Let me try to intregrate some player vs player structures into my transition system to give it some flesh. First, here is some psych mumbo jumbo (its not totally necessary to understand the system so just skip down if you wish.)
In terms of psycholoogy, experts are defined by having certain mental traits that separtate themselves from novices. Some of these traits include: 1. Interconnected units of knowledge organized in schemas. (basically an ability to quickly categorize a new stimuli because of prior experience) 2. Representation of problems bassed on structural similarites (an ability to recognize new problems quicker because it is similar to a problem previously encountered) 3. Automized sequence of steps(automatically solving problems without much conscious effort) ====================================================================
The key to any a good, competitive game is for it be fun to pick up and play, while still rewarding the more skilled, experienced competitors. Expanding on my transitional system, here are some ways to implement structures that reward the more skilled experienced player.
The issue of move spamming not only defies the look and feel of a real match but it is generally viewed as a less skilled strategy(cheapass way) to win a match. To combat this under this structure, without a reliance on the computer to simply auto-reverse spammed moves, I suggest an ability for a player to "set" a key reversal. For example
When player1 attempts the Stone Cold Stunner for a second time in the match, player 2 has the ability, right after seeing that move to set reversal button and ^(up) as a key reversal. Meaning, when player2 sees a stunner animation again they would press reversal^ which would give the reversal a much larger chance for success. In terms of timing in this example, we'll give the Stunner animation 2 optimal reversal spots, X1 the kick, X2 the arm attempt at the head.
No Set Key Reversal tie up------------------x1-------------------x2-----------------
So the better timed the reversal button is pressed during the animation to "hit" the X, the better chance ther is of reversing the move.
When the Key Reversal is set, the X's get bigger(easier to hit) tie-up -------X1------------------X2-----------
The reason I would require a move to been seen twice before being able to be set as a key reversal is so some someone can't take advantage of the system and say from the beggining of the match "F that he's not Stunning me ever, i'll make the reversal spots bigger now." This would also naturally make players want to hold off using their key manuevers until the end of a match so they can't be set as key reversals by their opponents. I see this as benficial because it requires a human opponent to take competitve measures to punish spammers and not just leave it out of their hands.
Expanding on this ------X------- timeline for timing button presses on a neutral grapple, I would make "true X" so extremely precise that it would be very hard to truely master or if that isn't a possibily I would alter the "X" position based on a match to match variable such as weight or overall rating. By ths I mean:
Default timeline ---------X--------- Timeline altered by a 100LBS weight class difference between wrestlers ---------------X---
Now this altered X spot gives an advantage to the more experienced player who has experienced a match of similar weight difference. By having a similar match, the experienced player will have an easier time timing the X because they have a feeling of where the 100LBS weight difference X is from a prior match. This altering of the X, based on a constant variable would also translate into to a feeling out period in the beggining of matches as seen in alot of in real-life matches. EX: two players struggle to time the X in the beggining of the match resulting in a stalemate grapple.
Just like timed reversals and grapples,the timed transitions would have players trying to hit the invisible X during an animation. And in attempting the transtions to start a new meter, the reversal x would get bigger(X) for the defender to more easily reverse the hold in that split second. For example:
Player1 applies and standing armwrench, attempts to transition into a grouded armwrench, which makes his oppponents invisible reversal X go from ---------x-------- to ----X---- the defender sees the attempted transition and quickly presses reverse into a flipping lucha armwrench reversal
Lastly I would imbed 2 to 3 X's throughout each animation(with the exception of strikes) so there is less watching animations as they happen, and more constant interplay during the one, two, or three sequences of a given animation.
Questions, comments? I'd love to hear what ya think, especially if there are flaws or a better way to do things. Perhaps a better way to reward skilled players?
Ahhh the age old question of skill vs. spam. I do like the concept of rewarding experienced players but it has to be balanced and intuitive so as not to prevent noobs (all due respect) from becoming frustrated. That's my biggest gripe with KoC. It, too, has different reversal and execution points that vary with the move set ups and if you spend time learning the system it can be a lot of fun. But you have to be willing to have more than a few frustrating matches to ever get to that point.
So I like your concept but the challenge remains; how is it fun for first time players?
I mean isn't that how we all became skilled anyway? We jumped into a game (doesn't matter what genre), got our asses handed to us politely by the AI in a ziploc bag for storage, and then after a few more ass-kickings, we'd drop the difficulty and when we got used to it, we'd bump it back up. The key is making sure the AI itself doesn't come off insanely cheap regardless of difficulty. Give the player a chance to say to themselves, "Ok, this is not my pace, I'll try this instead. ... Ok, now I got it. Also, please include a tutorial that is actually interactive and helps you learn the controls. A seasoned gamer can, most of the time, adjust to a game's controls regardless of genre. A more casual gamer may need more than a video clip to get the hang of it. Even if the tutorial comes off as hand-holding, it's still valuable.
Even though I consider myself a seasoned gamer, I just hate when I get a new game and look for a tutorial (even after reading the manual thoroughly) and come to find no tutorial. Sometimes I feel like video tutorials can be worse than none at all too. Because it can come off as insulting. Video: See, just like this... ** Wrestler A does move, while controller buttons flash on-screen**. As much as many designers think that helps, it doesn't. It's patronizing.
Tell me what do/press, show me what to do/press, show me what the result will/should look like, and then let me try it myself as much as I want until I'm comfortable. And also allow me to access what you just showed me as a reminder. And please, please... Do this for every situation in the game. I just hate when games only tell you half the controls. I mean I personally would rather spend 30 minutes to an hour in training mode and then go on to deeply enjoy the game, than skim through it and complain later.
This also goes a long way to get casual gamers playing too. Specifically my fiancee. She was pissed at the fact that the women in the WWE games weren't worth jack crap. So when I told her that Dave specifically told me that women will be equals, she told me she loved Dave and the team and that we had to get PWX. She's actually allowing me to fork out a few hundred from our savings specifically to upgrade our PC (if needed) or buy a 360, and get this game.
However, she's more of casual gamer and does often get annoyed with games because of a lack of good tutorial and controls that would give even the most hardcore gamers arthritis. So please, I'm begging you guys to have a great tutorial. Especially because I've seen some my fellow PWX fans refer to it as No Mercy + FPR + KOC all in one.
But to get back on topic, yes I do agree that the best way to go with a system like JohnnyR's is to vary it by difficulty.
Agreeing with Tonzo's difficulty adjustments here are some things that I think translate into a game being fun to pick up and play.
A few general things I think a random gamer who isn't impressed by things like wrestling engines would be attracted by: 1. crushing high spots and flying manuevers 2. beating the hell out of players with weapons 3. and just cleaning house on screen in general
To make these things enjoyable, basic intuitive controls that allow you to just pick up and smash heads are necessary. Reading complaints about wrestlers just getting up nonchalantly while their opponent is mid-flight in other games, I would suggest a type of "deer in the headlights type feature" where a wrestler is frozen if the flight is initiated and has to hit the reversal button which moves/reverses or take the brunt of the move.
Then for weapons the controls need to be simple and basically the same as performing regular moves but fully integrative. By that I mean If a wrestler goes to the top and presses leg drop, if he has a chair in his hand he legdrops sombodys head with the chair, same goes for a grapple(they drop it and perform it on the weapon). This would go for a myriad of other moves but I know this would be hell on animations costs almost doubling every animation so it could be performed with a weapon.
It was always cool with the THQ/Aki engine when your spirit would ignite and you could clean house and beat the hell out of everyone in sight. The problem I thought was the special(and eventually redundant) "ignited " animation and the presence of the on screen meter which led to taunt spamming until you could perform a special. I have a more subtle, realistic momentum system that should still give that "cleaning house" feeling but that will take a whole new post to write out.
Now when I watch a match, the things that entertain me on a very basic level about these three aspects are the sell-jobs and the crowd pops. These two things are the exclamation points and what really give the sense of "action" for lack of a better term. Some great sell animations in relation to these things are what I think would really emphasize that the player just picked up the controller and is absolutely killing these guys. Combine that with some great crowd pops, varying in sound(shock, awe, horror, excitement, ect.) and loudness it should make for entertainment at its most basic.
With all that said, I think the unexpected randomness of the critical/KO creates fun occurences for novices and experts alike. Add to that flash pins from roll ups and school boys ect.(I think anyone move in varying %'s should be able to end a match) and the sense that anything can happen regardless of skill creates for some edge of your seat play. While experts would win over a longer period of time, during any given match everyone has the ability to get their hand raised.
[quote][cite] PWX_Dave:[/cite]Ahhh the age old question of skill vs. spam. I do like the concept of rewarding experienced players but it has to be balanced and intuitive so as not to prevent noobs (all due respect) from becoming frustrated. That's my biggest gripe with KoC. It, too, has different reversal and execution points that vary with the move set ups and if you spend time learning the system it can be a lot of fun. But you have to be willing to have more than a few frustrating matches to ever get to that point.
So I like your concept but the challenge remains; how is it fun for first time players?[/quote]
See, that is the opposite to how I feel. I think that, although Fire Pro has good first time play fun, due to the timings all being the same, it also made the novelty wear off really quickly. Also, there is the chance, as there was with me, that I could get the wrist lock and powerbomb grapples almost every time but my friend could get the vertical suplex and firemans carry grapple more often than me. I've owned KoC2 for a few years now but so far two friends have beaten me on their first attempts, so I don't believe it is that inaccessible to noobs. Plus, the Dojo mode helps (though it takes far too long, and is uber patronising).
I prefer No Mercy's grapple system to any other, I don't like the idea of having to time my button pressing for getting my grapples to work, sounds frustrating.
While No Mercy was a great game and arguably still the most fun wrestling game to date, the engine still has things that need to be improved upon. One drawback about the Aki grapple system is that it doesn't really allow for an edge that rewards the more skilled players, with the exception of timing grapple dodges that don't ever appear in real-life matches. The other problem I viewed about the AKi one-way grapple was that it lead to these awkward looking crouch animation where players would try to constantly dodge getting grappled as they got off the mat and try to score some weird crouch clothslines that rarely ever occur.
[quote][cite] PWX_Dave:[/cite]So I like your concept but the challenge remains; how is it fun for first time players?[/quote]
The only games I bought this year were ArmA and GTR. Neither of these games has any short term appeal, but both of them make up for it by the eventual sense of immersion they give. The more this game focuses on deep mechanics which require skill the better it will be in my book. I'm also glad to see people critisising AKI's system. When people realise there are unrealistic elements to its gameplay they are more likely to agree with me that PWX shouldn't take too much influence from it.
That's certainly true. It also leads us to the second age old debate (after skill vs. spam) that being realism vs. fun. There was very little real about AKI's grapple system (and KoC is even worse in my opinion) and yet both seem to be more fondly regarded than just about any other franchise. And then there is the iconic Fire Pro series. Anyone seen a lot of bump-and-grapple on tv lately? But my biggest problem with the AKI engine was the Special system. Nothing about it forced your opponent to stay and take his beating like a man when your Special was flashing. But to play devil's advocate, would that have made it more fun if they did? I dunno...
At the end of the day, I think, No Mercy was great in its day. It exists still and we can play it. I think KoC rules and but has more flaws than No Mercy (I just prefer the gameplay). I wouldn't want Pro Wrestling X to be like No Mercy in terms of gameplay because it's been done. Other than graphical improvements and more moves I dont think that sorta game could be done better. Basically, a modded No Mercy is as good as No Mercy will be - which is, to be fair, great. A KoC update would be welcome, but it'd be more cosmetic than anything else. I think both this games suffer from being jerky and slow - very little is done smoothly and therefore it looks like a videogame. I've not played ASPW3 but the videos, to me, look the best, cosmetically speaking. The matches seem to flow - still slow mind. I dont know how ASPW3 plays but it looks like a wrestling match. Fire Pro, KoC and NM all look like shit because you grapple and then stop - everything is jerky looking and it feels "not perfect". All these games are good games but they are so far from perfect. The games dont feel particularly like wrestling. I think that these games have been successful at creating great games in wrestling masks, but not games that feel or look enough like wrestling.
[I've typed so much that not pressing return seems like a waste, but what i have typed is such utter train-of-thought nonsense that not pressing return seems like the better option....i always make bad decisions]
I feel the exact same way, as great as NM and FPR are. But one thing that has to be said is that with online play being an obvious evolution of the genre, and the fact that even the big money studios either got it wrong or were afraid to try (Spike could've had online long ago I feel) says a lot. This is where the debate of a timing-based system (Fire Pro) vs. a light/heavy grapple-based system will get even more heated. I feel that one of the reasons that Spike never tried online was because they knew ahead of time that lag, a natural opponent I'll call it, of even the best online games, would've nuked the game at it's core.
I mean look at Smackdown. It's a grapple-based system, and they also have some timing-based scenarios and know of fans that just completely ignore said segments when playing online. That is a bad thing. I mean sure, it makes sense. Don't want to be bitten in ass by lag? Don't attempt or hope the other guy doesn't attempt sleeperhold, so there's no timing meter.
But how can we justify completely ignoring a feature of the game that is said to create believable transitions in play?
Also, I'd say the best way though, would be to have a grapple-based system from the outset, that allows the player on the other end, to accurately reverse a move into an actual move. I mean understood Spike's intention when they had made it so that you never knew who would come out on top of a grapple, but at the same time I think it unfairly rewards a player for having better reflexes -- a flaw that not all gamers would be to help.
The problem is that the flipside to this, is No Mercy slow and methodical grappling. I'd say the best thing to do, would be to have the light grapples flow directly into a move but allowing a small window of opportunity to reverse. The heavy grapples I believe should stay the same. Also, any grapple should be able to be countered go right into a chain wrestling type stalemate. I understand that it's usually a starting point in a match but they can also happen quite frequently throughout a match depending on the styles involved.
Another could be to have different control schemes and pacing setups depending on the style of the wrestler. A cruiserweight for example, should be more timing-based, having the player watch the animations and pick their spots to counter. In that regard, a chain between to players would come off looking very much like a dance, a lot like how lucha appears on TV.
Meanwhile, more technical/power/brawler-based wrestlers would be slower and more methodical, but with the same result.
Lastly though, I feel that No Mercy was the most realistic of the bunch. Yes, I know it came off slow to some because the grapple-stop-move/reverse type gameplay but I still feel that it's approach to the animations overall (except sticking out your chest to block strikes) was more realistic. What I'd like to see in that regard, would be that if you guys were to take the No Mercy approach, albeit making light grapples more fluid, that a player shouldn't be able to hold block and not get hit. In No Mercy, either you sat there and blocked everything or you just happened to catch a wild shot to the face if you happened to let go of the block button while looking for an opening.
I think the best way to handle it would be making so that the defending player would have to actively time a block which could go into either a chain sequence or another move. They would be allowed to cover up (hold block) against light strikes but heavy strikes would rattle them and have them staggering a bit. Also, if they mis-timed a block it should leave them open to an attack. And the same could be applied to grapples. In No Mercy grapple beats block and dodge beats grapple but the animation, while it does leave grapple initiating player open was just to slow for the defending player to follow up effectively.
And one last thing... I think as far as finishers, I've said before that the most effective way to do them would be to combine Fire Pro and Smackdown. A simple one button press that everyone knows how to pull off, that can be done at any time in the match. It would be reversed every time with a penalty of sorts if done early, so there's no abuse of it, but the fact that it can be attempted any time keeps players on their toes.
[quote][cite] PWX_Dave:[/cite]That's certainly true. It also leads us to the second age old debate (after skill vs. spam) that being realism vs. fun. There was very little real about AKI's grapple system (and KoC is even worse in my opinion) and yet both seem to be more fondly regarded than just about any other franchise. And then there is the iconic Fire Pro series. Anyone seen a lot of bump-and-grapple on tv lately? But my biggest problem with the AKI engine was the Special system. Nothing about it forced your opponent to stay and take his beating like a man when your Special was flashing. But to play devil's advocate, would that have made it more fun if they did? I dunno...[/quote] I don't really think realism and fun are in contrast with each other. The stuff that has been listed about the Aki system that takes away from the realism,(one-way grapples, crouching clotheslines, "specials", ect.) are things that also took away from the fun of the game. I don't think the evading of special manuevers were fun for anyone when that meter ignited. I also think to a lesser extent the same goes for the thought of skill vs fun. Humans are naturally competitive beings and games that cater to skill actually allowing a player to win more are usually more appealing than random "crap shoots." This is why chess is a widely more popular game than checkers. Checkers in comparison to chess, there are very finite things you can do in the game and without much edge to the better player.
Wrestling at its most basic "markish" level has fans living vicariously through a wrestler as he beats the crap out of the other guy, or gets beat up himself. And this is on a very fundamental level, the "fun" of wrestling. So translating what goes on in a match into a control scheme that takes this vicarious living one step closer shouldn't really violate the fun of a game. When I think of these systems I just watch a match and employ every single happening into logical meaning and a functional control scheme. The same things that make watching a wrestling match fun should still be fun in a wrestling game only the watcher is now the player.
With this in mind I do think sometimes "forcing" players to be clobbered by the classic finish spots in wrestling adds to the fun. I'll try to layout my full momentum system some time which should have a structure that allows novices to clean house while still allowing experts to have a better chance of doing so and dodging this factor(although with no certainty). But to address what you said on a basic level, the on screen spirit meter and the special taunts were the visual indicators to a player that "oh crap I better get outta here." So eliminating these two things would probably aid in players taking their beatings, and I think make it more fun for both parties.
[quote][cite] Krow:[/cite] [I've typed so much that not pressing return seems like a waste, but what i have typed is such utter train-of-thought nonsense that not pressing return seems like the better option....i always make bad decisions][/quote] Lol I feel the same way alot of times.
[quote][cite] The New Blueguy:[/cite]I feel the exact same way, as great as NM and FPR are. But one thing that has to be said is that with online play being an obvious evolution of the genre, and the fact that even the big money studios either got it wrong or were afraid to try (Spike could've had online long ago I feel) says a lot. This is where the debate of a timing-based system (Fire Pro) vs. a light/heavy grapple-based system will get even more heated. I feel that one of the reasons that Spike never tried online was because they knew ahead of time that lag, a natural opponent I'll call it, of even the best online games, would've nuked the game at it's core.
I mean look at Smackdown. It's a grapple-based system, and they also have some timing-based scenarios and know of fans that just completely ignore said segments when playing online. That is a bad thing. I mean sure, it makes sense. Don't want to be bitten in ass by lag? Don't attempt or hope the other guy doesn't attempt sleeperhold, so there's no timing meter.
But how can we justify completely ignoring a feature of the game that is said to create believable transitions in play?
Also, I'd say the best way though, would be to have a grapple-based system from the outset, that allows the player on the other end, to accurately reverse a move into an actual move. I mean understood Spike's intention when they had made it so that you never knew who would come out on top of a grapple, but at the same time I think it unfairly rewards a player for having better reflexes -- a flaw that not all gamers would be to help.[/quote]
Is timing really ruined by online play? In madden play online there is alot of timing involved in things such as precision passing and catching/intercepting, real cores of the game.(maybe im ignorant to madden having highly evolved servers?) Can anyone elaborate if this is actually true or what are the details involving timing?
As for timing rewarding reflexes, I think great! In King of Kong, the top classic arcade game players in the world developed(almost ridiculously so) ultra fast game reflexes to become masters at their craft. Reflexes arn't a measure of physical prowess, which I agree doesn't belong in the game world, but a measure of mental processing developed over time. Games players take the time to hone their craft and improve hand/eye coordination in game reflexes and mental predictability through experience, to be better than the next guy. This should be rewarded in a wrestling game also. I would love to see a wrestling game where top players in the world would battle it out by having the most precise timing, best reflexes in reaction to the game and thier opponent, and the best strategies to inflict damage and score a pinfall/submission. I think it would be great to have competition like this so engrossing that you were afraid to blink when invovled with an ultra tough challenge.
"I don't really think realism and fun are in contrast with each other. The stuff that has been listed about the Aki system that takes away from the realism,(one-way grapples, crouching clotheslines, "specials", ect.) are things that also took away from the fun of the game."
That's an opinion though, I prefer oneway grapples. After I press grapple and capture my opponent first I don't want him to easily fight out of it. I think grapples should be about being the first to capture your opponent, not a timing game. It should be strategy over timing, in terms of skill: strategy > timing > button mashing
I like timing based but I don't think it should be as much of a bitch as KoC can be - but timing keeps you on your toes and stops you standing there in a grapple for 8 seconds whilst you decide what to do. Maybe there should be a bigger period to hit weak moves and a short one for strong moves.
[quote][cite] Krow:[/cite]I like timing based but I don't think it should be as much of a bitch as KoC can be - but timing keeps you on your toes and stops you standing there in a grapple for 8 seconds whilst you decide what to do. Maybe there should be a bigger period to hit weak moves and a short one for strong moves.[/quote] I rememeber buying KOC and not liking it but I can't even eloborate why since it has been so long and I cant remeber how it played. For weak vs stronger moves I would recommend a larger margin of error to correctly time the button press in that split second between grapple and move animation. Also The more precise timing could have variable implications as to inflicting more damage.
[quote][cite] dratsab:[/cite]"I don't really think realism and fun are in contrast with each other. The stuff that has been listed about the Aki system that takes away from the realism,(one-way grapples, crouching clotheslines, "specials", ect.) are things that also took away from the fun of the game."
That's an opinion though, I prefer oneway grapples. After I press grapple and capture my opponent first I don't want him to easily fight out of it. I think grapples should be about being the first to capture your opponent, not a timing game. It should be strategy over timing, in terms of skill: strategy > timing > button mashing[/quote] I understand the sentiment but I don't understand how being the first to press grapple is a strategy system? What about it rewards the more skilled players?
What I meant by one-way grapples taking away from the fun of the game was all of the inherent problems that came with it. Constant crouches, grapple dodges, and being able to only reverse(into a very finite amount of moves) a grapple once initiated to me weren't fun aspects of the game.
Pertaining to the fun vs realism, I do believe it possible to make a somewhat visually/functionally accurate game that is fun to play.
"but timing keeps you on your toes and stops you standing there in a grapple for 8 seconds whilst you decide what to do"
Also stops you from dragging your opponent to put on a table etc. Atleast an unconscious one-way grapple should be an option, so maybe put in both a oneway and a timing grapple?
how about have a button that puts you into drag mode like in KoC (you put em in a front face lock and can move them around the ring), so the suggestion you cannot move people round the ring is bullshit and there are sadly no tables in KoC so obviously you cannot put them on tables.
[quote][cite] Krow:[/cite]how about have a button that puts you into drag mode like in KoC (you put em in a front face lock and can move them around the ring), so the suggestion you cannot move people round the ring is bullshit and there are sadly no tables in KoC so obviously you cannot put them on tables.[/quote]
So basically the difference is grapple --> grapple --> drag instead of grapple --> drag? Seems like a you should be able to skip a step.
[quote][cite] JohnnyR:[/cite]Pertaining to the fun vs realism, I do believe it possible to make a somewhat visually/functionally accurate game that is fun to play.[/quote]
Assuming that a "grapple" means in context a collar-and-elbow tieup or a rear waistlock, and front facelocks and headholds/drags are handled as moves performed once in a grapple (as dratsab describes them), would it be possible for either timing-based or one-way grapples to be implemented in the game in a visually/functionally accurate way?
I just don't see the point in having to win two battles. First I have to capture my opponent with a grapple, THEN I have to win a timing war with him? In Fire Pro the grapple is automatic, which I thought SUCKED, I prefer having to capture my opponent rather than win a timing war with him. Timing a button press isn't as strategic as having to capture an opponent via grapple, when they could A) strike to break the connection or B) evade, or maybe like No Mercy had C) Counter grapple. Whereas two way grapples lead to A) you do a grapple move B) your opponent does a grapple move. I prefer that grapples give the capturer control to do what he wants, the challenge being to catch him.
Well, in real life there is two separate stages - ie Collar and elbow tie up then a headlock. and an opponent can do moves from collar and elbow as well as you so they should have the chance to do a move from the collar and elbow tie up too. If you are doing a move from a different position (ie Firemans carry) there are to stages (lifting and performing whatever move it is) from here an opponent could do a crucifix pin or escape so they should be able too. I understand what you are saying, dratsab, but I think a lot of people prefer the KoC way to No Mercy and I feel that KoC is a system that deserves a chance as people in North America and Europe can already play No Mercy without having to import it and mod their console. Obviously the control system won't be identical to either but let's just wait 'n' see. Maybe there is a compromise - No Mercy style for the aggressor and a timing based thing for those trying to reverse or escape. [or would that make it LoW2?]
[quote][cite] Zin5ki:[/cite][quote][cite] JohnnyR:[/cite]Pertaining to the fun vs realism, I do believe it possible to make a somewhat visually/functionally accurate game that is fun to play.[/quote]
Assuming that a "grapple" means in context a collar-and-elbow tieup or a rear waistlock, and front facelocks and headholds/drags are handled as moves performed once in a grapple (as dratsab describes them), would it be possible for either timing-based or one-way grapples to be implemented in the game in a visually/functionally accurate way?[/quote]
Timing based yes, but for either neutral or one-way grapples being visually accurate no. And here is where I feel a wrestling game needs to make a slight sacrifice from being 100% visually accurate to true wrestling. Timing wise simply implementing a grapple button + corresponding move button would initiate the visual animation of that particular move, each with its own ---X--- spot in that animation (for ex. Body Slam: at the lift attempt, Suplex: at the armhook/lift attempt). I agree with most of your points from reading your posts on game implimentations but the sentiment you and a few others on the board have prefering to see each grapple intiation be unique, I must disagree. While visually this would probably be a more accurate representaion of wrestling, game-wise I think the engine suffers. For one, it would require a myriad of different animation stages for a player to master in order to play fluidly but more importantly it leads to the same problem of the one-way grapple in only having the option to take that particular move or reverse it as the defender.
While I recommend a timing system as a way of rewarding the more skilled players I think maybe even more important is the neutral grapple. The grapple is the very core of a wrestling engine and to not have it a neutral equation really hinders the competitive aspect of human vs human play. The collar elbow tie-ups in a neutral fashion would be occuring in split seconds to initate moves so they wouldnt be a giant eye sore, but yes they would be less accurate than a multitude of tie-ups. Going back to what Dave said about games like KOC and others with various initial tie-ups, they have a very steep leaning curve to just pick up and play and even in mastering them I don't see them having as good a skill structure as a core neutral grapple because of the fintie timing variables and limited player options they present.
[quote][cite] dratsab:[/cite]I just don't see the point in having to win two battles. First I have to capture my opponent with a grapple, THEN I have to win a timing war with him? In Fire Pro the grapple is automatic, which I thought SUCKED, I prefer having to capture my opponent rather than win a timing war with him. Timing a button press isn't as strategic as having to capture an opponent via grapple, when they could A) strike to break the connection or B) evade, or maybe like No Mercy had C) Counter grapple. Whereas two way grapples lead to A) you do a grapple move B) your opponent does a grapple move. I prefer that grapples give the capturer control to do what he wants, the challenge being to catch him.[/quote]
Essentially you are championing a timing based system of strike breaks and evades. Both which are inaccurate representations of true wrestling matches. So to say strikes and evades are somehow more strategic than a timing system doesnt really make sense as it is a timing system(a very invariable one). Like I said a grapple button could still be present but I would have it initiate a neutral timed grapple. This gives the maximum amount of possible outcomes during the core of the game, while still giving a edge to the initiator as it is easier to time a grapple when you've the caused it than to see the grapple animation coming and having to react.
How about a grapple button for capturing your opponent, and an auto-grapple for two-way grapples? Like if you get close you will automatically go into a normal tie-up, but if you press a button you grab your opponent and shove him under your body (gaining control of him)?
Makes sense - one button for Collar and Elbow tie up, which could result in chain wrestling or some basic moves (body slap, snapmare, blah) and another one for strong grapples. Not entirely sure how Strong Grapples would work mind. One thing i dislike about KoC is the move specific grapples as lots of wrestlers, for example, do a snap suplex but no other suplex yet that wrestler needs the suplex grapple. IE if a fellows moveset is made up of 12 very different moves from a front grapple it is not always possible to give them their entire move set as you may need a normal grapple, suplex, wristlock, leg hold, firemans carry, belly to belly, exploder, urange, piledriver/powerbomb, double underhook, northern lights and a bodyslam grapple - you'd have to sacrifice certain moves because you can only pick 8 of these.
As far as one way grapples, I'd say you could always do what Fire Pro does. It starts as a two-way timing-based grapple and then as a player gets worn down, it becomes more one-sided. This would allow players to drag their opponents around yet still keep match pacing properly. This way, if you were to wear down an opponent quickly and try for a turnbuckle move like a superplex early, the opponent may just have enough energy to reverse it. Fire Pro's logic system has done this perfectly for years. But no one, dare I say, not even Spike, has been able to translate it to a 3D environment successfully. Though I'll admit the KOC games have been brought down by robotic-looking animations more than a bad translation of the FP system to 3D.
Any body remember the old WWF games on the Genesis? Royal Rumble and Raw. The Tie up was initiated by either party, and an advantage was given to whoever initiated, but the person receiving could turn the advantage in the button mash fest. I actually enjoyed this system and it worked well, so I don't see why the neutral grapple has people in an uproar.
Go and be a HUSTLER of ROMs, and get those and give 'em a shot.
[quote][cite] Tonzophunn:[/cite]Any body remember the old WWF games on the Genesis? Royal Rumble and Raw. The Tie up was initiated by either party, and an advantage was given to whoever initiated, but the person receiving could turn the advantage in the button mash fest. I actually enjoyed this system and it worked well, so I don't see why the neutral grapple has people in an uproar.
Go and be a HUSTLER of ROMs, and get those and give 'em a shot.[/quote]
They were decent games, but I still prefer the No Mercy system.
[quote][cite] JohnnyR:[/cite]I agree with most of your points from reading your posts on game implimentations but the sentiment you and a few others on the board have prefering to see each grapple intiation be unique, I must disagree. While visually this would probably be a more accurate representaion of wrestling, game-wise I think the engine suffers. For one, it would require a myriad of different animation stages for a player to master in order to play fluidly but more importantly it leads to the same problem of the one-way grapple in only having the option to take that particular move or reverse it as the defender. [/quote]
I understand your issues with that. Making each grapple animation unique was just something I suggested as a compromise. I originally wanted to know if there would be any quick takedowns from a ready standing position (like those from Touken Retsuden), which require only a single button press and a direction. "Split second" tieups, like in the raw pc game and DOR aren't much of an improvement.
Im not sure what the benefits of implementing a 'capture' grapple would be in addition to a neutral timing system. Compromise just for the sake of compromising doesnt really make sense to me. The issue of positioning opponents goes back to my previous post of interactive animations. Basically where you would hold the button that initiated the move and the animation would be completed when you decide to release it. So if you were going slam your opponent and wanted to position him in the corner you would hold the button which initiated the move and carry the wrestler until you release the button to slam him to the mat(with ones ability to do so having strength and stamina implications). In my view this is a more intuitive translation of true wrestling than capturing opponents.
One may prefer No Mercy's grapple system to another game, but in favor of any other progressive ideas? Why even make a new game if the No Mercy system trumps all? All of this is moot anyway since it looks like the PWX team already has a system in place with this upcoming release. Im just hoping from the lack of response to these ideas(Im beggining to feel like the douche starving for attention from the pretty girl at the school dance) that PWX has somthing better in mind and has decided to keep it on the hush hush. Maybe these ideas arn't the absolute best way to do things but the benefits of others systems arn't being explained as to why they are better.
[quote]I understand your issues with that. Making each grapple animation unique was just something I suggested as a compromise. I originally wanted to know if there would be any quick takedowns from a ready standing position (like those from Touken Retsuden), which require only a single button press and a direction. "Split second" tieups, like in the raw pc game and DOR aren't much of an improvement.[/quote]
A quick takedown could be implemented, and may be good for a MMA system that would leave players open to nasty strikes in attempting them, but i dont see it as totally necessary with the transition system and pre-existing snapmares/firemanscarrys/ect out of the grapple. I think the game-play quality of split-second tieups would all depend on the sophistication of a precise timing system. Im not too familiar with Raw or DOR so I dont really know the specifics of their drawbacks.
The drawbacks are purely visual; you don't notice the initial shared (collar/elbow) position at the start of each move until you see a variation of moves. At that point this position appears increasingly repetitive and superfluous (from a visual point of view). In the single button approach I want, "Grapple moves" (which I refer to as takedowns so as not to imply they must come from the collar&elbow position) would be handled by both the player and the game engine less like moves from restholds or initial neutral "struggle" grappling - like you describe- and more like ready strikes which, although cannot miss outright, have multiple reversal spots and would pose too much of a risk for players to spam them. If moves had a high "reversability", it would encourage players to tend to use them mostly when an opponent is somehow groggy: either stunned on the mat (by bringing them up to their feet beforehand), stunned on their feet (perhaps after they had slowly got up from the mat themselves, or recovered from a strike) or running towards them after an irish whip. I have noticed that most suplexes, throws and slams happen in real matches this way. It may mean that rookies lose a lot of matches by trying to spam and getting reversed as a punishment, but I too believe that players should only be rewarded for skill development. The timing system would certainly work for pain compliance holds, initial lockups (at the start of matches), grounded submissions, finishers and reversals however.
Yeah I liked how No Mercy implemented those running grapples which Im guessing is simliar your idea but from a standing position. The only drawbacks being the finite amount of reversals a defender would have because of the nature of the unique animation. However if a game could have enough variations in reversal animations it could be pretty sweet especially for a string of reversals that were nonsubmission/nonholds.
That also reminded me of another thought in having the reversal system in humanvshuman competition rely heavily player input just as grapples are. So reversals in humanvshuman matches would be much less reliant on how stong the move being performed is(although still a factor) and more about the skill of the player. So if an expert with good reflexes/timing/experience is facing a novice who hasnt mastered the game with the same precision(either the precise ---X---, or the altered match to match ---x--- from the original post) they could potentially be squashed like a jobber in classic wrestling fashion. EX: 1. Novice vs Expert in an online match 2. Expert has better precision and/or experience in execution of the game 3. Expert goes right after the novice who is unable to time the reverses and grapples properly and gets overwhelmed 4. Because of momentum factors from a series of crushing moves in a one-sided match the novice is squashed
Aside from the suprise KO/critical early in a match I don't see many games with the ability to have a squash match. Because of the stamina/toughness factors, a player knows with certainty right off the bat that their wrestler will be able withstand pin attempts for a certain amount of time. This structure would make players need to be on their toes at all times or potentially be crushed by a wave of manuevers even at the start of the match. The strategy of going for lighter moves early and gradually moving up isn't comprehensive enough to make for a competitive game. While it should certainly be a factor it is a skill set that is very easily learned and that being the sole strategic factor makes a games competitive potential have a very low ceiling. I remeber getting good at a online puzzle fighter type game and although the ability to crush the other player wasn't always there, when you greatly had the other guy outclassed it was very satisfying to smash the other players screen in mere seconds. I can only imagine how it would be in a wrestling game where your character is literally smashing the other guy.
Do you play much Fire Pro, Johnny? The reason I ask is because due to the timing based nature of the grapples the game becomes a stale mate for experienced players who have the timing mastered. We were originally considering the same grapple mechanic for PWX but a quick scan of the Fire Pro community forums uncovered a sad fact: skilled players soon find Fire Pro more fun to watch than to play. That's one thing that can be said for the AKI games and even DoR2 to a certain degree. That is, skilled players routinely have 5-star matches and I'm willing to bet it's because it's less about timing and more about strategy. AKI games have a rock-paper-scissors thing going on (albeit without the scissors...) that leaves you always wondering if your opponent is going for a strike or grapple and you only have time to try one block, strike or grapple block. The Giant Gram 2000 game took this concept further (they added the scissors) by throwing a well balanced set of ready moves to the mix. To make it even better (GOD I WANT A GG2000 SEQUEL!) they used a KoC style break point in the strong moves where, if timed properly, you could modify moves on the fly. For example, time a button press properly during a Tiger Driver and it turns into a Ganso Bomb. Beautifully done.
Ultimately, once we have a rock solid AKI-style grapple mechanic working we can build it out from there and have the PWX community beta test the different concepts as we go. We are starting by emulating the basic AKI grapple not because we want to stop there (because what would the point of that be?!) but because it makes for a good foundation for future growth in the grapple mechanics. Not just building out grapple concepts but chain wrestling as well.
"That is, skilled players routinely have 5-star matches and I'm willing to be it's because it's less about timing and more about strategy. AKI games have a rock-paper-scissors thing going on (albeit without the scissors...) that leaves you always wondering if your opponent is going for a strike or grapple and you only have time to try one block, strike or grapple block."
The ironic thing about these posts is that I dont even play video games and haven't watched wrestling for quite some time now, except for the occasional youtube match (terry funk vs jumbo tsuruta 2 out 3 falls on dailymotion is one I recently stumbled upon). I actually dont prefer Fire Pro to No Mercy but a timing structure is the only way I could see a neutral grapple working aside from button mashing. I can see how the firepro timing system has a ceiling for skilled players who master the grapple animation but I wonder if the same ceiling would still be present if the timed spot wasnt invariable. Or if the precision of a button press could be calculated down to a point where two players striking a button at the absolute exact same time would be near impossible.
Using a rock/paper/scissors equation I can see how neutral grapples could be less important if each strikes, grapples, and ready moves had equal weight in a match structure. However the problem I see with the r/p/s equation is that it gives no edge to the more skilled player. You could play r/p/s with someone who has never played before and they would have the same edge(barring that they don't throw rock out every time). The chances of actually picking up on someones r/p/s tendancies or patterns over a long period of time are very minute and a simple 1, 2, or 3 number generator elimintates even that possibility.
I never disputed emulating the Aki style grapples as a jump off for grapple mechanics, just the idea of players loving the capture grapple as the core structure is what doesnt make sense to me. In my mind it is all about maximizing variability. Going back to the r/p/s thing if both players attempted the same thing what happened in those games? I assume strike strike would be natural but what about the other two?
"Going back to the r/p/s thing if both players attempted the same thing what happened in those games? I assume strike strike would be natural but what about the other two?"
In WM2000 two grapples led a greco-roman knuckle lock