabs are cool, and he even has unique gimmicks with his vampire powers.
What ISN'T good or fun, however, is fighting against STANDS with him. He has no defensive options against Stands. all his specials are melee, which, while fun, countering an enemy by freezing them for a second, but needing a second to get to him if he had his Stand on sucks. He can get absolutely WRECKED by Stand users. It feels awkward having JUST the reach to get a counter in, but the guy has a stand that can absolutely STOMP it. It's smooth to execute, but really clunky when it can't actually hit.
Good, universal, defensive options don't just allow for good mixups, they also allow for WAY smoother gameplay.
Player expression in the modern era means something different than in the past, because of the pro scene and the inescapable presence of social media. Pros will always play optimally, and because they advertise their tech as a means of brand building; or you can watch them in a competative environment because tournaments are now live streamed as a matter of course - defined metas now emerge within months, whereas in the past it might have emerged over years, because the FGC wasn't as interconnected as it is now. As a result, games get figured out almost instantly, so therefore people just have to copy what works and build off of that.
In a way, player expression does exist, but differently than in the past, and much more "centralised". A top player might figure out how a character works optimally - like Punk did with Cammy in SF6 - and everyone just copies that, because why wouldn't they? Then their indivisual "quirks" might manifest on top of that, but only in micro deviations, because they're essentially playing Punk's interpretation of the character (Sako was legendary for this in SFIV). KOF players figure out a new patch in marathon streams for all to watch, and within a week or two the defined new meta (with regards to character picks) is pretty much cemented.
For me personally perhaps the most striking example of player expression in the modern era is Punk basically developing the meta of SFV all on his own. Is there an instance in fighting game history of one player being so instrumental in the way a game is played? That is pure player expression if ever there was, but again, on a macro level.
Where player expression still matters a great deal is in the utilization of underpowered, or low tier characters. Since lower tier characters are almost by definition far less jacked into the meta of a game, players have to make macro decisions a lot more than with high tier characters, so you're far more likely to see recognisable play styles manifest. In short, wanna express yourself in away that is easily recognisable? Go low tier, because then it's virtually all up to you to chart a winning path. That's kind of the appeal of low tier characters in the modern era - they're the avenue by which players claim an identity for themselves removed from defined metas and such.
This is why I don’t watch my main. I don’t watch nuckledu, imstilldadaddy or dieminion so I can develope my own style. Which also means I get bodied all the time. Pick ya poison
Fam, using pther people strats and tech is simply adding to the play style you should already be working on building. If you trt to just copy pros at a certain point you will becom predictable and lose.
@@ShawnWeeded510 The most efficient way to play the game and use characters will always emerge, and that will decide the dominant meta. It is an inescapable reality of modern fighting games - especially since so many games have similar central mechanics these days. Everything else is just micro deviations, or micro expressions. That's why I specifically mentioned underpowered and underutilized characters: because they aren't jacked into the flowchart meta of the game in the way the dominant characters are, there is more room for expression there, because you have to chart your own sustainable path to victory; but most people - especially "pro players" - are too chickenshit to rely on their own ingenuity to win. They want to rely as much as possible on the game effectively playing itself, and just make micro decisions in between; that's why so many games these days are on rails.
I played Lucia in SFV - a character hardly ever seen at pro level, and I know all about the joy and misery of relying on your own wits and ingenuity in charting a path to victory.
I think fighting games are the most similar with playing an instrument. Each character is a new or variable of a certain instrument. You have to learn all the notes and string before you can creat your own music.
I agree. This is also why nasty gimmicks are actually high art.
Yet a lot of modern FGs go the route of "choose your character and go into training mode for 20 minutes and you have all the tools and their application at your disposal."
I think that's a major downside due to devs not only reducing tools but also streamlining them and making them so straightforward in their application -while a new player might appreciate that- you immediately lose the "sondbox" like feeling of discovery over a long period of time with your character.
To go with your analogy: every instrument only has five notes. But since that applies to any instrument, you can win music competitions way more easily as there is simply less to learn.
I've seen the exact same statement about the Devil May Cry franchise, which honestly made more sense as there is no second musician, who simultaneously is playing music with you and is tring to beat you on the head with a saxophone.
I need to get to the bottom of this shit.
@@Graati whats the difference when 10 ai are trying to kill you? unless you are playing the easiest mode you still have to think about the enemy.
@@nomaschalupas2453 ai is dumb and can't adapt. After 100 hrs into the game you get hit only if you are messing around a little bit too much or if you mess up mechanically. Meanwhile in FGs there's always an opponent who tries to trick you into making a mistake by any means possible, and even if have them figured out after a while they can completely change their playstyle to throw you off your guard.
After a single watch-through, I have to say this felt like watching 3-4 different short video essays rather than a long essay with a main point. You talked about a lot of things, but through much of the video I was lost as to how what you were talking about connected back to the main topic of player expression.
That's kinda the point. What people call "player expression" is so vague that all of these points need to be addressed. From it's definition, to how games evolve, and then the people who play the games, being the ones who make it. All of these things play into what we view as "expression".
i think you might be stupid...
@@qmanchuyou didn’t really do a good job if that was the main point you were getting across.
Note that the Granblue mechanic is only a guard break. It's not armored so it's not comparable to Drive Impact, Shatter Strike, or even Focus Attack.
Cant believe a situation has nuance. A damn shame that's lost today
Smh my head. It hurts every time
I believe by player expression, people mean they don't want the same character to be played the same way all the time. They just like choices or seeing something new or different. The same reason we have more than one character in a fighting game
This is definitely at the core of most of the arguments I think, yes. But as is, so many of the games being complained about already have this. Lots of people, when they compare a game to an older one, seem to mostly miss very specific things
That's not really what the video is about, it's intended to demonstrate that the medium of the expression has changed but the nature of it has not. Unless you were just bringing up a point and not a counterargument.
@@qmanchu Well, yeah, I also don't think the old ones have an advantage over new games when it comes to variety
I think combos are a good comparsion, cause devs back then didn't yet developed the combo theory. In SF2, combos heavily linear, and SF3's meta was heavily reliant on multi-hit moves or supers to rack up tons of damage. While the old Guilty Gears were TOD cities with tons of excessively long repetetive combos/infinites
That's why I admire SF6 and the recent patch of Guilty Gear Strive. All of their mechanics serve to keep the combos fresh and knockdowns even fresher
Thanks for this video, my life goal is to become a game dev, and make a great fighting game. This video made me decide to have a playlist of videos to use as reference for what it is i want in a game, instead of doing it all on my own. Basically, your video bouta be the first chapter in my fighting game design bible
Whoa! That's high praise and I wish you nothing but luck! I'd recommend checking out Masahiro Sakurai's videos on stuff like this because it's great insight into the things directors look at when making decisions. Thanks for watching
In my opinion Samurai Shodown is the epitome of honest footsies game. This game is the most underrated there is.
Agreed! Rollback can't come soon enough
"honest" might be going a bit too far, but sure... =P
@@jacowboythe footsies are honest but the other stuff isnt
I think when people talk about player expression they always limit it to be combos/execution and set ups. When its really so much more, people ragged on SFV for not allowing player expression and couldnt tell the difference between players without the names. Yet when I played a smurf account against people from my local scene they all instantly knew it was me because of the play style
Yeah this is at the core of what I think people meant about 5 specifically. 5 was an interesting game in that you mostly expressed yourself in abstract ways since there weren't too many options in way of combos for most characters. And that was my favorite thing about 5 acrually
@@qmanchu Yeah definitely I think part of it is because SF4 had such like wild skill gaps execution wise for optimal combos compared to 5. In 5 pretty much all the damage optimal combos every one could do pretty consistently and weirdly enough a lot of the harder execution stuff in 5 was really sub-optimal. I did enjoy the more abstract aspect of 5 with player expression a lot of it specifically in the later seasons highlighted a lot of the abstract aspect of player expression in 4 with neutral I enjoyed as a viewer
14:52 - I would actually argue that parry in 3S DID significantly cause SF to break away from what it traditionally was. The fighting is mostly done at point blank range instead of from neutral range (the imbalanced cast may have something to do with this), opening up many new mix up opportunities. In that vein, I’m hoping SF6 evolves in the same manner, where players will stop playing SFV’s mixup/block string pressure game and go ham on close range setup after setup.
This was an interesting video essay! Thanks for making it!!
Oh yeah gameplay wise it's very different! I should've been more clear, when SF3 was in development early on, it wasn't a street fighter game. That's what I was alluding to but that wasn't clear at all lol
@@qmanchu Oh hey, no worries! Maybe I misinterpreted what you said. :D All good!
I didn't know that about 3S! I'll have to do a deep dive into SF/3S lore, lol.
@steamyrobotlove nah that was on me, it wasn't even remotely clear that that's what i meant. Sometimes when doing research for these things I come across so much information I forget not everyone knows the development processes for every SF title lol
@@qmanchu oh, I know the feeling, haha! But amazing video, nonetheless! :)
I care about player expression in games. I care about it in fighting games, I care about it in minecraft, I care about character customization, and I care about skill expression. To some extent I might even care about combo expression. This doesn't mean that any of these must be my reason for playing or not playing a game.
If I feel like I can't express myself in a game, I might choose not to play it.
This encompasses a lot of different ways of expressing myself, such as customization of the looks (Tekken, Soul Calibur), choosing assists or a team (UMvC3), custom moves (smash 4, absolver), a lot of combo expression (Yomi Hustle), builds (League of Legends), or many choices in neutral (insert game here). But there's more options in single player games. Pacifist runs and (casual) speedruns are a great way of expressing myself in a game.
Skill Expression is very important in games too, and I would count it as a type of player expression.
Hell yeah
Vortexing is fun because it forces the defender to look for patterns in the opponent's offense but the best part is that it teaches the defending player to use active defensive measures to prevent the vortex from happening in the first place. It helps to build context to the neutral game which I think is really cool!
Talking about the player expression specifically, player expression is a combination of what someone values in combos (damage, meter, set ups), how the player likes to condition their opponent or play neutral (low risk options(ex. fireballs) vs high risk options (ex. combo starters)), and the character that they play as.
I feel like the expression debate in sf6 would die immediately if they just adjusted how combo scaling works. As it currently is you'll make some neat combo route and optimizing to get in more hits while also dealing less damage and getting a worse knockdown than the default bnb.
Love the game but it can feel pretty demoralizing for experimentation with combos.
Yeah this is my main issue with modern fighting games in general, there's no return on investment for higher execution costs most of the time. Why do 20 hit combos when 10 hits does double the damage?
I felt this testing combos in fighterz and gg strive
I love when you try to squeeze every single posible input to do a combo but nowdays damage scalling completely screws it over
Some will say that is to stop people from doing very long boring combos but those games allow for looping certain sequences so the result is even worse
"Limitation breed creativity"
People love to hype up the old NES type era and how developers used the limited hardware as a way to get creative with implementing mechanics or especially music. However, when players have to do that themselves they throw a tantrum.
Or you have Tekken where people meme that out of 500 moves a character had you only use 5 of them anyway xD
When people complain about player expression I feel its usually tied to a game they don't actively play or follow. I can understand the minute decisions made in fighters i play and watch all the time. But if I were to watch a game i rarely play or watch, like Tekken 7. I'd have no way of differantiating two players in a mirror match
That may be true but the only reason I made this video was cuz of prevalent sf players saying they wanted to go back to 5. Blew my mind
I've have an extreme amount of time in granblue and love the game a lot, but I'm gonna have to say the game does lack player expression. Vs lower levels yeah I can be goofy and do stuff the show off. At higher levels, not at all. Its not really a matter of playing optimally. Its just the vast majority of my tools don't work against a skilled opponent outside specific situations. Situations that its just the only answer. Only thing I'm doing is playing my opponent, with my characters deck of cards vs theirs. I'm playing fundamentals and at a higher level the way I fight them with one character is mostly the same with any other. There isn't any real calling cards or key things that make things nuianced. Sure somethings maybe better or worse for one character but they don't define how I play into doing something else non fundamental.
The new defensive tools talked about in the video imo aren't a healthy form of expression, because offense imo hasn't evolved into a state that demands them. In every modern fg patience is the only defensive tool I need. And playing stronger players patience is the tool that keeps them alive too. Offense needs to take risks and defense calls them out to counter. Until offense doesn't need risks until the opponent dies to chip from full life once they set up their assault, defense doesn't need any more tools. When say running up to reset pressure you can stop short and attack early to attempt to stuff out and counter a check. Which better defensive tools, that becomes your check. You remove that option on offense because the risks normally are the same. Reward tends to not differ strongly either but even if it wasn't, getting out easier is often worth a damage cut for the defender.
Using defensive tools in neutral sure can be expressive but versus what? What tools are your opponent using that demands such options? Could you not use a proper whiff punish move? Premptively strike to stop them before hand? Use movement or a moves hurtbox shifting to evade? What i'm saying as these tools are unneeded. We have good enough defensive options. They just demand you use them with more nuiance and the same degree of decision making.
And lastly defense really isn't expression imo and the modern modes of offense aren't much either. I've often only got 1-2 viable options at any given window on defense. I just pick the one I think will work for my opponent not because its the thing I'd want to do ignoring my opponent. Offense too. One could argue for combo expression and sure, but end of the day i care more about 2 things: am I getting the ending situation I want with the most damage I can for the resources I'm willing to spend? And can I actually execute this combo? Sure I can say "well i got 4 combos that will kill. I'm gonna do the really hard one that looks cool just because" but i doubt that is a strong genuine argument here. Doing combos is a fun aspect of the game but not an expressive element in how you play it. Why? Because ita a 2 player game. If defense is where I only chose the option I guess will beat my opponent and offense is where I go for the specific ender I want (sure you could argue that also is expression but my rebuttal is, you tend to chose based on how you expect your foe to get hit again next. In granblue for example if you expect your foe to have good defense might blow all your resources since you won't be getting another hit soon anyway and by then cooldowns will be back up. If you think they won't then save one to start the next combo. In games where ending with an air reset is a good idea that can be a trip up to your opponent to get the next hit. To me its less expression and more picking the right tool for your opponent.), then what do i think is expression in fgs? Getting the hit.
See neutral is where you contest with your opponent with the multitude of options that ideally are high enough you can't quite reasonably account for them all unless they are linear or very formulaic. Which is my issue with modern fgs. There aren't enough viable vectors in neutral to allow you freedom to claim your advantage however you see fit. And if games prolong that struggle longer you'd see more of it too. Most modern fgs have honest footises. But without the flaws samsho has systematically (not flaws of the game just flaws inherit to every action and risks) that make doing risky things more viable. Since everything carries risk for the most part. And unless someone has a hard call out it goes on for a good while like this. Most modern fg have safer neutral, but when you screw up or happen to get hit, you end up in a pressure situation and take a good chunk of damage. This means safer neutral, less risky tools cause punishment is way higher and in general your tools are more limited. There is little variance in how to play the characters. There is little room in many areas as to what option to use when and how to play neutral based on your opponent. Basically you can only make one worth while flowchart in these games. Now not gonna act like older games didn't struggle too with this but modern fgs take it to the extreme. Sf6, gg strive and granblue are all basically the same game to me fundamentally. They have the same core and same issues from it. Thus I stick to granblue because its the one I like best. Compared to say arcana heart or kof where the flow of the games are distinct enough to give me itches to play one over the other.
Hey brother. if ur tired of F.A.L.A.N.X....... you should try melty blood or under night, we quite literally have none of those as a system mechanic
I love Melty. It's probably the best game out rn imo. But I love fighting games in general. Falanx doesn't bother me at all
There's some truth to the idea that most oldheads complaining about player expression complain about options that prevent offense, but I think it's fair to point out that offense was generally harder to run in a lot of older games.
It's not just that combos were harder, Fireballs and anti-airs were stronger, meterless reversals were common, and pushback on block was high. Getting in on good players was risky and difficult, and staying in was pretty much impossible without the corner or multiple successful mixups. The combos and vortexes were hyped up because they were somewhat rare at high level play. Strong offense was a reward for good fundamentals and reads, much like how faster routes in classic Sonic games were rewards for good platforming.
Most modern games aren't like this. A plurality of players don't want to put in any significant amount of effort to have fun, and while I agree that this doesn't necessarily make modern games worse, I also don't think it's fair to frame people that think they are as boomers high on nostalgia.
Modern games do have fewer viable playstles and less combo variety, and old heads were/are better at certain things than modern pros. It's fine to think modern games are just as good or better than the legacy titles. In some ways I agree. But I hate constantly being gaslit about old games and being told they weren't as good as I remember.
Great points!
Maybe if oldheads were to stop giving newer games, so much trash, we wouldn't be so down on them
Who says it's only "Oldheads" complaining?
I think there's room for both expressive offense and expressive defense. Part of what keeps Third Strike going all these years later is the fact of the parry system: Massive risk for massive reward. Blazblue CF has burst, barrier, and just frame block on defense, so - yes - the majority of expression comes from the offensive side, but deciding when and how to use burst is a huge skill as is managing the barrier gauge as is learning matchups to the point that you can just-block reliably against certain strings.
But all of this misses out on an extremely important self-expression mechanic in fighting games which HAS been consistently dumbed down since the old days, and that's movement. Melee is what it is due to movement mechanics as are a lot of old Capcom fighters (MVC and Dark Stalkers, most notably). With movement becoming more predictable and less expressive, there are fewer ways to play with offensive and defensive expression. Yes, it's nice to have direct defense mechanics like DI or Burst, but expressive movement allows for more ways to retreat, approach, corner-escape, mixup, continue combos, evade projectiles, and more. Movement is what separates a good fighting game from a great one.
Movement, or a sharp removal thereof, is easily the main reason I don't have as much fun with Strive as I do with earlier GG games, or even BBCF, though given the subject of the video was mainly SF6, I'm not surprised movement wasn't brought up beyond footsies.
In my opinion, Smash Bros. Melee has the best player expression ever in any video game. I can tell who is playing immediately within the first minute of watching, and I’m not even high level player. I can tell apart Cody, Leffen, and Mang0’s Fox without a question.
On paper, what you said, I think I agree with. But because of how vague the term "player expression" is, I feel as though I'll never be sure we are thinking the same thing haha.
But yes, Melee is awesome
DI is a defensive mechanic that a defender can use on most every hit of a combo, which is why truly centralizing offense (do a 50/50 with X anime character) doesn't really exist in the game. TBH, if Smash had made DI more transparent/reliable/intentional in it's balancing, I think we would see more mainline fighting games take on similar systems.
You could argue that defensive player expression is even more important than offensive, because statistically speaking one player will always need to be engaging in defensive mechanics in 100% of games, and the act of being on the defending side is inherently more stressful and patience draining than being the attacker.
In a lot of highly curated modern games, there usually is "the one answer" to something when you're defending, and that's probably part of why expression doesn't feel as strong. If you're playing Guilty Gear Strive and Sol is mashing far Slash, what are your options that end the pressure? Literally only FD. A game where the defensive options are limited to having "the" answer instead of multiple possible answers is not only bad for player expression, but it also makes retaining players harder because someone would need to lab it out or do research to find "the" answer if it isn't something that they found out instinctively - and a lot of players don't want to do that and it makes advancing your skill beyond a certain level feel like it's just restricting you to find that there's only one answer to various situations you find yourself losing against.
Honestly, it just sounds to me like you haven't played many older fighting games. To say that active defense is a good way to express yourself as a player, then turn around and suggest that games like Strive haven't reduced expression and are just different in the same breath, leads me to believe this is the case. Strive has less defensive options than XX and Xrd not just on paper, but in practice, as well. I honestly can't fathom how you can try to argue this in good faith unless you have just not played prior GG games.
Even your example about SFIV being a vortex heavy game, while rooted in some amount of truth, comes across as disingenuous. "Think about what you gained in later games": like throw loops (which, contrary to what some are now trying to say, did NOT exist in most fighting games for over 20 years)? Or the loss of meterless reversals? Or the loss of 0f throw even, something you entirely neglected to mention?
While I can appreciate your approach in some ways, and admire you not wanting to take what the FGC says at face value (much of it is half baked and half true), you don't seem to be equipped with the proper experience to really dissect it. I actually agree with the title of your video, that most people don't actually care about player expression (or want to play a game centered around footsies, or play a high execution game, etc), but for seemingly the opposite reasons you argue here. The modern playerbase simply doesn't know any better because the process of removing meaningful variety from these games started so long ago now that it's all most people know anymore.
This genre has been in an "accessibility" fueled death spiral from a mechanical design perspective for so long that you'd basically have to be a crusty arcade rat to know it. Lowering skill ceiling and meaningful variety (not necessarily the same thing, but with the way most FGs are designed, they may as well be) has created the volatile games people say they hate, yet the moment you suggest reversing this trend in any way, those same people will reject it on its face. Which is why we're stuck with metered reversals, two button throws, and all these other things that overwhelmingly favor offensive play: because most people who play these games today don't understand how or why these games became this way in the first place.
It isn't that I haven't played older games. It's why I mention you can just play the older ones. I have no issue with modern games and love older ones like CvS2 and I guess Marvel 3 is pretty old now too haha. But my point is that with every new generation of games, this trend continues of people saying they want so and so attribute from the old games. My whole point is that games have changed and will continue to do so. But we also have resources to play those old games in ways we never have before with parsec and fight cade.
I love fighting games in general and I'd hate to see them stagnate because developers become afraid to try new things. This video is specifically a response to the hate sf6 is getting so it didn't make much sense to dive that deep when all we have to do is go back 2 generations of games to see people making the same exact complaints.
@@qmanchu But fighting games have stagnated as a result of these changes is the thing. I don't think there's ever been a period of time where these games have been so blatantly and obviously homogenized as they are now. Every game has some flavor of Roman Cancel/FADC now, every game has some flavor of DI/Focus Attack now, etc. The distinction between airdash and SF style games (even 3D games now) has never been blurrier and it's not for reasons of artistic integrity, either. These devs see that there's a limited amount of interest in these games, so they're done trying to generate it and have now moved on to trying to vulture the playerbases of other fighting games.
I think you are viewing this phenomenon backwards. Our FGC forefathers have admittedly failed us on this too because they have not done a good job of explaining why fighting games got to where they are. But the truth is, the period of experimentation already happened a long time ago now, and we're currently at the phase where the devs are doing their best to appeal to a specific target audience as much as possible.
You say that people were complaining about games becoming more streamlined two generations ago with SFIV. That's because in some ways, they were right. I actually think SFIV was relatively conservative in this regard though and BlazBlue was actually the far more forward thinking and influential game, all things considered. But that game also faced heavy (warranted) criticism at the time for how much it had taken away from the core formula of airdash games.
It's easy to say that people have always complained about change, but you really have to understand how and why these changes occurred with FGs, otherwise it just sounds like dismissive hand waving. Unlike most other multiplayer games, these games have actually gone so far out of their way to achieve mass appeal that it's not just a matter of people being upset that they can't win anymore. If you go back and watch BornFree's interviews with top SFV players when the game first launched, most of them were doing just fine in tournaments, but also lobbed legitimate and widely agreed upon criticisms towards the game. If some of them sound similar to what's being said about SF6, ask yourself if it's because SF6 is either continuing a trend or just barely improving upon these aspects.
I think most people agree that SF6 is much better than SFV was, especially comparing the state of each at launch. I think it's better myself, but I'd also be lying to you if I said SF6 fixes all the problems people have with modern FGs. Part of why the old scene finds throw loops so offensive for example is because they bypass not just what were once sacred cows of fighting games, but because they also create a highly accessible and replicable scenario where guessing wrong once on defense can end the round. Even the unblockables in SFIV, messed up as they were, were incidental and required some momentum to set up most of the time. Throw loops are seen as a simpler, less rewarding, but far more accessible version of this, and it rubs people the wrong way because so much of the game gets pushed to the side in favor of this simple yet rigged scenario. And there's no shortage of examples of this happening in SF6 or other modern games, either. It's all part of these games reaching the point where no dev is willing to rock the boat anymore because they all want their slice of the pie.
THANK YOU! This qmanchu guy doesn’t fully understand what we’ve had prior to this new age formula of FGs. I absolutely love how everyone brings up vortexes with SF4, failing to acknowledge that throw loops and instant 50/50 mixups are not much different than those vortexes, especially with meterless reversals on the rise. And when that’s all there is to the meta of the game, it stagnates and becomes so reductive compared to its former glories of yesteryear. And qmanchu thinks this invites player expression? Absolutely not…
You show SF4 vortexes as a bad example of expressive defense, and then later you show GO1 blocking a long series of mixups as a good example, but these are the same thing, GO1 just defended successfully.
They're not the same example.... GO1 has all of his options available and the round resets to neutral MULTIPLE times. There's no neutral in the vortex clips, it's all advantage state
@@qmanchu The round reset to neutral because he defended correctly, if in the Tokido clip Chris G had defended correctly, it would have looked the same. Like I understand that version of SF4 had strong okizeme and unblockables, but its reductive to ignore all of the defensive options you have in that game, while claiming that this somehow isn't the case in newer games.
@@lumiere245 Except in the cases where the oki was unblockable, right?
@@qspec2002 literal unblockables are gone with the implementation of delayed wakeup in ultra. player expression on offense in SF4 is pretty good, there are a LOT of varying playstyles in the characters, and ways you can use each character based on how you want to play. for instance, i was a claw player back in the day, and i particularly liked trying to run safe jump setups into high/low mix, even though that's not what the character is "best" at. however, on defense your options are: block, jump, backdash, forward dash (sometimes) focus attack and let it hit, focus cancel backdash, focus cancel forward dash, or red focus +/- forward/back dash (almost forgot about that one!) unless your character has some sort of reversal. but the big problem here is that NONE of them are options you have AFTER you have gotten hit. the lack of defensive self expression once you get hit is kind of a big deal imo. because the whole point of it is that you are never just watching yourself get beat up helplessly.
a few starting points for how to address this: killer instinct has combo breakers, which gives you its own RPS of lockout, manuals, and combo breakers. to me it functions as an interesting minigame that you play every time you either hit your opp or they hit you, so you aren't *just* getting beat up. or in the case of MBAACC, you have reduce, which lets you press an input within a few frames of being hit to take less damage. one of them is higher risk, higher reward, while the other is relatively lower risk and reward, but each of these systems both allow and reward you for trying to learn how to defend yourself, and i think that's a good thing. what i don't necessarily think is a good thing is having more neutral defensive options and no once-you-have-been-hit options. it's like, sure, having "take my turn back because you threw out a poke" is cool, but i think it's super polarizing and doesn't actually solve the core issue of not playing the game when you are getting hit. hell even real fights aren't like that. you should almost always be able do SOMETHING.
@@bofaybaykweh That wasn't Ultra
Man, you really do make some of the best fighting game video-essasy around. You're for sure gonna make it big one day!
I super duper appreciate that! I'm working on it! Trying to improve every day
Bruhhhh Sonic Sol be having a heart attack about neutral in SF6
Great vid, love this topic haha
(: It's everyone's favorite...
Maybe people forget that these games are competitive by nature and therefore can only have so much variety to begin with without throwing balance out of the window? I can imagine just having characters dedicated to specific playstyles (grappler, zoner etc.) being a nightmare to balance as is.
Expression can work in other genres like RTS where you not only have different playstyles (races/factions) but also specializations (strategies/commanders) but I can't imagine it in fighting games outside of the aforementioned types.
If there was an instant win button on all controllers, fighting game players would complain about their opponents controller having a shorter cord
Note that another thing I consider that informs the player (and therefore expression) is the drive gauge on itself. You can manage it in different ways. You can risk empty parries or blocking. You can burn yourself out for damage because you believe the opponent will go down in the next guess, you can play it safe and hold onto the gauge to have EX options. You can burn it to extend a string or combo because you intent to burn the other person out.
As long as a game has rollback netcode and some kind of mechanic like the heat system that makes it easier for newbies to pickup it helps grow the player base I started playing fighting games when if you couldn't drive across country then a game would be dead a few months to a year after release regardless of how good it was. I love these new changes it gives vets new systems to work with and makes it easier for newbies to feel less like they shouldn't even try
You rase a very interested point about armored establishing tools. I wonder if this could be the birth of new genre staple mechanic, like super meters or modern throwing.
That's actually a great point. I personally don't think it'll last in most fighters but people said that about EX moves back in the day too.
It feels quite different from game to game, WA while comparable to drive rush for most characters, only has the armour for the white version on the heavies, so its a specific node/tool the developers can design around "this character gets red so they can convert well off of long reaching pokes, this character has blue so they can set up terrifying pressure and this character gets white because they struggle to get around marge hitboxes" as opposed to sf6 where the system mechanics are completely universal and a lot of movesets and interactions are designed with these tools in mind such as pokes like chun li 5hp and manon 5hk being godly pokes that lose to random DI being a big weakness that holds those large pokes in check.
I’m sorry but this video is just a word salad, opinion piece of someone who has never played the older SF games to truly understand why people say there’s no player expression in modern SF. When we say player expression, we mean two things:
1. Being able to express ourselves through neutral.
2. Being able to express ourselves through our character’s moveset.
I talk about player expression through neutral because the neutral is the silent crosstalk communication that exists between both players. When there is a properly established neutral in place, it allows for players to express themselves in the trinity of the neutral: poking, spacing, and whiff punishing. When this trinity is disrupted, you disrupt the neutral. In older SFs, for example, this trinity was established whether it was ST or Alpha or 3S. That’s why regardless of the unique or busted mechanics each game had, they all relatively retained that neutral SF “feel” to them. However in SF6, raw DR bypasses neutral entirely, usually placing your opponent in an instant 50/50 situation. When everyone can reap instant benefits like this, why even play neutral? Because let’s face it, aside from execution, neutral is another FG aspect that is hard to understand and to play. Most people will clearly jump on the chance to bypass this because they don’t wanna do the dirty work of feeling their opponents out. I think it says something when Dhalsim’s rushdown is more effective than his zoning in SF6.
Or we can use SF5 where everyone abuses +2 normals, low forward kicks, and crush counters for neutral because that’s what yielded the most results. The priority system further complicates things by reducing the game to crush counter poking. Then you have vtriggers which was in some ways, a prototype version of DR in SF6. Poking and whiff punishing were strong. Spacing? Not so much when everyone is in your face with plus normals due to there being hardly any pushback on block for normals let alone specials. This granted easy-peasy 50/50s that anybody could pull off…and everybody did. Why? Because that was the easiest way to get damage and exact offense. So the game devolved into a specific kind of way you had to play in order to win, lessening creativity and reducing the amount of moves that were viable in your character’s arsenal to express that creativity. And speaking of character moves, let’s talk about point #2.
In older SFs, you had moves that your character excelled with and moves that went untouched. However, there were always players you encounter that used these moves completely differently and had people rethink bad moves that might actually prove useful. For example, Ken’s roll in Alpha 3 is understood to be a shell of its former glory from A2. Not many Ken players use it in A3 because it’s unnecessary. However, every now and then you get Ken players who use the roll as a reversal to get out of deep crossup situations or as a left/right mixup after a knockdown. But pulling the timing off was DIFFICULT which is why most players didn’t bother, hence the variety in player expression. Those with the execution and timing to pull it off could do so. Those without, found their wins through other ways.
Sakura’s lk tatsu is pretty unsafe to most cr.mks and some sweeps. However, the move recovers very quick and could hop over all these lows and punish them, landing a knockdown. The timing for the punish must be quick. If spaced correctly on block, it became more ambiguous and harder to punish. So it was at your own risk if you wanted to use the move or not.
Or Karin (my Alpha 3 main) who is able to use her rekkas to get in and pressure her opponent while keeping herself relatively safe with her slide, palm, or hop kick enders if spaced correctly. Fast forward to her SFV self and NONE of her rekka enders are safe except the backdash option which costs more meter than the others. I don’t think I have to explain, but this clearly reduces player expression by limiting players to use these unsafe moves only in combos instead of being used freely at your own discretion. In fact, many special moves in older games were able to be made safe if spaced correctly which incentivized its use and created more variety. In SF5 or SF6, about 80-90% of the special moves are for combos only because it’s THAT unsafe to use in the neutral. In ST and Alpha, shotos could air tatsu to cover more ground to make up for their poor walking speeds or to get out of the corner quickly. They could still be punished but with the way tatsus worked back then, it required some careful thought on your end as they land. That’s nonexistent in SF6 because the game doesn’t reward that kind of creativity or else you’ll get punish countered with the quickness. Imagine Ryu in SF6 doing tatsu to close the distance. I would be excited because that meant a free punish counter for me and I get to exact my offense afterwards.
By limiting viable options in a character’s movelist, you are effectively reducing player expression and creativity, devolving players into using the same moves and same strings to reap rewards needed to exact offense, and essentially making the game look homogenized and “same-y” as a result.
Ye
I never would have expected to see a clip of modern Freestyle Skateboarding in a video about fighting games, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't appreciate it!
this reminds me of vernias screaming at brent because he keeps using k rool's down smash
4:11 What's the song name?
Regarding 6, I disagree that we have just different ways of player expression because what V Triggers allowed can't be equated to DRush solely because V Triggers were not universal in function, which allowed the audience to see different tools whenever different characters were played. With the system mechanics so dominant in 6 on top of the game giving everyone and their mother an oki vortex, everyone start to blend together outside some quirks. In V, it was more like UMvC3 in the sense that what you pick even before the match gave people some identifiable characteristic.
SF6's defensive options don't feel like tools of expression because they are just a part of the guessing game you're put into most of the time. So, they feel like something you're supposed to do rather than you choose to do. Getting a Perfect Parry on Dragon Lash is merely an expression of skill, not creativity or lab work or playstyle, which are all elements you can see in both neutral and defense in UMvC3, funnily enough, despite its ridiculous offensive focus, and I think it's because there's great customizability in what tools you go into the fight with in the first place. Essentially, you don't have any way of making a "build" in SF6 in any way besides picking a character, and characters don't feel as different from each other as they do in most other games due to usage of system mechanics being the decisive factor in most matches.
I’m sorry but V-Triggers DEFINITELY were universal in function in that it allowed for unsafe moves to be safe and allowed for extended combos when activated mid-combo
@@bartdude82 V Trigger has a universal function only during activation. Off the top of my head: Urien's mirrors gave him pressure and mixup. Ibuki got resets and mixups. Menat and Oro got new links, frame traps and conversions. Gief got an anti-fireball and whiff-punish tool. Juri got FSE or a way to bypass her already unique mechanic. Guile got insane buffs to his neutral gameplan. Laura got a vortex or a dodge...
Edit: Formatting.
I enjoyed this video, but I will say I haven't really heard gripes about expression in 6 (at least not on fgc twitter). Mostly just gripes about it being scrubby/inconsistent, which isn't really the same thing.
You'd be surprised lol. I only Included one example so as to not out anyone or anything
@@qmanchu I think you could go a little harder on when it comes to making your case. I'm not super into FGC Twitter, but I do watch a lot of SuguarPunch, Core-A Gaming, Maximillian, etc. So I enjoy it when a video like this pops up in my feed but I'm always a little out of the loop.
@@qmanchu Haha I gotcha. I do remember people saying a while back that it's lame how hard the game scales a lot of the much harder flashier combos.
punk always participate in these discousrses so follow him
@@feintfaint7213 I dunno if what he does is "participate" but he definitely talks about it a lot lol
Depends on how one defines player expression. I personally think being able to do something only you can do or is willing to do that differentiate you from other players is the expression. For example, in SF4 without know who is playing, you can already tell its Sako doing the 1f links Evil Ryu combos, because its extremely hard that most pros would never opt to do in tournaments. Well yes, SF4 is broken, the vortexes, the unblockables, option selects and the wakeup FADC crap. But because of those things, it made the game super defensive, players tend to play safe and not rush in blindly because 1 knock down leads to an massively unfavourable situation that may cause you the game. And thus, you get to see players do things differently, their footsie patterns, their baits, their turtleness etc. Which is why we see Umeshoryu... Daigo literally walk up and did delayed DP to open up players that are too defensive and tries to delay tech. These are expression we don't get to see anymore from SFV onwards.
One of the reason we lose those expression is because Capcom made combos easier, the hardest link in SFV is 3f compared to 1f in SF4. Everyone in SFV literally are doing the same combos because the hardest combos are easy and tournament viable. The other big reason is that they balanced the game with universal mechanics. In SFV its the V reversal and V shift, in SF6 its the drive mechanics of drive impact, rush, reversal and parry. The solution to specific scenarios are universal to most characters. If you see a incoming, drive impact, you counter drive impact regardless of what character you are using. Against fireballs you parry. Everyone plays the same way because of the universal mechanics being too dominant and meta. These things made the game super balanced, however, players don't get to express themselves, they start to play more and more optimized until everyone plays the same. You'll never see a DJ or Juri not do raw drive rush and you'll never see a Ken not do tatsu corner carry combos or drive rush behind a fireball. Whereas in SF4, each character plays and feels extremely different because the only universal mechanic is focus attack and it is not the answer to everything. Most things depends on the character's own unique tools, you can play Ryu as a zoner or as a rush down character. Likewise you can play Chun Li as a defensive wall or rush down with her. And because the combos are difficult, players use different combos in matches.
Imo, the game with the best character expression is Marvel vs Capcom 2. Because its even more broken than SF4, even if only a few characters are considered viable, everyone plays them different because the skill ceiling is too damn high. The execution required to control Magneto is very hard, there are some players that can maneuver him well some just do basic stuffs. Same with Sentinel, some would do high difficulty refly combos, some does moderately difficult fast fly combos and others would just do basic and the easiest air combos.
What i hope is fighting game developers don't resort to lazy designs like universal mechanics. And instead design characters that are unique from one another. Yes, that would make it really hard to balance but it'll be a game where players get to play different from one another. More importantly, increase the skill ceiling. Make combos hard, like super hard. And make the gameplay revolve around fundamentals. No stupid modern controls and no drive rush skipping neutral. I literally see master players in SF6 playing like scrubs, playing with flowchart from start to finish with no consideration for reactional play. There is a reason why the top 8 players in SF4 tournaments are consistently the same players whereas in SFV onwards, its random players one after another appearing at the top.
Gonna respond to this so I remember to finish reading it later. Will edit the response once I do lol
You wanna play blazblue central fiction, I recommend playing blazblue central fiction, it's s great game
SF5 top 8 randoms? Stop, new games bring new players, deal with it.
@@luisbo3 Dude, i'm talking about the players within the same generation of the game. In SF4 it was always players like Daigo, Momochi, Tokido reaching the top 8, and when new contenders like Poongko, Infiltration, PRBalrog, GamerBee appears and reached the top, they are consistently at the top.
In SF5, players in the top 8 are typically different group of people with a few consistent names. New or old players can do well in a tournament reaching top 8 and not making top 32 or 64 in the next. The biggest reason is because of the lower skill ceiling in SFV. Core-A-Gaming has a video that covers exactly that topic. The game is designed in a way that there is more randomness and easier to play that players of lower skill level can take out pros in tournaments at a higher rate compared to SF4. Its very hard to random out your opponent in SF4 in a first to 2 or 3. But in SFV and 6, its very possible.
I used to play with Xian in the Singapore arcades during the SF4 era and i could barely win 3 games out of like 40 games. In SFV & 6 i could suddenly win 3 out of 10 when i match him online. There is a massive jump in win rates. The story is also true vs my less skilled friends, who couldn't win even 1 game against me out of 10 in SF4 but suddenly could win like 3-4 in SFV and 6. I've not heard that players do better against higher skilled players in SF4 than in SFV. SF4 maybe broken and boring, its a much harder game to play than SF5 and 6 because its a super consistent game with fixed wakeup timings, option selects and FADC cancel. It will always lead back into neutral and footsie play, which is a test of fundamental skills. In SFV you literally have wakeups of different timing, after scoring a knockdown unless its a hard knockdown, you cannot apply pressure or meaty consistently because opponents can randomize the wakeup timing depending on the wakeup option they choose. If you mess up your meaty because of it, you can be punished. Mashing jab is actually a legit strat in SFV because of that. In SF6 you have neutral skipping options like DR or dragon lash kicks or spinning knuckle where players can get oki pressures very easily which leads to guessing more than reactional play. There is a difference between balance and skill ceiling, SF4 is broken af, but the skill ceiling is incredibly high. SFV and 6 is lower but balanced because of that.
@@skychaos87 are the recent top 8s not pros? I get it, this is another fgc boomer dissertation as to why everything after 4 is not a real fighting game and “if it was an old game i could beat ya grrr!”.
Well that there is certainly one of the most pretentions way to title a video essay.
Got your attention though
This guy gets it
Well, of course! You see, that's the truly beautiful thing about "video essays" -- the real product is just the video title, the duration, and following the formula!
Seriously, the title's the most important bit for this kind of thing. See, you gotta put a title that really, really riles someone up when they see it! Because that's how you start getting those nice views coming in! Remember, you gotta get views, that's the whole reason we're here! Stop thinking about anything else, that's bad! Views!
Huh? The content itself? Don't worry, as long as you follow the formula, that doesn't matter, silly! You can say whatever you want! Anything!! Is your point only 3 minutes long? That's okay! Just include whatever topic you think is even just tangentially related to pad it out, just go for it!
You can even talk about Avatar Battle; literally *no one* on the planet has ever even once claimed Avatar Battle represents the death of player expression in fighting games, but you can use it to say something really powerful sounding at the end of your video! It'll make your argument about the core game seem really persuasive, don't worry about it not making any sense or even sounding knowingly disingenuous!
But how do you know if you're right about your opinion? Isn't that hard? Like, I'm someone who develops games as a career and I'd still be really embarrassed to talk in a really ultra confident way like this, even if I was right. But no, it's actually really easy to know: did you like the game? Did your audience like the game? Then just act like the game did whatever thing right! Just go with your emotions here!
It's okay if there's weird stuff like, "so much of the time spent in this game involves someone simply attempting to blind guess their way out of a perfectly loopable simple strike/throw situation, but SF4 is different because everyone had to blind guess their way out of perfectly loopable situations instead! Remember?"
Always remember, almost no one's paying attention to what you're *actually* saying, they just wanna hear someone talk about games they like, especially if it vaguely and superficially sounds aligned with an opinion they probably maybe had when they read someone's tweet that they didn't like last week. So just go for it, you can do it!
It might seem like people have more useful things to do with their time -- and you're right, they do! But because of your title, they'll be compelled to click and watch anyway! A ton of people can't help it! They feel and believe that they're in control, but really it's quite hard! Many people have serious compulsive or even addiction-like problems with their consumption of videos like this; sometimes they meant to do something else important and valuable in their life, but get caught by this and instead give you and others nice views for hours! I mean, I'm here, right!? lmao
What??? What do you mean -- of course it's not opportunistic. It can't be! It's just a video lmao, everyone does it! You don't know? So no, no one will think this, they'll actually praise you instead! You're really just constructing this weird Skinner box money printer, but they'll think you're a really wise expert saying important things, even though you're a person just like them just saying what they feel! People might even start repeating stuff you say! You'll basically become a really cool person; imagine your self-esteem after that!
And when someone points out any of this, don't worry, it's just funny! Everything's on your side here, so they'll only look silly and you'll always win, so have no fear!
Okay, so maybe you *might* end up with a video talking about video game discourse that in itself is quite ironically an execution of the most damaging problem that modern video game discourse has, but the people who understand that are still gonna click your video anyway! Because that title you made is so aggravating!! Aren't video essays so cool and informative?
@@whoa-vl2xcI ain't reading all of that
What upppp
As a grappler main, player expression is very important. But only when it comes to gameplay style. I love slow, big armored characters. But grapplers have been changing lately making them fast. Which I don't like.
i expect nothing less from someone with a kenpachi pfp
The intention and idea of this video are all over the place, especially pitted against the title. There are so many arguable and one sided points, that this would have been a MUCH better topic for two people to discuss. Well produced video, but all over the place lol. I say so respectfully, as a fan of the channel
Appreciate the feedback!
I think the initial definition you put forth isn't really a definition. It's more so a sentiment regarding the discourse. Like player expression is simply 'the variation in defensible player choice'. It refers to their being meaningful decision-making where multiple options are situationally optimal. Being able to recognize a player is just a result of the player's habits that favor particular options in said scenarios. It's the specator perspective but, not the definition by itself. It's an aesthetic criticism of the game's(and metagame's) allowances.
Okay I'll admit I have not watching the video yet so I might add on something here after.
Yeah my purpose isn't necessarily to define it with clear boundaries but rather that the boundaries are actually quite vague, even when you get specific. I agree that it's more a sentiment than anything, even later on the video for that reason.
@@qmanchu fair enough although I do think people want non linear player expression. The element of personal preference plays a role in where they want the choices to be though. It's very similar to character variety: most people want it but everyone has something that they don't want to deal with.
@evilded2128 I agree! And I still think many of these games still have that. SF6 does a great job of it, but it's made out to be a very linear game. At the highest level, I could maybe concede that for some characters but as an overall package, in SF6 is in no way more limiting than SF5
The way I think of player expression is rather simple-if there's at least a handful (let's say 3-5) of "correct plays" that you can make in all standard gameplay situations, then the game has good player expression. Solved games like Tic-Tac-Toe or Connect 4 are terrible for player expression, because there is only one correct move for all game states. If the best move for any situation is subjective and comes down to personal preference alone, that's good player expression.
That being said, I don't think player expression (in the way that I think of the term) is in any danger, and that Street Fighter 6 is an pretty expressive game. I play Chun-Li, and every Chun-Li I play against seems to have a slightly different idea on how to play the character, and that's really cool to me. So, of course I care. I just think of the ability to express myself through my character as icing on the cake. The cake is that the game is equal parts fun to play and competitively invigorating, and I think SF6 has a solid foundation in these regards as well, although there's obviously tons of room for improvement.
You say games with honest footsies and fireball wars are easier to play now than ever, do you have any recommendations?
Melee's D.I is dope for expression
The amount of player expression isn't the issue, the real issue is that it's not NECESSARY. Like why ever do a complex combo, or exploit an obscure interaction when a super armoured dash attack into super does triple that damage
I think maybe that's an issue with the super attack then. Nobody wants to be caught in a cutscene, whether it be a combo or a real true cutscene like a super in Street Fighter. The moment you take away somebody's ability to PLAY your game, you've failed. Player expression goes further than just a string of combos. It should be every aspect, from offense to defense, combos to footsie, and I think too many people get caught up on "but muh 600 hit combo"
The idea that sf6’s defence is encouraging “player expression” more than other sf games is insane. I don’t see how losing in sf6 by one interaction in neutral and one wrong guess in the corner is somehow better than getting vortexed in sf4. Both are bad but at least in sf4 you have more opportunity to guess right and the combo may actually have a bit of execution to it unlike sf6 meaning not everyone can just do it. Sf6 is a great game in its own right and will get better over time but you can’t claim sf6 give you more player expression on defence when in reality it’s just giving you more ways to guess.
Player expression in neutral and how different players tackle a characters tools and develop their own unique play style around them was barely even touched on this video as well which is what most people are talking about when they say player expression
I exist more in the "recognisable playstyle" camp of player expression. If you can have 10 people play the same character in a unique fashion from one another, imo you have a well designed game.
I care for the viability of creativity first and foremost.
I've always looked at player expression against archetypes. Characters have "best tools" (SPD, Dhalsim limbs, Bison pressure button in whichever game) but the way they use their "good" tools to get to those tools tends to define the players, especially when it comes to risk. In SF4 Itazan loved the big read, Snake Eyez would just walk forward with 10 seconds left and Hagejin would make love to sLK and all 3 were top level players. Supporting your defensive claims, in S1 of SFV we had Momochi who rarely dp'd and Eita who frequenelty dp'd with Ken, then they nerfed a defensive mechanic and expression was very obviously reduced. To be honest, mixups and vortex are where the least amount of expression can be found.
I'm expressing my love for this channel
I just love your videos man.
Idk what to say, they're probably the second best video essay content in the fgc after the legendary Core-A Gaming.
Thanks! That means so much to me! Improving everyday to hopefully surpass them lol
Fighting games are about doing what you **have** to do and not what you **want** to do. Some FGC people have this weird need to feel ‘original’ or to ‘innovate’ because they’ve tied the sense of worth and their egos (and their livelihood) to playing a video game made for teenage children. There are no ‘Style Awards’ at EVO, the only thing that matters is getting a W. If you wanna ‘express yourself’ by moving AWAY from your opponent as Zangief and hoping they will come to you, you’re DEFINITELY playing unlike anybody else but no one is going to be praising you for doing that.
The same people who preach about how sacrosanct player expression is always seek to solve a game by finding the optimal punishes/combos/strategies and then call others trash or unoriginal for using said established strategies WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY calling others trash or scrubs for NOT using the established optimal combos. Follow the rules, or you’re ‘playing random’, but if you do then you’re unoriginal and ‘the game has no player expression.’
Don't let Smash players hear that this is a debate in the FGC, we'll be -insufferable- if word gets out
Because yeah Smash is what you're looking for if what you want is player expression. Analog moves (drifting during a jump, charging attacks, recoveries with 360 different angles, directional influence, dash dancing, etc...) tend to result in that sort of dynamic appearing. But don't let us yuck your yum, fighting games are great for different reasons
Smash is a great example because I don't like ultimate much and I prefer Sm4sh over any other iteration. I like that way that game let's me express myself so I still play it
I've never understood the player expression argument. Isn't the endgoal to optimize how you play, resulting in homogenized playstyles?
That's the idea behind 20XX. When players reach the pinnacle of gaming, we might as well decide matches with rock paper scissors and save time
so funny to me how there's now a pushback against the overabundance of attempts to justify personal dislikes with criticism language
Yeah, everyone getting Heat in Tekken basically gave everyone a free,"Gimme my turn" move. I use it to continue pressure or extend combo damge. Not a fan of some of the new overpowered moves. Wish there were more defensiv3 options because it seems like most game only wanna focus on developing offensive mechanics for each fighting game.
Combo-oriented players want a game where their opponent is just the training dummy. Round resets if they drop the touch-of-death combo they memorized from a talented labber, if they pull it off they win. Winners of tournaments are whoever can achieve the agreed upon best combo the most times in a row.
If you want to perform ceaseless perfect execution, look into some rhythm games. To me a good fighting game offers at least 3 chances of interaction in a round where players have to think about what the opponent will do or react to what the opponent is doing in order to win.
After becoming a lab monster, I unironically had a rhythm game phase for this very reason
@@qmanchu Every day we live in fear of when Osu players realize they could be absolutely rocking everybody at Guilty Gear.
Some developer has to make this an actual competitive game mode in a fighting game. A combo contest.
for a while I thought smash was losing that as well
starting with brawl-4 we lost so much advanced tech that brawl or melee had and it felt less expressive, then I moved to ult and rivals down the line, and my issue with ult is defense felt too simple, offense as a result to me felt too simple, so I craved that depth and moved to rivals, but I could feel those differences from melee that made it feel too simple defensively as well. These days I’ll play pretty much anything of course, but I understand ult still has a lot of player expression even if it lost defensive expression from 4, rivals has offensive and defensive expression melee doesnt have and vice versa, dbfz to marvel, sf6-sf4 and so on, these days though I mostly play duelists of eden or megaman battle network because it has the manner of player expression I always wanted, the ability to choose your moveset, I am much better at figuring out a game’s level of player expression these days because I’m better at understanding and weighing options than I used to be, which lets me see the depth more easily laid bare. I hope people will one day learn to chill out and learn first before judging
Good stuff. I never even thought about the prevalence of armoured neutral tools now, but that's an interesting observation.
The truth is that I have not seen much player expression, I mean the vast majority always go for the same combos, and attacks, only a few moments can I say that there really is "player expression"
I'm pretty much on the same page with you, except for that analogy at the end bro.
No players making mods is not like the company coming out with a new game worst analogy ever
Great video though homie
It's literally the process the current dev team of SF6 mentions they went with for SF6 lol. It's not something I pulled out of my ass. They mention that they had new ideas to mess with from playing old SF games in terms of mechanics and art direction.
@@qmanchu Yeah I saw that part of the video. And I still think that's nothing at all like players making mods.
Reminder though I totally agree about everything else
I think you're right about sf6, but I don't know anyone who said sf6 lacks player expression.
I heard about people complaining about the balance of sf6, but from what I heard, sf6 brought back all the player expression that was missing in modern fighting games.
You can't compare it to strive by saying that modern fighting games are about defensive expression.
guilty gear was always about expensive defensive mechanics as well, and strive took a lot of the defensive expression as well.
You're conflating people complaining about modern games being scrubby and complaining about the lack of player expression.
There's something to be said about modern games losing their experimentation in favour of refinement.
Luckily, the newer games seem to go back to the more creative and experimental times.
Strive is hated for being too sterile, sf6 is hated for not being sterile.
Whats the song at 4:16?
I admit my personal "skill gap" is part of why I do this, but I don't use Gold Burst much in GGXXAC or Roman cancel AT ALL.
I play Anji by Chaining Guard Point moves to bait a Kou/Sou/KCFG
I play Venom with Agressive Trick Shot Setup
Would love to know how that would go online but when I had a chance and tried I waited over 20 minutes busying myself... So I went back to Survival Roguelite
XD
Amazing video essay, thank you!
The FGC really can't get the difference between player expression and skill expression no matter how much time has past holy shit.
That's actually quite easy to tell.
See if I win a lot, the game does not lack skill expression; If I lose a lot, then clearly it's because the game is scrubby and lacks skill expression.
It's like in a MOBA, I'm always the best player in a match; And if I lose it's because "X" diff or lag. FGs are single player; So that means, if it's not lag, then the game itself is making me lose. The game should be tailored to me, to how I play.
So many people feel this way on this issue and it's fine. But we really need to call it like it is. I'm the same way in some cases btw
I saw the Caba/Uzura EVO clip at 5:45 live! I remember thinking: this is the ultimate expression of SFV. OK, I got caught up in the moment a bit, but it was definitely hype and unexpected. The whole set was really great. Uzura Ryu was keeping up in the projectile war against Caba Guile making great use of VS1. And for those who don't know, Uzura changed his tag to Kakeru for SF6, so there was some real life foreshadowing going on there.
I was there too! Probably a few feet from you! I think Melty top 8 was happening simultaneously so I was between screens
Which are the games with actual footsies, and how do I find them? The big fighting games today are either glorified hacky sack or diddling the controller to climax.
Footsies is a great game with rollback netcode. And part of the point is everyone has a different definition of what footsies even actually is. Some people say footsies peaked with KOF98 others say it peaked with SF4 vanilla! It mostly comes down to just play whatever game fits how you wanna express yourself lol
As an artist I thought your acrylic/watercolor analogy was very funny, considering watercolors predate acrylics by about five hundred years.
A much needed video❤
Really glad you liked it!
I play alot of Mobas/lol and when ever I hear the words "player expression" simply replace them with "I want good high movement flashy moves that look good when I press the buttons" and usually it gets wrapped up in some sort of weeb aesthetic ala the wind shitter twins, riven or irelia. I always thought that if people wanted "modern neutral" with "good honest footsies" they would play games like ssb brawl, For Honor or mk11.
In brawl outside of throws/chaingrabs there is very little to no hitstun for combos meaning every interaction becomes a neutral interaction where you are only slightly at advantage or disadvantage but both players can still control their fighter, for honor(1v1 duels) is similar. Mk11 has just block defense which makes predictable extended offense very punishable and delayable meter burns gives will they wont they type mind games.
In these games outside of the bs like tripping(which you can turn off) or fatal blows, when you make mistakes you really did get outplayed and when you get in you really did earn those exchanges but people don't really want that; they want flashy op moves that make it look like they did something even when they were messing up the entire time. Games that spectators can have fun watching but players wont have much fun playing.
Well said, my good sir.
First off, where’d you find that remix of Yun and Yang’s stage?
The arguments about player expression always kinda rang hollow to me (partly because people tended to conflate more elaborate/variable combo routes with player expression, which begs the question of why don’t they just go play Skullgirls then.) I play a pretty decent variety of games, from 90s titles with fairly simple system mechanics to games with multiple sets of mechanics to choose from. In all of them I can still get a sense of my opponent’s playstyle. Player expression comes exactly from that - the player’s expression of their choices, not solely from what the system allows or restricts.
I don’t like Street Fighter 6’s mechanics, but there’s not much I can say to tear them down except that they don’t feel good and they reward a style of play I don’t enjoy. And that’s fine, there’s games out there better suited to my taste. Using my own distaste to call SF6 a lesser or shallower game would be disrespectful to the people who are passionate about it.
Great video, will definitely share it around.
Yeah my main thing is that most of these talking points don't actually mean anything. FGC twitter is strangely political in this way. You just need to find the game that let's you express yourself the way you want is mostly what it is.
@@qmanchu for real though I’m gonna need that Crowded Street remix lmao
@@tz_toast_rider lmao check back this afternoon. Gotta add links to sources too. Idk how I forgot
What do you mean that’s the only reason I play fighting games. I love grabbing so much. Grabbing is so much fun it’s awesome.
Nothing says "player expression" like marlinpie in umvc3.
wild assault is not a universal invisible guard break
Neither is DI. It guard crushes, just like wild Assault. Most people don't really know the difference so I end up not splitting hairs when it comes to things like this
What is the song at the end of the video?
Got the same question, i think it could be from a naruto ultimate ninja game (3 or 5), maybe even storm generations or 3
number of options to interact with IS player expression...it's not ALL of it, but it absolutely is. I'm not gonna use tremolo from squigly in skullgirls because it's useless & unless you dont know, it's great in the corner for otg for max damage but thats pretty much it. if im understanding correctly.
1- I do consider customization as part of player expression, just along with gameplay.
2- f you think SF5 has top character customization in fighting games, you just forgot a lot of fighting games.
3- Player expression is hard to implement, because it doesn't link to winning directly, but both can interfere. It should run in a paralel line, where efficience allow character expression, but doesn't break the rules or becomes unfair.
4- More moves do allow more player expression. But this don't need to directly become more viable strategies. Ideally, they should just become more routes for the same strategy. Optionally, they dont need to even be truly useful: just having them around is enough to introduce variance, even if they aren't even close to optimal.
5- Player expression is something the game must allow, but the ones actually responsible for doing it are the players. A solid meta may discourage player expression, but it doesn't erase it. A good game will have a meta flexible enough to encourage it, but the choice is always there.
5.5- Corolarium for 5: Expressive players don't play meta. They choose lateral estrategies, not conventional characters and suboptimal answers just for the sake of expression. This is valuable because it is fun.
6- Most expressive games are those that don't punish sub optimal choices too hard, allowing a very loose constellation of alternatives for use in movement, neutral, combo and also very diverse gameplans, at least in intermediate levels of play.
Tekken is top in this usually, but SF6 is a great example of low estructural complexity with huge sintactic complexity: lots of expression with few elements.
Two of the most expressive games imo were from Namco with Tekken and Soul Calibur. Post T5 they became flow charty, where you STILL have "options" or you have what works. Which is where expression becomes a problem. WHn you setup things to just work, why have so much bloat that doesn't? Which is how I felt with MKX/11 it was messy with how many movesets were just ass. Which really creates Metas since when you realize something was MADE to be bad. Especially when how they're showing frame data more and more. It'll make you think they'll avoid making moves to just exist to be trash.
On the face of it I agree considering the SF games that had THE ULTIMATE "player expression" Alpha 3 and Capcom Vs SNK 2 barely ever have 30 and 20 concurrent players respectively on fightcade
fuck sf6
I have to agree and used to hard in A3 back in the day. No two players played alike.
@@ExeErdna Even now. I've played someone who played the same character and ism as me and I'd mainly try to stay outside their effective range poking etc, whereas he would do everything he could to constantly be on me
i think you are right, i think games are more expressive than ever, and in current year we have means to play.. whatever we like... for the most part.
my only problem with fighting games in the modern day is that while sure, modern FG's do not appeal to me AT ALL. i can log onto FC and play what i actually like. this is relegated to street fighter and arcsys stuff the most. if you want to play boomer tekken where movement is THE core mechanic.... too bad.
your topic on player expression is spot on. the more expression the more "scrubby" stuff exist in a game. which leads the game to a cross roads. do they continue to focus on player expression at the cost of their simple fundamental core. or revert back and have their game be called 1 dimensional. well the FG space currently has picked the former and in regards to e-sports it's probably the better choice as much as i don't like it. but again thanks to community efforts we can still go back to the older titles. i just wish the devs themselves did more for their legacy. especially namco
People who say SF6 lacks player expression are bitches who smoke crack.
However I believe SF6’s design is actually a large step away from where the last generation or so of fighting games have been heading.
I know that you said this video is primarily about SF6 but I disagree with Strive being lumped in with games that just “Switch Some options out for others” since the grand majority of Strives changes from previous entires have been pure subtractions with the only thing filling their absence being damage which leads to straight up less interactions made between players than before. ( which leads to less opportunities to express yourself and actually play the game.)
Where with Street Fighter 6 not only did they buff every characters move list (thank god) but every new system mechanic operates in a way where the player is given an absolute metric shitload of opportunities to make plays and gain an advantage over their opponent through several different avenues on Offense AND Defense that synergize and lead into one another. (Health, Drive Meter, Corner, Damage).
Whereas with games like Strive and SFV the additional mechanics that surround their core don’t really build off of one another and just compound the very basic gameplans that those games are designed for.
Yeah…let’s tone down the exaggerations.
“Every new system mechanic operates in a way where the player is given an absolute metric shitload of opportunities to make plays and gain an advantage over their opponent…”
This paragraph is problematic because not only is there more to player expression than just system mechanics, but also the way the mechanics are balanced and implemented. The way you describe the mechanics in SF6 is how you can describe any FG with mechanics. Alpha had Alpha Counters, multiple supers, and A/V/X-isms; EX2+ had Excel Custom combos, guard break, and super cancels; Tekken Tag had the unique tag mechanic. System mechanics are very important for player expression but that’s only one piece of the puzzle. What about a strong, well-balanced neutral in place? Unique combo routes with that actually took skill and hard work to pull off? Freedom to use a character’s full moveset instead of certain moves/special moves being delegated to specific combo use only? SF6 falls short in answering these questions.
And in fact, you are not given an “absolute metric shitload!1!1!!” of options when there’s an obvious power imbalance in those options. Drive Rush is abused to the ground, being the focal point of the meta. Drive Parry incurs too much reward with not enough risk. Drive Impact incurs too much risk compared to its reward. Drive Reversal is useless because why use a potentially UNSAFE Drive Reversal when you can Drive Parry? These mechanics make the game feel same-y because while the game gave players both offensive and defensive options, they are not balanced equally. And furthermore, with their intent on balancing the game around these universal mechanics, you further lose player expression when everyone does the same thing in a given situation. Fireballs coming at you? Just parry. Want to start your 50/50 offense? Just raw/cancel DR. My opponent wants to DI? I’ll DI back or neutral jump in return. You’ll never see a DJ or Juri not DR. Or Ken DR into st.hp for instant strike/throw guessing time. The answers to these situations are universal AND optimal for damn near the entire cast, which forces players to play a specific kind of way. And when you force players to play a specific kind of way…you forgo player expression (*shocker* 😱)
Focus Attack in SF4 didn’t have this problem. It was the main focal mechanic but it wasn’t a one stop shop answer for most situations. Unique character tools that were mostly free to use at any time without penalty (at the player’s discretion) and varied combo routes with a diversified tier in difficulty (cancels vs links or a combination of both) heavily incentivized player expression.
This comment reeks of someone who argues “theory fighter” instead of someone who has experience with a wide range of FGs.
@@bartdude82 It sounds like rather than actually looking for new and alternative ways to counter the situations you talk about (Fireballs, DI, DR to Start Offense) you just seem to immediately give up and double-hand deep throat the “Meta” options, I main Ryu (widely considered the most standard character in the game) and I know for a fucking fact I have more options than Parry Fireballs, Counter DI, and DR in to start my pressure.
For Fireballs unless I’m full screen away I can use an EX Fireball to instantly win the exchange and gain more ground and usually Oki on my Opponent.
For Defending Against Drive Impact a thing I love to to is constantly bait and poke my opponent with a quick normal into a plus on block special only for them to try Drive Impact and I cancel into super to immediately shut them down and get Oki.
Why not counter DI? Because what if I don’t want to use the meter to DI?
What if it would put me into burnout?
And do you know why I don’t always drive rush on Offense? Not only to conserve meter but to throw off my opponent they made walking fast in this game for a reason, I highly doubt you actually get much out of brainlessly DR in on a player with any amount of game knowledge.
At around an intermediate skill-level the game puts you in these situations and gives you several options to solve each one, and if you arent being put into these situations it sounds like the skill-pool your playing in is not very high.
I only discovered those new options the better I got at the game and started to understand the systems better.
I love to say that it sounds like a Skill Issue from your end.
12:00 JoJo Venture OST???
Anyone know the name of the song at the end?
I'll update the description with links and tracks tonight. Forgot to do so before scheduling lol
@@qmanchu you forgot again haha
Generally whenever im around people that start talking about player expression the first thing i do is ask. What do you mean lol.
Because its such a vague statement. On top of that persons personal preference.
Alot of people get player expression confused with personal preference. Because at the end of the day how can they say a game lacks player expression when in alot cases they are barely playing at a level where player expression should even be in the conversation.
I think player expression is experienced at different levels and depending on there actual skill level it really explains what expression means to them as a player.
And so we end up in this..odd situation that no one really gets the point across because we are at different levels of skill so it's like we are playing two different games and having totally different experiences, so our conversations are drastically different. We are playing the same game and they swear the game is lacking all these things but fail to realize they lack the skill to take advantage of the deeper parts of the game. They have no hit confirms, they cant barely do bnbs let alone a consistent optimal combo. Cant block for crap. Yet complaining about how there's no gatlings or there stand D doesn't combo into 214C or somthing lol.
They cant even punsh a DP and crying about a attack thats not in the game anymore. that they used to spam in middle school. Like...bruh.
So this convo is really tough to have. And in most cases it just ends in me recommending other games for them to play because usually its just not the game for them. Or the game they still wanted it be. And that leads to other things i could say but..this is enough.
Good vid man.
Lol true, player expression not equal to player preference
@shutup1037 what? Clearly didn't read. Do you even know what true player expression is? Sounds like somthing someone would say when they have no idea. what should be vs what they want.
What is this. "True player expression" you speak of. Please tell me.
I do, it's the difference. But this is more prevalent in 3D fighters as opposed to 2D.
I usually express myself with Eddy on tekken
System mechanics in SF6 are marked by wild, randomized splashes of paint. That's no coincidence.
You're trying to say we don't value expression just because we don't want to watch the fighting game equivalent of someone splashing paint all over the canvas?
Player expression is the most buzzwordy of buzzwords. Sf is popular for a reason
To prove it let's count buzzwords in this video:
2:36
2:40
3:41
4:13
4:27
6:06 we made it bois. 6 minutes into the video
6:09
6:51
6:58
7:46
11:02 that's so true it hurts
12:40
14:48
15:08 argument from the author is never good
16:35
As I missed a several we can safely conclude the rate of more than 1 buzzword/minute
Exactomundo. The conversations you see around player expression are always starkly different from each other lol. It exists to start discourse
The issue that I have that DI and Parry is that they are both turn steal defense mechanics, they're essentially just a counter attack mechanic that's named something else. There are so many tools like different wakeups or mechanics that push the opponent away that would be more interesting overall. DI makes it so that the game has to be played with ones finger on a button that's a completely boring game mechanic.
That said, well thought out and interesting video, I gave you a like for the effort, even though I disagree mostly.
That's what it's all about baby. I'm not exactly saying DI and PP are fantastically implemented either. I mostly respect the developers trying new things. I like the idea of being able to defend your way out of any situation but honestly, for consistency sake, maybe that shouldn't exist. Only time will tell.
@@qmanchu Agreed, I just wanted to let you know that you had a great vid even if I'm not on board 100%, keep doing what you're doing!
Perfect parry is still ass though to be honest. If you go for parry you should have to commit to it, but fishing for parry is really easy and not skill based, just throw it out and even if you don’t get the perfect parry u don’t get punished.
I'm still on the fence about PP. It feels like a mechanic not for the top 5% of players to be playing with lmao. With everyone else, it's fine
@@qmanchu I agree with that, pro players will just fish for perfect parry all the time with absolutely no risk, but normal players don’t use it like that
What 3S did right was make it so parrying has risk. You mess up, you eat a combo. SF6 makes it too easy. I think PP is a terrible example of defensive player expression.
@@FapasaurusRexx yeah that’s absurd. They said they added parry because it’s a hype mechanic, there’s nothing hype about spammable no risk parry.
Me a fighting game dev who really does care about player expression 😢
Lmao I swear it's just a click bait title don't take it personally! Most of us do. I just think everyone defines it slightly differently. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that. We've just gotta keep open minds to that fact
Maybe its just a fact of getting better at the genre myself, but I do miss the feeling of older fighting games where I felt like I could watch the gameplay and know who was playing based on their gameplay alone.
I don't mean to sound rude but if you can't tell players apart in a modern game you might not be as aware as you imply.
@@evilded2 lol how good do I got to be for opinion to be valid?
Tbh idk why I prefaced that option with the fact that I've gotten better. I just recognize optimal play when I see it and that tier of play is more accessible than ever due to simplified execution requirements and social media making optimal play more known.
@@DragynFyre12 don't worry this is a thing people get wrong a lot, it's why I'm writing a paper on it. I don't know if you're familiar with optimization problems but, essentially there is a relationship between 2 or more variables where they are all dependent on the others. This produces a curve of optimal outcomes where all points along the curve are valid. I like to use combo structure when explaining because it's much simpler than having to talk about asynchronous decision making and risk reward in neutral.
When people say that a combo is optimal they are probably actually referring to a combo being DAMAGE optimal. But, of course you can optimize for any variable that effects outcomes such as positioning and meter usage.
Different players even when playing optimally will inherently prioritize different outcomes. This advanced decision making is constantly happening in all points in a fighting game.
Even two players playing the same character in the same way are uniquely Identifiable as a collection of habits. While executional difficulty is an easy way to tell one player from another there are many more subtle queues that are present in all deterministic, skill based games with asynchronous actions.
My explanation oversimplifies the topic but, I can't go too in depth here.
@@evilded2 I'm not trying to flex or anything, but I think I'm good enough to be aware that combo routing is a thing lol. I think most top players tend to route similarly because there is a general strategy that feels optimal (if not meta). A lot of the time that feels pretty obvious in modern games because of their design. I guess I'm more interested in talking game design because at that point it gets into why ppl route the way you do. Yeah you route for corner carry vs dmg but in modern games, the corner is so strong, you just route towards that.
Plus I think player expression has is a lot more than just decision making. It's attitude. It's patience. It's mind games.
I think this video is, more or less, on the money. Anyone complaining about modern Street Fighter not playing like Street Fighter, who then uses SF4 as an example of a "proper" Street Fighter game, always loses me instantly. When your Shoryuken can be blocked, and you can just say "Nah" and take it back with an FADC, you aren't playing Street Fighter, bruv. When you have an option select that completely nullifies throws, giving you the optimal result every time, you aren't playing Street Fighter, my guy.
I get it, it was the game that revived the franchise. I loved SF4, and played it for years, but man, I am so happy to have moved on from that shit. Give me Crush Counters and Drive Rushes any day of the week.
A nice level headed response
Great video.
I think a lot of the current narrative around SF6 is being driven heavily by players who were really good in SFV and now they're still good but they are frustrated because the way they thought things should work has changed. It's been happening forever in Street Fighter, a lot of the SFV players used to laugh at the SF4 players for doing exactly the same but History is doomed to repeat itself.
*stares in Virtua Fighter*
Script sounds like it was made by chatGPT ngl.
I'm no expert on fighting games but they seem like the more skilled you are, the less playstyles become available to you since fighting games are much more "solved" than other genres like MOBAs or shooters.
Guilty Gear Roman Cancel is a key to player expression