One of the BIGGEST differences between old and new fighting games.
#lordknight #fightinggames #fgc
Follow me on Twitter –
One of the most requested videos in the past month or so – what I mean by a particular aspect of how moves are made in fighting games, what I think it does to a game and why I think devs do it. The difference between games being balanced around advantage (plus frames) and disadvantage (minus frames).
Follow me on Twitter –
Pull up to the clips channel –
Come chill with us on Twitch –
I don’t really use Instagram but people think it’s important so follow me there too –
Thumbnails by Tsuntenshi –
Editing by ChadDrawsThings –
Get 10% off a Respawn gaming chair with code – beastcoast
As a Gio player… Minus frames exist in this game?
I definitely feel what LK's saying. I feel way more comfortable pressuring in some older games where i can just lean on my plus frames. Plus close slashes in strive are my lifeline, lol
What I'm gonna say is a bit of a stereotyping, but how can people think that this game both has weak defensive options and also offense has to take a massive risk? Isn't it just that the weakness of defense and the lack of multiple options balancing out offense being built around conditioning your opponent to respect you more than they should? Essentially an RPS of should the defender commit to a read, attempt to react or just stay blocking?
> One of the BIGGEST differences between old and new fighting games.
This assumption makes for a very limited view of the FGC, it's hard to even name a game that follows this trend that isn't an Arc game. So the video feels like "Here's another weird reason GGS is bad"
The difference is XX is sick, Xrd is cool, Strive is boring.
I wish he would use the word "literally" correctly 🙁
Glad to see you finally gathered your thoughts on the matter. Coming from BlazBlue and UNI, it's kind of what I expected it to be, and it's something I think I like as a casual player. I can definitely see why it can drive people mad, though.
sounds like the offens person can toy more with the opponent in older games, sounds fun
Minus frames? Nago go brrrrr
10:28 "Characters have moves that are plus"
cries in only one plus frame move that is a 43F start-up projectile Anji
Strive is the first FG I’ve taken seriously and I actually prefer the way it is compared to the older games as you describe it. Pressure feels like a balance of risk reward and if I defend well by understanding my opponents patterns, i get a turn to fight back by nature of them running out of options to pressure with or me reading a gap on something risky. Furthermore i think this makes the situation when your opponent uses RC to extend their turn really exciting because it subverts your expectations of when your turn is supposed to start. Idk, a lot of people have issues with strives pressure and defense but I personally find it really exhilarating. Great vid tho as always LK!
I think blazblue nailed it in this regard, feels good and you get to cancel easily.
Ooh, I've been really curious about this topic since you brought it up in previous videos, so I'm glad to see it covered!
You kind of bring this up when you mention the +7 situation @ 2:35, but one thing that is frustrating for me in GGST is having to be aware of situations where a move/sequence that is minus but normally not punishable suddenly becomes punishable in specific (and sometimes character-specific) situations.
For example, ending Ky's block pressure with Dire Eclat is USUALLY safe because of the pushback, but if they get a good IB (or if you're playing against Ramlethal), suddenly what you thought was your standard block pressure ender no longer works. It turns into a situation where an ender that is normally quite strong (frame traps, leaves him at a good spacing, chips a bit, applies Shock State, etc.) feels kinda unreliable. Of course, you can mix up your options to make the Dire Eclat ender less predictable, but in that and similar scenarios, I find myself wishing that there was a more intuitive "safely end my turn" option that works universally no matter what, even if it were less strong or rewarding.
I played Ky in Xrd as well, and, like you brought up, at a beginner level it was really intuitive knowing that ending your turn safely was very simple, and most of the risk instead came from going for pressure resets, which made sense. Obviously there will always be aspects of character matchup differences when it comes to building a gameplan with a character, but I feel that in games that are balanced around minus frames, you are forced to confront and work around those differences at a much lower level of your gameplan than in games built around plus frames.
After hearing your explanation, I think I like the approach strive has more than XRD. I would rather have risky offensive pressure than be put in situations where I cant do anything defensively because that removes the defensive player's agency, being stuck in a vortex is not fun.
To me it seems that making offensive mix ups risky is you playing the player, as in you are actively trying to condition them, where as having offensive mix ups/pressure very safe/positive you play a single player game for that moment, and makes the opponent feel helpless.
I feel this when I go to strive or fighterz after play sg i play way differently when i jump to strive or fighterz
Meanwhile in under night you have a character that is like – 16 on all his normals but has a rekka and super long delay windows and puts you into set play hell off every hit. Don't need plus frames to have oppressive offense
I feel like you should of mentioned how Xrd and XX have much better defensive options to compensate for the high amounts of plus frames. IB is fairly easy to do and makes most plus frame moves minus or even punishable by a zero frame throw.
I knew something felt off, but I just couldn't put my finger on it. Great video LK!
Considering what you said about everything being minus, that's probably why characters with invincible dps feel really strong in this game.
The more gaps in pressure, the more opportunities for beligerant dps.
Ayo who trynna play xrd
From a Tekken perspective, I think minus is more fun than plus, assuming not everything is so minus to be unsafe.
Pressure based on minus makes back and forths happen more often. Having no 2 connected choices be totally guaranteed puts a higher focus on adaptation, conditioning and reads. Minus pressure is cooler to me because the expression of getting outplayed is a lot more obvious. Ya just done got read and you gotta hold that.
Honestly, anything that minimizes the need to read frame data is good in my eyes. I hate how just because it's available thanks to the internet that some devs feel like it's a good idea to unironically validate people who say they "can't get into fighting games because I don't want to have to study hundreds of moves."
It feels good to learn a frame trap, sure, but it feels worse when you are completely helpless and then when you look up matchup data the reason you lost is because you NEED to know the frames. Also I have experiences of beating someone by just doing a frame trap and found it really unsatisfying since it just feels dirty to just have one knowledge check and suddenly you can easily win. I believe that's a legitimate issue that probably should be experimented with how to deal with in some way.
Fighting games are already super big on rewarding offense. I think that making moves to get people to slow down their aggressive play and think more methodically about it since they are more likely to get shut down also has benefits worth considering.
Really my stance would be that there's room for both types of balance but also that devs should always be thinking of ways to improve it.
But like, if you are conditioning someone to block, that doesn't enforce mirazh. If I am trying to block S disc or lust shaker, then I am also looking at the screen and am going to punish mirazh on reaction with a throw. If I ever have a long set with a Millia, that player always stops cancelling into mirazh entirely because they can't enforce it.
The thing that I like most about plus moves is that the frametrap time is guaranteed by being able to make use of the game's buffer window.
I remember during the first open beta for Strive thinking that Sol's f.S needed to be plus because he couldn't delay cancel and couldn't create a frametrap otherwise. But now his f.S frame advantage just overlaps with the delay cancel 5H. And at the end of the day, most Sol's opt for the 5H frametrap as opposed to f.S 2K, or f.S 5P, or f.S 5K for example because the reward on hit is way higher on 5H and it is less prone to whiffing due to FD.
So there are many more factors that go into post block situations than just having a plus move or not. It is possible to feel stronger after a negative move if the cancel options are great.
However, I agree that plus moves allow more freedom and variety (increases the scope of the dev's intentions). It's not that offense is actually fundamentally weaker in Strive because an identical mixup can be created with cancels or plus moves. It's just that the frequency and variety of situations is lower so it is easier for the human brain to comprehend the offense.
Lk talking about + frames causing fucked up situations. Garuda loops makes me inclined to agree.
To summarize: game design is evolving into a direction that lets players play the "mind games" part of fighting games sooner. Old fighting games tended to reward frame-perfect execution first and foremost. You drop a combo? You get blown up. You play against someone more experienced? You don't really "get to play" much – it's more about getting humbled and going back to reading up on numbers and figuring things out in training mode. Of course this process can be fun, but it requires a ton of commitment and tolerance for frustration.
I much prefer to have a FGC community where everyone can improve and have fun playing against friends, intuitively figuring things out and getting better. The old design philosophy will always create a more niche type of game that most people will abandon quickly or never even give it a shot.
Strive makes it really obvious and intuitive when it is your turn and what you can get away with. It feels much more dynamic in that you are constantly thinking about what the other player is doing and how you can counter their current plans.
So, if I'm following, with plus frames, doing things feels like less of a risk to you, while minus frames feels like more of a risk to you.
definitely defined my problem with how strive feels, like after going for a franetrap, instead of being + or being able to reset pressure quickly compared to older fgs, i just felt like i had to take risks in pressure all the time and hope i dont get blown up. Its obviously also harder for the defender to deal with just because the situation is so strong, and getting out is just so much riskier, but you also actually feel rewarded for getting your pressure started compared to modern fgs. Great vid
This is my first big disagree eith lord knight. I think the new way has their advantage. Strive has more back and forth which what Daisuke wanted in the first place. I am a Dizzy player and her she only had one move that was + on block and that's c.S. Not everyone is created equal in Xrd.
I'll be honest I never noticed this feeling. But I've pretty much only played Potemkin in AC+R, Xrd, and Strive. Maybe it doesn't apply to him as much?
I think I have a kind of fucked up view of this because I originally came from Smash before I started playing other games. In Smash, everything is fake as fuck, you're almost always minus and the "mix" comes from knowing they have to stop blocking and choose to do something because otherwise they get shieldbroken. So after already playing Blazblue for like a year or so before Strive came out, playing Strive felt comfortable for me because I don't really care if I'm minus, like I still have options because if they respect my cancel window and keep blocking I can just run up and do it all over again. And even if I do make a commitment, as long as I'm not like… -6 or more at point blank I'm basically fine. I don't really feel the distinction between having risky options to rotate and absolutely dominating with things that are always plus.
This was really helpful in more technically explaining something I felt intuitively, but could not properly express.
Great video. Really interesting to consider the difference from a design perspective
This is trend I noticed in fighting games as well. I hope to see more games in the future that DON'T go in this direction.
This is an interesting conversation. Coming from tekken I was able adjust to strive pretty easily because I didn't have to radically change the way I play or look at the game.
Strive is perfect for a guy like me.
Why did you just… not talk about the safe and frame trap options in Strive that both new and veteran players will do? You can mix between spaced Disc and Shaker/Mirage
I hope over time they move just a little closer to the classic titles. Not too much, but the mindset this game puts you in is definitely different than other games. I have definitely become more aggressive of a player due to this game, and ironically I feel like it has actually elevated my play in older titles (more offence and bigger cojones I guess) but it does add to the scrambly feeling this game has at the upper-mid level.
maybe it's because i come from smash, or because i play nago so he has an escape option out of his negative frames, but i really enjoy the idea of always being negative and having to use movement, timing and spacing to either trick your opponent into a false sense of safety so you can catch them mashing or force them into an infinite pressure loop until they crack.
you get to shimmy while you're doing your blockstring and as the opponent you have to be sharp on the gaps and the opponent's intent. the pressure becomes about understanding the opponent's habits and options, and make the correct read, and when you do, it's super satisfying.
Way back when SFV first dropped, I very much felt that way about the game (so much stuff feels minus, feels like I just throw a thing out, hope I'm right, and either they'll eat 50% or I will). In Strive I think the biggest thing was how there weren't as many jump cancels. Even though I main Sol and he got to stay in and be sticky, it wasn't for reasons that made me feel particularly powerful (ironically). The jump cancels were there, on good buttons too, but ending out at 5H range for instance and not being able to take a risky IAD to force my way back in just felt kinda bad to me among other things. I think Strive is a great game, I think plenty of people are rightfully having fun with it, but man even as an amateur +R Sol player it just feels better to take my turn and keep it instead of feeling like every interaction is a massive gamble for the round.
I've actually been thinking about this a bit recently. I took up Guilty Gear with Strive, but I've been playing Accent Core with friends, and it honestly just feels more conducive to finding out what beats what on your own.
I can't really agree with plus frames being new player friendly, extended block strings and pressure is what leads most people to feel like they cant do anything
So Xrd has more moves with plus frames, but it’s harder to link them into each other?
Very interesting topic :0. My main fighting game I play is Undernight and while everything is minus I still think the offense feels really powerful and free because of how reverse beat works as well how different specials and normals cancel between eachother. I could see why its so jarring for old guilty gear players to switch to strive based on that fundamental difference or especially the change to dragonball where the only thing that is plus (especially early on) is mostly assists.
Is Melty Blood a minus Frames Game or a plus Frames Game ?
if strive had as many plus frames as xrd the people complaining about the lack of options on defense would go wild
Just a reminder that KOF gives you a plus frame jump in on literally everyone that on hit leads to an untechable knockdown.
Two words… Behemoth Typhoon.
Thanks for elaborating.