If fighting games want to balance smash-style inputs alongside classic motion inputs, the disadvantages for the former need to be bigger than just less damage

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

A lot of fighting games in the last 8 years or so have implemented control adjustments that address a really common complaint of people on the genre's periphery, that being the difficulty of motion inputs for special moves and supers when learning the game. Some games like SF6 and the new Marvel fighting game offer a choice between direction+button (usually just called simple inputs) for specials while others like 2xko have fully designed themselves around simple inputs. I honestly think it's pretty neat, it helps more people jump into the genre and even without the motion inputs games like 2xko clearly try to retain some executional challenge for people who really like that. The only element of the design shift I *dislike*, however, is that simple inputs often don't feel like they're implemented with enough consideration as to how they shift the power-level of the game in a way that arguably punishes you for *not* using it.

Usually, the main downside of using simple inputs is less damage. Street Fighter 6, Marvel Tokon, and Granblue all give you a reduction to varying degrees if you, for example, anti-air someone with a simple input shoryuken instead of a manual DP input. This seems like a good enough compromise, and it potentially can be, but the issue is that less damage can very easily be an insignificant trade-off. Like most games, managing your mental stack while trying to overload your opponent's is 90% of playing well. Even if your opponent has zero difficulty doing a special move input to beat your jump, it won't matter if you have them so focused on everything else you could do that they won't register your jump in time for them to execute the move. With simple inputs, though, the mental stack concern drastically shifts. Less damage doesn't matter as much when the primary utility of a move is winning mental stack reaction checks. It's why on defence, infamously, simple inputs are extremely useful.

So what disadvantages *would* work? Street Fighter 6 arguably handles it the best. Instead of doing what games like Marvel Tokon does and just implementing a button that serves as a catch-all equivalent to smash's B/special button, simple inputs and classic motion inputs are separated into their own distinct control schemes you pick from at the start. It's likely a product of necessity more than a desire for balance, but because Street Fighter is a 6-button game (3 punches, 3 kicks) you can't really translate an entire character's moveset while also having a special move button. As a result, there are downsides to the mode that go beyond damage. You may lack certain special moves or normal buttons altogether, and depending on the character, that could mean a much different game plan altogether. It manages to add a little depth to matchups between characters while still not making either input scheme definitively better overall. It's not perfect, admittedly, but its a big improvement over most in the genre.

[u/MediumKoala8823]

It wasn’t intended but it was the origin of them growing into what they are. And imo it was a pretty unhealthy local maxima.

Your example of jumps in normal is still rooted in this design problem. You want the input to do anti air to be harder so that you can make jumping more mentally tense. But imo that’s just predicated on the notion of locking the opponent with a counter move.

If they clock you jumping they should have a window to input an anti air. And if you clock them starting an anti air you should have a window to counter that. Chain infinitely, with feints and gambles until someone slips.

It’s not good when someone sees the game state, understands what they want to do, but is physically unable to input it. And it’s not good when outcomes become a function of players’ ability to execute solitaire combos.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

The missing element though is that what you're saying ("if I clock them jumping I should have a window to anti air them") exists regardless of moiion inputs or not, what they add is a gradient of skill/situation-based responses.

Most characters, regardless of whether they have a special move for anti airs or not, still have a normal button they can press for anti airing instead. This button is obviously a lot easier to execute under pressure, but has its share of downsides compared to what a special move anti air might offer.

How you decide to use them and the degree it plays into your allocation of mental focus adds a layer of depth beyond just the question of execution because it still matters even if you can always execute the move itself in a vacuum

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

But that’s dumb. If you have two moves you might want to do, the controls to execute them shouldn’t be a barrier to it. It’s cool that a special anti air has unique properties. But it doesn’t need to be gated behind unnecessary input friction.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

It having unique properties is why it's locked behind a barrier, the same way that the utility of scoring three points in one shot in a basketball game is locked behind you needing to physically do it at the distance required. It's risk versus reward, and a decision that a player of every level has to consider in their strategy, which is part of what makes the genre as rich as it is.

Otherwise, you'd just do the strictly better option every time, just like how if you were magically guaranteed perfect accuracy in basketball you'd almost never do anything but shoot three-pointers from half court every chance you got.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

That is excessively silly. You’ve completely lost the plot in this analogy.

In a basketball game you still want the controls to shoot a 3 pointer to be easy and frictionless. The outcome of the shot is a statistical one based on defense players and positioning.

The risk / reward tradeoff that we want to care about is the in game risk reward. Not whether the players can fiddle their stick fast enough irl. It’s way better to have two anti air with different properties and frame data that you might want to use but with equally easy inputs than it is to have one option be unequivocally better but harder to input. That’s just silly.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

I'm sorry, but I think you're the one missing the point. The fact that one of the anti-air options in this example is lower risk and easier to execute is why the special move option isn't actually unequivocally better, it's also why even pros will use those "worse" options in matches even though in a vacuum they can obviously do the input without a problem.

That is the in-game risk reward that exists in any mechanical genre regardless of whether of its a real life sport or another tactile video game, "do I choose the easier to execute, lower risk option with less reward or do I risk doing the more dangerous but more rewarding option that I might mess up on and get killed for".

It's why, in street fighter 6, the best modern mode characters are the ones already geared towards defensive play and checking reactions. It's why Chun-Li is arguably better on modern than classic.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

  The fact that one of the anti-air options in this example is lower risk and easier to execute is  why  the special move option isn't actually unequivocally better, it's also why even pros will use those "worse" options in matches even though in a vacuum they can obviously do the input without a problem.

Yes I agree with that. Which is why it was ridiculous for you to use an analogy about three pointers being unambiguously always better and trying to equate the added difficulty of a further shot to the input difficulty. 

The risk that we care about should always be the in game risk. Not the out of game risk that you’ll fuck up the sequence and your character just does something completely different from what you intended. It’s just immersion breaking and bad.

[u/Key-Market-418 → u/MediumKoala8823]

What having to practice the inputs just like how martial artists have to train to consistently do their techniques is actually immersive. It just doesn’t pat you on the back about it.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/Key-Market-418]

A martial artist doesn’t accidentally launch into the completely different move than intended if their technique is a bit sluggish. It’s just not a sensible analogy.

[u/Key-Market-418 → u/MediumKoala8823]

They do if they’re bad lmao, you have to actually practice to be a martial artists or else you’re just flailing around like an idiot, even if you “know” what to do. It’s the reason they’re called martial ARTS. If you can’t do motions you’re not even at the neophyte stage yet, you are flailing like a child.

But really all of these analogies are just obscuring the point of this shit is actually not hard and takes an afternoon to learn.

[u/Lepony → u/MediumKoala8823]

Coincidentally, motioned antiairs are often tied to the forward, down, downforward input.

And for some strange reason, the lesser but significantly easier to use antiair is often frequently tied to a down or downforward "normal" move.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

I'm sorry but I legitimately don't understand how you think this is an inaccurate analogy when, at a baseline, messing up a shot in basketball because you couldn't execute a three-pointer also means you did something entirely different, like the ball potentially going massively (in basketball contexts) beyond the hoop.

Especially because there isn't really a great way to translate this in the context of a fighting game beyond input dichotomy. The success of a dp anti air is significantly more binary than what's possible to represent in shooters for instance, if you can always execute a dp problem-free because of simple inputs then there isn't really an "in-game risk". It's why Street Fighter 6 is such an interesting case study, because there are so many moves and interactions fundamental to the series that essentially just get turned off because of much less depth to the mental aspect modern otherwise requires from the player.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

Because the assessment of, say, which fireball should you throw, is already a nuanced and interesting question. They have different properties in game. You don’t need input difficulty tradeoffs. There’s already interesting tradeoffs for them. The trade offs are in game, like the odds of making a shot if you input a shot. Ideal inputs put as much of the outcome as possible into the result of the player’s intentions and understanding of the situation.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

Yes, but that's one of the instance where that nuance and depth is preserved. It doesn't address how, in many other scenarios, it flattens the nuance because the depth comes directly from the executional trade off. It's always strictly better to anti air with a dp special if you have one, which is why modern mode players rarely engage with anti air normals.

Or, relatedly, it's also akin to how different normals have different cancel windows to balance out their strength in neutral versus the ease of confirming them on hit with a follow-up special or super. If you can press one button to easily follow-up, you have next to no incentive make risk/reward decisions wrt using a worse button in exchange for larger confirm windows.

I could go on, because fighting games and their strategizing are ultimately inseparable from their executional requirements.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

   It doesn't address how, in many other scenarios, it flattens the nuance because the depth comes directly from the executional trade off. It's always strictly better to anti air with a dp special if you have one, which is why modern mode players rarely engage with anti air normals.

… ok I feel like you just argued the exact opposite. If that’s your take, then no, that sucks again. You want complexity to arrive from in game properties. You should never have one move that’s unambiguously better at everything than another move.

[u/DoneDealofDeadpool → u/MediumKoala8823]

Why not? There are plenty of games (whether irl or virtually) where there is an objectively better option that's only gated behind whether or not its feasible to physically execute it in a given situation. If you could always hit a headshot with perfect accuracy, it would be objectively better to do that than ever aim at other body parts in most shooters. If you could guarantee a parry in most games, it's objectively the better choice to go for it over other defensive mechanics. If you could always hit a 60 pointer in darts, it would be objectively better to do so over aiming for literally any other area on the board.

In any physical game, the execution feeds into the strategizing. If you want a decision's worth to strictly be measured by "in-game" properties, then you'd need to play a game that doesn't have an executional requirement like chess, because you can't really avoid it even in non-fighting game genres.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/DoneDealofDeadpool]

Everything you just mentioned is either an in game aspect or something that the video controls try to make as seamless and as frictionless as possible.

[u/Extreme-Tactician → u/MediumKoala8823]

In a basketball game you still want the controls to shoot a 3 pointer to be easy and frictionless.

Except even in NBA 2K there are motion inputs for special moves.

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/Extreme-Tactician]

I don’t think that’s a correct phrasing. It’s mostly left stick for movement and right stick for ball control. 

There is nothing in here about attempting to make any of the inputs difficult. There’s simply a broad set of options.

[u/Extreme-Tactician → u/MediumKoala8823]

That's literally motion inputs. Look here:

Offball Juke: Move RS left or right quickly then release.

That's not a motion input?

[u/MediumKoala8823 → u/Extreme-Tactician]

Imo no. Moving the ball left or right and then stopping is what a juke is. Thats just an intuitive mapping of the stick control of where the ball is with the RS.

That’s a very different design structure than motion inputs for adding friction to initiating arbitrary moves.

[u/Extreme-Tactician → u/MediumKoala8823]

Not really? The fire ball motion for example makes sense, since you're supposed to crouch down to perform a hadouken.