🚀 go-pugleaf

fl...@moby.micro.umn.edu (Jesse R. Waldack) writes:

>In <1993Sep8.0...@hal.depaul.edu> jleo...@falcon.depaul.edu (Jim R. Leonard) writes:

>>	- Playing to win means playing the game in an oppurtunity-taking
>>manner without exploiting true weaknesses of your opponent (i.e., if I just
>>started playing 2 weeks ago, I'm not going to know how to block throwing).
>>When I play, I play with "friendly" people; that is, my opponent test the 
>>waters with a quarter or two to see how good we are, and if one is greatly
>>unbalanced, someone teaches the other something new about the game they didn't
>>know.  This may seem stupid, but it makes for more involved gameplay with less
>>frustration.

>>	- Playing to "beat people" means just that--using every lame, cheesy,
>>cheap, cornering, throwing, and generally exploiting-the-weaknesses-of-the
>>game-or-your-opponent moves in order to win as quickly as possible.  Whenever
>>I fight one of these people, and it's clear I'm worse, the game is over in
>>about 20 seconds with a 2:0 win on his side.  Is this considered fun?
>>I did this once on someone who was worse than me, and the look of frustration
>>on his face just wasn't worth it.

>I think that I am in the middle, I start out playing fair, but if I find a
>weakness, I will hit it (not untill he is dead ... just to weaken him).

>I was playing at an arcade that is not my home arcade and just got PISSED OFF
>by those who know all of those shitty moves that are made for those who want
>to "beat people". (I think I am above average, so these moves are REAL CHEAP!)

>At the arcade that I am used to, everyone plays fair (for the most part), I 
>would rather lose a game and laugh, than win a game with a cheap ass player, 
>being upset about the tactics of the other.

>I think that others may agree with this.

I generally agree.  There are people out there that insist on just doing the
same thing to every player.  (Try to imagine the scenario Jesse...)

A player enters a tournament on v. 5 or 6 machines (where two hits in the air
will turn the gravity up and drop the character down before another hit can be
done) and takes Sonya throughout.  In the matchup all he does is first test
to see if the player can get out of the leg grab pattern.  If that doesn't
work, he just foot sweeps.  Surprise, surprise, he wins.  Question:  Did this
person have any friends or anyone who sympathized with him?  Answer:  No.
He tried to get some of us to empathize with him when an opponent couldn't
get past the leg grab phase.  He failed.
Not out of bitterness, but out of pity, I hope I don't see this person again.

::: All I demand is those I work for,
::: Those I give, all my skills,
::: All my time and pain,
::: Those that I entertain,
::: Give me the same, compassion, in return.
::: But the fools never learn.
	-Chess:  End of "Florence Quits" prelude to "Pity the Child"

I never got a chance to play him, but I knew how to do it.  I think they should
also weigh in the quality of the person playing.  I think that in a tournament,
the final matches should be decided by a set of several rounds.  What I'd
love to play in is a tournament where the second to the last round is the
best of three matchups (different characters each time for each player) and
the final round the best of the seven mirror matches.  This way, there is
no such thing as unfairness or inequality, outside of the players.

According to an arcade employee I talked to here in Minnesota, he intends to
run an MK tournament weekly (on Mondays) and have various prizes depending
on the size of the tourney.  I'm intending to visiting occasionally.

Someone yell when the hack comes out of MK where all of the maneuvers can be
done in the air.  It will happen, it's just a matter of when.

Also, can we hold off on the comments regarding the home versions of MK until
Mortal Monday when the commercial market can generate some input.

Greetings from Minnesota, MKers.
..Brett.