Welcome Back

Now that the post-Evo rush has ended and I've eased into a more comfortable schedule, I can dedicate the appropriate attention to this blog and its content. I'll be revamping it as a more arts-design-inspiration centric blog, as opposed to a blog for game theory and design.

I'll take this space to point to Tobias Boesen's Out of A Forest.

Out Of A Forest from Tobias Gundorff Boesen on Vimeo.

This stop-motion animation is absolutely brilliant and well polished. The lanterns dangling off tree branches is an enchanting visual kick and really establishes that 'homey' warmth while also setting it outside the typical; absolutely love it. I'm also impressed that the guy shot stop-motion outdoors - even at NIGHT - undoubtedly a giant pain in the ass.

Evolution

I haven't been able to update this blog recently due to being extremely busy with various projects and getting prepared for my recent trip to Evolution. Expect a post in the near future on Evolution 2009, as well as thoughts on the upcoming console release of Tekken 6 BR.

Three in a Row

A handful of posts ago, I wrote about how every competitive game can, in part, be traced to Rock Paper Scissors. Recently I found myself locked in combat in a certain game, and it struck me then that I may have failed to acknowledge that game as the other base competitve game patriarch - or matriarch, if you will; Tic Tac Toe.

Tic Tac Toe is, for all intents and purposes, the shittiest excuse for a game this side of Pin the Tail on the Donkey. Everyone knows how to play TTT; simply get three of your mark, X or O, in a row on a 3x3 grid, and you win. And as you likely know, Tic Tac Toe has been solved. What this means is, it is possible to ensure a win or draw for yourself, regardless of what your opponent does, starting from the beginning of a game. And if you sat down for ten minutes tops, you too could solve Tic Tac Toe (if you haven't already). If you play first, your best move is any corner square; if your opponent doesn't respond by taking the center, you have won. If you play second, the best you're likely to do is a draw even against unknowing players, so just play to not lose and avoid maximum shame.

Now, TTT is one of the first games you teach your kids; it's not designed to be a competitive game. Still, it's important to note that someone playing TTT for the very first time has zero percent chance of beating someone who has the maximum knowledge of the game, someone who has solved it. The newcomer might luckily or intuitively fight his way to a draw, but that's the best he could hope for. And in games with more complex rulesets, the further away a possible human solving sits, and the more likely it is that the player who is more knowledgable within the system will win.

Tic Tac Toe can be forced by both players into a draw, Connect Four is a guaranteed win for whoever plays first, and Checkers is also technically a game that ends in a draw. Computers are still working to solve games like Chess, Othello, and Go, with some partial success. Computers, however, will never be able to solve Rock Paper Scissors (harrdy harr); bringing in that distinctly human guessing / prediction element. Both knowledge and prediction are integral in successful competitive games; and the most basic examples of those two concepts are easily found in Tic Tac Toe and Rock Paper Scissors.

I'm Good at Soul Calibur

Before I get to the post, I spent most of this past weekend at the Maryland Film Festival, and am obligated to recommend 'Make-Out with Violence'. It's a terrific movie, and it would be a tragedy if it doesn't get a widespread release. Check out the synopsis, trailer (the trailer is MUCH more reliant on the zombie element than the movie is, it's not really a zombie movie at all) and a couple free tracks from the killer soundtrack at makeoutwithviolence.com.




"I'm Good at Soul Calibur"

a.k.a.

"I'm Good at Smash Bros."

a.k.a.

"I'm Good at Halo"

If you are a casual gamer in your late teens / early 20's, chances are you've said at least one of these phrases at some point in your illustrious gaming career. And chances are, you're wrong.

Hell, I know I was.

Soul Calibur 2 was released in 2002, and it quickly gained massive popularity due to its weapon based combat, its strong visual style, and guest characters, not the least of which was Link from the Zelda series. My circle of gaming friends played the game frequently, and at that point I was arguably the best player in my circle. Obviously, I was 'pretty good' at Soul Calibur 2.

In the early to mid 2000's, I often spent my weekends, especially in the Summer, at my local arcade. (Arcade? What's that?) I'd step into that gaming paradise, chew some gum, smirk, and saunter my 'I'm Good at Soul Calibur' self over to the Calibur 2 machine.



And whenever I dropped my two quarters against the arcade vets like Steve Harrison, I got smashed. Embarrassed, even.



What separates the casual gamer from the hardcore gamer? The bad player from the good? The first two steps a casual must take to walk the path of a champion are those of knowledge and experience.

My knowledge of the game came from playing against people who had no idea what 'frame data' is or was, and neither did I. The piddly combos and setups my Talim could muster paled in comparison to the ones I'd see in the arcade on a Saturday night.

But even then, if I knew all of Talim's frame data and had wild combos and setups, I'd still be in bad shape without matchup experience. My character experience at home was effectively useless against players who were discussing the game in depth on Calibur Forums, or who already had a richer fighting game background. That's only something gained from playing the game against players equal to and better than you.

Suffice it to say, I didn't think I was good at Soul Calibur anymore. In fact, I had a light realization of this blog scrap. There was a time period between my arcade closing in mid 2000 and the first fighting game tournament (No longer Calibur 2, but 3) I attended where I wondered if I actually could compete with the best of Soul Calibur, or any game; if I could actually be - *gasp* - "good". The answer is yes, not just for me, but for anyone. It all starts with gaining the right knowledge and the right experience. At that first tournament, I was greeted by my old arcade terror, Steve Harrison. He was thrilled to see me and gave a big greeting, and once I saw him dispose of the Calibur 3 competition there, there was no leaving this hobby. Steve was, in fact, good at Soul Calibur; it was about time I was, too.

Note: Steve Harrison will be traveling to Japan this year, as he earned a berth in the illustrious Super Battle Opera tournament. Congrats to him.

Steve Harrison after qualifying for Evolution's Guilty Gear 3v3 Team Tournament all by himself

Hilarious example of Steve Harrison playing Soul Calibur

RNG

The final hand played between T.J. Cloutier and Chris Ferguson in the 2000 World Series of Poker, was a monumental and shocking television hand. Watch and see what I mean. (Feel free to laugh at the 'bad guy' music at 0:53)

WSOP 2000

As a huge believer in the chuch of Jesus (not that Jesus) this river card goes to show the might of his divine hand. T.J. Cloutier, aka "Second Place", (He also happens to be a poker great, but not remotely as visually iconic) made the right call. Going into heads up play, he was down a lot of chips, but had bled Jesus to the point where they were basically even. He had Jesus right where he wanted him; all he needed was NOT a 9 on the last card.* And yea, the deck parted, and the Lord brought forth the Nine of Hearts, and there was much rejoicing.



When a beat that bad hits you in Poker, can you complain? Not really. All you can really do is shake your head and get the strongest of drinks at the casino Bar, bitching at the Bartender how you made all the right plays, second place prize money in tow. Sure, you were supposed to win the hand, but you didn't. Why? It's simple; RNG.

What is RNG? It's short for Random Number Generator. Slung around the World of Warcraft competitive circuit mercilessly, it's when a player happens to roll a 100 sided die three times, and gets a 100 each and every time. What it means to you is, you just got fucked. In the WoW Arena, It means a Hunter traps you, pins you in place, and stuns you three times in a row, all the while drilling you up the ass with explosive shots (which, of course, are all critical hits). When that happens, can you complain? And would T.J. Cloutier would have something to say if you do?

Probably not. But it's important to who you direct your complaints. When you play Poker, Blackjack, or even Monopoly, you go in aware of the dangers, of the hopes and dreams RNG carries to the party. So when you pick up both Park Place and Boardwalk, or when you have to pay up on Marvin fucking Gardens for the fourth straight time around the fucking board, you find yourself in the same situation Cloutier and Jesus did in 2000. Your skill can take you so far before you drop your fate in the hands of the dice gods.

So sure, card games and board games have that accepted RNG element. But when RNG encroaches into games with a supposed higher skill than luck factor, bad things happen. In NFL Blitz, when you've got the lead in the 4th Quarter, your chance to fumble skyrockets and your friend gets the comeback of the century, not to mention major bragging rights. In a tight Mario Kart race, when the person barely in last place gets the lightning bolt and monster trucks his way to a first place finish. In WoW, the times a team plays a match perfectly against a Warrior team, only for their healer to get Mace Stunned (RNG element) by the Warrior three times in a row, sprinkled with a dash of criticals and an execute on top. Can you imagine if Street Fighter's Zangief had 20% chance on I caught you in a throw, I didn't? (If you're not a Zangief player that sounds great, but hear me out on this one)



When this happens, your players get mad. And I don't mean "Aw shucks" mad. I mean grasping the cord of your controller with both hands, maddeningly swinging it above one's head like ye olde ball and chain, and converting your television screen into a Jackson Pollack mad. That may be an exaggeration, but Cloutier certainly handled himself with more composure than the average frustrated gamer- and he lost a lot of money on that nine of hearts. Pro tip to the game designer; (Hey Sakurai, we need to lunch over tripping in Smash Bros. Brawl. Tripping? How does that even remotely get past the drawing board?) if you're making a game to appeal to gamers wanting a high degree of skill, don't give your hand grenades a 20% chance to erupt into balloons and pink confetti on toss. Make T.J. Cloutier proud, and do the right thing.

*Jesus could've split the pot with a 4 or 2, but that waters the thrill down, and who wants that?

Toasty

I was having a good conversation the other day with my Father on competitive gaming. At age 60, he isn't one to sit down and play a round of Instagib CTF. He enjoyed his foray into less strenuous video games such as Wii Bowling, which he soundly thrashed me at, being an ex-bowler himself. (He made me look terrible.) My Dad is an actuary, spending lots of time with numbers all week long, and is a fan of math / odds based games like Blackjack and (especially) Backgammon.

During our talk, he looks at me and says, "I just don't get it, what's the point of Fighting Games?" It hit me like a sack of bricks. To me, a solid Fighting Game is the blending of chess and action movie. To my Dad watching some guys play a fighter, they mash a bunch of buttons, they beat the shit out of each other on the screen, and someone goes home happy. The whole underlying ruleset is unknown to the outsider - not just my Dad, but to the bulk of fighting game consumers. Spacing, mixups, footsies, oki; an entire language goes unknown to most people that actually buy the fighter. (Except 'wakeup'. Believe me, SF4 XBOX Live Ken knows ALL about wakeups.)

But, is 'Eye Candy Button Masher X' really what sells? It used to. Mortal Kombat II was wildly popular in arcades, and while I have fond memories of the game and it has achieved a cult fanbase, it is by no means a structurally sound game. Mortal Kombat vs. DC is similar; Superman really IS the Superman of that game. His ground pound combos into itself, and if he wins one round, he can bug it so the match doesn't go on to another round; he just wins. MKvDC is sluggish, broken, and created not for a community to delve into, learn, and compete with, but rather made to earn a quick buck off of gamers who want to answer that "timeless" question, who would win between Batman and Sub-Zero? Find out in: Mortal Kombat vs. DC! You know what? Go buy a Wrestling Game, create Batman and Sub-Zero or whoever else you want, and stop funding Midway's awful product. Companies like Midway can get the fuck out of the Fighting Game market. (And they will, too! )

With Street Fighter, Tekken, Guilty Gear, and so on, the designers understand that visuals are important in drawing in the casual fan to the purchase, but they also set out to craft a system that is fun, intriguing, and balanced. These games are sent in early beta phases to arcades for testing amongst the best fighting gamers. You originally had to block C. Viper's Flame Kick while standing; with how good she's proven to be now, imagine how godly Viper would be if that change never happened.

Similarly it's important to note that if you make a game with too many complex inputs, or inaccessible characters / fighting styles, you won't gain the rich fanbase you need to sell copies, much less play your game. But the fact stands; gamers are getting smarter. Competitive games are growing in market and in number. There are game leagues with logos ripped straight from professional sports, prize pools are growing in digits, and there are Starcraft players you might confuse for NASCAR racers with all the logos on their uniforms.



The competitive gaming community is on the rise, and as it spreads, so does its language. While I can't be sure that Fighting Games can ever overcome the burden of the 'Button Masher' branding in the public eye, a man can dream.

Street Fighter 4: State of the Game

This upcoming weekend is going to be interesting for SF4, as the National Tournament Finals are being held in San Fran. Top 16 Gamestop winners are going to duke it out, and MD/VA is being represented by Eric Kim. Eric's been a solid SF3 player for a long time, and his Sagat is no joke. More offense heavy than I think he should be, but extremely solid. Daigo of all people will also be there, collecting a free trip to California and a big paycheck, and hopefully Eric will smoke him too. :)

Take a look at the most popular arcade games in Japan right now;

Video Games
1. Tekken 6: Bloodline Rebellion - 365.4 (-)
2. Blazblue - 274.2 (-)
3. Mobile Suit Gundam: Gundam vs Gundam - 260.3 (-)
4. Sugoi! Arcana Heart 2: Tenkousei Akane to Nazuna - 217.2 (UP)
5. Melty Blood: Actress Again - 184.7 (DOWN)
6. Virtua Fighter 5R - 115.6 (-)
7. Guilty Gear XX Accent Core - 111.5 (UP)
8. Street Fighter IV - 83.4 (DOWN)
9. Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike - 76.1 (UP)
10. Death Smiles Mega Black Label - 52.4 (-)

(Courtesy Arcadia Magazine, May 2009)

Blazblue at #2? Guilty Gear moving UP? Street Fighter 4 at 8th? What's going on? Granted, this is the first installment of the SF4 franchise. Seems like it's possible, though, that Zangief / Sagat / Boxer is too much for the Japanese scene to handle. Zangief is an especially big problem. Matt Frank "The Tank", a common face in the fighting game scene from North Carolina, has this to say about SF4 Gief;

"He still loses hard to most of the top characters, but the characters he does beat stand little to no chance against him; he's kinda like ST Honda (who I also hate) in that respect. I don't like him cuz he's braindead stupid easy, and he's absolutely no fun to fight as or to fight against. I mean, you can't fucking sweep lariat most of the goddamned time. What the hell?

He's like AC Pot, but without all of the system options that GG has that let you get away from Pot. There are far too many characters that have zero options to escape once they're cornered by Gief. He's one of the things that make me question whether or not I actually think this game is long term good, and according to Arcadia, Japan agrees with me."

When you have a character in a game that does extremely well against most of the low to mid tiers but poor against some higher tiers, it becomes a headache for the community. It's even more problematic in some ways; since he's got his issues with some characters, and thus avoids the ban hammer. So either you're picking a character that gets smashed to bits by that problem character, or you pick that problem character and get scraped badly in an unfavorable matchup. This issue applies not just to SF4 Gief, but also ST Honda (Has problems vs projectile characters) and I believe Algol in Soul Calibur 4. Characters like these can discourage picking those low-mid tier characters in the first place, for fear of ever running into that guy in tournament.

That being said, SF4 is still alive and well, both in Japan and (especially) in America. It's certainly better than SF3, and it doesn't seem to be going anywhere anytime soon.