I think a good rule of thumb is comeback mechanics are fine as long as the player is never thinking "I wish I had less health right now." It feels wrong for the player with less health to be in an overall advantageous position.
Well, in Mortal Kombat 11 and Tekken Tag2/6/7... often, good players will just stop a combo before the opponent gets the comeback mechanic. So of course then, the opponent now wishes they have (slightly) less health HAHA.
One thing that frustrates me is when players say they should be rewarded for playing well, i.e., that they should receive an advantage in future interactions. It's like they forget that winning interactions already puts them ahead. Their reward is that their opponent is closer to dying than they are.
This is exactly what I was thinking. If getting hit charges a comeback mechanic, then it's just compensating for the disadvantage that comes from... you know... taking hits. It's even more meaningful in games like DBFZ where you actually lose a ton of power if a character dies.
This is what they're probably thinking: "I'm winning and I'm good but I can't work around this comeback mechanic, so it's trash." If they can't win despite the mechanic... are they really that good or winning that hard? I bet they forget to ask that question. These mechanics are there to make matches more interesting than "Player A ran player B over, GG no re." Yes, comeback mechanics can be done terribly but they aren't an inherently bad thing for a game.
I tend to dislike comeback mechanics cause it locks more interesting mechanics behind losing health. SFV without V-Triggers is a less interesting game with less interesting character designs, I just hate that I gotta get beat up to get to use the fun tools in the game
This is my favorite take. What if they just made it where each character was in this VTrigger state the entire fight? It just depends on the power level of the state of course, but why anyone would want a less interesting game is beyond me
You gotta think about the opportunity cost of not having comeback mechanics at all, because sure it would be fun to use V Trigger more often, but then you'd have no comeback mechanic or another mechanic that ideally is as fun as V trigger, which would have the same 'problem'. Comeback mechanics have value because despite what some players believe, there is some element of randomness in fighting games. In BB at round start, there's an immediate guessing game going on. If I'm against a Susanoo he can beat any normal I press with his 5B, which leads to good corner carry and many advantages for him. If I jump over that move, I can punish it and get a full combo which reverses the situation. Now I can mind game to try and figure out what he will do, but that's an educated guess at best, and if I guess wrong I've lost a shed load of tempo. Without any comeback mechanics in BB as designed I'm pretty fucked based on a single mind game I guessed wrong in at round start, and BB becomes an awful game. As it is, providing I have burst/overdrive I can at the very least reset the playing field with a burst or at best based on a successful guess in another mind game (overdrive used as reversal) equalise the health a little and gain my own edges. The fact that I get a guaranteed second mind game to try and win back off a bad initial guess automatically reduces the randomness of winning/losing any given round by giving me more chances to come back due to better understanding of my opponent. The comeback mechanic has literally improved the amount my own understanding of the game and personal skill has an impact on my victory or loss, therefore it has value. To use X Factor as an example, X Factor can take a match you were losing and instantly win it for you because you pressed one button on a character. It isn't a comeback mechanic, it's a comeback button.
One of my favorite FG mechanics ever, the famous burst, is a comeback mechanic, and you rarely see people complaining about that one. When something is done well it's done well...
Burst is not really a comeback mechanic, you don't *need* to be losing to use burst. Same thing with spark in DBFZ. You could say the same about X-factor, but it has a ton of other problems.
@@agni2051 It is in the sense the #1 way you gain burst meter faster than the opponent is getting hit, at least in GG, BlazBlue has active flow and etc, so the more you're getting hit the more bursts you'll have. It's not unbalanced, and it works a lot like infil was talking about in the vid, usually both get to use it, but still.
@@AgentBacalhau In BB the burst can also be used as overdrive, which gains value the lower on health you are as well. It also makes it more likely you'll have meter when you overdrive, which makes the odds of you using overdrive only to do massive damage significantly greater at low health. You CAN use it at high health or as a burst instead of overdrive, but this has a longer cooldown and means you're less likely to have it to survive a big damage combo. I think its fair to call it a comeback mechanic, but it isn't ONLY that. Whether you use it as that or not is a tactical decision that differs depending on character. BB has a LOT of stuff like this. As the match goes on you gain meter which gives access to rapid cancels, which can be used to make moves safer, especially DPs. This means that your defensive options get safer and more reliable the more meter you have as the match goes on, and you gain more meter for getting hit than dealing damage. These mechanics are literally what make BB tick.
@@agni2051 x-factor is a stupidly strong mechanic. But it’s not really a comeback mechanic at high level. There is a lot of counter play that the other player can do.
@@agni2051a burst/combo breaker is literally a button used to force your opponent to drop a combo that they otherwise wouldn’t, and return to neutral. It’s designed to get a player out of a disadvantageous situation caused by them making a mistake. It is by its very definition, a comeback mechanic designed
@@dianauwu1312 It was definitely a soft buff for heavies but it was most obvious in crazy jank like part of Samus's Up B killing you almost instantly. Bowser, Ganondorf, Donkey Kong and Dedede are always strong with three out of four of them having mediocre recovery options. Only one has a true projectile (which can be turned back without a reflector) but Bowser has fire which is surprisingly useful. None of them had great options to get out of disadvantage. Bayo by comparison can kill at any percent and kills FASTER with rage even without Witch Time. Her canon weight may be high but she's no heavy.
I'm cool with comeback mechanics, the issue is if the characters can't function in any capacity without it. Like Lucario in smash: completely trash until Aura kicks in, and you can't have max Aura if you and your opponent's stocks are at the same count. Not to say a comeback reliant character has no place in a game, but the character shouldn't be completely garbage without it unless its a troll character EDIT: maybe make sparking an actual burst and keep limit break as is. That way you could interrupt the limit break shenanigans when they're happening
I think a problem with smash comeback mechanics is that the game isn’t balanced around them, and most character’s with them excluding Lucario can function without them making it occasionally feel like your opponent’s character can just bullshit you with some insanely powerful tool. Though I also get that the developers wanted to add broken stuff like super moves and Arsen and needed a way to balance them.
Most of the examples people are giving are from games that are not really balanced to begin with. Smash and MvC2 are not balanced games, they are games made to be fun party games (tm). Cliched but true.
Man I miss the UNI scene so much. It was my favorite game to watch before the pandemic but now everything’s just on standby until we can have in person events again
@@ApexGale Kamone quickly said stop asking them though, because Under Night players were getting annoying apparently. I have faith they'll get it done.
Uni's GRD system is soo good, as it can work both as a comeback mechanic for you or a lethal weapon for your oponent, it all depends whether if you played a good defense or not, and if your oponent can open you and stay unpredictable, when you get it you can use while defending on a string to turn around the offensive, or keep it so your oponent plays more carefully and tries to win the next cycle, this ofc works both ways, as having it on the offensive opens up more ways to open your opponent and stick to them, pretty cool system as it rewards the better player and forces you to be it
Something a lot of people don't talk about in regards to SFV's v system is they made normals do grey health chip damage. Blocking successfully always gives you some v meter, even if it doesn't permanently effect your health bar. The grey health and visible stun bar also changes decision making on offense and defense. Someone hungry to stun or cash out grey life could end up making an opportunity for the defender by overextending. The person on offense could also make different decisions to try and bait a v reversal (which lowers the stun bar, which again is information both players have and can play around). SFV's mechanics are really well considered imo outside of the obvious balance issues currently with characters like G and Kolin.
an interesting question is comeback mechanics vs snowballing mechanics. i think snowballing mechanics are more incidental and comeback mechanics are made in response
I'm glad Sajam brought up GRD in this video, it's easily my favorite implementation of meter management in a game. I'd love if Sajam or someone else made a video discussing not just comeback mechanics but characters and system mechanics that function as secondary objectives to help you win. Stuff like GRD, character specific meters, susanoo special unlocks for example
I feel like the best comeback mechanic is GG Burst. You have to think where is the right time to burst, how much life you have left, if you can survive the current combo, how much of a match is left, how many rounds are left in a match, and how many other different factors. It’s also something to consider on the offensive side, because a burst can be read and punished. It’s also the tastiest and best feeling in GG imo. Those same factors that the defender thinks of are what the offensive character considers as well. I think it’s similar to KI Combo/Counter Breakers, but I feel like it is harder to use at a beginner level than Burst. And while the newer characters are different, I think some of the V-Triggers in SFV are things I wish the characters had normally in their kit, and not an install or one-off.
Rage Drives are cool until you play the game constantly for 3 years, interesting RD usage is pretty rare, most are now predictable and formulaic but with no counterplay other than just block and let them get their extra 50/50 after it, but if you happened to guess low then you're boned.
@@shiftyshitter348 Sidestep is much weaker in tekken 7. That in turn made the game hyper aggressive. you wont get launched if you block more, and pressure. a round ending with two interactions is your fault, not the game. Maybe choose not to wake up after being combod into the wall and roll so you can wake up away from the wall.
@@mmmk6322 "Just don't get launched"! Genius. How did no one think of not getting launched. Watch an EVO match and count how many rounds are decided by two launches. Every time you move or do an attack, you're risking 40~60% of your health. Even Harada admitted it in a dev interview, what the fuck are you talking about "it's not the game's fault" when it absolutely is how the game works...
blazblues overdrive system is a very versatile traditional comeback mechanic - defensively you can burst or exceed accel which is just another one button super offensively- you get an install which is makes you extremely strong or you can offensive exceed accel to increase how fast your overdrive meter recovers and boosts damage. There are many decisions to make with this
I like the comeback mechanics for their effect on the narrative of a fight. It helps build the rising action to follow the standard story structure. The fight's been going on for some time and the characters get a second wind to give it their all is hype
I'm pretty sure when people complain about comeback mechanics, they're only referring to one or two games, and not the genre as a whole. I personally love the OD/burst dynamic of the newer blazblues.
YEEES! BB did it so well with OD since it's a comeback mechanic AND a win more mechanic at the same time. Also cause it lets me pretend they didn't remove Unlimited characters(while they don't belong in the meta, they're fun as fuck to mess around with)
I'm not sure if it counts, but Baroque is probably my favorite one, It encourages meter management so you can save up for burst, and It's also a clever way to add mechanics for getting hit, but not making it exclusively a late game mechanic
I'd say comeback mechanics as a whole is good, but some comeback mechanics are done kinda badly or at the very least have bad word of mouth in the hard-core-competitive and ultra-casual scenes.
i remember a video about Catherine (a puzzle game with a versus mode) that talked about how the comeback mechanic in that game encouraged the player who was winning to come down and knock out their opponent to stop them from bolting ahead and stealing their lead, which feels like it fits into that win condition thought process you talked about as an extra threat to account for and prevent the winning player from getting to complacent
Under nights grd system is a really sick pseudo-comeback mechanic. It doesn't just reward a player for being behind during a match; instead it allows a player who's behind to make a comback by playing good defense. If you just hold it down for like 10 seconds you can win vorpal and then use cs to get out of even really oppressive offense with basically zero risk.
Something I wish was in modern fighting games was a user-adjustable "comeback mechanic." Imagine SF4, but you could power up your Ultra meter at the cost of more expensive EX moves or a longer Super meter. Or, have cheaper EX moves/multiple Super stocks (a la SF3) at the trade-off of an Ultra meter that is very weak or may take all three rounds to fill. I think it would be a lot more interesting if the meter mechanics of games could be molded to fit a player's playstyle (aggressive vs turtle, etc.) instead of being rigid and the same for everyone.
DoA5 does a good job of balancing it's comeback mechanic. When your health bar reaches 50%, you can do a Power Blow or a Power Launcher. The Power Blow gives you a decent amount of damage and allows you to manipulate where your opponent lands, letting you combo into stage transitions, danger zones, etc; while the Power Launcher is pretty self explanatory, and it lets you get huge combos. All characters have both of these, and some will benefit more from one than the other, but the biggest thing about them is that, since you have to charge these attacks before they hit, doing them outside of Critical Stun or Critical Burst is very risky, since it's super telegraphed. So you have to decide *when* to use them and which one would benefit you more at that given moment.
DOA deserves more attention, but we'll, you know, Koei Tecmo do their best to not make the public perception of the game appealing to a larger audience
@@DragoonCenten tbh it kinda deserves the bad rep it gets, especially after 6. I love DoA, it's the fighting game that got me into fighting games and by far my favorite, but it stakes it's reputation on it's sexuality and completely ignores what makes it so great - the triangle system and how you can interact with the environment to create insane combos - so it is a shame it isn't as popular as it could or should be, but I personally think it totally deserves that, considering the direction the series took
I really love the comeback mechanic in P4A, the entire game revolved around getting into your awakening or preventing your opponent from doing so, which each character was able to do. The extra super you got from awakening was usually so good it warped the game around it. Playing around awakening was of utmost importance and gave the otherwise simplified airdasher unique depth. Then they released shadow characters that were always in awakening and had to nerf it removing this depth in ultimax which made the game way worse.
Constantly having to play around low-life conditions sounds pretty lame Like having to drop my combo just so they don't get crazy buff lame :\ I'm on the side of not getting supers from getting beat up mostly because it's just annoying on offense
But shadows were really bad in 1.0/1.1 aside from fringe all-or-nothing characters like Mitsuru & Chie. Part of the reason was that they just didn't have any awakening mechanics at all lol. Shadows have way worse design flaws though
@@Minastir1 Having the same combo be optimal the whole time isn't a problem that can only be fixed with comebacks. Them's Fighting Herds, & Skullgirls are able to have combo variety without making your opponent super powered when at death's door.
the shadow characters sucked on release because Shadow Fury traded in their ability to burst and enter awakening. That's why you only ever saw touch of death Shadow setups with characters like S. Chie or Narukami. Otherwise it was dumb cheesy shit like S. Naoto. The reason being that the loss of defensive tools meant if you weren't just killing the enemy off one touch, you were liable to getting blown up. As such if you wanted a ToD on every character in the class and still had comeback tools, you'd just play Liz (who was still one of the worst characters in the game). Then they went to 2.0 and gave every Shadow character burst and awakening for free basically just making them strictly better than every single regular character apart from like, base Narukami. ASW really shit the bed on that update.
I don't mind the idea of comeback mechanics, as long as they do add that depth. I don't feel like Tekken's Rage Arts or Drives do that. Drives usually feel like a free, safe, tracking, long range mixup into MORE pressure, and Arts only express that you thought your opponent was going to use ANY attack in a particular moment. They aren't very expressive within Tekken's system because they cover too much. And they're buckets of damage if they land. It really digs into the potential to have an interesting exchange in last hit situations. I guess it wouldn't be that bad if we didn't have to deal with it EVERY ROUND. It's not even fun to see them when they're used so constantly, and in such a shallow way. I wouldn't mind so much if it was only was a match.
I love sparking in dbfz since it’s like X factor but made to where it’s not overpowered. It works as a mechanic to help when there’s one character left, or you can extend combos with it in order to kill a character
X-factor isn’t OP as a comeback factor at high lvl. I don’t think umvc3 would be played so much if it was. A lot of the problem with x-factor lvl 3 is for more causal players. It allows for easier tod but umvc3 is already mostly a one touch game at high level. It allows for faster mix ups but can you really say that it’s worse than zero jam session on incoming.
They definitely still existed into the early 2000's. Used to see old SRK threads about supers being unbalanced because you gain meter for getting hit and the last pure SF game was hyper fighting.
I still remember defending Fatal Blows and their balance on Discord with a couple of friends. All because they don't have frame 1 armour. Oh how naive of me lmao
Think fatal blows do a few things right like limiting how many per match youll see and making sure supers arent just a desperation movie that wastes all your meter for a sub optimal sum of dmg but i think they shouldnt have armor and should do less dmg with slightly better scailing. This was they still work in a combo and feel satisfying while also not being a degenerate 35% armored reversal. When you combine that with the "nothing is guaranteed" mentality the devs had for this game it just makes it too easy to catch somebody slipping with a FB
@@casually_competitive1349 Super moves in NRS games always had armor, and the fact that they can only be landed once per match justifies that even more. If they had no armor on top of damage scaling they would become too weak and it will be a dead mechanic. And dead mechanics are not good at all. Also "nothing is guaranteed" mentality? LMAO that doesn't make any sense.
I'm usually in favor of comeback mechanics, but Fatal Blow is a prime example of how NOT to do one. First, it's incredibly binary, you either use it or lose out, unless you got roflstomped on the first round and a Fatal Blow isn't threatening at all to the opponent, it's ALWAYS the right move to use it. Second, you can confirm it, you can combo into it, you can punish with it, or you can even trade with the super armor it gives, it's incredibly easy to actually hit the damn thing. And of course, it's the same input across all characters which is not that big of a deal by itself, but already makes e bad mechanic even more boring. MK9 and X weren't peak example of comeback mechanics but at least it was a resource you had to manage instead of unga-bunga whenever it's up.
@@RoyArkon ScrubQuotes X But no seriously in all of the previous games the supers cost all your meter and provided you with sub optimal damage for the bar wasted. They always did about 30-35% dmg raw and cost 3-4 bars in games where getting 40% for 1 bar was not uncommon. It was stupidly wastefull, scailed poorly and was a mechanic only really usefull for unbreakable dmg, panic armor and stlye points for beginers taht didnt know how to combo yet. Supers were really underpowered in previous games and unless your character built a lot of bar and used little for their combos and pressure you never saw them. MKX kitana for example built so much bar that seeing her X-ray was not that uncommon but johnny cage needed his bars for pressure and dmg cassie had the luxary of a safe on block launcher off her 50/50s that did more dmg and was safer then the X-ray so youd never EVER use it. MK11 gives you supers for free and there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOWNSIDE to missing the super . Every other mk game took all of your resources for missing it but mk11 doesnt. There is literally no case to be made for Fatal Blows being well implemented into the game. None at all. They are an ok idea executed very poorly at best and just a train wreck of a system mechanic at worst.
Not being as broken as X-Factor is far from "Good". you can have a mechanic that doesn't break the game in half and it still be bad for the game overall. Mediocre mechanics that reward bad play is still bad
FighterZ's Sparking is pretty good, although I personally hate it because it gives the player access to specific setups and combos which are only available while the mechanic is active. And I don't really want to lab stuff which I can only use for 20 seconds at most in a round which lasts 3-5 minutes. So my use of Sparking is far worse than my opponent's and I'll often get bodied because of that after winning a match. But that's on me
X-factor Isn’t a comeback mechanic. Like it starts life as one at low and mid level play and then slowly transitions to a snowball mechanic because of how brutal incomings are
Pokken Tournament sort of has an interesting take on comeback mechanics. First, the game has the synergy gauge which is just your normal super meter that builds up by either taking damage or by picking up an orb that drops when the game switches from Duel Phase to Field Phase. Secondly, you have a support gauge which lets you pick one of two pokemon and gives you an assist-style option that builds up over time and can usually be called once or twice per round depending on which one you pick. However, there is a third mechanic called the Cheer skill. Depending on the cheer skill you select, you will get a benefit depending on the result of the first round. The default Cheer skill will give you both synergy (super) and charge both support pokemon to be ready for the next round. If you win round 1, you get a small amount of synergy and it'll max out the support pokemon you didn't use while the one you did use will be on cooldown (you can still pick them, but they won't be available for a little while). However, if you lose the first round with the default Cheer skill, you get way more synergy gauge (sometimes maxed out if you took a lot of damage and maximized picking up the orbs) and you get access to both your support pokemon, regardless of if they have long cooldowns or not. There are other Cheer skills, like one that'll always guaranteed you max out your synergy gauge if you reach round 3 (but has no effect on round 2 nor touches the support gauge), or a cheer skill that will always max out both support pokemon whether you win or lose, but will never touch the synergy gauge. This isn't my favorite take on a comeback mechanic, but it was definitely one of the more interesting ones.
Comeback mechanics can in theory be a crutch for a lack of good defensive options, no? Is having both good defensive options and a comeback mechanic interesting or just encourage players to not engage with the defensive options? I feel like comeback mechanics need to be considered with the game’s defensive options in mind, SFV’s V-system being a good example of intersecting them. Glad you brought up Uni - interesting decisions around defensive options can be the whole comeback system itself for the reasons you talked about.
I'm not really well versed in the technical aspect of fighters, but I think SF4 did both comeback mechanics and meter really well with it's Ultra meter
I think it’s more those little things that reward people for losing (Things always returning to neutral or adding a combo limit) that I hate. The big ones are (usually) pretty hype and reward a constant offense to either kill before they use, pop it early to kill faster, or stop them from killing you
comeback mechanics increase the randomness in the outcome of the match. you might lose when you have 40% HP and the opponent with 5% HP hits you once. also when comebacks are easier, they also become less impressive. so a comeback mechanic that needs skill to use is better. worst thing is when it's like mario kart where the comeback mechanic is so strong that players intentionally fall behind.
Both players having a chance to use the comeback mechanic definitely isn't true for MK11, most of the time if you give your opponent fatal blow and they get a chance to combo into it you're just dead
Still love Persona 4's comeback mechanics. If you hit 25% life you got: Increased Defense because they didn't kill you An extra 50 Meter for free, and a new 150% bar. A new super. So, if you did too much damage off a big punish, they typically get another chance to play and the tools to even the gap if THEY'RE GOOD ENOUGH to run it back.
I think V-triggers get problematic when the character pretty much only gets online(or even interesting) when the v-trigger is available. Those are the type o v-trigger designs that i'd like for developers to avoid. As for KI, I feel like there's no instincts that fall into that category, every character feels whole and interesting without them. I think Tekken's rage is one of the best comeback mechanics, it doesn't fall into the sfv trap i mentioned and there's coutnerplay
Blazblue has the best comeback mechanic IMO, you could use it to burst and break a combo when you're losing OR use it to go into overdrive and negate the opponent's burst when you're winning. OR go into overdrive while losing for the high risk high reward. And burst regenerates faster if you're being offensive and if you use overdrive. And you can bait burst too for ultimate swag. So you can choose to forsake the comeback to go all in or play it safer.
how come? Both players will have access to it and if anything the one who was winning is still winning in terms of meter because they're the ones who's gonna get it.
Sparking was good enough. I personally think Limit break is very bad design, because it isn't a player decision at all. Plus, you can't play around it in the slightest since it doesn't have a timer or a baitable activation.
@@KittSpiken but then you have unbalanced play. The person who took the initial lead never gets to use the same advantage that the "losing" player evened things out with in the first place.
Limit Break is awful. Theres no counterplay to it. No thought to it. Its just "I put Base Goku, UI, or GT on Anchor so give me 2 of your characters." I legit commit robberies with Limit Break its so dumb.
I mean, I like Install supers/mechanics (Instinct, V-Trigger, etc), I just don’t like them tied to ”revenge meters” that mainly/only build through taking damage, which is what make them a comeback mechanic. There’s no reason Instinct & V-Trigger couldn’t be tied to a non-revenge style meter, or even just be implemented into the regular super meter (as is the case with Soul Calibur 6’s Soul Charge mechanic), except for the designers desire to give the losing player an increased chance to make a comeback. Which is fine, I just don’t personally think it’s a very fun nor interesting gameplay design, and I’d even argue it’s a net negative for spectators in the long run by making comebacks less rare and special.
I suggest watching Core-A-Gaming's "Analysis: reducing the skill gap" video if you haven't already. Comeback mechanics may be flashy and stylish, but making comebacks more likely makes them a lot less exciting. This is why moment 37 and JW comeback in mvc2 I think it was are important to the fgc. They are and were nearly impossible to pull off, that's why they made a lot of noise and why they are remembered. It is something to be considered.
Bold of you to think that people here haven't watched at this point There is that but in general they can add something more to the gameplay,they aren't necessarily bad nor necessarily good,they are there and this video highlights those that made them good and interestring Btw,Core-A gaming isn't always right,especially at this point,many things in that video are now either very exaggerated,fixed or made them seem like they are worse than they actually are
Have you ever seen people try to play UMVC3 without x-factor? It was super boring. When even the worst comeback mechanic can make a game more exciting, i call bs on comeback mechanics making games less exciting.
Justin wong umvc3 evo run in 2014 is also just as if not more legendary especially that x-factor cancel with akuma. But let us look at legendary moment from marvel 3. DK vs Jan. Dual Kevin plays deadpool Dante Hawkeye while Jan is left with solo haggar. This is 9.5 to 0.5 match up. However Jan successful navigates the projectiles and lands himself a happy birthday. Now in a game without x-factor he wouldn’t be able to kill. He would have to reset deadpool another time. Then get a hit on Dante. And then get two hits on Hawkeye. These are all 9-0. Match ups. Maybe it would encourage more skill from Jan but it’s also impossible. With x-factor he is able to kill both deadpool and Dante. And then get a hit on Hawkeye securing the game
@@kevl0rneswath x-factor isn’t even bad except for Vergil and Phoniex. Vergil is a strong character in his own right even without x-factor and Phoniex has her own mechanics that amplify x-factor
The issue surrounding the discourse around comeback mechanics has always been the terminology itself. IIRC, Capcom called Ultras a comeback mechanic to counter snowballing - I may be wrong here, though. The fact that mechanics like Ultras are built up from losing doesn't do them any favors. It's a perception thing, though. Both players have access to the same mechanics (relatively). It all boils down to one debate: should there be preventative measures against snowballing?
I think a manually activated comeback move that puts you at a disadvantage the next round could be an interesting dynamic (can't be used in a closeout game for either player). For example, activating Rage in Tekken to help close out round 1, and then and then starting round 2 with 75% health. Possibly stack the negative effect if used in consecutive rounds. Could make for some epic reverse 3-0's that feel earned and not cheap. Go down 0-2, then Rage and win by the skin of your teeth twice to make it 2-2, then outplay your opponent at half health in the final round. Not sure how well it would work but I like the idea.
Ultimately, it's a tool in the game. The player that better utilizes their tools is the one that is going to win. Sure, the game could be balanced in a way where that tool is bad or harmful to the overall game. This is true of all the other tools, combos, fireballs, grapples, and other meters have all also had this problem. Having something that lets you stop the other person's momentum or do explosive damage can lead to exciting gameplay, and by making it situational it lets you give the character a tool to combat bad matchups without giving them an overwhelming edge. Ultimately, I feel it is a potentially exciting and interesting mechanic
Sports also have comeback mechanics. In Hockey you pull the goalie. Baseball has kamikaze plays. I call it a viable part of the whole competitive milieu.
Anyone who complains about comeback mechanics being a new thing needs to take a history dive. SNK has implemented comeback mechanics as early as Fatal fury 1!
And because of this, SNK has the best comeback mechanics(besides guard cancelling in KOF '95. That game's version of GC is straight up broken(in MAX mode, do ANY special/super special move while in block stun of ANY special/super special move).).
I just don’t quite understand some games that gives comeback mechanics when the game already had many tools/mechanics that you can use to comeback and not need a mechanic that losing gives you tools to win, like you can literally use supers, character’s tools, shimmy and invincible DP just by being smart to use it. To me, It’s more interesting to see a losing player in a disadvantage can comeback with smart reads and tools they can use like for an example, CSGO/Valorant ace or clutch when a player can save or comeback the game by just relying raw aim skill and map awareness without a comeback mechanic, like maybe the last remaining player gets a buff to help it get a clutch, it’s like a pity reward. Just take an example of an Okizeme situation, the knockdown person is in a disadvantage and they need to read opponent’s attack to save themselves from the situation. They have tools to save themselves without a comeback mechanic to lock a tool if they’re in a disadvantage to save themselves. Bottomline is that I don’t want games to lock mechanics for comeback or separate the mechanic cuz it’s like rewarding the player for losing in my opinion. Let the mechanic be usable at all times with risk and reward or it needs meter like a invincible DP or super.
The case of Urien and having Aegis, being a 3rd strike staple and key part of his moveset, it would feel weird not having aegis at all. But in 3rd strike it was a super, they just decided to lump it in through the V-system instead. He could've had it as a super in SFV too and something completely different for his trigger. My take on comeback mechanics is that they are fine as long as they add interesting gameplay and decisionmaking without being super oppressive. Need reasonable ways to counter them if used poorly, as they should require a degree of thought and execution. Mashing out wake up ultras/rage arts that get blocked and countered vs tacking them on a roundwinning combo
That's kind of the main reason why I'm not a fan of V-Triggers, because it just feels like a lot of characters are restricted by not having access to some of those moves it grants all the time.
@@dyldragon1 while it does allow for balancing characters around powerful triggers that allow you to do crazy shit i agree with you in that feeling great in trigger does not make up for feeling lackluster outside of it. Nobody played Phoenix in mvc3 for regular old Jean, but for the insanity that was Dark Phoenix
it's funny that ultras in SF4 didn't come up; the discourse around comeback mechanics was HUGE at the time. and unlike v-trigger in SF5, there's no way to build it other than taking damage. (yes, you can use focus to take temporary damage and build it, but that's still putting your health at risk.)
10:28 on late game. Some games like umvc3, mvc2 and power rangers have a very important late game to think about. Consider people who snap in assist/end game characters to try and kill them. Example: Vergil, Phoenix, Commando, Eric, Jen . For games like cvs2 or kof considering how to build bar or preserve bar for later rounds/character often make the difference between a win and a loss. Metter management is hype
Honestly, I think Blasted was just talking about Tekken. Tekken doesn;t need rage damage, comebacks used to happen in Tekken without rage and damage. rage art and rage drive can stay, but the increased damage is not really fair.
Ah, man. X Factor was the best! I always played Hulk anchor and tried to wipe my opponent's team off it. The design was awful, but it was the only way I got any wins. :P
The only thing I have issues with is calling things like X-factor and Sparking Blast since they aren't really a comeback mechanic. Both players have access to the resource. A comeback mechanic naturally would have to be one-sided IMO to really facilitate a comeback.
They get stronger as you lose characters, which means that if you are doing worse than your opponent, your XF/SB will be stronger than theirs. That's a textbook comeback mechanic.
Do you think it's possible to have a good comeback mechanic that's built into a character's moveset? Not sure if traditional fighting games have an equivalent but smash has characters like Joker with Arsene and Lucario with Aura
Aura is actually cool (except in Sm4sh where there already was Rage and it got out of hand). Lucario is somewhat reliant on the mechanic, so it’s less comeback mechanic and more fundamental to the character.
I think it's also interesting to point out that nobody ever says things like this about any other mechanic, except comeback mechanics. People have been mashing out invincible reversals and getting lucky wins since the 90s, yet you lose one match to someone's lucky rage art and decide that all comeback mechanics need to go? Even in Tekken there have been moves way more absurd than any rage drive or rage art ever was, but people tape those nostalgia goggles to their face and decide that because X character's Rage Drive is too strong the entire system should be scrapped. No one says all invincible DPs should go because their opponent mashed out a DP while in blockstun and won. It's absurd on it's face honestly.
In Smash comeback mechanics are specific to just a handful of characters. Most dont have access and the ones that do, have characters specific mechanics that unique to them. They can be arguably balanced (I guess) but would you say thats ok in that context? Its not a universal mechanic so i would assume its kinda just dumb when a character has one
Well, then we have Yoshimitsu, who can hurt himself to get rage... (And I don't just mean stabbing himself, there's ways to lose a low amount of health for those "I almost have rage" scenarios.)
Nah I don't think you'd agree with this in certain situations. There are plenty of possible unhealthy comeback mechanics that would required necessarily hurting yourself.
The most sensible comeback mechanic that immediatrly comes to mind imo is Baroque from Tatsunoko vs Capcom. You spend all of your red health for extra damage and combo potential. Another honorable mention is Awakening in Persona 4 arena.
Awakening is one of the mechanics I hate in that game. It rules the game in a really intrusive way IMO. Baroque is great though, I agree there. I think Sam Sho Rage Gauge in both SS5S and SS7 is excellent too.
@@meathir4921 Hmm, I guess I can see how you interpret it as intrusive. Because when you go awakened, you essentially have to play a different way when you activate it. But I would argue thats not necessarily a bad thing. Start of round yu plays different than end of round 1 awakened yu whereas start of round 1 Vergil plays the same as level 3 xfactor Vergil. Xfactor didn't offer as many upgrades to the character as Awakening did(not to be confused, Im not saying Awakening overall is a better mechanics in terms of winning a game, we all know xfactor wins games. Im just referring to xfactor just giving you power, speed and health regen vs Awakening giving you a new moveset, more meter, damage and defense boost).
@@jme-james That’s not really what I have a problem with, but I didn’t really explain myself well so that’s on me. The reason I find it intrusive is because it only becomes a factor when someone gets low. You spend ~60% of a health bar ignoring the mechanic completely and then suddenly you have to worry and temper your combos or get punished. Ironically, it’s a comeback mechanic that punishes new players who are less aware of how to deal with it and doesn’t really make the game more interesting for veteran players since it doesn’t really change how the game works fundamentally, more than it just goes “hey have some free shit because you’re below a health threshold.” There’s nothing wrong with that inherently but it is contradictory to most comeback mechanics’ design, same with Limit Break in DBFZ versus Sparking. It was one of the things that turned me off from P4A though so maybe I’m missing something but this was always my impression. I compare this to something like Rage Gauge in Sam Sho where it doesn’t feel like a freebie to hit max Gauge. The Gauge is tuned per character, the length of time too. Characters unlock tools and not just comeback focused ones like a flashy super, moves become better and some characters build entire strategies around their Gauge because of it. And then there’s also Rage Burst and I can keep going but I think you hopefully get the point. In Sam Sho, the comeback mechanic IS the game, not added to the game, and you care about the mechanic from second 1 of round 1 to the final hit of the final round (unless you both burst lol, but that’s the point). You could take Awakening away from P4A and whilst it would be a different one I don’t think the fundamentals of the game change very much. In Sam Sho the game doesn’t work without it. I can also discuss Baroque in the same way; it’s a such a ubiquitous and strong tool to use that it’s fundamental to how the game works, but if you lean into it as a comeback mechanic it has both great risk but actually actively makes you have less effective health. Efficient Baroqueing chip damage is powerful and cheap but it makes that chip permanent. But trying to greed and save the health might make you lose neutral/get opened up and now you’ve taken a full combo and have a shit ton of blue life that you have to think about Baroquing. It permeates the whole game from the moment someone gets hit. It’s not something that comes into play only at the end of a round.
@@meathir4921 Never played Samsho so alot of that is new to me but I get the jist of it. Sounds like you're saying the comeback mechanic in samsho is heavily integrated in the game that taking it out will essentially destroy the game. Which is cool, but wouldn't that not be called a comeback at that point and just a mechanic/feature of the game? Perhaps I just need to play or watch it to understand so I'll just concede and move on. Maybe my definition of a comeback mechanic is too shallow but I feel P4A and TvC fit the bill very well: a mechanic that gives you a massavive boost but you still at a real risk of losing. While I understand Baroque could and would be used at any time of the game and in neutral, you still sacrificing red health that could not be regained at all. In other tag games like DBFZ, the marvel series and BBTAG, depending on the player, characters and tactis you were using, seeing red health was a sign to typically gtfo there and tag a new character in. Which you could still do even in TvC. But you also had the choice of Baroque which was ALWAYS risky to do whether if you successful in winning the neutral/getting the hit or not(at least on paper). Doing Baroque was putting you that closer to death which I think all comebacls should do. Persona 4 arena imo was kinda tge same way though arguably less significantly. I believe tvcs red health paralelle is Persona's learning curve to play the same character differently now that it's active. I understand it's not that big a risk to go intp training mode and learning new combos now that you're almost dead vs actively killing youraelf but, meh. Both are situations neither player wants to be in.
@@jme-james Awakening's defense boost is a bit odd if you take into account Blazblue's damage and Health amounts as comparison. The normal health in P4A is 9500, and in Blazblue it's 11500. However if you check damage numbers for combos in both games, P4A is only a little behind Blazblue's despite having almost 20% less health. However if you factor in maximum Awakening health (9500-(9500*0.35)+(9500*0.35/0.625)) it comes out to 11,495 which is effectively just Blazblue's health total of 11500. Awakening's defense values just normalize P4A's damage to health ratios to Blazblue's damage to health ratios.
I have never really gotten the hate for comeback mechanics. Most super attacks in fighting games, even far back in the golden days, would be considered comeback mechanics. Rage from Samurai Shodown and Desperation moves from KOF (that’s why they’re called DMs for the folks who never played the older games) are good examples of what I’m talking about.
Tbh I think comeback mechanics work in fighting games because the nature of winning in fighting games means the losing player can be NOT PLAYING like literally not doing ANYTHING AT ALL in a lot of cases. There are obviously examples of bad comeback mechanics (UMVC3 X-Factor, Smash 4 Rage) in fighting games but I don't think comeback mechanics as a concept are bad.
@@malcovich_games that's meaningless then. That's like saying heavy punch is a comeback mechanic because you can do it while losing when it has zero basis on your HP.
Well, think about it this way: it aint simply poking the opponent to death with HP but more of "if i can just score a few hits in quick succession i can stun them and make huge comeback" so I guess i should be saying that dizzy is a mechanic that aids in a comeback but not a true comeback mechanic.
I was thinking about this recently. I don't really play SFV but on paper I really like how the whole V-system shakes out for Ryu. Since parrying rewards you with V-meter a skilled player is always being pushed to implement as many parries into their playstyle as they can (which probably involved getting good reads) without getting too predictable so they can install and become even _more_ dominant. Sounds like a really fun risk/reward. Does it actually shake out like that? I dunno, I don't play SFV and Ryu is probably too low tier to really get pushed, but I think they had some fantastic ideas going on.
I agree with James Chen on this one. Comeback mechanics make games very exciting for spectators but for players it's just frustrating. At least to me you feel cheesed when you're winning and then get steam rolled backwards. Just not a fun feeling especially when it's a mechanical thing and not a skill thing (mainly).
To use a game I like as a point of reference, I think kof has some of the best comebacks to watch and execute for a few reasons. your meter increases faster while blocking successfully. In a game where you have extensive movement and offensive options it's interesting that blocking gets you probably the most meter, which works well since some of your defensive options require 1 bar. you also get a decent amount of meter while getting beat up because you are gaining meter and not using any of it. Plus the meter capacity raises as you lose characters.If you are winning outright and your opponent does use this to his advantage and manages his meter well he can get a comeback that can easily be seen as earned because he actively managed his meter in order to reverse ocv. So he basically did what you did to him just with his last character and his back against the wall because you can easily do the same with your last character and shut down his reverse ocv because the mechanic is universally balanced. It feels fair since it's common to every character. Where as games like sfv, managing v trigger is almost automatic, and depending on the character the v trigger can seem completely unfair. So I can understand why people get frustrated when they are winning the entire round and the opponent gets a massive buff for simply getting his ass beat in the neutral on each round while making zero decisions to manage his comeback. It's like they get rewarded for making a ton of bad decisions, get buffed, make a couple of good ones, and gg. That feeling of having to climb back with your back against the wall while intelligently managing your resources throughout the entire fight just isn't there; it's more about how much time you have left on your trigger activation, making two or three good decisions, and how good your character's v-trigger is. I don't think v-trigger is a bad idea in general; I just think it's a bad idea in street fighter 5 and doesn't really work with the rest of the game's mechanics in how it's implemented. It completely disrupts the flow of the game and says "fuck it" to all of the game's mechanics, while arguably creating even more imbalance to an already unbalanced game. it really feels like the game caters to less experienced players in order to make them feel like they have a chance. Even in a game like Samsho where there are plenty of comeback mechanics left and right, it still manages to seem fair and balanced while also giving you a heart attack. The Zetsumei Ougi/ssm, Rage Meter, WFT, Rage Explosion, weapon catches, and issen all seem pretty fair despite some being much better than others (oh and shiz's Crazy downpour/KDP) . You can even consider weapon deflects and weapon catches as well as deep jumps as a pseudo comeback mechanic due to the damage potential or the benefits of disarming your opponent. This game is litteredwith comebacks, and of these mechanics are considered fair despite how ridiculously strong they are because of how they work so well with the game as a whole, and how balanced they are considering the risk vs reward. The game really finds this strange middle ground of catering to new players without completely affecting experienced players with "cheap baby-proof mechanics."
I think comeback mechanics are much better when they are actually new moves or mechanics for specific characters, like most V-triggers I feel, Aegis being the prime example. I personally don't find them as fun or interesting when they are just a power boost, like sparking or X-factor (for the most part).
I know youre not a smash head, but im surprised you didnt mention smash 4 rage. As a quick example, samus had a combo that was late hit dash attack into screw attack and that killed at 0% if Samus was at 125ish %, people got HEATED when that happened
Sajam I’m extremely surprised you didn’t mention resonance blaze in BBTAG? What are your thoughts? It would be great to hear back from you on your opinion if it adds/subtracts from the overall gameplay?
Im not Sajam, but I think it's a pretty eeak comeback mechanic honesly. Sure it leta you do some sweet ass combos, but it's nothing too game changing. It doesn't change your character in ways that let you single handedly open up an opponent. You always want two charactrrs as oppossed to one. Not to me tion most characters can't activate it reliably.
Half of the problem I have with fuckin fatal blows is the 13 years it takes to watch them. The first 3 times they're cool, after that its just way too fuckin much man. It completely destroys the flow of the game and makes getting hit by them so much more frustrating overall. If you want some cheap (in mortal kombats sense, it is too much, even if I dont mind comeback mechanics) 30+%, thats fine, but don't make me have to watch that whole thing
Simple resolution: remove super freeze and keep the camera at default positioning, like VSAV. The animations take forever because you have to wait for the freeze, and they have to make the camera fly all over the place.
@@SupermanSajam oh definitely, but netherrealm seems to make them especially slow for cinematic purposes. Im sure they're longer than other supers-if not it certainly feels that way
There are supers in other games like DBFZ that are way longer then them like some of the Level 3's in DBFZ. And cinematic purposes are necessary for them, and having them in 90% of the matches is perfectly fine. Otherwise seeing supers in 90% of the matches in other games, even short ones, would be bad, and they are not.
I like it when the game limits at one comeback mechanic per game/round. I didn't like when they added Limit Break on top of Spark in Dragon Ball... It made the anchor character way too strong and limit the team composition as you should pick certain characters (Broly, Base Goku, Yamcha, Trunks etc) in order to fully take advantage of this mechanics.
I'll be honest, I prefer the mortal kombat/street fighter style of having a meter to be able to boost special abilities and gain access to offensive and defensive abilities over tekken style "rage mode at less than 30% hp" thing
I wonder if the people who hate comeback mechanics wish a passion (as in, they are all bad, no matter what) would rather the game just end when you're down to your last character against a team of three in dragonball or down even one person in bbtag (which as Sajam said, and have noted from experience, is estremely brutal. Especially in BBTAG), or down to five percent health while your opponent still has 80+ percent left in Tekken or Street Fighter? The odds of getting a win out of those situations is so small that the loser continuing is futile, game should end right there so as to not waste any more time than necessary. Would those people prefer games end up like that?
@@noboty4168 But its not decided lol, you MUST finish the job. The game isn't over until the player dies. Comebacks can and have existed without comeback mechanics.
Imo one of the worst instances of a comeback mechanic is joker in Smash ultimate because in most scenarios he is the ONLY person who can do it in almost every circumstance. On top of that joker without his comeback mechanic is already top tier and no matter how much you’re losing by getting arsene is almost always a win condition. At least with X factor both players have X factor even if it’s more useful for different characters.
Good comeback mechanics: Burst in GG V trigger in SVF (SOME VT) Instinct Burst in BB Bad comeback mechanics Rage in tekken DBFZ's limit breaker X factor Rage in smash 4/Ultimate
DBFZ did come back really good as it feels more as a last ditch effort and not a I win button unlike rage art in Tekken 7 or Vtrigger like to me V trigger isn't an I win but it's just something that could of been base kit for some of them.
....you sure? If you use the correct anchor, it’s downright unfair Comeback mechanics in DBFZ are not fair in any way, if you think so play Z broly, leave him as the last character with full health and lvl3 sparking and try to win, it’s too easy to win as a player who’s supposed to be in a huge disadvantage
@@grief6052 I already do he is strong when sparking but several characters are like that and Z Broly unlike UI has a limited kit and therefore it's pretty easy to read what they are gonna do.
So I have two different opinions. I haven’t played any traditional fighters with comeback mechanics (I don’t particularly count power rangers’ mega morph) but it was absolutely essential in For Honor, back when I played. I have incredibly fond memories of going 4-1 was Raider, strategically locking onto the enemy who I knew was too panicky to properly counter my r1+r2, allowing me to stampede the enemy team unimpeded. That game was amazing, and it’s a shame they so clearly loved the weebs most of all.
I quite like them in Tekken 7, as I love rage drives, but rage arts can be a little bit polarizing. I think rage arts could be balanced better if they didn’t do so much damage, but rage drives are amazing and should stay.
I would like T8 to have multiple Rage drives that you have to choose at the beginning of the match or just give each character 2 rage drives. The devs could use the different rage drives to fulfill different roles and use them to balance characters. It would be interesting if some rage drives would be launchers and plus on block while others enhance combo potential (Like Lee's rage drive in T7) or increase combo damage. Giving them multiple rage drives could potentially get rid of the rage art mechanic and would provide more satisfying comebacks.
@@jjlw2378 Ideally they just need to remove the Rage Drive types that have become boring, it's pretty clear that a big mid that's plus on block, some of which you can instead use to increase post-S! damage, are the best by a large margin and aren't that interesting anymore, get rid of them or the second RD will probably never get picked. They might be better off adding movement/crushing RDs, swayback RDs, maybe more low RDs with small combos or single followups after them, I'd even be more interested in a king RD that functions similarly to Giant Swing as a fast throw (But ideally doesn't do ~50% at the wall) but has a 50/50 break mindgame.
@@PsyDin_ Yeah they would definitely have to balance them to give each one pros and cons. Otherwise make all characters have 2 rage drives like Steve or Negan. This could add more options that would make characters much more threatening in rage. Regardless, I would rather have more rage drives take the place of rage arts.
I actually think its the opposite, Rage Arts are currently far easier to accept because balancing them is rather cut and dry, unlike Ultra in USF4, rage arts are universal and basic in their utility. Either combo enders or very punishable gambles (could maybe do without the crazy damage boost at low health). Rage drives on the other hand can make or break a characters come back potential and end up with the most variables, they can tip from being semi strong to being nearly a full on ToD i.e Steve having a super quick/super easy/super rewarding r.drive. imo they need to really rethink how damage scaling and combos with r.drives work, also not a big fan of the dlc characters like Fahk and Negan getting multiple rage drives for every situation. A lot of discussion around rage drives and how they overextend combos and give far too much damage. That said, both are sick and compliment each other, the option between both is the interesting choice and Id like to see em both in future Tekken games
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
"Comeback mechanics are good until my opponent uses them and I lose. Then, they are bad." - is what I thought how the tweets were gonna go
Wait, it was scrub quotes all along?
@@FahmiZFX Always has been...at least on Twitter
I think a good rule of thumb is comeback mechanics are fine as long as the player is never thinking "I wish I had less health right now." It feels wrong for the player with less health to be in an overall advantageous position.
I feel like I agree in most cases, but in Sam Sho that kind of IS the game to some degree, and that’s why I like it there.
Well, in Mortal Kombat 11 and Tekken Tag2/6/7... often, good players will just stop a combo before the opponent gets the comeback mechanic. So of course then, the opponent now wishes they have (slightly) less health HAHA.
Tekken in a nutshell, with how insane the damage is, the previously "winning" player doesn't even get to use his comeback mechanic
Exactly. In DBFZ there is not a single one that play seriously thinking "man I should let my character die so I can get the limit break buff".
Well don't watch any Marvel then. You may have a heart attack.
One thing that frustrates me is when players say they should be rewarded for playing well, i.e., that they should receive an advantage in future interactions. It's like they forget that winning interactions already puts them ahead. Their reward is that their opponent is closer to dying than they are.
This is exactly what I was thinking.
If getting hit charges a comeback mechanic, then it's just compensating for the disadvantage that comes from... you know... taking hits.
It's even more meaningful in games like DBFZ where you actually lose a ton of power if a character dies.
This is what they're probably thinking: "I'm winning and I'm good but I can't work around this comeback mechanic, so it's trash."
If they can't win despite the mechanic... are they really that good or winning that hard? I bet they forget to ask that question.
These mechanics are there to make matches more interesting than "Player A ran player B over, GG no re."
Yes, comeback mechanics can be done terribly but they aren't an inherently bad thing for a game.
They should just play Guilty Gear so they get tension for hitting folks. Problem solved, lol
you get a lot more meter if youre the one dealing the hits, thats good enough
So essentially, Street Fighter stun all the time? That wouldn’t be really fun...
That jab at Max...Sajam, you throw the sharpest yet most endearing shade.
Was that a jab? Or even a shade?
Timestamp?
@@bennymountain1 the outro
He finally took ken's advice. 🤣
Yeah, that wasn't really shade...
I tend to dislike comeback mechanics cause it locks more interesting mechanics behind losing health. SFV without V-Triggers is a less interesting game with less interesting character designs, I just hate that I gotta get beat up to get to use the fun tools in the game
This is my favorite take. What if they just made it where each character was in this VTrigger state the entire fight? It just depends on the power level of the state of course, but why anyone would want a less interesting game is beyond me
yeah, i wish they were part of the kit, not waiting half the match to do the fun v trigger shit
@@TheKeaver That's called just go play an airdasher or a VS game.
You gotta think about the opportunity cost of not having comeback mechanics at all, because sure it would be fun to use V Trigger more often, but then you'd have no comeback mechanic or another mechanic that ideally is as fun as V trigger, which would have the same 'problem'.
Comeback mechanics have value because despite what some players believe, there is some element of randomness in fighting games.
In BB at round start, there's an immediate guessing game going on. If I'm against a Susanoo he can beat any normal I press with his 5B, which leads to good corner carry and many advantages for him.
If I jump over that move, I can punish it and get a full combo which reverses the situation. Now I can mind game to try and figure out what he will do, but that's an educated guess at best, and if I guess wrong I've lost a shed load of tempo.
Without any comeback mechanics in BB as designed I'm pretty fucked based on a single mind game I guessed wrong in at round start, and BB becomes an awful game. As it is, providing I have burst/overdrive I can at the very least reset the playing field with a burst or at best based on a successful guess in another mind game (overdrive used as reversal) equalise the health a little and gain my own edges.
The fact that I get a guaranteed second mind game to try and win back off a bad initial guess automatically reduces the randomness of winning/losing any given round by giving me more chances to come back due to better understanding of my opponent.
The comeback mechanic has literally improved the amount my own understanding of the game and personal skill has an impact on my victory or loss, therefore it has value.
To use X Factor as an example, X Factor can take a match you were losing and instantly win it for you because you pressed one button on a character. It isn't a comeback mechanic, it's a comeback button.
@@MH3Raiserx-factor is not a comeback button at top level
Sam Sho 5S and 7’s Rage Gauge as well as Baroque in TvC are great because the games are built around those mechanics. It doesn’t feel intrusive.
Baroque shits all over X factor.
Baroque is dope
One of my favorite FG mechanics ever, the famous burst, is a comeback mechanic, and you rarely see people complaining about that one. When something is done well it's done well...
Burst is not really a comeback mechanic, you don't *need* to be losing to use burst. Same thing with spark in DBFZ. You could say the same about X-factor, but it has a ton of other problems.
@@agni2051 It is in the sense the #1 way you gain burst meter faster than the opponent is getting hit, at least in GG, BlazBlue has active flow and etc, so the more you're getting hit the more bursts you'll have. It's not unbalanced, and it works a lot like infil was talking about in the vid, usually both get to use it, but still.
@@AgentBacalhau In BB the burst can also be used as overdrive, which gains value the lower on health you are as well. It also makes it more likely you'll have meter when you overdrive, which makes the odds of you using overdrive only to do massive damage significantly greater at low health.
You CAN use it at high health or as a burst instead of overdrive, but this has a longer cooldown and means you're less likely to have it to survive a big damage combo. I think its fair to call it a comeback mechanic, but it isn't ONLY that. Whether you use it as that or not is a tactical decision that differs depending on character.
BB has a LOT of stuff like this. As the match goes on you gain meter which gives access to rapid cancels, which can be used to make moves safer, especially DPs. This means that your defensive options get safer and more reliable the more meter you have as the match goes on, and you gain more meter for getting hit than dealing damage.
These mechanics are literally what make BB tick.
@@agni2051 x-factor is a stupidly strong mechanic. But it’s not really a comeback mechanic at high level. There is a lot of counter play that the other player can do.
@@agni2051a burst/combo breaker is literally a button used to force your opponent to drop a combo that they otherwise wouldn’t, and return to neutral. It’s designed to get a player out of a disadvantageous situation caused by them making a mistake.
It is by its very definition, a comeback mechanic designed
Smash 4 rage was a strong comeback mechanic that made alot of matchups crazy, you could be winning neutral then lose because you messed up once
Also a soft buff to heavyweights, which were historically low tiers. Sadly, rage also made it harder to memorize combos. Still a cool mechanic imo.
@@dianauwu1312 It was definitely a soft buff for heavies but it was most obvious in crazy jank like part of Samus's Up B killing you almost instantly.
Bowser, Ganondorf, Donkey Kong and Dedede are always strong with three out of four of them having mediocre recovery options. Only one has a true projectile (which can be turned back without a reflector) but Bowser has fire which is surprisingly useful. None of them had great options to get out of disadvantage.
Bayo by comparison can kill at any percent and kills FASTER with rage even without Witch Time. Her canon weight may be high but she's no heavy.
I'm cool with comeback mechanics, the issue is if the characters can't function in any capacity without it. Like Lucario in smash: completely trash until Aura kicks in, and you can't have max Aura if you and your opponent's stocks are at the same count. Not to say a comeback reliant character has no place in a game, but the character shouldn't be completely garbage without it unless its a troll character
EDIT: maybe make sparking an actual burst and keep limit break as is. That way you could interrupt the limit break shenanigans when they're happening
I think a problem with smash comeback mechanics is that the game isn’t balanced around them, and most character’s with them excluding Lucario can function without them making it occasionally feel like your opponent’s character can just bullshit you with some insanely powerful tool. Though I also get that the developers wanted to add broken stuff like super moves and Arsen and needed a way to balance them.
Most of the examples people are giving are from games that are not really balanced to begin with. Smash and MvC2 are not balanced games, they are games made to be fun party games (tm). Cliched but true.
I really wish Lucario didn't have his own special rage mechanic. I dropped him because it felt so bad.
Man I miss the UNI scene so much. It was my favorite game to watch before the pandemic but now everything’s just on standby until we can have in person events again
Me too man I was just thinking that
I will wait forever for French Bread to figure out Rollback. They'll get it soon enough.
@@baltharaaz9847 they did ask the fans to keep urging arcsystemworks. kamone said they might receive more support from them if we are vocal
@@ApexGale Kamone quickly said stop asking them though, because Under Night players were getting annoying apparently. I have faith they'll get it done.
Just play Melty Blood.
Uni's GRD system is soo good, as it can work both as a comeback mechanic for you or a lethal weapon for your oponent, it all depends whether if you played a good defense or not, and if your oponent can open you and stay unpredictable, when you get it you can use while defending on a string to turn around the offensive, or keep it so your oponent plays more carefully and tries to win the next cycle, this ofc works both ways, as having it on the offensive opens up more ways to open your opponent and stick to them, pretty cool system as it rewards the better player and forces you to be it
Something a lot of people don't talk about in regards to SFV's v system is they made normals do grey health chip damage. Blocking successfully always gives you some v meter, even if it doesn't permanently effect your health bar. The grey health and visible stun bar also changes decision making on offense and defense. Someone hungry to stun or cash out grey life could end up making an opportunity for the defender by overextending. The person on offense could also make different decisions to try and bait a v reversal (which lowers the stun bar, which again is information both players have and can play around). SFV's mechanics are really well considered imo outside of the obvious balance issues currently with characters like G and Kolin.
an interesting question is comeback mechanics vs snowballing mechanics. i think snowballing mechanics are more incidental and comeback mechanics are made in response
I'm glad Sajam brought up GRD in this video, it's easily my favorite implementation of meter management in a game. I'd love if Sajam or someone else made a video discussing not just comeback mechanics but characters and system mechanics that function as secondary objectives to help you win. Stuff like GRD, character specific meters, susanoo special unlocks for example
I feel like the best comeback mechanic is GG Burst. You have to think where is the right time to burst, how much life you have left, if you can survive the current combo, how much of a match is left, how many rounds are left in a match, and how many other different factors.
It’s also something to consider on the offensive side, because a burst can be read and punished. It’s also the tastiest and best feeling in GG imo. Those same factors that the defender thinks of are what the offensive character considers as well.
I think it’s similar to KI Combo/Counter Breakers, but I feel like it is harder to use at a beginner level than Burst.
And while the newer characters are different, I think some of the V-Triggers in SFV are things I wish the characters had normally in their kit, and not an install or one-off.
Rage Drives are cool until you play the game constantly for 3 years, interesting RD usage is pretty rare, most are now predictable and formulaic but with no counterplay other than just block and let them get their extra 50/50 after it, but if you happened to guess low then you're boned.
I think rage drives would be a much more interesting mechanic in a game where you don't die in two interactions
@@shiftyshitter348 Sidestep is much weaker in tekken 7. That in turn made the game hyper aggressive. you wont get launched if you block more, and pressure. a round ending with two interactions is your fault, not the game. Maybe choose not to wake up after being combod into the wall and roll so you can wake up away from the wall.
@@mmmk6322 "Just don't get launched"! Genius. How did no one think of not getting launched.
Watch an EVO match and count how many rounds are decided by two launches. Every time you move or do an attack, you're risking 40~60% of your health. Even Harada admitted it in a dev interview, what the fuck are you talking about "it's not the game's fault" when it absolutely is how the game works...
Keeping rage drives and removing rage arts would be a good change imo.
@@Elivanse you remove the utility of Rage once you do that though and we're back to T6/TTT2 where Rage was one note
blazblues overdrive system is a very versatile traditional comeback mechanic -
defensively you can burst or exceed accel which is just another one button super
offensively- you get an install which is makes you extremely strong or you can offensive exceed accel to increase how fast your overdrive meter recovers and boosts damage.
There are many decisions to make with this
I like the comeback mechanics for their effect on the narrative of a fight. It helps build the rising action to follow the standard story structure. The fight's been going on for some time and the characters get a second wind to give it their all is hype
I'm pretty sure when people complain about comeback mechanics, they're only referring to one or two games, and not the genre as a whole. I personally love the OD/burst dynamic of the newer blazblues.
YEEES! BB did it so well with OD since it's a comeback mechanic AND a win more mechanic at the same time. Also cause it lets me pretend they didn't remove Unlimited characters(while they don't belong in the meta, they're fun as fuck to mess around with)
I'm not sure if it counts, but Baroque is probably my favorite one, It encourages meter management so you can save up for burst, and It's also a clever way to add mechanics for getting hit, but not making it exclusively a late game mechanic
I'd say comeback mechanics as a whole is good, but some comeback mechanics are done kinda badly or at the very least have bad word of mouth in the hard-core-competitive and ultra-casual scenes.
i remember a video about Catherine (a puzzle game with a versus mode) that talked about how the comeback mechanic in that game encouraged the player who was winning to come down and knock out their opponent to stop them from bolting ahead and stealing their lead, which feels like it fits into that win condition thought process you talked about as an extra threat to account for and prevent the winning player from getting to complacent
Under nights grd system is a really sick pseudo-comeback mechanic. It doesn't just reward a player for being behind during a match; instead it allows a player who's behind to make a comback by playing good defense. If you just hold it down for like 10 seconds you can win vorpal and then use cs to get out of even really oppressive offense with basically zero risk.
Something I wish was in modern fighting games was a user-adjustable "comeback mechanic." Imagine SF4, but you could power up your Ultra meter at the cost of more expensive EX moves or a longer Super meter. Or, have cheaper EX moves/multiple Super stocks (a la SF3) at the trade-off of an Ultra meter that is very weak or may take all three rounds to fill. I think it would be a lot more interesting if the meter mechanics of games could be molded to fit a player's playstyle (aggressive vs turtle, etc.) instead of being rigid and the same for everyone.
That's the next step
DoA5 does a good job of balancing it's comeback mechanic. When your health bar reaches 50%, you can do a Power Blow or a Power Launcher. The Power Blow gives you a decent amount of damage and allows you to manipulate where your opponent lands, letting you combo into stage transitions, danger zones, etc; while the Power Launcher is pretty self explanatory, and it lets you get huge combos. All characters have both of these, and some will benefit more from one than the other, but the biggest thing about them is that, since you have to charge these attacks before they hit, doing them outside of Critical Stun or Critical Burst is very risky, since it's super telegraphed. So you have to decide *when* to use them and which one would benefit you more at that given moment.
People really don't give DOA the credit it deserves.
DOA deserves more attention, but we'll, you know, Koei Tecmo do their best to not make the public perception of the game appealing to a larger audience
@@mthsdcs it's the FGC doing the most damage to it, everyone calls it a casual titty game, it's obvious those people didn't even play it.
@@DragoonCenten tbh it kinda deserves the bad rep it gets, especially after 6. I love DoA, it's the fighting game that got me into fighting games and by far my favorite, but it stakes it's reputation on it's sexuality and completely ignores what makes it so great - the triangle system and how you can interact with the environment to create insane combos - so it is a shame it isn't as popular as it could or should be, but I personally think it totally deserves that, considering the direction the series took
@@kakugowaii5854 if you cant looks past a marketing gimmick, you are an idiot. The only actual criticism is all the costume DLC.
I really love the comeback mechanic in P4A, the entire game revolved around getting into your awakening or preventing your opponent from doing so, which each character was able to do. The extra super you got from awakening was usually so good it warped the game around it. Playing around awakening was of utmost importance and gave the otherwise simplified airdasher unique depth.
Then they released shadow characters that were always in awakening and had to nerf it removing this depth in ultimax which made the game way worse.
Constantly having to play around low-life conditions sounds pretty lame
Like having to drop my combo just so they don't get crazy buff lame :\
I'm on the side of not getting supers from getting beat up mostly because it's just annoying on offense
@@ivrydice0954 I think it's lame that the correct combo in every situation is the same but to each his own.
But shadows were really bad in 1.0/1.1 aside from fringe all-or-nothing characters like Mitsuru & Chie. Part of the reason was that they just didn't have any awakening mechanics at all lol. Shadows have way worse design flaws though
@@Minastir1 Having the same combo be optimal the whole time isn't a problem that can only be fixed with comebacks.
Them's Fighting Herds, & Skullgirls are able to have combo variety without making your opponent super powered when at death's door.
the shadow characters sucked on release because Shadow Fury traded in their ability to burst and enter awakening. That's why you only ever saw touch of death Shadow setups with characters like S. Chie or Narukami. Otherwise it was dumb cheesy shit like S. Naoto. The reason being that the loss of defensive tools meant if you weren't just killing the enemy off one touch, you were liable to getting blown up. As such if you wanted a ToD on every character in the class and still had comeback tools, you'd just play Liz (who was still one of the worst characters in the game).
Then they went to 2.0 and gave every Shadow character burst and awakening for free basically just making them strictly better than every single regular character apart from like, base Narukami. ASW really shit the bed on that update.
I don't mind the idea of comeback mechanics, as long as they do add that depth. I don't feel like Tekken's Rage Arts or Drives do that. Drives usually feel like a free, safe, tracking, long range mixup into MORE pressure, and Arts only express that you thought your opponent was going to use ANY attack in a particular moment.
They aren't very expressive within Tekken's system because they cover too much. And they're buckets of damage if they land. It really digs into the potential to have an interesting exchange in last hit situations.
I guess it wouldn't be that bad if we didn't have to deal with it EVERY ROUND. It's not even fun to see them when they're used so constantly, and in such a shallow way. I wouldn't mind so much if it was only was a match.
I love your video title, topic and conclusion without the need to clickbait and I still watched you every times
I love sparking in dbfz since it’s like X factor but made to where it’s not overpowered. It works as a mechanic to help when there’s one character left, or you can extend combos with it in order to kill a character
X-factor isn’t OP as a comeback factor at high lvl. I don’t think umvc3 would be played so much if it was. A lot of the problem with x-factor lvl 3 is for more causal players. It allows for easier tod but umvc3 is already mostly a one touch game at high level. It allows for faster mix ups but can you really say that it’s worse than zero jam session on incoming.
Aren't there old IRC chat logs in the 90s were people were complaining about Supers in SF2?
I'm curious to see that.
They definitely still existed into the early 2000's. Used to see old SRK threads about supers being unbalanced because you gain meter for getting hit and the last pure SF game was hyper fighting.
I still remember defending Fatal Blows and their balance on Discord with a couple of friends. All because they don't have frame 1 armour. Oh how naive of me lmao
Think fatal blows do a few things right like limiting how many per match youll see and making sure supers arent just a desperation movie that wastes all your meter for a sub optimal sum of dmg but i think they shouldnt have armor and should do less dmg with slightly better scailing. This was they still work in a combo and feel satisfying while also not being a degenerate 35% armored reversal. When you combine that with the "nothing is guaranteed" mentality the devs had for this game it just makes it too easy to catch somebody slipping with a FB
Oh you were right, you are naïve now, sadly.
@@casually_competitive1349 Super moves in NRS games always had armor, and the fact that they can only be landed once per match justifies that even more. If they had no armor on top of damage scaling they would become too weak and it will be a dead mechanic. And dead mechanics are not good at all. Also "nothing is guaranteed" mentality? LMAO that doesn't make any sense.
I'm usually in favor of comeback mechanics, but Fatal Blow is a prime example of how NOT to do one. First, it's incredibly binary, you either use it or lose out, unless you got roflstomped on the first round and a Fatal Blow isn't threatening at all to the opponent, it's ALWAYS the right move to use it. Second, you can confirm it, you can combo into it, you can punish with it, or you can even trade with the super armor it gives, it's incredibly easy to actually hit the damn thing. And of course, it's the same input across all characters which is not that big of a deal by itself, but already makes e bad mechanic even more boring. MK9 and X weren't peak example of comeback mechanics but at least it was a resource you had to manage instead of unga-bunga whenever it's up.
@@RoyArkon ScrubQuotes X
But no seriously in all of the previous games the supers cost all your meter and provided you with sub optimal damage for the bar wasted. They always did about 30-35% dmg raw and cost 3-4 bars in games where getting 40% for 1 bar was not uncommon. It was stupidly wastefull, scailed poorly and was a mechanic only really usefull for unbreakable dmg, panic armor and stlye points for beginers taht didnt know how to combo yet. Supers were really underpowered in previous games and unless your character built a lot of bar and used little for their combos and pressure you never saw them. MKX kitana for example built so much bar that seeing her X-ray was not that uncommon but johnny cage needed his bars for pressure and dmg cassie had the luxary of a safe on block launcher off her 50/50s that did more dmg and was safer then the X-ray so youd never EVER use it. MK11 gives you supers for free and there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOWNSIDE to missing the super . Every other mk game took all of your resources for missing it but mk11 doesnt. There is literally no case to be made for Fatal Blows being well implemented into the game. None at all. They are an ok idea executed very poorly at best and just a train wreck of a system mechanic at worst.
they are good as long as they arent as fucking broken as x factor, fighterz has a pretty good one
Not being as broken as X-Factor is far from "Good". you can have a mechanic that doesn't break the game in half and it still be bad for the game overall. Mediocre mechanics that reward bad play is still bad
FighterZ's Sparking is pretty good, although I personally hate it because it gives the player access to specific setups and combos which are only available while the mechanic is active. And I don't really want to lab stuff which I can only use for 20 seconds at most in a round which lasts 3-5 minutes.
So my use of Sparking is far worse than my opponent's and I'll often get bodied because of that after winning a match. But that's on me
@@DXYS95 Sparking isnt a comeback mechanic, you can use it at any point in the match
X-factor Isn’t a comeback mechanic. Like it starts life as one at low and mid level play and then slowly transitions to a snowball mechanic because of how brutal incomings are
Pokken Tournament sort of has an interesting take on comeback mechanics. First, the game has the synergy gauge which is just your normal super meter that builds up by either taking damage or by picking up an orb that drops when the game switches from Duel Phase to Field Phase. Secondly, you have a support gauge which lets you pick one of two pokemon and gives you an assist-style option that builds up over time and can usually be called once or twice per round depending on which one you pick.
However, there is a third mechanic called the Cheer skill. Depending on the cheer skill you select, you will get a benefit depending on the result of the first round. The default Cheer skill will give you both synergy (super) and charge both support pokemon to be ready for the next round. If you win round 1, you get a small amount of synergy and it'll max out the support pokemon you didn't use while the one you did use will be on cooldown (you can still pick them, but they won't be available for a little while). However, if you lose the first round with the default Cheer skill, you get way more synergy gauge (sometimes maxed out if you took a lot of damage and maximized picking up the orbs) and you get access to both your support pokemon, regardless of if they have long cooldowns or not.
There are other Cheer skills, like one that'll always guaranteed you max out your synergy gauge if you reach round 3 (but has no effect on round 2 nor touches the support gauge), or a cheer skill that will always max out both support pokemon whether you win or lose, but will never touch the synergy gauge. This isn't my favorite take on a comeback mechanic, but it was definitely one of the more interesting ones.
Comeback mechanics can in theory be a crutch for a lack of good defensive options, no? Is having both good defensive options and a comeback mechanic interesting or just encourage players to not engage with the defensive options? I feel like comeback mechanics need to be considered with the game’s defensive options in mind, SFV’s V-system being a good example of intersecting them. Glad you brought up Uni - interesting decisions around defensive options can be the whole comeback system itself for the reasons you talked about.
I'm not really well versed in the technical aspect of fighters, but I think SF4 did both comeback mechanics and meter really well with it's Ultra meter
I think it’s more those little things that reward people for losing (Things always returning to neutral or adding a combo limit) that I hate. The big ones are (usually) pretty hype and reward a constant offense to either kill before they use, pop it early to kill faster, or stop them from killing you
comeback mechanics increase the randomness in the outcome of the match. you might lose when you have 40% HP and the opponent with 5% HP hits you once. also when comebacks are easier, they also become less impressive. so a comeback mechanic that needs skill to use is better. worst thing is when it's like mario kart where the comeback mechanic is so strong that players intentionally fall behind.
Mario kart, the biggest example of a fair competitive game
Both players having a chance to use the comeback mechanic definitely isn't true for MK11, most of the time if you give your opponent fatal blow and they get a chance to combo into it you're just dead
Still love Persona 4's comeback mechanics. If you hit 25% life you got:
Increased Defense because they didn't kill you
An extra 50 Meter for free, and a new 150% bar.
A new super.
So, if you did too much damage off a big punish, they typically get another chance to play and the tools to even the gap if THEY'RE GOOD ENOUGH to run it back.
I think V-triggers get problematic when the character pretty much only gets online(or even interesting) when the v-trigger is available. Those are the type o v-trigger designs that i'd like for developers to avoid. As for KI, I feel like there's no instincts that fall into that category, every character feels whole and interesting without them.
I think Tekken's rage is one of the best comeback mechanics, it doesn't fall into the sfv trap i mentioned and there's coutnerplay
Blazblue has the best comeback mechanic IMO, you could use it to burst and break a combo when you're losing OR use it to go into overdrive and negate the opponent's burst when you're winning.
OR go into overdrive while losing for the high risk high reward.
And burst regenerates faster if you're being offensive and if you use overdrive.
And you can bait burst too for ultimate swag.
So you can choose to forsake the comeback to go all in or play it safer.
Limit Break is definitely the comeback mechanic of DBFZ. But I wish it would go away when it become a 1 v 1
how come? Both players will have access to it and if anything the one who was winning is still winning in terms of meter because they're the ones who's gonna get it.
Sparking was good enough.
I personally think Limit break is very bad design, because it isn't a player decision at all. Plus, you can't play around it in the slightest since it doesn't have a timer or a baitable activation.
Give both players a defense boost that cancels out the offense boost when it's down to one on one. I don't see it as an issue tbh.
@@KittSpiken but then you have unbalanced play. The person who took the initial lead never gets to use the same advantage that the "losing" player evened things out with in the first place.
Limit Break is awful. Theres no counterplay to it. No thought to it. Its just "I put Base Goku, UI, or GT on Anchor so give me 2 of your characters." I legit commit robberies with Limit Break its so dumb.
I mean, I like Install supers/mechanics (Instinct, V-Trigger, etc), I just don’t like them tied to ”revenge meters” that mainly/only build through taking damage, which is what make them a comeback mechanic.
There’s no reason Instinct & V-Trigger couldn’t be tied to a non-revenge style meter, or even just be implemented into the regular super meter (as is the case with Soul Calibur 6’s Soul Charge mechanic), except for the designers desire to give the losing player an increased chance to make a comeback. Which is fine, I just don’t personally think it’s a very fun nor interesting gameplay design, and I’d even argue it’s a net negative for spectators in the long run by making comebacks less rare and special.
I suggest watching Core-A-Gaming's "Analysis: reducing the skill gap" video if you haven't already. Comeback mechanics may be flashy and stylish, but making comebacks more likely makes them a lot less exciting. This is why moment 37 and JW comeback in mvc2 I think it was are important to the fgc. They are and were nearly impossible to pull off, that's why they made a lot of noise and why they are remembered. It is something to be considered.
Bold of you to think that people here haven't watched at this point
There is that but in general they can add something more to the gameplay,they aren't necessarily bad nor necessarily good,they are there and this video highlights those that made them good and interestring
Btw,Core-A gaming isn't always right,especially at this point,many things in that video are now either very exaggerated,fixed or made them seem like they are worse than they actually are
Have you ever seen people try to play UMVC3 without x-factor? It was super boring. When even the worst comeback mechanic can make a game more exciting, i call bs on comeback mechanics making games less exciting.
Justin wong umvc3 evo run in 2014 is also just as if not more legendary especially that x-factor cancel with akuma.
But let us look at legendary moment from marvel 3. DK vs Jan. Dual Kevin plays deadpool Dante Hawkeye while Jan is left with solo haggar. This is 9.5 to 0.5 match up. However Jan successful navigates the projectiles and lands himself a happy birthday. Now in a game without x-factor he wouldn’t be able to kill. He would have to reset deadpool another time. Then get a hit on Dante. And then get two hits on Hawkeye. These are all 9-0. Match ups. Maybe it would encourage more skill from Jan but it’s also impossible. With x-factor he is able to kill both deadpool and Dante. And then get a hit on Hawkeye securing the game
@@kevl0rneswath x-factor isn’t even bad except for Vergil and Phoniex. Vergil is a strong character in his own right even without x-factor and Phoniex has her own mechanics that amplify x-factor
The issue surrounding the discourse around comeback mechanics has always been the terminology itself. IIRC, Capcom called Ultras a comeback mechanic to counter snowballing - I may be wrong here, though. The fact that mechanics like Ultras are built up from losing doesn't do them any favors. It's a perception thing, though. Both players have access to the same mechanics (relatively). It all boils down to one debate: should there be preventative measures against snowballing?
I think a manually activated comeback move that puts you at a disadvantage the next round could be an interesting dynamic (can't be used in a closeout game for either player). For example, activating Rage in Tekken to help close out round 1, and then and then starting round 2 with 75% health. Possibly stack the negative effect if used in consecutive rounds.
Could make for some epic reverse 3-0's that feel earned and not cheap. Go down 0-2, then Rage and win by the skin of your teeth twice to make it 2-2, then outplay your opponent at half health in the final round. Not sure how well it would work but I like the idea.
Ultimately, it's a tool in the game. The player that better utilizes their tools is the one that is going to win. Sure, the game could be balanced in a way where that tool is bad or harmful to the overall game. This is true of all the other tools, combos, fireballs, grapples, and other meters have all also had this problem. Having something that lets you stop the other person's momentum or do explosive damage can lead to exciting gameplay, and by making it situational it lets you give the character a tool to combat bad matchups without giving them an overwhelming edge. Ultimately, I feel it is a potentially exciting and interesting mechanic
When I think of bad fighting game comeback mechanics, I think of Smash 4 rage.
Sports also have comeback mechanics.
In Hockey you pull the goalie. Baseball has kamikaze plays. I call it a viable part of the whole competitive milieu.
Anyone who complains about comeback mechanics being a new thing needs to take a history dive. SNK has implemented comeback mechanics as early as Fatal fury 1!
And because of this, SNK has the best comeback mechanics(besides guard cancelling in KOF '95. That game's version of GC is straight up broken(in MAX mode, do ANY special/super special move while in block stun of ANY special/super special move).).
I just don’t quite understand some games that gives comeback mechanics when the game already had many tools/mechanics that you can use to comeback and not need a mechanic that losing gives you tools to win, like you can literally use supers, character’s tools, shimmy and invincible DP just by being smart to use it.
To me, It’s more interesting to see a losing player in a disadvantage can comeback with smart reads and tools they can use like for an example, CSGO/Valorant ace or clutch when a player can save or comeback the game by just relying raw aim skill and map awareness without a comeback mechanic, like maybe the last remaining player gets a buff to help it get a clutch, it’s like a pity reward.
Just take an example of an Okizeme situation, the knockdown person is in a disadvantage and they need to read opponent’s attack to save themselves from the situation. They have tools to save themselves without a comeback mechanic to lock a tool if they’re in a disadvantage to save themselves.
Bottomline is that I don’t want games to lock mechanics for comeback or separate the mechanic cuz it’s like rewarding the player for losing in my opinion. Let the mechanic be usable at all times with risk and reward or it needs meter like a invincible DP or super.
Blazblue's overdrive is the best comeback mechanic solely because it's effects and use completely depends on the character that's activating it
*Bang noises*
Wow that thumbnail is great
The case of Urien and having Aegis, being a 3rd strike staple and key part of his moveset, it would feel weird not having aegis at all. But in 3rd strike it was a super, they just decided to lump it in through the V-system instead. He could've had it as a super in SFV too and something completely different for his trigger. My take on comeback mechanics is that they are fine as long as they add interesting gameplay and decisionmaking without being super oppressive. Need reasonable ways to counter them if used poorly, as they should require a degree of thought and execution. Mashing out wake up ultras/rage arts that get blocked and countered vs tacking them on a roundwinning combo
That's kind of the main reason why I'm not a fan of V-Triggers, because it just feels like a lot of characters are restricted by not having access to some of those moves it grants all the time.
@@dyldragon1 while it does allow for balancing characters around powerful triggers that allow you to do crazy shit i agree with you in that feeling great in trigger does not make up for feeling lackluster outside of it. Nobody played Phoenix in mvc3 for regular old Jean, but for the insanity that was Dark Phoenix
it's funny that ultras in SF4 didn't come up; the discourse around comeback mechanics was HUGE at the time. and unlike v-trigger in SF5, there's no way to build it other than taking damage. (yes, you can use focus to take temporary damage and build it, but that's still putting your health at risk.)
10:28 on late game. Some games like umvc3, mvc2 and power rangers have a very important late game to think about. Consider people who snap in assist/end game characters to try and kill them. Example: Vergil, Phoenix, Commando, Eric, Jen . For games like cvs2 or kof considering how to build bar or preserve bar for later rounds/character often make the difference between a win and a loss. Metter management is hype
Honestly, I think Blasted was just talking about Tekken. Tekken doesn;t need rage damage, comebacks used to happen in Tekken without rage and damage. rage art and rage drive can stay, but the increased damage is not really fair.
rd and ra are also bs
Ah, man. X Factor was the best! I always played Hulk anchor and tried to wipe my opponent's team off it. The design was awful, but it was the only way I got any wins. :P
The only thing I have issues with is calling things like X-factor and Sparking Blast since they aren't really a comeback mechanic. Both players have access to the resource. A comeback mechanic naturally would have to be one-sided IMO to really facilitate a comeback.
Thank you
They get stronger as you lose characters, which means that if you are doing worse than your opponent, your XF/SB will be stronger than theirs. That's a textbook comeback mechanic.
i like sparking for how many things you can do with it but limit break is meh. There is no choice in using it, you just get it.
If only French Bread netcode was as good as the Grid system
Have you ever heard of the Lucario doubles strat in Smash Bros? Lose a stock on purpose to get the comback mechanic kicking in.
It got nerfed going into ultimate
Yea i heard something like that. Point is, it had to be a really damn good comeback mechanic to WANT to die
That's hilarious, but also genius.
@@blank_e1 good as in powerful, definitely not good design lmao
Do you think it's possible to have a good comeback mechanic that's built into a character's moveset? Not sure if traditional fighting games have an equivalent but smash has characters like Joker with Arsene and Lucario with Aura
Aura is actually cool (except in Sm4sh where there already was Rage and it got out of hand). Lucario is somewhat reliant on the mechanic, so it’s less comeback mechanic and more fundamental to the character.
My reaction even reading that is "I hate that shit".
@@Boyzby Well, like, Lucario below 30% has been described as the worst in Ultimate so...
I think it's also interesting to point out that nobody ever says things like this about any other mechanic, except comeback mechanics. People have been mashing out invincible reversals and getting lucky wins since the 90s, yet you lose one match to someone's lucky rage art and decide that all comeback mechanics need to go? Even in Tekken there have been moves way more absurd than any rage drive or rage art ever was, but people tape those nostalgia goggles to their face and decide that because X character's Rage Drive is too strong the entire system should be scrapped. No one says all invincible DPs should go because their opponent mashed out a DP while in blockstun and won. It's absurd on it's face honestly.
In Smash comeback mechanics are specific to just a handful of characters. Most dont have access and the ones that do, have characters specific mechanics that unique to them. They can be arguably balanced (I guess) but would you say thats ok in that context? Its not a universal mechanic so i would assume its kinda just dumb when a character has one
As long as the player doesnt actively hurt himself to try to get the comeback mechanic its fine in my eyes
This happens a lot
In other words, don't play BBTAG Yang.
Well, then we have Yoshimitsu, who can hurt himself to get rage... (And I don't just mean stabbing himself, there's ways to lose a low amount of health for those "I almost have rage" scenarios.)
Focus backdash?
Nah I don't think you'd agree with this in certain situations. There are plenty of possible unhealthy comeback mechanics that would required necessarily hurting yourself.
The most sensible comeback mechanic that immediatrly comes to mind imo is Baroque from Tatsunoko vs Capcom. You spend all of your red health for extra damage and combo potential.
Another honorable mention is Awakening in Persona 4 arena.
Awakening is one of the mechanics I hate in that game. It rules the game in a really intrusive way IMO. Baroque is great though, I agree there.
I think Sam Sho Rage Gauge in both SS5S and SS7 is excellent too.
@@meathir4921 Hmm, I guess I can see how you interpret it as intrusive. Because when you go awakened, you essentially have to play a different way when you activate it. But I would argue thats not necessarily a bad thing. Start of round yu plays different than end of round 1 awakened yu whereas start of round 1 Vergil plays the same as level 3 xfactor Vergil. Xfactor didn't offer as many upgrades to the character as Awakening did(not to be confused, Im not saying Awakening overall is a better mechanics in terms of winning a game, we all know xfactor wins games. Im just referring to xfactor just giving you power, speed and health regen vs Awakening giving you a new moveset, more meter, damage and defense boost).
@@jme-james That’s not really what I have a problem with, but I didn’t really explain myself well so that’s on me. The reason I find it intrusive is because it only becomes a factor when someone gets low.
You spend ~60% of a health bar ignoring the mechanic completely and then suddenly you have to worry and temper your combos or get punished.
Ironically, it’s a comeback mechanic that punishes new players who are less aware of how to deal with it and doesn’t really make the game more interesting for veteran players since it doesn’t really change how the game works fundamentally, more than it just goes “hey have some free shit because you’re below a health threshold.” There’s nothing wrong with that inherently but it is contradictory to most comeback mechanics’ design, same with Limit Break in DBFZ versus Sparking.
It was one of the things that turned me off from P4A though so maybe I’m missing something but this was always my impression.
I compare this to something like Rage Gauge in Sam Sho where it doesn’t feel like a freebie to hit max Gauge. The Gauge is tuned per character, the length of time too. Characters unlock tools and not just comeback focused ones like a flashy super, moves become better and some characters build entire strategies around their Gauge because of it. And then there’s also Rage Burst and I can keep going but I think you hopefully get the point. In Sam Sho, the comeback mechanic IS the game, not added to the game, and you care about the mechanic from second 1 of round 1 to the final hit of the final round (unless you both burst lol, but that’s the point). You could take Awakening away from P4A and whilst it would be a different one I don’t think the fundamentals of the game change very much. In Sam Sho the game doesn’t work without it.
I can also discuss Baroque in the same way; it’s a such a ubiquitous and strong tool to use that it’s fundamental to how the game works, but if you lean into it as a comeback mechanic it has both great risk but actually actively makes you have less effective health. Efficient Baroqueing chip damage is powerful and cheap but it makes that chip permanent. But trying to greed and save the health might make you lose neutral/get opened up and now you’ve taken a full combo and have a shit ton of blue life that you have to think about Baroquing. It permeates the whole game from the moment someone gets hit. It’s not something that comes into play only at the end of a round.
@@meathir4921 Never played Samsho so alot of that is new to me but I get the jist of it.
Sounds like you're saying the comeback mechanic in samsho is heavily integrated in the game that taking it out will essentially destroy the game. Which is cool, but wouldn't that not be called a comeback at that point and just a mechanic/feature of the game? Perhaps I just need to play or watch it to understand so I'll just concede and move on.
Maybe my definition of a comeback mechanic is too shallow but I feel P4A and TvC fit the bill very well: a mechanic that gives you a massavive boost but you still at a real risk of losing. While I understand Baroque could and would be used at any time of the game and in neutral, you still sacrificing red health that could not be regained at all. In other tag games like DBFZ, the marvel series and BBTAG, depending on the player, characters and tactis you were using, seeing red health was a sign to typically gtfo there and tag a new character in. Which you could still do even in TvC. But you also had the choice of Baroque which was ALWAYS risky to do whether if you successful in winning the neutral/getting the hit or not(at least on paper). Doing Baroque was putting you that closer to death which I think all comebacls should do.
Persona 4 arena imo was kinda tge same way though arguably less significantly. I believe tvcs red health paralelle is Persona's learning curve to play the same character differently now that it's active. I understand it's not that big a risk to go intp training mode and learning new combos now that you're almost dead vs actively killing youraelf but, meh. Both are situations neither player wants to be in.
@@jme-james Awakening's defense boost is a bit odd if you take into account Blazblue's damage and Health amounts as comparison. The normal health in P4A is 9500, and in Blazblue it's 11500. However if you check damage numbers for combos in both games, P4A is only a little behind Blazblue's despite having almost 20% less health. However if you factor in maximum Awakening health (9500-(9500*0.35)+(9500*0.35/0.625)) it comes out to 11,495 which is effectively just Blazblue's health total of 11500.
Awakening's defense values just normalize P4A's damage to health ratios to Blazblue's damage to health ratios.
Mr.beast looks like a budget Sajam
no good hair, shilling roll back but this was a odd comparison.
I have never really gotten the hate for comeback mechanics. Most super attacks in fighting games, even far back in the golden days, would be considered comeback mechanics.
Rage from Samurai Shodown and Desperation moves from KOF (that’s why they’re called DMs for the folks who never played the older games) are good examples of what I’m talking about.
Lmao I was reeling back in my chair until I saw (except X-factor)
Tbh I think comeback mechanics work in fighting games because the nature of winning in fighting games means the losing player can be NOT PLAYING like literally not doing ANYTHING AT ALL in a lot of cases.
There are obviously examples of bad comeback mechanics (UMVC3 X-Factor, Smash 4 Rage) in fighting games but I don't think comeback mechanics as a concept are bad.
Just give everyone cracked options without a resource attached to them instead
Stun/Dizzy can be a comeback mechanic. Or at least it gives you a possible way to (quickly) retake the lead/victory while at low health.
If you are at low hit point, you are gonna be likely the one getting stunned. That's the complete opposite
You're totally right. Agreed that it's primarily designed as a win-more mechanic, though it can aid in comebacks.
@@malcovich_games that's meaningless then. That's like saying heavy punch is a comeback mechanic because you can do it while losing when it has zero basis on your HP.
Well, think about it this way: it aint simply poking the opponent to death with HP but more of "if i can just score a few hits in quick succession i can stun them and make huge comeback" so I guess i should be saying that dizzy is a mechanic that aids in a comeback but not a true comeback mechanic.
I was thinking about this recently. I don't really play SFV but on paper I really like how the whole V-system shakes out for Ryu. Since parrying rewards you with V-meter a skilled player is always being pushed to implement as many parries into their playstyle as they can (which probably involved getting good reads) without getting too predictable so they can install and become even _more_ dominant. Sounds like a really fun risk/reward.
Does it actually shake out like that? I dunno, I don't play SFV and Ryu is probably too low tier to really get pushed, but I think they had some fantastic ideas going on.
I agree with James Chen on this one. Comeback mechanics make games very exciting for spectators but for players it's just frustrating. At least to me you feel cheesed when you're winning and then get steam rolled backwards. Just not a fun feeling especially when it's a mechanical thing and not a skill thing (mainly).
To use a game I like as a point of reference, I think kof has some of the best comebacks to watch and execute for a few reasons. your meter increases faster while blocking successfully. In a game where you have extensive movement and offensive options it's interesting that blocking gets you probably the most meter, which works well since some of your defensive options require 1 bar. you also get a decent amount of meter while getting beat up because you are gaining meter and not using any of it. Plus the meter capacity raises as you lose characters.If you are winning outright and your opponent does use this to his advantage and manages his meter well he can get a comeback that can easily be seen as earned because he actively managed his meter in order to reverse ocv. So he basically did what you did to him just with his last character and his back against the wall because you can easily do the same with your last character and shut down his reverse ocv because the mechanic is universally balanced. It feels fair since it's common to every character.
Where as games like sfv, managing v trigger is almost automatic, and depending on the character the v trigger can seem completely unfair. So I can understand why people get frustrated when they are winning the entire round and the opponent gets a massive buff for simply getting his ass beat in the neutral on each round while making zero decisions to manage his comeback. It's like they get rewarded for making a ton of bad decisions, get buffed, make a couple of good ones, and gg. That feeling of having to climb back with your back against the wall while intelligently managing your resources throughout the entire fight just isn't there; it's more about how much time you have left on your trigger activation, making two or three good decisions, and how good your character's v-trigger is. I don't think v-trigger is a bad idea in general; I just think it's a bad idea in street fighter 5 and doesn't really work with the rest of the game's mechanics in how it's implemented. It completely disrupts the flow of the game and says "fuck it" to all of the game's mechanics, while arguably creating even more imbalance to an already unbalanced game. it really feels like the game caters to less experienced players in order to make them feel like they have a chance.
Even in a game like Samsho where there are plenty of comeback mechanics left and right, it still manages to seem fair and balanced while also giving you a heart attack. The Zetsumei Ougi/ssm, Rage Meter, WFT, Rage Explosion, weapon catches, and issen all seem pretty fair despite some being much better than others (oh and shiz's Crazy downpour/KDP) . You can even consider weapon deflects and weapon catches as well as deep jumps as a pseudo comeback mechanic due to the damage potential or the benefits of disarming your opponent. This game is litteredwith comebacks, and of these mechanics are considered fair despite how ridiculously strong they are because of how they work so well with the game as a whole, and how balanced they are considering the risk vs reward. The game really finds this strange middle ground of catering to new players without completely affecting experienced players with "cheap baby-proof mechanics."
Yo did we not mention GRD in Under Night
I think rage in Ult is actually an example of a pretty good one.
Its not bad but nothing special
I think comeback mechanics are much better when they are actually new moves or mechanics for specific characters, like most V-triggers I feel, Aegis being the prime example. I personally don't find them as fun or interesting when they are just a power boost, like sparking or X-factor (for the most part).
Thumbnail is actually fire!
Back when I played SFV in s2 I remember getting tilted about Urien having great neutral and still for some reason had a setup/mixup-focused vtrigger.
Weak defence
I know youre not a smash head, but im surprised you didnt mention smash 4 rage. As a quick example, samus had a combo that was late hit dash attack into screw attack and that killed at 0% if Samus was at 125ish %, people got HEATED when that happened
ah yes, my favorite mechanic: killer instinct instinct
Sajam I’m extremely surprised you didn’t mention resonance blaze in BBTAG? What are your thoughts? It would be great to hear back from you on your opinion if it adds/subtracts from the overall gameplay?
Im not Sajam, but I think it's a pretty eeak comeback mechanic honesly. Sure it leta you do some sweet ass combos, but it's nothing too game changing. It doesn't change your character in ways that let you single handedly open up an opponent. You always want two charactrrs as oppossed to one.
Not to me tion most characters can't activate it reliably.
Jago and S1 Spinal can build up instinct... but you knew that
Half of the problem I have with fuckin fatal blows is the 13 years it takes to watch them. The first 3 times they're cool, after that its just way too fuckin much man. It completely destroys the flow of the game and makes getting hit by them so much more frustrating overall. If you want some cheap (in mortal kombats sense, it is too much, even if I dont mind comeback mechanics) 30+%, thats fine, but don't make me have to watch that whole thing
Tbh this is any super, but it's way worse when you see them every single game yeah.
Simple resolution: remove super freeze and keep the camera at default positioning, like VSAV. The animations take forever because you have to wait for the freeze, and they have to make the camera fly all over the place.
@@SupermanSajam oh definitely, but netherrealm seems to make them especially slow for cinematic purposes. Im sure they're longer than other supers-if not it certainly feels that way
There are supers in other games like DBFZ that are way longer then them like some of the Level 3's in DBFZ. And cinematic purposes are necessary for them, and having them in 90% of the matches is perfectly fine. Otherwise seeing supers in 90% of the matches in other games, even short ones, would be bad, and they are not.
@@DragoonCenten Nope, bad idea.
I like it when the game limits at one comeback mechanic per game/round. I didn't like when they added Limit Break on top of Spark in Dragon Ball... It made the anchor character way too strong and limit the team composition as you should pick certain characters (Broly, Base Goku, Yamcha, Trunks etc) in order to fully take advantage of this mechanics.
I'll be honest, I prefer the mortal kombat/street fighter style of having a meter to be able to boost special abilities and gain access to offensive and defensive abilities over tekken style "rage mode at less than 30% hp" thing
I wonder if the people who hate comeback mechanics wish a passion (as in, they are all bad, no matter what) would rather the game just end when you're down to your last character against a team of three in dragonball or down even one person in bbtag (which as Sajam said, and have noted from experience, is estremely brutal. Especially in BBTAG), or down to five percent health while your opponent still has 80+ percent left in Tekken or Street Fighter? The odds of getting a win out of those situations is so small that the loser continuing is futile, game should end right there so as to not waste any more time than necessary. Would those people prefer games end up like that?
Im not one of those people, but why would they want the game to just end? The guy whose winning has to finish the job.
@@water-111 What is the point in continuing when the outcome is already decided?
@@noboty4168 But its not decided lol, you MUST finish the job. The game isn't over until the player dies. Comebacks can and have existed without comeback mechanics.
They would LOVE Kizuna Encounter(SNK tag team game).
Instinct feels good. KI wins again.
ROFL, got me with the except X factor 🤣
Imo one of the worst instances of a comeback mechanic is joker in Smash ultimate because in most scenarios he is the ONLY person who can do it in almost every circumstance. On top of that joker without his comeback mechanic is already top tier and no matter how much you’re losing by getting arsene is almost always a win condition. At least with X factor both players have X factor even if it’s more useful for different characters.
Very well said.
Good comeback mechanics:
Burst in GG
V trigger in SVF (SOME VT)
Instinct
Burst in BB
Bad comeback mechanics
Rage in tekken
DBFZ's limit breaker
X factor
Rage in smash 4/Ultimate
Burst is not a comeback mechanic
Baroque in TvC is good for all the chad Wii owners/emulators out there
Comeback mechanics don’t reward the person losing, they punish the person that’s up for not finishing the fight
Hype & Rage more like naps and bottles lmao
DBFZ did come back really good as it feels more as a last ditch effort and not a I win button unlike rage art in Tekken 7 or Vtrigger like to me V trigger isn't an I win but it's just something that could of been base kit for some of them.
....you sure? If you use the correct anchor, it’s downright unfair
Comeback mechanics in DBFZ are not fair in any way, if you think so play Z broly, leave him as the last character with full health and lvl3 sparking and try to win, it’s too easy to win as a player who’s supposed to be in a huge disadvantage
@@grief6052 I already do he is strong when sparking but several characters are like that and Z Broly unlike UI has a limited kit and therefore it's pretty easy to read what they are gonna do.
So I have two different opinions. I haven’t played any traditional fighters with comeback mechanics (I don’t particularly count power rangers’ mega morph) but it was absolutely essential in For Honor, back when I played. I have incredibly fond memories of going 4-1 was Raider, strategically locking onto the enemy who I knew was too panicky to properly counter my r1+r2, allowing me to stampede the enemy team unimpeded.
That game was amazing, and it’s a shame they so clearly loved the weebs most of all.
I really liked baroque mode from TvC
I quite like them in Tekken 7, as I love rage drives, but rage arts can be a little bit polarizing. I think rage arts could be balanced better if they didn’t do so much damage, but rage drives are amazing and should stay.
They could also make Rage Drives more cinematic next game by just messing with camera angles, zoom and other effects.
I would like T8 to have multiple Rage drives that you have to choose at the beginning of the match or just give each character 2 rage drives. The devs could use the different rage drives to fulfill different roles and use them to balance characters. It would be interesting if some rage drives would be launchers and plus on block while others enhance combo potential (Like Lee's rage drive in T7) or increase combo damage. Giving them multiple rage drives could potentially get rid of the rage art mechanic and would provide more satisfying comebacks.
@@jjlw2378 Ideally they just need to remove the Rage Drive types that have become boring, it's pretty clear that a big mid that's plus on block, some of which you can instead use to increase post-S! damage, are the best by a large margin and aren't that interesting anymore, get rid of them or the second RD will probably never get picked.
They might be better off adding movement/crushing RDs, swayback RDs, maybe more low RDs with small combos or single followups after them, I'd even be more interested in a king RD that functions similarly to Giant Swing as a fast throw (But ideally doesn't do ~50% at the wall) but has a 50/50 break mindgame.
@@PsyDin_ Yeah they would definitely have to balance them to give each one pros and cons. Otherwise make all characters have 2 rage drives like Steve or Negan. This could add more options that would make characters much more threatening in rage. Regardless, I would rather have more rage drives take the place of rage arts.
I actually think its the opposite, Rage Arts are currently far easier to accept because balancing them is rather cut and dry, unlike Ultra in USF4, rage arts are universal and basic in their utility. Either combo enders or very punishable gambles (could maybe do without the crazy damage boost at low health).
Rage drives on the other hand can make or break a characters come back potential and end up with the most variables, they can tip from being semi strong to being nearly a full on ToD i.e Steve having a super quick/super easy/super rewarding r.drive. imo they need to really rethink how damage scaling and combos with r.drives work, also not a big fan of the dlc characters like Fahk and Negan getting multiple rage drives for every situation. A lot of discussion around rage drives and how they overextend combos and give far too much damage.
That said, both are sick and compliment each other, the option between both is the interesting choice and Id like to see em both in future Tekken games