Play of the game: Bastion.

@colinbrown74

8 жыл бұрын

The difference here is the game tells you several times how to counter Bastion if he kills you though little yellow tips that pop up. It just seems people don't want to play Genji, Reaper, Hanzo, Junkrat, Widowmaker, Tracer, D.Va, Roadhog, Pharah, or Zenyatta to counter Bastion by using what strengths these characters bring (hint: Mobility to get behind him, long range to outrange him, projectiles that dont need you to stay in his sight for optimal damage, damage that forces him to move, or Discord Orb)

@xalls2389

8 жыл бұрын

Given the reload time of Bastion, he can continue to fire while in sentry mode for quite long enough to deal with threats like Zenyatta (who dies in seconds, especially while under fire from multiple heroes.) The same is true of Hanzo and Widowmaker as Bastion remains effective even at long range, and D. Va and Roadhog... Do you even know what you're talking about? Bastion is designed specifically to counter tanks! Keep in mind that a Bastion with full ammo can continue firing for seven seconds straight. That's long enough to destroy a Roadhog, even if he heals himself, and D Va's only counter is her flight, during which Bastion can still fire at her. Pharah's low health makes her an easy knockout for a Bastion who knows how to click on her for a few seconds, the same is true even more so of Junkrat, who lacks the mobility that Pharah does, leaving Genji, Reaper and Tracer, assuming you know where Bastion is and can use your mobility to get away from/behind him. What if he's backed up against a wall? What if there's no accessible path to where he is unless you face him head on? That rules out Tracer, who will be pretty much forced to rewind away, and to some extent Reaper, who may be able to get off a few shots but will also be easily mowed down due to low HP. Genji is a strong counter to Bastion, but playing him to specifically counter Bastion (especially by a player who lacks the skill to use Genji effectively) is not a viable option, as it basically lowers your team down to 5 people. While Bastion can be countered specifically, it requires a large amount of dedication to doing so, and forcing your opponent's team to do such a thing is a despicable strategy.

@ElNeroDiablo

8 жыл бұрын

D. Va - Fly in and "NERF THIS!". Really useful as an airburst by going OVER buildings, and the mech nuke can NOT be destroyed in the 3 seconds it takes to detonate. Roadhog is meant to pull Bastion out of Sentry mode and up close with the hook before unloading his shotgun into the mech's chest. That's easy enough if there's a vertical difference between the two and Bastion is pulled up/down to the Roadhog. Bastion is basically useless on targets beyond 55 meters, so a Widow with good perch and vantage point out at like 60 meters can punch his core in if Bastion is stupid enough to stay in Sentry mode when he starts taking damage. Ana is decent in that situation as she deals DOT with her rifle if she stays out of range, or hides in an area where she can see/attack the Bastion but he can't see her (same for Widow) A Bastion sitting around a corner with walls nearby is a dead one if Hanzo fires his Split Arrow into the area by bouncing it around the initial corner. Dragonstrike is also useful to take out a Bastion with wall/s between him and Hanzo (Okami/Lone Wolf Hanzo are better at this with their much quieter Dragonstrike). Junkrat also takes benefits of having walls and corners between him and Bastion as he can lob grenades over the walls (if low enough) or bounce them around the corner much like the Split Arrow option. RIP-Tyre is best used if it's climbing over a wall between Junkrat and Bastion otherwise it's shredded if it goes in head-on. Pharah can deal splash damage from around corners and by popping in/out of the way of Bastion, plus doesn't have damage dropoff so can stand/hover 55+ meters away and potshot at Bastion's general area (2 seconds rocket flight between her and Bastion would be 57 meters). As for using Zenyatta to take on Bastion? You better be about 60 meters away and sniping, as his Orb of Destruction fly at 66.66 m/sec (100 meters in 1.5 seconds), and the Orb of Discord only has a 40 meter range before it returns (even if kept in line of sight).

@Stairwayto711

7 жыл бұрын

BRO PLZ DONT TRIGGER ME

@mattias2576

7 жыл бұрын

Man-Eating Bagel sombra is a really good counter to him

The way I see it, this really depends on the game. If the "noob skill" or "noob weapon" shows its limitations as player skill grows, then people are going to start looking at different options once they hit those limits. However, if it promotes bad habits (like E. Honda's 100-hand slap), then it could actually make those players worse in the long run. There's also, of course, the issue of skill rewarding vs skill balancing, or in other words the blue shell paradox.

2:33 < Click here to see a description of Counter Strike

@DaviSilva-oc7iv

3 жыл бұрын

2:33

@anonymousanonymous9587

3 жыл бұрын

JAKE EYES POG

2:35 It's scary how relevant this is for Planetside 2.

@Nersius

8 жыл бұрын

+Jack ­ Made worse by the fact they are actually statistically much stronger than the newcomers, not just skill-wise.

@g_glop

8 жыл бұрын

+Jack ­ Yep, it's either zerg or get zerged, or batcap or get batcapped.

@laughingalex7563

8 жыл бұрын

+G_glop The same happened to the unreal tournament and quake series. It became completely impossible to even learn the games when newbies would be destroyed without any chance of figuring out whats getting them killed, so they'd quit and never return. You'd see servers with a small group of extremely skilled veterans cutting newbies to pieces with such skill levels as to even make some new players think they were cheating but were not. Even being in between a raw newbie and a veteran would result in said newbie mistaking you for a cheater in Ut2k4 with the sheer movement speeds a player could move around the map. Of course I also feel it doesn't help that at the time of UT2k4 there was a lot of people cheating and it caused a witch hunt in which even legitimate players were accused of cheating 90% of the time and it was quickly apparent to anyone with skill that they were not.

@typorad

8 жыл бұрын

+Jack ­ In some respects, the starting equipment is almost equal, but the attachments make a huge difference. Luckily they don't take too long to get a hold of.

@Senaneone

8 жыл бұрын

+Jack ­ Don't forget about fighting games.

One can kinda see this in TF2. Most of the unlockable weapons are empirically _weaker_ than the stock weapons. However, the key is that any given unlock will reward a player with enormous power if they play a certain way or can execute a specific tactic, but at the cost of making other tactics/strategies useless. One example is the old Loch-n-Load vs the stock Grenade Launcher. The L-n-L rewarded players who could consistently land their shots with an enormous amount of damage in a short amount of time. However, some strategies that could be executed with the stock launcher became almost impossible with the L-n-L. Probably my favorite property of the stock launcher is the ability to deal damage to the enemy without being in their line of sight by bouncing 'nades around corners, rolling them down inclines, and lobbing them over obstacles. You can't do that with the L-n-L. Anyway, this is why a common pattern in TF2 is for new players to start with the stock weapons to learn basic play, moderate players to move to unlocks to stretch their abilities and skills, and then advanced players to move back to stock weapons because of their better raw power and well-rounded usefulness.

@cosmozone271

8 жыл бұрын

+Intrafacial86 I'd agree, but I'd add two more unlockables that are similar to your example, which is starter-friendly, but once you get more skilled, becomes rather detrimental. Sydney Sleeper: Increased charge rate, no headshots, marks targets hit with Jarate. Allows starter Snipers to just aim and fire, not opt for a headshot. May not be as powerful as other rifles, but it works to train accuracy. Once the Sniper player gets more skill, they'll hit headshots consistently, and the Sydney Sleeper's no-headshot rule is more of a detriment. Natascha: Damage resistance, damage penalty, and slows down targets hit. Gives Heavies an easier time to hit moving targets, and take a lot of fire in return, which is a problem in starter Heavies, charging in recklessly, guns blazing. The damage resistance helps to increase their longevity, and train them to retreat when on low HP. Once the player becomes better, the damage penalty becomes more prominent, and the slowdown is useless, since you can land shots with the other miniguns just as proficiently as when he had slowdown assist. And the slower spin-up time is neglectible to new players due to spinning up at spawn, but for Heavies who jump-rev or spin up in battle, the time it took to bring the gun to bear is slower, and they could have taken massive damage, or gets instantly killed by a Sniper or Spy.

@Jckfrbn

8 жыл бұрын

+Intrafacial86 Though true, alot and I mean ALOT of vets still use stock because that power is real. I think a better example is(Im going to get crucified) Random Crits, here me out before you kill me. Random crits allow a newbie a chance against a skilled player, and give them a moment of awesome while because of there nature cannot rely on crits saving them when in need. Now when it comes to a competitive environment I see why these are considered negative and agree on all accounts, but they pull newbies in. Let them feel powerful even if just for a moment, and the scaling crits allow less powerful class's(aka medic and engi) to shine even more with these effects encouraging playing with them. Now this isn't the only thing to hook new player but its a big part of why tf2 thrives

@cosmozone271

8 жыл бұрын

I was gonna say Random Crits was basically TF2's response to the Noob Tube, but I just didn't feel like it fit well here.

@remkirkthegamer1157

6 жыл бұрын

I prefer using the Sydney Sleeper to support my teamates. I may not be able to kill anyone instantly but I can use it to put out fires, detect enemy Spys, and apply minicrits to that Heavy+Medic combo pushing

@michaelbesser4984

6 жыл бұрын

Jckfrbn Random Crits actually should, psychologically speaking, drive new players away from the game. What do I mean by this? Zenomite has an in-depth video I would recommend on why crits should be removed, but crit chance actually increases as you do more damage in a period of time. In other words, more skilled players, who likely do more damage, have a higher crit chance. For this to want to draw in and encourage new players, imagine a bell curve. Now, the players to the right of the peak her crits more often than the players on the left of the bell curve. Theoretically, the top 50% of players should profit from crits, as they on average kill more people with crits than people kill them with crits, but that isn't actually the case due to human psychology. You see, humanity suffers from Negativity Bias, or, in other words, bad things will feel twice as bad as good things feel good. If killing someone with a crit is good and getting killed by a crit is bad, then a player would be ambivalent towards crits if they kill people with crits twice as often as people kill them with crits. Only above that point will crits actually feel good to the player. Going back to put bell curve, since this is more or less napkin math and I don't have any mean or standard deviation data to draw from, Let's assume one standard deviation above the mean is considered to be the 2:1 KD ratio when considering crits. You wanna know what percentage of players are more than one standard deviation above the bell curve? 16%. Based off this napkin math, assuming a standard bell curve, only the top 16% of players would actually perceive crits as a good thing. No inexperienced player could ever fall in this area due to how the area is defined in the first place, so theoretically all players lower than the 84th percentile of skill in TF2 players should actively dislike crits more than like them.

I know I'm probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but I think the Super Smash Bros. series does a pretty good job with this. The games' designer, Masahiro Sakurai, implemented Stale-Move Negation (which powers down a move when it is used repeatedly in succession, and restores the move's original power when enough other moves are successfully used) to discourage players from spamming the same move over and over. While it's not perfect, it's certainly a unique mechanic that really makes it worthwhile to utilize a character's entire moveset, rather than relying on a select few bread-and-butter moves.

@BappyDappy

10 жыл бұрын

I had no idea that feature existed. I'll keep that in mind.

@PinuyashaRPG

10 жыл бұрын

Stale move negation is actually a huge problem with Brawl and is not a good balance mechanic at all. The decreased knockback allows for characters to perform stupid long combos with the same move over and over because the knockback keeps decreasing to the point where the opponent needs a high amount of damage percent to even escape. For the characters who don't get so lucky as to have the tools to use stale move negation in their favor, they get screwed over because they have a much harder time getting in hits. And then you have characters like Pit, who only have a limited number of KO potential moves, getting forced to build up ridiculous amounts of damage to KO someone or never using one of their best moves in their toolbox for fear of not getting a KO. Forcing a character to not use their best moves for fear that it will become crap later is stupid. Imagine if Zangeif's Banishing Flat (Green Hand) lost power and priority with each use. Now the 'Gief player is forced to use the move far less despite the fact that using said move is the key strategy for 'Gief getting trough projectile spam. Zangief players get screwed over. A character performing the same move over and over is not a problem that needs to be fixed. There's nothing wrong with a player spamming the same move. After all, there's a HUGE flaw in that strategy. You're super easy to predict. Imagine if a Ryu player kept using Hadoken. The player would easily be punished again and again. If you want a character's full range of moveset to actually get used, then the developer has to not make them shitty and not give a character one move that handles the majority of situations the character encounters. BnBs often exist because a character's other pool of moves are so poor that they're not worth using most of the time. A perfect example of this is Alisa from Tekken. She has one good low attack, and the rest are crap. She's forced to use that same move because she was not developed with better alternatives. Brawl has shit balance and Sakurai has done nothing to help it.

@LegitBacKd00rNiNJa69

10 жыл бұрын

PinuyashaRPG great point stale move negation (with knockback scaling), hitstun canceling, auto sweet spotting and tripping ruined what potentially could have been a worthy, albiet inferior successor to melee.

@kr1spness

10 жыл бұрын

In brawl it was so bad to a point where in competitive play people save their kill moves because using it means another minute of trying not to die because you no longer have anything strong enough to kill. He definitely went overboard, in melee it only effected specials attacks (B moves) which is what most people spammed anyways, perhaps he should have added knock back staling to smash attacks as well instead of merely percentage staling but he went overboard with it in brawl.

@zeromailss

7 жыл бұрын

remind me of DMC 3 where you get bonus score when you use different combo/weapon instead of spamming

At least in TF2, F.O.O strategies are often called crutches. Just as a real crutch would help someone with a limp, but hinder somebody with a functional leg, these weapons or strategies will help newer players, but ultimately hinder those at a higher level of play.

Skill vs power makes me think of parrying and backstabbing in Dark Souls 1. Backstabbing is easy critical damage and just by being faster than your enemy you can get a lot of damage in with little risk. This became so popular that unskilled PVPers would simply rely entirely on it doing lag-stabs. Parrying then riposting is a superior move with it doing a lot more critical damage but it is a lot more difficult (i practiced parrying hollow soldiers for hours until I got parrying down.) Riposting is very powerful able to kill the most intimidating of enemies very easily but it is also easy to screw up. For inexperienced PVPers lag stabbing was a FOOS strategy with many of them not bothering to learn the parry timings.

Many people here don't quite understand what EC is talking about. I'll make a comparison to something in reality that works like what they suggest, martial arts. The average Joe going into a fight for his life against a new martial artist like a white belt is going to use the Foo strategy of flailing. They have no idea how hard they're going to hit the opponent, or if their attack might hurt themselves more than their foe. The average white belt at anything will have just learned the stance and two or three strikes, alongside the blocks to those specific strikes. White belt gets owned because of several reasons. 1. The fighting style as a whole is new and weird to them. The stance puts them at unease, the moves are easily telegraphed because of the slowness to get ready, and they don't know how to block gibberish they've never been taught about before. 2. The white belt absolutely _can't_ figure out what the opponent's thinking of doing next. That's because the opponent _is not_ thinking about it and is just trying not to die. Punch? Kick? Bite? He doesn't know! Confusion-Fu for everyone! Now, as those white belts train up, they learn more moves, more blocks, counters, stances, and become familiar with them all. They become more fluid, more versatile, more aware, more powerful, more skilled. They got good. And that's before getting into the black belts, people who have learned the art to the point where they can find where a new student is failing to perform the move efficiently enough, knowing exactly how much pain someone is going to feel after a technique, how to move at a moment's notice, how to pinpoint every muscle required for a technique to work at its peak performance. That little "Make it up as you go along" fighting style? USELESS They know exactly what you're doing, even if you don't, and they know how to turn your flailing little arms into rubbery, boneless tentacles in five seconds! Without a gun, the only thing that can beat them is another martial artist! *This* is what he's talking about! Noobs shouldn't be able to trample over high-level players, but they shouldn't be getting demolished either. There should be a skill-gate character in a fighting game, for example, who is able to defeat other characters who are being used with equal skill by noobs, but should fall apart before the difficult but awesome ones played by professionals. tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SkillGateCharacters tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DifficultButAwesome As for the Noobtube complaint about incorrect info, the information is misleading, but the principle should not be forgotten, much like how scorpions would never ask frogs to get them across a body of water, yet we still have the age-old tale of the scorpion and the frog. The Noobtube represents something awesome for someone with very little skill but bad for someone with a lot more of experience and technique, much like how the scorpion represents a person who is rotten and untrustworthy and the frog the gullible fool who knew who he was dealing with and gave him a hand anyways and got shanked with a poison stinger in return. The Noobtube represents the crutch-character, the skill-gate tactic, the taste of power that soon becomes meaningless.

@EXHellfire

9 жыл бұрын

Simon Barr thank you for using TVTropes, I never see people doing that...

@BakuTex

8 жыл бұрын

+Red Dragon "They got good." That made me laugh. Alot.

@reddragon8167

8 жыл бұрын

BakuTex Yep, I knew what I was doing when I wrote that. Got tired of people bellyaching at me when I told them I couldn't wavedash in Melee, so I threw that in there.

@FinaIAeon

8 жыл бұрын

+Red Dragon That's not what the video is saying though. The video is saying that the white belt should be able to occasionally take down a black belt by flailing his arms and will eventually adopt new techniques to increase his power. But if a black belt can be taken down by someone who is just flailing his arms how much better than the new player is he really? Was it really worth training for 10 years to achieve black belt status to be taken down by a random guy who is flailing his arms? The video is essentially just saying that skill should be taken out of the equation.

@reddragon8167

8 жыл бұрын

Dances With Poles No, you don't understand. A. The White Belt isn't the flailer. It's the guy who hasn't even registered for the class. B. The video didn't say "master player." They said, "more experienced." A White Belt is the "more experienced" person in this equation. Like I said, Black Belts take one look at the guy doing the arm-flailing and, while it's more difficult to deal with than a White Belt using standard-issue, orthodox tactics, turn them into a fine, red mist with their pinky. The point of the Skill-Gate character is to get a leg up on those of equal or somewhat higher skill, and maybe, maybe, _maybe_, make sure that a high level player doesn't win while blindfolded and playing the game with his toe.

I just realized, that foo strategy thing is exactly what I used to do in Pokemon. I always just used my starter pokemon and nothing else for battles (specifically infernape with only fire and fighting type moves), and I stayed that way all the way up until the elite four, which I couldn't do without grinding to level up other pokemon.

@pokekitty1

8 жыл бұрын

+Dequan Milete nothing to be ashamed of even players from the first gen games have been guilty of doing that when they first started playing myself included. even though the games explain how types work quite well at the beginning if you talk to the right npc they don't really punish players for adopting that strategy all that much.

@BknMoonStudios

8 жыл бұрын

I think that has to do with Pokemon being an extremely easy game overall, bar some very few exceptions. Compare that game with, say, SMT 3: Nocturne and HOLY SHIT, you'll see what I'm talking about. As soon as Matador comes in (and he comes VERY early in the game), you'll either learn to use buffs/debuffs and elemental advantages or you WILL get killed. You simply cannot win that game by using one single strategy. It's almost required to change demons for each dungeon. Just another reason why I love that game. :) (Even though fusing demons for more than 2 specific skills is a pain in the ass.)

@carlolson932

8 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I did that too. I think that's what every kid does when they first play pokemon. That might be why (at least in my experience) people stop playing pokemon in middle school and high school, only to come back again in college.

@WordChicken-mk7el

8 жыл бұрын

That's the exact same thing that happened to me! Exact! Except I never beat the elites...

@BknMoonStudios

7 жыл бұрын

***** It would be a great way to limit options to a few concise ones, but I don't think it would solve the problem at hand. The player can still choose to cheese the game by catching a really strong Pokemon and disregard the rest. In Emerald, all you really need to beat the core game is an overleveled Blaiziken and the occasional counter for when things go wrong. My suggestion would be to _rebalance the movelist, improve the enemy A.I. and raise the skill ceiling a little bit_ so that options in combat become much more *meaningful* and good strategy and planning become a priority, instead of having the player think "what Pokemon/move lets me kill everything before they can strike back".

Another older example I found: Relying on Marcus/Seth in the GBA Fire Emblem games and Ryoma in Birthright. They are _technically_ not the strongest units in their games (some 20/20 units can surpass them) but it's *sooooo much easier* to simply throw them at any problem and hope for the best. And if you play on Normal or Casual, they CAN solo the game.

@geodude671

7 жыл бұрын

Should probably add Xander to that list. Xander can solo Conquest even on Lunatic.

@BknMoonStudios

7 жыл бұрын

Milton Hollmann The problem is that, on any difficulty above Normal, he gets destroyed just as easily as the rest of the Nohrians. His strength, defense and mobility are certainly above the majority of Conquest's cast, but he can be overwhelmed by fast and accurate attacks. Ryoma, on the other hand, can easily clear every chapter he's deployed in, even on Hard difficulty. His high speed, skill and luck make him a solid candidate for a solo run. Not to mention that Birthright favors this kind of playstyle more than Conquest.

@MaJuV

7 жыл бұрын

Yes, but any guide immediately says to drop the Seth/Marcus unit asap because he's an experience spunge for your other units. Yes, he can save them. But removing all that precious XP away from your early game characters is just going to make the game more difficult in the long run (especially the older games where the only way to LV up certain characters is through the Colosseum).

@BknMoonStudios

7 жыл бұрын

MaJuV The problem that, unlike Hard Mode Marcus and Conquest Xander, Seth and Ryoma can solo the game by themselves. They are *_too_* powerful. There's no reason to use anyone else besides voluntarily wanting to do so. And even when that's not the case, I still wouldn't call it a good idea from a game design perspective. Perhaps someone really likes the Jagen of the game or they are led to believe that those characters are good. By the time the player realizes he needs better units, it's entirely possible to have screwed himself over, unless he has mastered the game. (Which isn't likely, given his previous choices.) It goes back to the part in this video where Dan says players either get bored because the game is too easy or they ragequit because the game didn't make sure to teach the game mechanics properly and expects too much from them later on.

@Underworlder5

7 жыл бұрын

not sure if seth is a very good example. the only flaw that jagen characters have (poor growth rates) does not apply to him, so while he is reserved only for emergencies early game, he makes a pretty good regular unit even as your other units start to promote. honestly you still should not trust him that much late game since he goes from a powerhouse to just another unit at your disposal

Holy shit now I understand Master Yi

it seems like devil may crys stylish meter is a way to do that. you can still spam one move the whole game, but you're rewarded for varying your techniques. stringing together combos of different weapons in search of that elusive SSSTYLISH!!!

It's noteworthy that a lot of pro players of any game became good by sticking to the same strategy or character for a very long time. Many LoL pros began as "one trick ponys" only playing one character. Beyond just learning that one mechanic, doing the same things over and over again also provides tons of insight into other elements of play (in LoL for example how roaming and ganking and objectives work) on a high level, that can then be transitioned to other strategies and characters. Like, someone who always zerg rushes will also see what strategies are good versus rushes and which are particularly vulnerable.

This completely happened with me in final fantasy 12 I was playing along and had just passed the opening section of the game. I had discovered a special move called quickening which was basically that games limit break. I could only use it once, with one character, and then i effectively couldnt use that character again until i reached a checkpoint I eventualy reached a stage where the attack wasnt enough and i needed to strategize but I couldn't.

A classic episode. Everyone should see this one.

This is why League of Legends is so popular in my opinion. At low levels they match u up with new players and the low cost champs that wreck others were like teemo or warwick but as you leveled up and had the points to get new champs you saw that it required more slightly more skill but was more powerful and it sucked you into the addictive game

@vitorsantos5047

4 жыл бұрын

nowadays the low lvl matchs only have Smurf accounts Sad..

great video! sound reasoning and very appropriate in the gaming era we are in. thanks!

Holy crap at 2:53 the veteran just 'put himself in their shoes' literally, nice touch

I can't believe you guys have been around for this long and I just learned of your videos. Now I'm hooked.

I feel the noobtube is a poor example because every gun in CoD kills in like 2-3 shots anyway so a bad player can often kill a good player just because they started shooting first.

@gmwho170

8 жыл бұрын

+shurikin93 This is really only the case in hardcore mode. Normal has always taken a few extra bullets to kill someone.

Splatoon has suffered severely from this problem since its launch. Currently, if you're not one of the long-time players, you have no chance. Everything is balanced such that new players have no "noob tube" to turn to. The closest there is to that is the .52 Gal, which you still have to get up to level 5 to even access (most players that quit early do so by level 3 or 4), and the advanced player base has found a multitude of ways to nerf its effectiveness to near-zero. There's not even a way to limit matchmaking so that you don't get pitted against high-level players; it just "tries" to get you in against similar-leveled players. But since there's no low-level players left, you're stuck against a pack of level 50 players every time.

@crimson-foxtwitch2581

7 жыл бұрын

Sky Render Blasters were implemented but they are made accessible way too late into the game

@pistonpkm

7 жыл бұрын

The introduction of the "Noob Tube" kind of weapons in Splatoon present yet another problem. Because they have such high kill power and are easy to use, they tend to be effective all the way to high level, causing many experienced players never abandon them.

@silverrain530

6 жыл бұрын

Sky Render I don't know, I barely play Splatoon and I almost always am the best player on my team (albeit this is in turf war, not ranked).

@Bobsican

6 жыл бұрын

And thus the Clash Blaster Neo happened.

@awesomefuzz4008

5 жыл бұрын

Um, rollers? Countered easily, but when they get the jump on you you’re dead. Of course, flicking is better once you’re skilled, but rolling works occasionally.

A game that really suffered from ignoring this concept is For Honour and I genuinely believe it's one of the major killing blows for the game. There are many skills (mostly of all guard break) that require skill to dodge - if you fail to dodge it, it is very easy to get instantly killed by either cliffs or spikes. It basically means there's no room at all for beginners because if THEY use it an experienced player can easily block it, punish them for it and kill them. Whereas on the other hand, the one who fails to block it dies instantly or at the very least suffers heavy damage. It also doesn't help that some characters have some REALLY fun skills that are really effective... but easily countered if you know about them - namely shugoki is super guilty of this. He's tanky, loads of really deadly and beginner friendly moves... but once someone knows how to beat him, he's just out-paced and countered to death. The skill cap drops off hard and suddenly and means you have to pick an entirely different character to get back into good game habits. Or failing that a LOT of painful persitence that most would find too repetative.

I think these videos are extremely good. Their structure is very well thought out, they are very easy to understand yet very informative and they are super well illustrated. Keep it up man! PS It would be cool if you could do more in depth videos every once in a while. They might include more theory and mathematics and statistics.

One word: "seal-clubbing." When an elite, highly skilled player goes into a game full of new players and more-or-less hunts them for sport.

@mage3690

4 жыл бұрын

Or smurfing, as it's now more commonly known.

"Never see veterans use low skill, high power tactics" Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope.

@ufukcangencoglu2279

6 жыл бұрын

He was talking about stuff that ONLY helps noobs to have a chance to compete. Also not that good when you are a skilled player.

@cephalonorcan4256

4 жыл бұрын

They mean things like spamming heavy attacks or special attacks or button mashing

@mileshardin6906

4 жыл бұрын

NEVER cheese. nope.

This is why I love the Dark Souls community so much. It starts out as a difficult game then when you play it so much that it becomes too easy, you can do what a lot of the community does and play the game again with restrictions placed on yourself such as no leveling, no using certain items, modding the game to make enemies more difficult etc. It's one of the few game I have played where you actually want even more of a challenge and actively search for new ways in which to under-power yourself.

This is one of these topics I didn't really think about before. Thank you for explaining it in more detail!

"I main Meta Knight."

The grenade launcher has a higher skill curve than any weapon in CoD, it can be prefired more effectively, it's perfectly accurate, it can kill multiple enemies with one shot, it arcs over cover and has splash damage which can mean hitting a ceiling or a floor near a corner allows you to kill enemies which cannot even engage you. It's really powerful for the untrained user but only gets better and outclasses all other weapons. Pros either can't use it because it's banned or definitely use it for spawn killing, depending on the context of the competition...

@Vedgy

10 жыл бұрын

***** I said it had a higher skill curve but meant skill ceiling, my bad. Either way I kind of think you didn't read my whole comment.

@Vedgy

10 жыл бұрын

***** I think we'll just have to agree to disagree, there is so much you can do with the m203 if you're good with it that you just can't do with a point and click gun. I'm not saying it's hard to use, it's just that if you truly master it, you can accomplish more with it than you could with a plain assault rifle. Once you get down headshots with a point and click gun you're a one trick pony. You can't kill people you can't see. You can't shoot over cover. You run the risk of random recoil and spread making your gun miss. You move more slowly because you need to aim to be accurate. It puts you at a tactical disadvantage to use any other kind of weapon. So sure, it's not hard to use it effectively, but it has more potential than any other weapon to be used masterfully. Also I should specify I'm mostly referring to it in the context of MW2 where you could have potentially infinite grenades for it. Okay have a great day, thanks for not using any mean words with me.

@deriznohappehquite

10 жыл бұрын

Matthew Sbar And that makes it overpowered.

Always learning something new about gaming with these videos! Keep it up guys!

I think a great example of this would be the Drake Sword in the first Dark Souls. You can find it very early, and it's incredibly powerful during the early game. Eventually, you hit a brick wall with it and are either forced to change weapons or have a much harder time getting through the game. The problem is, the Drake Sword is so effective early game that it makes a lot of the essential mechanics trivial, so new players don't learn the game. When they get to a point where they have to use a new weapon, none of the weapons to choose from are as proportionally powerful as the DS was in the beginning, and now they have to learn the mechanics. At this point in the game, the devs expected you to know the mechanics, so the difficulty has significantly increased, making learning the mechanics a million times more difficult.

when i started playing street fighter II i usually select M. BISON.... because his moves are so easy to control, yet deliver powerful damage. i used to defeat the game very often with him :) and i admit i was not skilled player and very often i was overwhelmed by skilled player like RYU or KEN...

It saddens me this video has only 125k views. More people need to be aware of the skill/power duality!

@Knalxz

10 жыл бұрын

I know right. I'm very surprised that the people on this channel don't get more attention.

@Mahaveez

10 жыл бұрын

SuperKnalxz Grey They should at least be up there with Game Theory. Maybe they just haven't figured out how to advertise it well?

@ShouldOfStudiedForTheTest

6 жыл бұрын

Mahaveez EC doesn't use clickbait and prefers quality content over wild theories, that is the reason for less success than Game Theory.

This video just reenforces my love for KH2FM. it's combat is so beautifully fine tuned, and it kinda has fout (w/e) strategies at low as well as high skill levels. Just so satisfying.

I think you should push to make that "Strategy + Free Cake" frame more well known. My gosh, that single frame easily sums up such a good game mechanic on so many levels for so many game genres, not just balancing and difficulty walls.

4:05 I'm thinking of the Dark Souls Drake Sword

@noonoox12

7 жыл бұрын

Noob tube done right

@rockthemoose66

4 жыл бұрын

Ouch... you are so right. (Wow, 3 years ago. Hello from 2020!)

Smash Bros. Melee provides the best balance for skill ratio I have ever experienced. The advanced techniques are easy to use, but hard to master. It is easy to play as a party game, but it requires some commitment to play at competitive levels. However, Wavedasdhing, L-Cancelling and DI are not very difficult skill barriers to cross and anyone can learn their basics between a week or two, often less time even. I can do it in backhand style, pressing the shoulder buttons with my pinkie fingers. If I can do it, anyone with an able pair of hands can. Higher level smash is extremely accessible, and with the additions of certain feedback features, Project M has made it even more accessible while keeping its depth. Making a game too challenging to learn is a problem, but so is making it too easy. The idea is to give incentive for people to learn. the player who learns these techniques must have a clear advantage, but it must be easy enough to learn these tricks so that anyone can pull them off with some time and effort.

@snes90

10 жыл бұрын

I get what you're saying and I learned how to perform some of those advanced techniques myself. But the apparent ease in learning them is sharply contrasted by the skill and experience needed to incorporate them into actual play; competitive Melee is anything but "extremely accessible". But I do agree that Smash Bros. provides a great low-barrier-of-entry, high-level-of-mastery experience.

Just so you know, the pyro from TF2 is one of my examples of parts in games that make it easier for newcomers. The pyro is simple to play, can beat out medium tier players, and because the pyro is also one of the hardest classes to master, it grants new players some immunity against veterens. The difference between how a newbie players and how a regular plays reinforces this balancing for skill, as the pyro drops off usage when regulars learn of better classes. That is, until a newbie pyro comes around that kicks the crap out of them because playing against a pyro is different to playing against any other class.

i really like your vids and esp the illustrations very good!

true story!

If you want to be a game developer and you think that advanced mathematics is not necessary or useful, I encourage you to read this! I was enticed by the (unfinished) explanation of the difference between a higher power/skill ratio for lower skill and a higher power output for lower skills, so I decided to go ahead and do some math for those that may have been as interested as I was, and to show what math can do to solve problems in game development. If we say that the power of a tactic should be dependent on the skill needed to execute such a move, then we can say that power is a function of skill, and call that function P(s). Since increasing the skill required should never decrease the power of the move, we can say that P(s) is, ideally, a monotonically increasing function. This just means that increasing skill will only increase power or cause no change, it will NEVER decrease power. On the other hand, the power/skill ratio, which is P(s)/s, should be higher at lower skill levels. In other words, decreasing skill should cause an increase in power/skill, and increasing skill should cause a decrease in power/skill. We call this function monotonically decreasing. So our goal is to find a function P(s) such that P(s) is monotonically increasing and P(s)/s is monotonically decreasing. This is where the math comes in, and requires at least some knowledge of differential equations and calculus to fully understand. P(s) is monotonically increasing is an equivalent statement to P'(s) ≥ 0. P(s)/s is monotonically decreasing is an equivalent statement to [P/s]'(s) ≤ 0. This gives us a system of differential inequalities. Expanding the derivatives and doing some algebra, we have: P'(s) ≥ 0 P(s) ≥ sP'(s) (it's also important to note that, since we're talking about power of tactics and skill levels, we should only consider that P ≥ 0 and s ≥ 0, since it makes no sense to consider negative values of power or skill) We'll solve the bottom equation and see which solutions satisfy the top also. If we assume a solution of the form P(s) = e^(ks), we can see that e^(ks) ≥ ks*e^(ks). Since e^(ks) is always positive, we have 1 ≥ ks. This means that k can be 0, as 1 ≥ 0; k can be negative since ks would be a negative number and therefore less than 1; or k can be 1/(s+a) [a ≥ 0], since ks would be s/(s+a) which is always between 0 and 1 for a ≥ 0 and s ≥ 0. In the first case, k = 0, so P1(s) = e^(ks) = e^(0) = 1. In the second case, k is negative, so we'll say that k = -b, where b ≥ 0, and P2(s) = e^(-bs). In the third case, k = 1/(s+a), so P3(s) = e^(s/(s+a)). Since multiplying by a positive constant doesn't change the value of an inequality, our solutions become the following: P1(s) = c P2(s) = ce^(-bs) P3(s) = ce^(s/(s+a)) a, b, c, s ≥ 0 For P1, we see that increasing skill required results in no change in the power of the tactic. While this technically satisfies the requirement of being monotonically increasing, it's not what we want so we can throw it away. With P2, P2'(s) = -bse^(-bs), which is always negative, and therefore doesn't satisfy our first requirement. P3 is, however, the winner here. Checking with the inequalities, P3'(s) = [a/(s+a)^2]e^(s/(s+a)), which is always positive for a > 0, and is 0 for a = 0 (which makes P3 = P1). Double checking in the second condition (though this is what we were solving for so it SHOULD work), [P3/s]'(s) = -[(s^2 + as + a^2)/(s^2(s+a)^2)]e^(s/(s+a)), which is always negative for a ≥ 0. In the end, we can say that, ideally, the relationship between power and skill should be determined by the function P(s) = ce^(s/(s+a)), for any positive numbers c and a. Changing a will affect the steepness of the curve, while changing c will affect the scaling (which is ultimately useless since there's no real unit for power and skill in this sense). I'm curious as to whether or not this is actually used in game development or if there's a more trial and error approach to solving this problem. Either way, I had fun solving it and I hope that some of you discovered how useful math can really be in solving real-world (or game-world) problems.

@matthewneagley2136

9 жыл бұрын

I enjoyed this a lot and it's full of good insights. Consider this also: Another way of saying this is that P(s) must be monotonically increasing since more s must bring more P ie P'(s) must be ≥ 0. Another way of saying that the rate at which P(s) increases must decrease as s increases is P''(s) must be ≤ 0. Now, especially in polynomial functions P(s)/s is sometimes used as a convenient shorthand for P'(s) so it's not surprising that if we consider them roughly the same, that we've said the same thing, but trying each may produce some interesting results. In addition, using this method it's fairly easy to find P3'(s) and P3''(s) and show that P3'(s) is always positive and P3''(s) is always neagtive (it ends up hinging on -a^2 -2as always being negative and since s>0 is a given and a>0 is neccesary for earlier parts to work right, we're in the clear) Further, while I think you've made a good choice in assuming a form of an exponential funtion (it's a common growth form and the derivatives are pretty easy), don't forget there are other functions or function segments that hold the same properties. Some transformations of 1/x, roots of x of a magnitude >1, segments of polynomial curves, some harmonic functions for example so there are a wide range of curves to choose from depending on the particular behavior we want within the restrictions of P'(s) ≥ 0 and P''(s) ≤ 0

@Dracus_Dakkrius

9 жыл бұрын

Yes. YES! This is exactly the mathematically stated guideline that game devs should follow! (or at least, a good concept to look at when trying to balance a game in any area.) I'm copying and saving this in a text document for future reference.

@FinaIAeon

8 жыл бұрын

+Alexander Jones I haven't taken calculus, so correct me if I'm wrong (which you probably will because you took the time to write all of that out showing you're invested in the idea enough to argue for it), but it sounds like all the mathematics you describe are theoretical with little to no application in PvP games. While it would work in a matchup against X skill vs Y skill and then comparing the level of difficulty to execute to determine the winner, games often involve counters to certain classes in general or to a particular class of skills (i.e. mages deal more damage to warriors but are weak to rogues, or riven to counter darius, etc.). Then you also have to add buffs and debuffs into the equation. You also have to take into consideration the utility of a skill, which has a nominal value that can't easily be calculated in math because if you have a skill that freezes someone, it might be no issue for a tank class, but it would be a huge detriment to a rogue class. The only way I can see a mathematical approach to PvP being effective is if the skills are homogenous and all values are calculated equally across species and no skill or ability lasts long enough to influence anything outside of an immediately following combo. In which case, PvP will be boring. An example of what I'm getting at is runescape PvP. You could say that it was balanced because all characters have the same access to abilities and potential stats, taking level out of the equation. However, if one character uses a combination of magic and archery which is slightly more difficult than just hack and slash, against a primarily close range class then that close range class would simply lose without much of a fight despite both players being equally skilled. If you provided utility to the close range character to stop the long range characters move, then the long range player is at a disadvantage. Small differences like that can make huge differences, and ultimately people will join the bandwagon and change the relative difficulty of skills. On top of that, we have to go through the calculations to determine what is considered Power. What factors into skill? Can it be items, money, mounts? Etc.

@Aki-to

8 жыл бұрын

+Alexander Jones Satan, just give me the finished product. I won't even calculate 1+7 because it is too hard. Maybe I just should delete anything in my game, that demands math. Satan not allowed!

@alxjones

8 жыл бұрын

+Dances With Poles The best point you brought up is that we didn't really define power or skill (which in general should be part of 'cost' instead) in a real way. Determining how much 'power' a strategy has can be a whole feat in it's own right, and same goes for the 'skill' required to implement it. An example of a sufficient definition would assign an accurate power level to each strategy in a best case situation, and consider the likeliness of such a scenario and what can be done to combat it. This would include buffs and debuffs, interesting combinations, and any other things which change the direct amount of power, but it would also help us identify the usefulness of counters and checks, on a small scale and a large one. This is quite complicated, but with a sufficient defintion, strategies can be put on the curve and there will be a balance, as long as we recognize that the power of a strategy will shift due to a metagame, and when that shift is too large, there should be a change in the skill/cost.

This made me think about the Arkham games, you start of with punching and countering which are powerful enough, but you slowly gain more gadgets and techniques that grant more xp if you use them. Nice to know, good vid.

Thank you extracreditz!!! My friends and I are trying to come out with a fighter and this and the music video helped me greatly. Thank you.

Pros don't use the noob tube in CoD because it's banned. In MW2 it had ridiculous synergy with One Man Army and Danger Close.

A great example of this is Yun vs Chun Li, the S-Tier characters in Street Fighter 3. Chun Li outdoes the majority of the roster in raw power, and is quite easy to use. However, Yun outdoes the ENTIRE roster in terms of sheer speed and ferocity, but is far harder to use due to more difficult inputs, low health and low stun meter. Most competitive players will actually use Chun Li due to her simplicity, but a truly smart player can use Yun, who (when played to his maximum potential) destroys Chun Li. Chun Li is basically the FOO strategy, whereas Yun is the true best overall. Then there is Sean, but we don't talk about Sean.

@ZhangHe2369

10 жыл бұрын

But if you actually played 3s against people, you'd remember that yun's bad match-ups are Chun-li and Ken, the two simplest and most powerful characters in the game. Even at the highest level. And Yun was only good because he had the most overpowered super in the history of street fighter (even more broken then aegis reflector). If Yun didn't have Geni-jin, Yun would be Remy tier.

@fwolle30

10 жыл бұрын

Another greate example is Tomb Raider Aniversary. The End Bosses forces you to use certain skills, ive never practiced, until it was crucial to know them. T-Rex introduces a special attac thant was'nt needed when discovering a bug (or execute the technic by accident), and then the cenaurs rely on the technic, you could'nt practise enough because it was easier to rush through.

@MoldMonkey93

6 жыл бұрын

Kurt Horsting Yet 3Rd strike balances out so well, when you get the skill needed.

whenever i start a new game, i try to find one of the hardest skill ways to play so that I learn fastest how to be good. then, when I'm tired of losing a lot, I fall back on foo strategies. It's really important that they exist, i never realized that. beautiful video.

This reminds me a lot of the Smart Pistol in Titanfall. The note of "challenges" to ween players off of this particular strategy is present in the regen challenges, which require you to use and master weapons other than the ones you'd normally use if you want to advance in prestige.

How am I supposed to solve for n when you didn't give me enough equations? I can only express it in terms of other unknowns.

3:39 Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Links multiplayer in a nutshell.

I just referenced this in conversation with a mod developer for Minecraft. I wanted to make sure they didn't fall into the pitfall of making something a FOO Strategy. This will probably be only the first of many times I reference this video. Thanks for all you do to help the Internet (and anyone with access to it) to understand game design, EC. If I ever become a big game developer, and it's something I hope to become eventually, you definitely have a job with me if you're interested :-)

Good video 😊 The section about FOO strategies reminded me of my first experience with Final Fantasy VIII. I didn't really grok the junction system, but summoning GFs did *way* more damage than my normal attacks, especially when I Boosted them as best I could - so I almost completely relied on them for bosses. Then I came completely unstuck against a boss near the end of the game, where using GFs would inevitably cause a game over. I didn't have the knowledge needed to win that fight, so gave up on the game for a while. When I came back and started again, I took the time to actually understand the junction system (and realised how slow my original GF strategy was, aheh). So that boss was just another roadblock.

League of legends anybody? lol Riot NEEDS to see this.

@BlackHoopz

10 жыл бұрын

ramus will never be the same....ever

@y0urh0mew0rk

10 жыл бұрын

yea. and it's annoying when you see diamond "beginner players" playing trynda.

@psinjo

10 жыл бұрын

they do see this. a riot employee was even the inspiration behind their "counter play" video. Perfect examples? garen, tryndamere. they absolutely stomp early levels because people don't know how to get around them. Yet watch the lcs, I haven't seen anyone use garen ever personally, and It's been at least a year since anyone played tryndamere. It also heavily varies on your champion pool. For example, I like to play poppy, who counters tryndamere, if you don't play her, you might have to find a different way to beat him. A friend of mine was bored and played lissandra top, she literally shuts down garens entire existance because if you play well, he'll never get close enough to hurt you. And while lissandra top may not be LCS strategies, it's a different way to play, that certainly can work

@y0urh0mew0rk

10 жыл бұрын

psinjo well dunno in which league you or your friend paly.. but trondomere was played alot at the moment i commented that; about lyssandra and garen.... heh, that garen's probably an idiot; all toplaners should win vs all midlaners if played well (few exceptions) in limited area. greater base dmg, more gap closers, can take way more dmg, more sustain, etc. The new Riven is a perfect example; she gets raped by every toplaner since the hp regen nerf. they didn't take the cd / dmg ratio from her, cause that's a midlaner's speciality. Different ways to play can be done in silver / gold tier and they are hugely limited by the enemy skill; that's why you win and go higher. But when you reach an opponent with same skill level, the counters come in and you can kiss goodbye to your "creative" playstyle. And then again, there are the "win only" guys who are picking only the banable champs since we can only get rid of 6 of 'em.

@vialgyy

10 жыл бұрын

Riot did this right, darius, yi those are champs easy to play at lower levels but once you get better at the game you play otherones that require more skill.

The TF2 team need to watch this episode... Hopefully then they can skill index shit like the Short Circuit

Plan on becoming a game designer, these videos help alot! i just ogt back from your bejeweled 2 video that was pure genuis!

great insight I never consciously thought of this until now thank you

now i get why master yi is only 300 lp

The noob tube is a terrible example. The game never forces you to try something different, and it remains pretty useful even against skilled players. Why do you think it's banned in competitive play? So no, I don't think it benefits the game. It fundamentally breaks it, and is completely unnecessary when there are ways of pandering to new players without breaking your game if the developers weren't so lazy/pushed for time.

@unsertainley

10 жыл бұрын

If you can find the way to give new players a chance against veteran players. We're all ears. But yes I do agree with you.

@ethanmcd2

10 жыл бұрын

***** I'd like to see you in bronze beat a Master league smurf. You won't unless your really lucky. the same thing with a grenade launcher, you'll get kills but unless it's team death match it isn't going to effect the outcome much. other people will still kill way faster than you. also, with a name like McToast1337 I severely doubt your old.

@Artersa

10 жыл бұрын

***** Except that the Grenade Launcher in MW2 cant be avoided with skill all the time. The TTK in the game is so low already that once sighted, escaping is hard. With the launcher, it becomes much harder, if they fire soon enough you die. If they fire a bit too late with a gun, you get behind the wall in time. Nade Launcher? The AOE is big enough to still net you that kill.

@coastersplus

10 жыл бұрын

***** Yes, it would be great if people had to learn to play the game through single-player instead of going into multi-player with no knowledge. And I suppose a game could be developed so that multi-player was unlocked only after single-player was beaten. But honestly, it seems that there should be some better way.

@HolyAvgr

10 жыл бұрын

***** Or ... you know, considering your player-base being in the millions, instead implement a ladder system? Like any single game that takes ranking does?

Very insightful video this one. I'd apply this to experienced veteran gamers as well, whenever they feel wear and tear (a.k.a. boredom). If you are really good at a game but you start to get tired of it for whatever reason, try re-adjusting your strategy and/or try another role (Support, Heavy Gunner etc. etc.). Find ways to get better. "Power" has no meaning without some sort of "Skill" after all. Remember, you can only be a better/more skilled/more powerful you. No one else can.

This is something that could be used in teaching. Making sure that the assignments match the level of skill students are expected to have at that time.

THE BEARDED BABY OH MY GOD

@hyperreal866

8 жыл бұрын

+Ridley yes

ok, because so many people don't seem to get what he's saying. skill a = very easy has 100 power skill b = less easy, has 125 power skill c not very easy, but has 150 power skill d hard, has 175 power. this is a GENERALIZATION for what he's saying. He is NOT saying that a skill with more power should be easier than a move with less power. he's saying that a skill's difficulty should not scale 1 to 1 with it's power. skill d might be twice as hard to pull off as skill a, and might be a better skill all around, but it should NOT have 2x the power just because it's more difficult. let's pretend skill e has twice the difficult of skill a, but has 2x the damage. it is too powerful, because new players will get steamrolled by it before they can properly learn anything else in the game. The objective is to have easy skills that have modest power, and can still potentially take out a better player (give them a chance at all), but a veteran who is better at the game, doing skills with 3x the difficulty CAN"T be doing 3x the damage with a single skill. Or it's simply no fun

@awesomefuzz4008

5 жыл бұрын

TL:DR for the above comment: Move A requires 10 skill and deals 10 damage. Move B requires 20 skill and deals 13 damage. Move C requires 40 skill and deals 18 damage. This is (roughly) balanced.

Interesting concept. I've never actually thought about this before but it makes a lot of sense

Fantastic video and one that developers and gamers alike should watch to understand why certain mechanics are left in games even when they seem wildly unbalanced.

I solved for N

Nowadays, it's Micro-transactions and cash currencies = no skill needed.

@Khalkara

10 жыл бұрын

Alfred Yap In very few games (bad ones) they do that.

@Khalkara

9 жыл бұрын

***** I don't see an increase in pay to win games? Wildstar, Archeage and some of the other big MMO releases this year weren't P2W.

@Khalkara

9 жыл бұрын

***** "gaming"

@Khalkara

9 жыл бұрын

***** Wow did I touch a nerve there? Jeez louise, calm down. Mobile gaming is as relevant to gaming as street football is to actual football clubs.

@Khalkara

9 жыл бұрын

***** "they are barley even games" That is my whole point. Seriously what are you mad about? Street football is practised alot more because of its shitty quality (so to speak) when compared to organised ('legit') football clubs. But in reality what a couple of kids do on the streets isn't really relevant to the sport as a whole. What a national football club does IS relevant to the sport as a whole. In other words: You can't compare proper games to mobile ones.

Damn it EC! These vids are narcotics. sitting here at 03:00 at night watching them!

Extra Credits, don't ever stop making these. :D

so... moral of the story: git gud or git rekt

Bastion in Overwatch. Fine example of a FOO strategy.

@SoylentGamer

8 жыл бұрын

***** There are counters other than Genji, and a smart Genji with good tracking will instead reflect Bastion's bullets onto his teammates instead of Bastion himself. Pharah, Widowmaker, and Hanzo all can outrange Bastion, especially if they have teammates distracting him. Reaper if played well and strafing can outduel a Bastion close quarters too. Roadhog can hook Bastion out of turret mode, and Tracer can bomb him easily.

@SoylentGamer

8 жыл бұрын

+hjklr54679 Okay, there are counters outside of Genji. Widowmaker and Hanzo can outrange him. Reaper can take him out point blank if he strafes properly, Roadhog can pull him out of sentry mode, a McCree stun-fan combo will kill him.

@colinbrown74

8 жыл бұрын

I agree here. Bastion is an easy defense hero since defense is typically harder than offense so they needed a simple, "Foo" character. However, he gets destroyed when someone switches to almost an entire half of the game's roster and uses those characters well. Genji can deflect him long enough to get behind or can sneak past him very well. Reaper can use Wraith Form to get to him and then blast his core, or use teleport to sneak behind him. Tracer is the best at getting behind Bastion through Blink, and has an out with Recall. Pharah can just long range shoot rockets at him to force him to move. Junkrat can shoot frags around corners or over walls to get Junkrat (or my favorite, suicide into Bastion with mine and kill with passive). Hanzo can use his arrows similar to Pharah rockets, plus has the advantage of using arc to more safely attack, PLUS his ultimate can force Bastion to move. Widowmaker is a hard counter since she can be all the way across the battle and kill Bastion.

@colinbrown74

8 жыл бұрын

(Entire counter list didnt fit in one comment) D.Va's projectile blocking move can tank for her team long enough to focus Bastion and her ultimate forces Bastion to move or die. A really good Roadhog can sneak around and hook a Bastion out of Sentry mode. Zarya can somewhat counter with her arced projectiles, although not quite as well as Junkrat. Finally, Zenyatta can use Discord Orb to make focusing Bastion 100% easier for his team, and a REALLY good Zenyatta can use his ultimate to tank some Bastion shots for those behind him. Bastion's skill cap is relatively low and he can't do much passed what he can do off the bat. Sure, a super Bastion player will probably be able to find ways to enhance him through the map and such, but so can any character players.

@RhynoD2

8 жыл бұрын

This is where you have to go watch the other Extra Credits video on perfect imbalance and incomparables. Bastion is easily countered and not a good hero...except for when he's OP as shit. With the right team around him, on the right map, he's incredibly useful. He himself counters other heroes, and some strategies on certain maps. But that's part of the game. That's why we enjoy Overwatch and are playing it instead of, say, Halo or COD. Because there are checks and balances and different strategies and team comps to play with, eh?

They also start coming across other terran players who spend the first ten minutes or so clenching for the rush, but soon start to realize fewer and fewer players are using rush strategies, and the ones that do get shut down irrevocably rather early. Since they no longer need to clench for the rush, they can start spending the resources they would have spent on front-loading thier base with anti-rush measures on other things, and begin to have a deep, strategic experience.

Nice video, It had a lot of good points. I guess you can call skill a form of difficulty curve. What I got from this is that you don't want the skill to be to high to be worth the reward. Like most difficulty curves you want to ease your players into it by having the skill/reward increase in small but substantial increments, until they are finally ready for top tier characters.

Waaat. The noobtube argument is COMPLETE bunk. You can easily remedy the slaughterfests by stratifying similar skill groups together or some other means. You don't compromise gameplay! A player who spent 100 hours on a game should not have an "EZ" option of besting a 2000+ hours player. In chess, there's no imbalanced chess piece that can occasionally crush grandmasters. That philosophy is one of my biggest peeves about the gaming industry today. Old school games like Counter-strike, Quake, Starcraft, etc. are not as popular because players don't like the challenge of climbing the skill curve (which is fine). Valve (and Blizzard somewhat) are now finding nice ways of offering a pleasurable experience to everyone in the skill spectrum with things like casual/custom game modes and Elo rank systems.

@DrZalmat

9 жыл бұрын

Actually, I think the argument is valid. For example in DOTA2 there is a matchmaking based (roughly) on skilland there are some Foo Strategies, for example the Rikiplayer. Riki is a permanent invisible hero who can totally own in low ranked games without much skill because no one knows how to counter him. In higher mmr people learned to counter him but the typical Rikiplayer never learned the other basics of the game like positioning simply because he learned to play a hero others cannot see. So he totally gets owned. That means basically that he is stuck in low mmr, because he cannot win enough to get through to higher play himself and he never learns the skills necessary because he never gets involved with better players he could learn from. You usually learn not simply by doing, but by doing it together with people who are better than you.

@herpderpmonkey

9 жыл бұрын

Xamael Zalmat that's nothing to do with the issue... that's just poor design of low skill cap. "Easy to learn, hard to master" -CEO of Atari That should be the design principle of any skill based game.

@-snek.

9 жыл бұрын

AWP.

@herpderpmonkey

9 жыл бұрын

***** low fire rate, inefficient for close range engagements, scoping makes noise to give away position, high cost. It's a powerful weapon but noobs will use it as a crutch and it's easy for decent players to marginalize them.

@-snek.

9 жыл бұрын

herpderpmonkey One-hit kills, pinpoint accuracy and a sizeable ammo pool for a sniper. It illustrates the point of this video. The AWP is an annoying weapon, sure, but it gives new players some fighting chance against others and people who use it soon find that there are more useful weapons capable of handling a far broader range of situations once the player learns to use them over the AWP.

Heres an idea: GIT GUD

@redrounin1440

9 жыл бұрын

***** WUT R U CASUL?

@AlenobaLP

9 жыл бұрын

redrounin u r a nub, amirite?

@redrounin1440

9 жыл бұрын

Alenoba u wot m9?

@bocbinsgames6745

9 жыл бұрын

***** I'm not a casul i play competetive lemmings

@PAPASTAIN

8 жыл бұрын

+Fred Dafish but that's kinda the point tho. there should be some characters easier than others in terms of skill floors (and likewise, for a satisfying mid-player, more difficult characters in terms of skill floors), but in terms of overall skill ceiling, everyone should relatively even out (although higher tiers tend to have a higher skill ceiling by definition, because highest-skill players are best with them)

Fantastic episode.

I've actually been researching for a speech about this topic. There are many studies out there that have concluded that playing violent games leads to more aggressive thinking, not actions. The responsibility still lies on the person to differentiate reality and the game. There are also many positive effects from playing action games like COD, including faster decision making skills, better spacial awareness, improved dexterity, etc.

OMG EC JUST SHOWED US HOW TO FIX CALL OF DUTY AND MAKE IT FUNNER :O

@MrDoverfield

8 жыл бұрын

Yes more noob tubes

@awesomefuzz4008

5 жыл бұрын

..and they do that with different episodes for a LOT of games.

Call of duty is susscessful?

@DudeTheMighty

10 жыл бұрын

CoD is a well-made, well-designed series with a terrible community.

@muzzleflash6922

10 жыл бұрын

Henry Mclaughlin I am talking about ghosts I love Blops 2 it was good fun. Ghosts came and said what you liked the pick ten you like the old game well we don't like its devs so we are changing everything. Also why play COD when their is BF4, heck BF2 looks and plays better then ghosts

@DudeTheMighty

10 жыл бұрын

Muzzle Flash I'm not sure what you mean... I don't actually _like_ CoD. I was saying saying that the installments that are well-known (like CoD4 or MW3) are _mostly_ well-design but that the community around CoD has many toxic people. Again, though, your reply was kind of hard to read, no offense. I think I get what you meant, kind of.

@toahnater

10 жыл бұрын

Henry Mclaughlin I mean, CoD games are fun, but then you realize how bored you are playing them.

@Montis6

10 жыл бұрын

Muzzle Flash Blops 2 was kind of OK, but imo the first one was much better as it felt like the weapons were much more balanced. With the exception of Famas and few other weapons. MW2 was just purely frustrating even as a new player due to the noobtube that would kill you from 10-20 meters away from the area it impacted on. When I finally had the skill to compete in that game I realized that what's the point in having skill when you can't even use it to the maximum due to the overpowered under barrel grenade launcher. MW3 was OK too, but I bet none of the future CoD games will be as well balanced as the first Blops.

Awesome video, great insight. If you came up with this, genius. If you didn't, great presentation. 10/10, liked + subscribed. Would recommend.

Speaking of Combat, one of the variations in the game where one player controls three jet fighters flying in tandem with each other while the other player only controls one is also a skill-leveler in that, while the player controlling three jet fighters could strafe the sky with three bullets at a time instead of one, the player controlling one jet fighter has a choice of three targets to shoot at.

You're dead wrong on the noob tube, your average auto fire weapon in CoD games take much less skill and are much more powerful. any gun in CoD, has a high rate of fire, no real recoil and no real travel time on small maps with very slow moving targets with massive hit boxes. and it takes on average 4 hits anywhere to kill a better example would be Machine Guns with a wide spread verse accurate Single shot weapons in twitch shooters. yes the MG is going to be much easier to use however the single shot should still do more DPS regardless of range assuming flawless accuracy.

@aomsin89

9 жыл бұрын

He still has a good point though.

@jus7addwater

9 жыл бұрын

Arty Brutix Save thats not true. On the PC the competitive community removed it instantly because after 1 week people already had it down to a science. No one did not run noob tubes.

@Daskellhounds

9 жыл бұрын

Conor Parker Yes the noob tube was good, mostly because it was free AOE weapon, there were no penalties for it. why would you not take that tool over say, an RDS. all I'm saying is skill in to power out ratio was much higher for the guns, Its piss easy to hit anything in CoD games.

@jus7addwater

9 жыл бұрын

Not in Cod1 :D

@jacobnorris8256

9 жыл бұрын

Arty Brutix Do they even have travel time at all? It seems like a wasted mechanic.

better idea, match-making.

This reminds of playing stealth games, especially Arkham games, with my friends. There were so many ways to take down enemies, yet all my friends did was to use the silent takedown throughout a stealth mission. And when it was time to encounter minigunners, they would pass the controller to me. Really frustrating, cuz they wouldn't find any difference between Arkham Asylum and its sequels due to this habit of theirs. Anyway, this is how it should be: designers must include some fancy moves and items, but should test the player, by asking them to use them in specific situations (e.g. a boss fight).

This video shows exactly why I come to Extra Credits. I lived with a gamer who bought, I'm fairly certain, every single recent Call of Duty game which came out, and all I can distinctly remember of him playing was screaming at the TV for "noobs" using martyrdom and the noobtube. If I had listened only to him, I'd still believe that the launcher was overpowered, but EC gives me so much more perspective on these design choices.

Oh my globe, comment section is a troll farm...

I like Dark Souls 1's stance on this, Skill only; Do not help new players if anything punish them for being new.

@jayreese8522

9 жыл бұрын

VB2P360 You probably shouldn't make a multiplayer game if you enjoy that approach.

@clangersrule

9 жыл бұрын

Jaye サンダーの治世 DayZ, minecraft, dark souls series all do this. Perhaps you need to re-evaluate your position.

@VB2P360

9 жыл бұрын

***** Weeding out the casuals. This keeps a good community.

@Ratchetpower2

9 жыл бұрын

VB2P360 What absolute bullshit. There are way too many pros who are absolute dickheads for that to have any sort of truth to it. If anything the opposite would happen, the community gets filled with shit talking ass wipes who have no lives. If that's a "good" community then I don't even wanna know what a bad one is.

@LazyMaybe

9 жыл бұрын

VB2P360 Dark Souls doesn't actually punish you very much though.

amazing video. I can relate. I tend to assume players will learn the skills how i want them 2. Gotta babysit them till they want to choose a different strategy.

It's funny that I find this video in my feed at the same time that I am struggling to find a replacement for spear+shield in Dark Souls 2. Mixing up tactics is hard, but necessary - greatswords here I come!

I hate games which 'balance for skill', I feel that skill should translate to an overwhelming success over someone with less skill. In a game of chess for example, the world champion would never EVER lose to someone with an ELO rating of say 1800, but in shooting games, the existence of so called 'noob weapons' allow for someone with moderate skill to kill extremely skilled players, that's what I don't like in the modern gaming scene.

@SolarMegaMan

8 жыл бұрын

+Angel33Demon666 Honestly, in a game where... say, 2 players are fighting against each other in a game, that's entirely fair. If you're facing off against only one player, you don't want them winning entirely because they picked a certain tactic that's easy to execute and hard to fight against. In a large-scale game, though? That hardly matters. No matter how much of an expert you are, in games where you can and will take damage from multiple enemies before you die, you'll end up being picked off when you're most vulnerable sometimes. You'll get into hopeless situations where your only choice is to try and kill yet another person before you're dead. As such, it doesn't make as much of a difference if a player is capable of using a somewhat cheap weapon or strategy to win a little more often. It gives a chance for the new players to try fighting against higher ranking opponents and win, so they'll be invested and they'll try different strategies as time goes on, as they'll inevitably get to the point that they can't win consistently enough for them to be satisfied anymore. Though, what I've noticed with the games that try to balance for skill is that for most of the moves or strategies or whatever, if done well, they usually have a very fatal weak point. Basically, something anyone can do to make it stop working, at which point it's just a little bit of a puzzle for you to figure out what it is. Let's say that, in a 3D fighting game, there's an attack that hits really hard in front of the character within just a few frames, but has a long recovery time. You'd need to guess when your opponent's planning to pull it off, yeah, but a more skilled player will quickly notice a pattern and either block the attack or sidestep around it before performing an attack of their own, as they know exactly how to get around the incoming attack. That way, a more skilled player is indirectly rewarded for having learned how to fight a cheap strategy, and the less skilled player is basically forced to give something else a try if they want to get anywhere. Well, at least that's how I see things. Who knows, maybe I'm thinking about it all wrong.

@thefruitofpassion927

8 жыл бұрын

+Angel33Demon666 that's why I like Dark Souls. It's hard all around. There's no cheating. And the getting invaded by 3 people at once just makes it all the more fair. Yaaaa!

@Ben-fx9kx

8 жыл бұрын

The problem isn't that the problem is some games make it extremely difficult for you to learn even the basic fucking mechanics of playing. Chess while an incredibly complex and beautiful game is pretty simple in terms of mechanics, Queen moves like this, knight moves like this, castling, en passent etc but certain multiplayer games just through you in to get continually shredded by veterans with better equipment and more skill you don't even get a chance to learn or fight back. In summary chess is a fair game (and being turned based so you can really think and strategise while games like FPSes are always run and gun) while other multiplayer games don't even give you a fair opportunity to get good enough to play the damn multiplayer

@Angel33Demon666

8 жыл бұрын

+ben zhong I disagree, to win at chess requires a lot more than the basic mechanics, the same is true in video games. Most fps are mainly point there, and shoot, that's the basic mechanics, however to actually win requires a different skill set.

@Ben-fx9kx

8 жыл бұрын

Angel33Demon666 That's not what i said at all, I said chess requires lots of skill but the basic mechanics are simple to grasp everything else attacking, pinning, forking, mating patterns requires more skill but the basic movement of pieces and rules is simple. What I'm saying is some games like Planetside 2 veterans have such a high skill gap and such OP equipment its like playing against an opponent in chess, who has 2 Queens. In addition in chess you can at least choose your opponents and struggle up the ladder beating 900s -1500s (ELO) before you get decent. Meanwhile the matchmaking in some FPSes and what not (fighting games etc) is horrible it would be like you or me forced to fight a fucking Grandmaster or having some random1800 player going against Magnus Carlsen. You don't learn that much getting your ass handed to you

welcome to the age of "EVERYONES A WINNER!" this is going to be the down fall of the gaming industry at one point or another. why play a game when no skill players can pull off the same shit as skilled players. its not encouraging for the veterns to keep playing if the game is designed to be noob friendly.

@Thenextworldwar

9 жыл бұрын

As in, have a low barrier to entry, but higher rewards for higher skill levels? There's something wrong with this?

Two words: Drake Sword. It'll get you through a lot of the early areas in Dark Souls, but quickly becomes outshined by other weapons which scale better with stats. A fine example of something powerful early on, but is mainly meant to teach you the mechanics.

One thing to add about the zergling rush example is that at the time before it got nerfed it was also blatantly overpowered due to the map design and Terran and Protoss building times which made it one the most optimal strategies to do along with being very easy to execute. Another thing that added to its power was that its counter-strategy was extremely counter-intuitive if you had just picked the game up (using 2 worker units repairing each other to block the ramp to your base to buy time for your building wall and using buildings/micromanaging workers to block with Protoss to buy time for cannons/Zealots) while building an early pool and rushing with zerglings was extremely easy to understand and execute. This also carried over to early SC2 where dealing with the fastest Zergling rush build was similarly very hard to grasp for a new player since you had to use drone drilling(worker units ignore collision when ordered to a new mineral patch and thus can be stacked on top of each other to prevent focus fire and allow them to burst down the zerglings) to drive the zerglings away with minimal losses.

AA Genesis Violet's Exceed move - ultimate Foo Strategy in that game. Of course you don't get the weapon to pull it off perfectly until near the end of the game. Developer knew what he was doing!

I really enjoyo your videos, congratulatoins ^^

This describe W+M1, sticky spamming and close range rocket/rocket spamming so much

I felt this in Arkham city, they give you all these macro weapon uses and combos but mashing attack and timing counters got me through the game. I wanted to play again one day and decided to try new game plus mode and I hit a brick wall pretty early on. I could get through fights but wihtout seeing the counter I took a lot of unnecessary hits. I decided of my own accord to now, at the beginning of the game when I shouldn't have been meant to have any weapons but instead had all of them for having beaten the game and was expected to know all the combos and quick use inputs, I had to go through and teach myself all of them and memorize all these new buttons. I put myself through it and found the combat in that game fucking awesome afterwards

Damn you ExtraCreditz! You just made me max out my limited bandwidth!

I think a really good example of a FOO strategy is Dark Soul's Drake Sword.

Had a situation like this in Kindoms of Amalur (spelling) where the final talent in the talent trees was super easy to perform and you could easily juggle 3-4 opponents in the air until dead and even some bosses fell prey to this, after a while it turned into a chore to slog my way through level upon level doing the same combo over and over instead of a game.

Nice! Good explanation.