Does that shit really matter? I mean like the way I see it's just a fucking label.
Sig by @Brokendeck
I remember watching this one flash years ago (forgot the name), and there was this quote which I agreed with and stuck by.
"tiers are for queers"
Meh, I see them as guidelines, get an idea of what the FGC is thinking.
It's like in an FPS "what's the best gun?" "These are the top 5 best guns in the game..." It interesting information but really its up to the player to find what is suitable for them even if it isn't in the top 10 or top 15 etc.
In Dark Souls you beat it however you want. Some people just like the game just the way it is, others challenge themselves even more.
If you're a HARDCORE FAN prepare to be always disappointed.
I would assume that the people who play a game professionally while working with people who pore over frame data and damage statistics come up with somewhat accurate examples of what characters are most likely to be successful when played at the highest levels of skill, but it's arguable how useful that information is to anyone not playing in the top .01% of players.
Happy with what you have to be happy with
you have to be happy with what you have
to be happy with you have to be happy with what you have
At 2/16/16 04:20 PM, SmartyPants wrote: I remember watching this one flash years ago (forgot the name), and there was this quote which I agreed with and stuck by.
"tiers are for queers"
I'm pretty sure you're talking about this one:
Fighting games are really technical to design with collision and animations playing a big part in how powerful a character is. Tiers are absolutely necessary when deciding how well the game is balanced, Eddie from Tekken Tag Tournament is an example of a completely broken character because of his animations and inability to block them effectively. Diddy Kong in the new Smash Bros was another example of damage and animations that allowed for little to no counter play.
At 2/17/16 03:43 PM, n00bman wrote:At 2/16/16 04:20 PM, SmartyPants wrote: I remember watching this one flash years ago (forgot the name), and there was this quote which I agreed with and stuck by.I'm pretty sure you're talking about this one:
"tiers are for queers"
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/442158
Actually
Sig by @Brokendeck
At 2/16/16 08:59 PM, Hoodie wrote: All I know is that Guile fucking sucks dude.
WHAT? he is the definition of space control. Almost in every iteration he's been in, he has some dope ass tools that are very basic and helpful. that's why he only has sonic boom and flashkick. He's not the best but he ain't the worst either.
At 2/16/16 09:21 PM, Homicidee wrote: No they don't because fuck spammers.
lmao this scrub either can't jump over fireballs or learn how to block and punish
Tiers are just made to show which character's are really really good with their tools or really really bad. Good example is a game like Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 in which zero,doom,vergil and morrigan are top tier, but you have characters like arthur and pheonix wright who are low tier. You can STILL WIN with low tier characters but you're gonna need a lot of forethought and effort to go against a top tier team.
those characters i mentioned are considered top tier in the game because they are all consistent with controlling space and most have crazy pressure(ESPECIALLY MORRIGAN AND ZERO, imho). Pheonix Wright is only really dangerous in turnabout mode, and that requires spending time in 1/3 of a match to get the right evidence. Arthur can control space well, but he has low health and is pretty slow, compared to rocket raccoon, who can do what he does but is crazy fast.
You really don't need to play as a top tier character, if you're good at the game and you wanna play as a low tier character cuz he has that really good normal and special move then go ahead. No one's gonna call you out for playing as one. I have a friend who mains a mid-to-lowtier team and he can beat me easy, since he is much more familiar with the game(still to this day I don't get how to use team aerial counter).
play Etehfowr Against
People don't understand tiers, and they're all different for every game.
A game like Super Smash Bros Melee only has 8-10 viable characters out of the 26, and even then, you only ever see around 5-8 of them actually win tournaments.
A game like Street Fighter 4 has way more viable characters, the tier is basically saying "this is how viable the character is" but it doesn't necessarily mean that character is bad. Unless they're like at the bottom.
But at the end of the day, fox reigns supreme.
20XX
I got Tom to make a sig, bow down to me.
At 2/16/16 04:20 PM, SmartyPants wrote: I remember watching this one flash years ago (forgot the name), and there was this quote which I agreed with and stuck by.
"tiers are for queers"
Hey Mario! Why can't I be a Top Tier character?
Silly Wario! Tiers are for queers!
Seriously though, some characters are just up better than others. You can't seriously say that Jigglypuff is a "good" character in SSB.
illicit makes a damn good signature.
I understand why they are tiers and that characters aren't properly balanced, this is fine and all but I thought the point was to pick characters you like. You know something's not right when you get insults for playing as your favourite character.
i like how half of this thread is a street fighter circlejerk
anyway it may as well just be a measurement system to determine what character you should use. low tier is generally hard to learn, top tier is typically more accessible.
"Death upon death... Nothing but death in this barren land. Who can we pray to? There are only demons and fiends here."
~The Journal of a Man Who Wandered into Another World
Alright, OP. Let's play a round of SSB64.
I'll be Kirby.
You can be Luigi.
it's honestly hard to evaluate, since ideally balancing the characters implies that if a character is broken it will atleast have a foil, with the most obvious and basic example of this being fast and light characters beating heavy characters, but in turn losing to more nimble but heavier mid-sized characters, who in turn lose to the heavy characters all sort of taking place with a confined rock-paper-scissors-esque metagame. there's a wrench in this however in that most fighting games have a shitload of variables these days. moreover some characters are pretty inarguably useless chaff, like mokap in MK, or pichu in SSBM: they have their place but they're just arguably inferior versions of already existing characters and in pichu's case they also have drawbacks.
In all honesty, if the game is designed perfectly then statistically speaking the "best character" should probably simply have %50 matchups against the field, IE no real weaknesses but no real strengths either. it's also fine for certain characters to be advantaged against others, and have theoretically say a 60-40 matchup against particular characters but this is usually balanced with having other matchups that are, say, 40-60; in this way a character can still be considered tier-1 even though it can prey on other characters very easily without actually be considered broken.
there are enough variables that generally agreeable tier lists spring up from time to time, as I would argue is the case with a lot of the SSB games, but obviously there's so much going on with most of the characters having well defined identities and many of them having extremely high ceilings in the hands of skilled players and whatnot.
most of my reasons for thinking this are from playing semi to professionally competitive SSB, pokemon and magic: the gathering, where different strategies and their presence in the metagame alongside their general match win percentage and whatnot will eventually form a tier list regardless of whether or not you agree with them: we can all agree that dickhead running metaknight in SSB, a team of 6 legendaries in Pokemon or a deck with 4 dark ritual 4 necros in MTG is generally a piece of shit and should not be encouraged. at the same time, though, when everyone's playing fair the tier list can shift and changed based on who's playing what, making it existent but not altogether concrete.
tl;dr when you actually analyze pro players match win %'s alongside their general opinions of every individual character, you get a tier list that's pretty hard to argue the extremes of (kirby vs. luigi in ssb1 to use an example above) , but you can be successful ignoring it. take this with a grain of salt as well that this is coming from someone who usually gravitates towards high tier characters/strats (i have mained fox since I was 9 in every ssb and almost always play one of the tier one blue decks in magic every year)
"What I would and wouldn't do with your tight twink body is none of their business. But seriously, I would fucking destroy you." - Xenomit
