Project M Social Thread

[Rikana]

how did melee buffer work then? my understanding of it was that out of hitstun gave buffer, but nothing else.

Buffer rolls, buffer spot dodges, and get up attacks.

 

[shanus]

It's easy to agree on codes that would be best, but with most coders out of play, we are largely limited to whats in fighter.pac to alter; so don't get your hopes up there

 

[Sneak8288]

This. I put A LOT of ****ing time into into my techskill. I don't want some guy who put no time into the game be able to do the same stuff as me without even having to try hard. Plus whats the point of using 0 buffer when you could use a high buffer and make less mistakes? I have a EXTREME amount of techskill BTW, like, anything Shiz can do I can. I know thats hard to believe but I'm MADDDD serious. Do yall know GOTM? He said I was one of the most technical Falcons/Falcos he's ever seen and 100% sure he's played Sca.r, Hax$, Eggm, Cactus, and Jman (and possibly Chops).

thats cuz they never played my boy Nando... up and coming best falcon look him up lol

Shanus, during the 1st open beta you really should make a poll on a universal number of frames for buffering although i still think it should be a wifi only thing

 

[SiD]

I don't understand why you people think that having 10 frames of input buffer somehow make the game hella easy...it's not as if suddenly everyone will be able to waveshine around for day because that **** is buffered, it's really not a big deal. In my experience, even the conditional buffering in Melee has cause me to nair off the stage to death more times than it's helped me, it's not something that makes the game easier...at all really...it's just a matter of personal preference.

They allow you to turn tapping up to jump off in Brawl, for example. Should we complain because we spent time learning to di up without jumping? No, of course not. Some people like it one way, others like it another way. Options are a good thing, don't forget that.

 

[kupo15]

Players cannot, though, be expected to know how long the hitstun from each specific attack will last, so that they know when to attempt to wobble/attack. Removing buffer in these circumstances serves to make the game more clunky and promote trying to mash out of combos instead of timing them.

It's alright talking about how buffer reduces the tech skill requirement of certain feats, but many people neglect to consider its other implications on making the game play smoothly.

You make a very good point at explaining why a universal 0 buffer might not be good because of the clunkiness it might cause in certain situations. Are you arguing against a universal non adjustable buffer for tourney play?

I agree that conditional buffer would be best. I just think that even if that turns out to be impossible, 1 or 0 frame buffer should be standard (though adjustable buffer should be left in for practicing purposes).

This debate can wait till later though, since after all nobody is really suggesting that the adjustable buffer system be removed entirely are they?

I agree with this and all the points DS made. I also agree with what kix said about there should be a standard buffer to have a level playing field for all the players.

In my experience, even the conditional buffering in Melee has cause me to nair off the stage to death more times than it's helped me, it's not something that makes the game easier...at all really...it's just a matter of personal preference. .

Don't blame the buffer when in this situation, it was all your fault.

 

[Blank Mauser]

People should stop being conceited about this buffer talk.

I personally don't care whether theres a universal standard. Either way, people will adapt, move on, it won't keep better players from winning games they should. It may be harder, but its just hard for the sake of being harder. Which I think is silly and vain but its really all preference. People input the inputs they do, buffer doesn't make them input things they don't want.

However, I like some of my chars with buffering and some without. I think some techniques are more difficult with buffering, some without. You CAN use the double-edged sword argument here because difficulty is subjective. Some find learning timing easy, others might find it irrelevant because of their playstyle or character. You're not going to break that player specific barrier no matter if you strip down costumization. Some people have to work harder then others to get the same results, and we should honestly get used to it.

Now I imagine most would bring in the argument "But thats what we're diminishing, we want player skills balanced." Yet in the end the result will be the same and its just a trivial beef to quell the masses call for rewarding tendencies and maybe even putting the people who don't even care about timing ahead of the game for a bit.

 

[BEES]

Buffer systems make a game easier to balance. When you know attacks will be performed with frame-perfection, you can balance them as such. You can require frame-perfect execution for combos without making them impossible. Fox's attacks in Melee would be god tier if humans could do them with frame perfection consistently. Dexterity is the only thing balancing that game, and that's no way to properly balance a game.

 

[Kix]

So this is the way I see it.

Pro buffer choice:

-It lets people choose what input system feels the best.
-It's a double edged sword.

Rebuttal:

-That's not a good thing if it makes execution of the same techniques easier because then the lower buffer settings with the tightness is just for ballsiness and preference but is blatant disadvantage.
-Only if it is higher end buffer. Otherwise it's your own fault.

Pro buffer standard

-It keeps execution goals totally level.
-To feel the most like Melee and disregarding arguments against whatever specific buffer, it should be a low buffer at least.
-The idea of it just makes things less solid as it's like a little bit of a program-your-own preference in game.

Rebuttal:

-It's arbitrary
-Things will turn out the same anyway, as better players will still be better.
-You can program buttons and turn off tap jump.

Rejoinder:

-It's not superfluous to have the game have tight input system at the least being low buffer as it will keep things that require execution to be harder, but shouldn't really be a problem for standard techniques (it makes things that you have to think about take practice).
-Well just because better players overcome things doesn't mean those things are good. Look at better tier characters that have almost universally good matchups. It doesn't need to be this extreme, but because people overcome this, it doesn't mean the balance itself is good.
-Buttons generally don't give leniency in timing when you map them in different places. I can take this point to a degree, but I don't really think tap jump is really the best thing either.

This isn't the biggest deal in the world to me, and to be honest, to keep things from not being sloppy and making things consistent I would even be more accepting of a standard buffer in the medium/medium low range, even though I think the lower buffers are just arguably better. I want what most Melee players would say is closest to Melee play - and I think that is a good argument given the project if you're trying to stick with a most-Melee feel.

Melee isn't Chess. People need to realize it's a game and so execution has a heavy presence in skill. I'm completely fine with that, but I understand the need to make it so things aren't needlessly hard. My point is that with buffer choice the lower end buffer is more of a disadvantage in any possible playstyle even if you like the feel better.

It's true that it isn't a good at balancing characters in and of itself. An example would be Slayer in Guilty Gear XX Accent Core. He isn't suddenly not top tier because he has to 2-frame link everything he does on the ground for the most part. Still I'm not saying it's a balancing tool.

 

[Shell]

I don't really see the point in allowing something like 0-3 buffer range when buffers in the 1-3 range would supposedly offer the most benefits vs. the negatives anyways. Why not then just let anyone use 4-10 as well?

In my opinion the argument really comes down to zero buffer (possibly with a more logical conditional setting), vs. free choice 0-10.

 

[Magus420]

-That's not a good thing if it makes execution of the same techniques easier because then the lower buffer settings with the tightness is just for ballsiness and preference but is blatant disadvantage.


My point is that with buffer choice the lower end buffer is more of a disadvantage in any possible playstyle even if you like the feel better.

Except at the level of play that actually matters, buffers of 1-2 have a clear advantage over the others as they allow you to be consistently frame perfect on things that are bufferable but with little or none of the downsides. If there's an issue with buffering making things a bit too 'easy' the buffers of 1 or 2 will be the ones to blame, since it doesn't really matter if with the help of higher buffer FoxSephirothCloud12 has an easier time learning to waveshine or Marf9000 can now consistently spam his double f-airs like a moron since they both suck anyway.

 

[shanus]

Except at the level of play that actually matters, buffers of 1-2 have a clear advantage over the others as they allow you to be consistently frame perfect on things that are bufferable but with little or none of the downsides. If there's an issue with buffering making things a bit too 'easy' the buffers of 1 or 2 will be the ones to blame, since it doesn't really matter if with the help of higher buffer FoxSephirothCloud12 has an easier time learing to waveshine or Marf9000 can now consistently spam his double f-airs like a moron since they both suck anyway.

Interesting. Has anyone tried to see if the 1 liner buffer code set to 0 removes any buffering from histun?

 

[Kix]

You're probably right about that. It's too hard to set up if it's not 0. I don't really know how high the buffer would mess up things because I've never gone above 5 since 10. I guess the fact that it would be too hard to get a consensus on things would be a reason to leave buffer choice. If 0 buffer is arguably clunky though, I guess you could move to 1 because it's the closest without being clunky, etc.

Though it's not so much of it being a medium buffer as the fact that I think a standard buffer should be imposed. I guess the finding out what makes the most sense is the hard part if it's not the extremes. I doubt people generally would want a forced 5 buffer - in the center. I can see why it would be left out of the problem escaping it. I just think that the argument against it staying is decent and the argument on it staying is pretty much held by the annoying/too hard to get a consensus part.

Except at the level of play that actually matters, buffers of 1-2 have a clear advantage over the others as they allow you to be consistently frame perfect on things that are bufferable but with little or none of the downsides. If there's an issue with buffering making things a bit too 'easy' the buffers of 1 or 2 will be the ones to blame, since it doesn't really matter if with the help of higher buffer FoxSephirothCloud12 has an easier time learning to waveshine or Marf9000 can now consistently spam his double f-airs like a moron since they both suck anyway.

So I'm not sure I get how that low buffer somehow makes if you did the same input with the higher buffer worse. Wouldn't it come out just the same?

 

[Deleted member]

The audience that this is appealing to wants rich and vibrant technical gameplay coupled with a Melee feel. If buffer happens to be in or out of the game, and the aforementioned is true then the audience probably will still want to play. We haven't thrown away our Brawl discs for a reason.

Incorporate the buffer, and if it is negative to the overall gameplay and audience, then it can be removed. Experimenting is part of science, and trying simple things out before dismissing them may be beneficial.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but having a 5 frame buffer means you lose 5 frames to your reaction to input time as well?

 

[Kix]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but having a 5 frame buffer means you lose 5 frames to your reaction to input time as well?

If you're pressing stuff when you're not supposed to. If it's for a follow up that you would generally input anyway, you just get it easier, especially if it's got strict timing. I don't see how it really carries over useless inputs, but I could be wrong because 5 frames is higher than I'm thinking about. I'm open to being wrong about this, but I think some main points will stick, anyway.

Interesting. Has anyone tried to see if the 1 liner buffer code set to 0 removes any buffering from histun?

Well this brings up a good point against higher buffer. You can buffered punishes/etc!

 

[Dark Sonic]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but having a 5 frame buffer means you lose 5 frames to your reaction to input time as well?

No. Having a 5 frame buffer means that you can input an action up to 5 frames early and it will be executed as soon as possible.

A 1 frame window becomes a 6 frame window (if the action can be buffered), a 6 frame window becomes 11, ect, ect. The double edged sword that people refer to is that you may input an action that you later did not want, but couldn't take back because it was already "buffered."

But with low buffer settings (1-3 ish) this is not an issue. At that point buffering is strictly advantageous, which is why I think it's not really smart to support variable buffer. If there's no downside, then why wouldn't everyone use it? And even worse, what of the people who don't realize this and spend countless hours trying to get close to frame perfect, while others just rely on buffering? They get no tangible reward (they both play at the same speed and neither of them inputs unwanted commands, only the one with buffering has more leniency in timing). So setting a universal standard is really only to ensure that everyone experiences the same amount of technical difficulty. Whether that be 0 frames or 3 frames, I just think it all players should be expected to learn the same timings for actions. As long as the buffer is not too high (reaching the "double edged sword" point), then it's not a matter of preference in playstyles, only foolish pride.

Well this brings up a good point against higher buffer. You can buffered punishes/etc!

Actually, I think Shanus is hoping that the one line buffer code does NOT remove buffering during hitstun. I'm not sure exactly what that would suggest (possibly that he'd be able to isolate buffering during hitstun and write a separate code for it?)

 

[kaizo13]

^ couldn't have said it better myself

 

[kupo15]

agreed with kaizo agreeing with DS

 

[kaizo13]

It's easy to agree on codes that would be best, but with most coders out of play, we are largely limited to whats in fighter.pac to alter; so don't get your hopes up there

coolstoryshanus......just quit slacking

jk <3

 

[Dingding123]

I agree with kupo agreeing with kaizo agreeing with ds.

So then, is it safe to say that a certain low buffer, if possible, should be standard in some way, shape or form? If so, my vote's for either 1 or 2 frames.

 

[Shell]

A few of you are missing the point presented by Magus and myself that if you allow 1-2 buffer then you might as well allow the less advantageous 3-10.

Furthermore, some people need to get out of the (strange) mindset that 10 buffer is the best and that 1-2 are a good compromise between not having a buffer at all and having one. That... is not a compromise at all. That's just agruably the best buffer.

And since we would never get 5 buffer passed as the standard, it really comes back to all or nothing.

I know this mostly what DS was saying, just making sure everyone's on the same page.


And then there's another thing... we're trying to get AT frame windows to be as close to Melee as possible whenever we can, but what happens when we can't always? Say a certain AT requires an input on frame 14 or 15 in PM rather than 16 in Melee... are we willing to assume off the bat that this project will be so succesful that people are willing to memorize two minutely (yet frustratingly) different versions of an AT for a game they can't be sure is worth spending the grind time on? Lord knows we work hard to make sure things like this happen as little as possible, but it's not impossible.

 

[kaizo13]

i hear ya shell.... yet nothing that would make me change my mind. And i'm sure everybody here is aware of the fact that it is impossible to perfectly clone melee over brawl, so yes i am certain people won't mind "memorizing" and re-learning new timings for AT's aslong as they are close enough to their Melee counterparts.

and ofcourse this game is gonna be worth "spending grind time on"....it's freaken Project M


edit: and wait....how is 3-10 buffer less advantageous? o.O

 

[Shadic]

Because anything above three and you're drastically increasing the chance that the main negative consequence of buffer (Unintended inputs) will happen.

 

[Shell]

kaizo, while I appreciate your unflinching readiness to support and train for this project, it's hard to say how many of the more conservative Melee pros who are already busy having fun and winning money in an established game will see eye to eye with you.

However, I admit that I may be underestimating the ability of muscle memory to adapt on the fly to small (frame) differences in timings so long as they have the proper visual / audio stimuli.

 

[Dingding123]

I didn't mean to imply that 3-10 buffer should be impossible to choose; I'm just suggesting
that we have the option of either choosing a higher buffer or going along with the 'default' or
'standard' buffer of 1-2 frames. This would enable players to have whatever size buffer they want, while suggesting that they go along with the buffer that the game is usually played best with.

 

[kaizo13]

i just don't see why anyone would want anything that causes unintended inputs to be part of the game.....and for those who believe that the advantage of higher buffer (easier inputs) v.s the disadvantage (unintended inputs) balances each other out, i believe you are mistaken. and I don't think that makes it viable to incorporate it into this game

Edit: and i know that if we were to have high buffer, that it would be optional.....but i just think that its a advantage/disadvantage for the players, one playing high, one playing low (and don't tell me that it's players preference because in this situation it DOES make a difference in gameplay although not visible to the eye)

 

[GenoGar]

Buffer or not... the better player will win. The only thing buffer does is make it harder to own people a level below you. Even so... in the end you'll be winning matches when you should be winning them.

-----------------

Here's a situation:

Fox and Ness are both in killing range. Fox lands a dair on Ness.

w/ Buffer - Fox will buffer an Up Smash for the kill within his buffer window which will guarantee an Up Smash on the first available frame Fox can act on.

w/o Buffer - Fox will have a 3 frame window after the dair finishes... which he can input an Up Smash for the kill. If he fails to input it within those 3 frames Ness will get his shield up since holding shield will put it up on the first available frame. This will result in a powershield to back throw for the kill.

-----------------

The argument is that if Fox could pull off a dair on Ness then Fox deserves the kill; buffer insures that. Whatever Fox did to nail that dair... he deserves all the rewards that come with it which means an Up Smash for the kill. I don't expect scrubs to land dair on skilled players.

Just because it's easier to get that Up Smash out of a dair in doesn't mean buffer will make it easier to get that dair in in the first place. This is where skill comes into play which involves reading your opponents, finding openings in moves, and maintaining stage control.

Tech skill is only a small part of what makes a great player. In theory if everyone had perfect tech skill then the only thing separating the players is their overall ability in outplaying the other player. Buffering only lessens the impact that technical skill made on determining great players.



Okay, if you had a buffer window with Melee-Fox he'd probably slaughter more than he already does. But this isn't Melee... this is a Brawl mod that emulates Melee. Obviously the frame data isn't the same so Fox will NOT dominate just because he has buffering. It's not like you can balance Melee... but you can balance P: M so buffering can be taken into account.



Also some of you guys are arguing over mechanics in gameplay that were just "bad". The technical skill that "separated amateurs and scrubs" was developing habits that overcame bad game mechanics.

Spoiler

That's why I'm against L-Canceling but I have B+ for that.

I don't think the goal is to emulate every single aspect in melee... including the bad ones.

If it is... then I'll just play Melee lol.

 

[Wind Owl]

Guys... It's a mod. You can play it however you want―with buffer, without buffer, with L-canceling, with automatic canceling. I don't really understand why you guys are taking up several pages arguing over whether you should force other people to play the same way as you, especially when you consider that you cannot.

The game's not even close to a beta yet, either.

 

[Sterowent]

welp, they're trying to make as competitive a standard as possible, for those in the dark about those sorta things. which is a little ridiculous, but it's for a good cause: to make a level playing field to base yourself vs. other people playing.

that said, i'm definitely going to FFA with items on high. my friends aren't that great, but they'll love a good balanced roster in a speed-o-rama game like this.

still hoping on some visual changes, by the way. i recently realized that what makes brawl models less awesome as melee models isn't that they're bigger, isn't that the camera blows. it's that they don't fit the stages. the stages in melee were about as realistic as the characters themselves, so you got the sense that they belonged on the stage. brawl models stand out way too much, when juxtaposed with stages...

 

[kaizo13]

The argument is that if Fox could pull off a dair on Ness then Fox deserves the kill; buffer insures that. Whatever Fox did to nail that dair... he deserves all the rewards that come with it which means an Up Smash for the kill.
I don't expect scrubs to land dair on skilled players. <------- lolwtf?

Geno ur argument makes no sense to me. I don't want to be rewarded with a free up-smash just because i landed a dair with fox.....i want to be rewarded because i timed it correctly and L-canceled my dair. If i happened to miss the L-cancel then the other player should have the chance to shield/shield grab me if he reacts quick enough. That is why many of us think of buffer as "easy mode" when it come to Melee mechanics. Ur right about one thing tho, buffer Does decrease the gap between low and high level players, which is a big no-no for competetive gaming.

and plz stop saying this isn't Melee. (i had enough of Brawl+ not being Melee 2.0)
if we have the ability to resemble Melee mechanics as much as possible, then thats what we should aim for....if not, plz change the name of this project

Edit: Advanced appology to the P:M Team. I am in no way trying to make it seem as i have any authority over this project. I just have really high hopes for this project so sorry for any Bold statements i have/might make.

 

[Bandit]

This is the dumbest conversation I have ever seen.

People who have no access to the game are theory crafting rules and situations. Then other people who have no access to the game are arguing with them. Then people who are making the game are telling them none of this conversation is worth it, but they ignore them or tell them they are wrong.

Project M = Closed Experimental Beta

All your theory crafting is completely useless, and you should probably talk about something that actually matters.

Go ahead and tell me the last time buffer decided a match in a tournament. You can't because you have no idea and are just guessing.

:bandit:

 

[kaizo13]

sry Bandit but i don't need access to Project M to know how buffer works.

Edit: i'll shut up if that's what you guys want, although i think these conversations/arguments are actually healthy towards the project, especially in the phase/stage that it is currently in.

 

[ValTroX]

Just let everyone use the buffer settings they want, Play your game and let everyone play theirs. I mean, if they can use it, so can you, so there's no real advantage for any player.

Edit: I do agree that it will make many techniques easier, but it's just personal preference. For example if buffer was applied to melee, it will make it easier to wavedash with characters that had slightly different jump timing(Dorf, Falco to name a few).

 

[Dark Sonic]

-----------------

Here's a situation:

w/ Buffer - Fox will buffer an Up Smash for the kill within his buffer window which will guarantee an Up Smash on the first available frame Fox can act on.

w/o Buffer - Fox will have a 3 frame window after the dair finishes... which he can input an Up Smash for the kill. If he fails to input it within those 3 frames Ness will get his shield up since holding shield will put it up on the first available frame. This will result in a powershield to back throw for the kill.

Well, power shield holding will be removed, but....

This is exactly what the problem is in the first place. Let's say both players input the move only 2 frames early (not too far off of the window right?). The one with 2 frame buffer hit with THE SAME TIMING that the other one missed. They were both off, so why the discrepancy? Why should the buffering player be pampered like this?

To that, people bring up the disadvantages of buffering. But so far, THERE ARE NONE. People don't input unwanted moves 2 frames before they're able to do them anyway. The "inputting unwanted moves" weakness is not there, and buffering has no other weaknesses to speak of.

The argument is that if Fox could pull off a dair on Ness then Fox deserves the kill; buffer insures that. Whatever Fox did to nail that dair... he deserves all the rewards that come with it which means an Up Smash for the kill. I don't expect scrubs to land dair on skilled players.

I don't agree with this. I'm sure that there are others that don't agree with this.

Fox's dair is not particularly hard to land, and even so no combos should ever be just given to you. It's your job as a player to learn the timing of your combos.

This is where skill comes into play which involves reading your opponents, finding openings in moves, and maintaining stage control.

So skill should not come into play when following through after successfully making an opening?

Tech skill is only a small part of what makes a great player. In theory if everyone had perfect tech skill then the only thing separating the players is their overall ability in outplaying the other player. Buffering only lessens the impact that technical skill made on determining great players.

But technical skill is still SKILL and should be rewarded. It's a show of dedication and practice. Slowly becoming more precise also serves to make the mental game itself more interesting, as you are gaining more options as you practice. Your diligence is rewarded by having options you did not have before, allowing you to expand on your mental game. That's part of what makes fighting games so interesting in the first place.

Okay, if you had a buffer window with Melee-Fox he'd probably slaughter more than he already does. But this isn't Melee... this is a Brawl mod that emulates Melee. Obviously the frame data isn't the same so Fox will NOT dominate just because he has buffering. It's not like you can balance Melee... but you can balance P: M so buffering can be taken into account.

....frame perfect Fox is beyond human abilities because we do not have the reaction time for it, not because our muscle memory is incapable of emulating it. Players already do things like multishining or invincible wavelands from the edge, or shine->bair combos. And you know what? It's impressive BECAUSE not everyone can do it. They feel a sense of pride because they practiced and achieved something that other players did not.


I'm done now I guess. We can talk about buffering after beta <_<

 

[Team Giza]

Just let everyone use the buffer settings they want, Play your game and let everyone play theirs. I mean, if they can use it, so can you, so there's no real advantage for any player.

This is an argument that is supposed to be made AFTER the game is completely released. Right now we are discussing which one of these paths might make the game more fun long term.

Personally I like forcing the lowered buffer just because it puts people on equal ground when it comes to on-reaction punishment of attacks. Right now I just woke up so I am not ready to make a rational argument for it. I may be pretty biased because I am a defensive player who really likes a lot of offensive pressure being put against me as I try to predict what they might do. The lack of buffer makes this just a bit more difficult for me and thus makes it slightly more fun.

 

[shanus]

Speaking of shine bair, yes you can do it in PM :D

 

[Dingding123]

This is the dumbest conversation I have ever seen.

People who have no access to the game are theory crafting rules and situations. Then other people who have no access to the game are arguing with them. Then people who are making the game are telling them none of this conversation is worth it, but they ignore them or tell them they are wrong.

Project M = Closed Experimental Beta

All your theory crafting is completely useless, and you should probably talk about something that actually matters.

Go ahead and tell me the last time buffer decided a match in a tournament. You can't because you have no idea and are just guessing.

:bandit:

Are you a game developer or a troll? I can't tell.

At any rate, I'm not out to bash anyone - I just want this project to produce something amazing. It isn't a matter of having this game or not; heck, buffering is all over the place in many fighting games. This discussion is about:

a.) trying to make this project as prematurely amazing as possible, and

b.) getting input from as many people as possible, in order to make this as popular as possible.

Just saying...y'all should think about how less active this thread could have been if I or anyone else had never brought up buffering in the first place.

So, have we come to an agreement that people should be able to pick their own buffer, but, if possibe, there should be
a standard, default, very low buffer set that the game is intended to be played at for most people to perform their best with?

 

[shanus]

I can tell you as a developer of the project, there is no agreement on buffer yet at this time. However, due to the codes available, we will most likely keep the handicap=buffer option at least currently and see where we go later on.

 

[Dingding123]

I can tell you as a developer of the project, there is no agreement on buffer yet at this time. However, due to the codes available, we will most likely keep the handicap=buffer option at least currently and see where we go later on.

Blargh, kk.

Edit: so, is PC gonna play P:M today? :D

 

[Blank Mauser]

But technical skill is still SKILL and should be rewarded. It's a show of dedication and practice. Slowly becoming more precise also serves to make the mental game itself more interesting, as you are gaining more options as you practice. Your diligence is rewarded by having options you did not have before, allowing you to expand on your mental game. That's part of what makes fighting games so interesting in the first place.

Some of the diligence it takes to unlock said options could just come naturally within minutes to one person and seem impossible to another, regardless of previous practice. Some might not even need to practice it because their "mental game" just doesn't require the need for it.

Execution is a part of any game, but the amount of "effort" put forth will always have marginal variances from player to player. Its really not fair to say you're leveling the playing field by setting universal buffer, not only for a variety of other factors but because with customizable buffer the only one stopping yourself from trying a higher buffer is you.

Your options come from acknowledging your lack of them, and in other cases your opponents lack of them. How much buffer and stricter timing equates into this is up to the Project M staff, but in real play the players are the ones who get to decide how much they want to rely on their own ability to handle said factors.

I'm not against either, but trying to say that it levels the playing field or that one is better then the other is silly. P:M wants a technical direction so I'd tell them that universal is the way to go, but its really all preference and If it were up to me I'd leave it customizable.

 

[Kix]

Some of the diligence it takes to unlock said options could just come naturally within minutes to one person and seem impossible to another, regardless of previous practice. Some might not even need to practice it because their "mental game" just doesn't require the need for it.

I could never get down Slayer in GGXXAC. Still the point is that the expectation for execution is the same regardless of how people are naturally better - or worse.

Execution is a part of any game, but the amount of "effort" put forth will always have marginal variances from player to player. Its really not fair to say you're leveling the playing field by setting universal buffer, not only for a variety of other factors but because with customizable buffer the only one stopping yourself from trying a higher buffer is you.

Pretty much any source of precision is just gone with a higher buffer. What are you really timing at all? You dial it and hang on for the ride! So therefore you have to take a disadvantage just to have the game feel tighter. As I said - whatever value is lowest and least clunky with lead to a tighter gameplay experience.

Your options come from acknowledging your lack of them, and in other cases your opponents lack of them. How much buffer and stricter timing equates into this is up to the Project M staff, but in real play the players are the ones who get to decide how much they want to rely on their own ability to handle said factors.

So the player get to decide how much they want a disadvantage at the cost of the tightness of gameplay?

I'm not against either, but trying to say that it levels the playing field or that one is better then the other is silly. P:M wants a technical direction so I'd tell them that universal is the way to go, but its really all preference and If it were up to me I'd leave it customizable.

Well it realistically does, as far as expectations. You don't try to factor in people's physically or mental states when on their own these buffers have an objective advantage. Since lower buffer would probably feel more like Melee, again, that's probably what you'd want to shoot for.