Many good points in the video, however I feel the statement at 38:38 "If developers reduce the effectiveness of leverless controllers, then what was the point of them in the first place?" is very off the mark. I don't use keyboard to play fighting games because it makes me win more; I use keyboard because it's right in front of me and I don't need to buy a dedicated peripheral to play the game. It's cheaper and more accessible for me, and many many other PC gamers to just play the game this way. If leverless controllers were nerfed by developers, I'd still use keyboard, and still choose to buy leverless once I feel I've invested enough because that's what I'm *familiar* with. Arcade sticks were the standard input option because they were previously the most accessible and familiar input option. Fighting games used to be primarily on arcades, so at the time, most players first exposure to the genre was at an arcade cabinet. Now, arcades are mostly gone in the west, so the scenario of using the control scheme before going out of your way to buy an arcade stick is *impossible* for many players. The entire point of arcade sticks, from the beginning, was *familiarity,* but now in the current market, it no longer serves that purpose to new players going forward. The purpose of arcade sticks as the default input method is reliant on context that no longer exists; the very same familiarity that *now* exists between keyboard and leverless controllers. This isn't to say that the inputs are balanced. The advantages of directional buttons is undeniable. But the truth is that banning leverless controllers gates out a huge amount of possible players from the scene. From the viewpoint of growing the community, AND the business viewpoint of maximizing sales, embracing leverless controllers is the logical answer. There will be concessions and compromises, but the presence of leverless controllers *has* contributed to the FGC's recent surge in popularity. I think things like the crossup hybrid controller and developer tweaking are more than worth it as compromises.
literally. It's what I'm comfortable with. It doesn't give me free wins but I have an easier time and it doesn't hurt my hands to use as opposed to a sanwa-style lever.
you right i agree its just worth noteing the business viewpoint of maximizing sales will cannibalize all else, it is not an argument that works and is bad retoric to have echo within you
The final couple of minutes really drive the point home. This isn't a call to action, so much as a yearning for a more arcade-centric era of gaming. But that's also why I think, even if leverless was banned early on, said ban would've eventually been overturned because leverless' prominence is to fundamentally tied to wider shifts in the gaming industry. It certainly would've been overturned by COVID. The FGC never had the strength to say "screw the money, we'll set our own rules!" A lot of comments have pointed out the problems with comparing esports to sports. I'll add that I think the anger over leverless is more properly analogized by the Luddites. Anxiety over how new technology destroys cultures and livelihoods, or in this case, how PC gaming helped destroy arcade gaming.
Wow, genuinely impressed with this. Presentation alone is insane levels of quality but beyond that, the amount of fighting game history that is covered here is a genuine love letter. Every single time I thought of something to add to the subject you were one step ahead and it would start playing on the screen. While at the end of the day my want for anyone and everyone to enjoy the genre trumps the need for any kind of *standard* (even if the only way someone can enjoy the game is *technically* better), the controller arms race discussion is still a fascinating one to me. War has changed!!!! Great job!!
I don't really buy the arguments made at 38:38 (If we reduce effectiveness of leverless, then what was the point in the first place?) and 41:43 (A ruling would set players back in time and money.) Both of these are sunk-cost arguments. If you invest in a control method that cracks the game to some degree and that method eventually loses its effectiveness for the sake of fairness and fun, then that's a risk that you signed up for. It's kind of like saying that top tiers shouldn't be too nerfed because high-level players have already invested so much time in mastering the best characters. But I don't care about that. In the age of patching issues later down the road, it's on you to do whatever will lead to long-term enjoyment rather than short-term gains. In fact, I think that's a good thing. It encourages players to use what they personally prefer rather than what's currently optimal. As for how to make leverless more fair, I've heard that first input priority would be a good solution, as it requires commitment to a single input until you release it. I wonder if there's something I'm overlooking, however. Maybe no cleaning on the hardware side and first input priority on the software side is the way to go.
Really don't agree with the (honestly callous) take on accessibility controllers with leveless setups. That genuinely caught me off guard. One of the best aspects of competitive video games is their massively increased accessibility compared to other sports. Regardless of physical fitness or ability, if you have a way to interface with the game you have the ability to practice and compete. The way you do that is up to the player. Obviously fighting games are in a unique position with their various motion inputs, but as long as people aren't using a macro to outright skip the input is it worth antagonising an entire control scheme over? People can have hand health issues for all kinds of reasons. It could be genetic, or it could be environmental. Someone could have a serious injury, they could have a job that strains their hands. They might already be a fan of fighting games, and then what they're forced out because we banned their leverless accessibility controller? Responding to people with physical handicaps with "Sorry, shouldn't have injured your hands then lol" makes you sound like a dick. I think if I had to give an overarching criticism, I feel like you do a lot of "making up a guy to get mad at". In a couple of places you come up with an incredibly binary answer to a question or scenario that has way more nuance and depth than you're giving credit for. "Why have leverless if the game is just going to account for them to even the playing field?" is kind of a stupid take. Maybe people have hand health issues. Maybe they find digital buttons easier to use than interpreting the direction of an analog stick. Maybe they're used to keyboard games and leverless is more intuitive. Maybe they like that buttons have fewer moving parts and therefore less points of failure. Maybe they just think it looks cool because they don't have pre-existing bias due to arcade nostalgia. You've assumed the only reason ANYONE would pick up leverless is to optimise their gameplay, then argued everything from there.
There should be rules for healthy people and the ones with clinical disabilities. The disability should be confirmed and official. Only then should they be allowed to use accessability extensions to the rules. Otherwise we'd need to go for the worst possible case and all play with our mouth like that one dude with no hands nor legs (kudos to him, he would whoop my ass like its nobody's business). I'm sure half of leverless users who claim to have issues are really just looking for an excuse them wanting an unfair advantage (something FGC is so keen on being against). Notice how I've never mentioned hitbox? That's because hitbox is the opposite of ergonomic. In fact its even worse than keyboards in that respect. So I think they should ban leverlesses (with clinical cases as an exception) or do something creative and smart, like having two brackets, each for stick/pad & leverless and having the winners of each fight each other in grand finals. Fat chance on that though!
@@Dizintegrator Everything you just suggested sounds like a logistical nightmare. Besides the obvious issues with asking people to disclose personal medical information to "prove" they're allowed leverless, has anyone actually proven that swapping to leverless will let you beat people you couldn't before? There are so many aspects to any fighting game beyond those execution gates. I could be playing Tekken with a macro that lets me do perfect wavedashes, KBDs and electrics and I would still lose to the players I was losing to before.
@@thesporehero professional athletes must disclose their conditions, so I dont see how that is any different. Ifthe rules are that its either stick or pad, unless you just cant because of health, then the latter must be proven. Dont see any logistical issues there either, since medical inspection is only required once per athlete. You're right, swapping to leverlrss doesnt magically unscrub you, but it certainly does make an already goodplayer even better. More importantly it makes other pros at a potential disadvantage if they refuse to switch. Shit's cancer and it used to be banned for a reason. The devs also seem not to care, ex sf6 nor t8 do ANYTHING to mitigate the advantage you loose by not playing leverless. Mind you, Im talking purely about competitive scene. Online warriors will use whatever they want anyway and theres no way of stoping them.
Other reason is cost. Since I started, I used a Xbox One/PS4 controller/fightpad. They cost around $60. Then, when looking for more arcade-ish controllers, I see that lever controllers cost over $150 for a not so great one, while a quite good leverless can be bought at $60. Also, in my case, I have quite big hands, and my hand (specially thumbs) feels cramped after a while, and also I can't get around at inputting some motions with the dpad.
All the emotional und subjective opinions aside, let's just talk facts. 1. Leverless enables the player to execute certain inputs easier und with higher precision compared to a stick. 2. Continuous play with a stick, a couple of hours or more in a week over decades, will damage your wrist. The human wrist isn't designed for such continous and repetetive movement. You're asking for evidance, yet the evidence is there in abudence. Maybe not exactly for Arcade stick use, but for other tasks like tennis players, factory workers etc. Repeating continuosly tasks in a frequenzy and strain for which the affected bodypart isn't designed for will damage it over time, and it highly increases the chance to devolop a chronic disease in that area. The leverless has a definitive competitive advantege over the stick. The leverless beeing the much more health-concious option though, leads to the rational conclusion, that the leverless should become the new standard, and the stick an option for those, that want to use it for their subjective reasons.
That's like saying F1 should still use stick shift instead of paddle shit. We've made a better controller and now it's time for games to adjust. This is called progress. There's more to fighters than just execution. Easier execution opens us up to focus more on the other aspects. Also easier didn't mean easy. Certain aspects of driving an F1 car are easier today than years ago but that doesn't make it easy. At the highest levels of competition you still see a lot of the same names. The evolution hasn't changed the talent and skill needed to be at the top.
The third option is 'I'm a pc gamer but I'd like something more ergonomic for fighting games, while retaining the familiarity of a keyboard'. It's cynical and disingenuous to assume the only reason anyone would go for leverless is to 'win more'. You mentioned yourself that the pc scene for fighting games has grown exponentially in the last decade, fourteen years to be more precise (SF4), so it's baffling to me that outside of that small mention you would then neglect that key bit of information for the rest of the video.
39:36 The video has a lot of good stuff in it, but this whole section is just so wild to me. To say that injury is an inevitable part of any competition, and that having an injury preventing you from competing just "is what it is" seems so callous to me, when the entire video is about alternate controllers that can help alleviate or entirely prevent these injuries. A runner developing a leg injury and someone playing fighting games developing wrist/hand injury over a long period of time because they are using a controller that doesn't work for them, are presented as equally unavoidable things. I'm biased because I like using leverless to play the games I love without my wrist feeling like garbage, but I think the advantages that leverless offers pale in comparison to the chance to be included at all, no matter how "miniscule" the people in my position are.
It's the weirdest bit in this entire video. So is he saying that these people who found better alternative for their injuries should fuck off? Is he really taking the ableist route because he dislikes leverless controllers?
@@tamaskalem1492and his argument there makes no sense. Like yes obviously giving someone a bike in a foot race is dumb but that isn’t comparable to using a hitbox. A hitbox can give you a mechanical advantage but there are so many other things you have to consider when playing a fighting game. A bike would just give you an objective and massive advantage in every way
yeah that was actually so ignorant and gross. I'm glad i saw your comment first because i don't want to hear anything else this person has to say if this is something they believe.
I don't agree with him but from the way he worded it it seems like he is conflicted on the issue. It's not like he's sitting here demanding things of people, he's just sounding out ideas in a video. I took inevitability to mean the inevitability of having to balance competition between regular players and players needing assistive inputs that arguably give an advantage. Basically finding the point at which assistive technology becomes unfair and if the difference is too far maybe there should be separate competitions. It seems kind of similar like the debate over whether or not runners on prosthetics are significantly advantaged compared to able-bodied runners. It is clearly something the community is still trying to figure out and this dude's just giving his 2c. I don't get how people are reading callousness and even maliciousness into it.
18:25 tekken has neutral guarding and backdash guarding (aka, backdashes are safe, you can block during them) so the only time you are vulnerable while doing a korean backdash is during the downback input, and only to mid attacks, highs will never hit you while kbding properly, you will either back block, neutral block or be crouching and the high will whiff, and mids will be blocked while you hold back, are neutral and hit if you are holding db to crouch
Doesn't Tekken also have guard break moves that you can't block from the neutral position? I guess technically KBD is insurance against those attacks as well
@@MrCactuar13 Neutral guarding in Tekken is extremely weird. It reduces pushback on certain moves but, as you said, your guard can be broken. If you hit someone who is neutral guarding with a plus enough attack (be it a low or just a plus on block high/mid) they won't be able to block the next one by neutral guarding. This only really comes into play if you rely on neutral blocking as your main form of defence, with KBD you are only using neutral for movement and those that use it will immediately switch to holding back after they block something.
This is false as you can get hit by everything during a backdash. Performing a backdash will actually break your neutral guard if you don't hold back during it. (b, b = vulnerable, b/B = not vulnerable.) This means that the time spent not holding back in order to go to down/back you will get hit by highs and mids.
@@MrCactuar13 there are a few wonky moves you can't neutral guard but they are always the hits after the first hit in a string, for instance the 2nd hit of heihachi's hunting hawk move, neutral guard just wont block it, but it will block the first hit, so by the time you see them using a move you'd have stopped kbding and just started blocking normally again
this has been mentioned by some commenters already, but this video seems to fail to address the fact that theres a lot of other factors that come into play when it comes to what controller you use, mostly focusing on the two reasons you presented in the video -- selectively winning more and being able to do something you weren't able to do something easier. these two reasons are definitely the responses some would give as to why they would prefer one controller over the other, but i think it glosses over other complexities that come into play when you consider controller choice. to draw from my own experience as an example, i play primarily on keyboard, a control scheme that pretty much can replicate anything a leverless can do, but this is because ive been playing this way for my entire fighting game career, and other control methods feel unintuitive and less responsive to me. i dont want to gloss over the fact that you do in fact address reasons other than the two major ones you focused on in the video; ergonomics, accessibility, and developer intention are probably a much more objective standard to consider in terms of the debate, but i think its important to consider the subjective angle of the debate too. the core of the argument id say for a lot of players is that certain control schemes are more comfortable to use for many people, and to some that comfort means utilizing the most "efficient" control scheme. there's definitely some muddiness to the matter due to the subjectivity involved, but the overall comfort allows players to get more into the gameplay loop of fighting games, and also aspire to be the best player they can, and, to add some personal perspective on the matter, i think this is the most important part of the debate. i also wanted to address your closing thoughts in the video, as its really the only genuine criticism i have for it. the rest of the discussion was really interesting to consider. you express lament in the phasing out of levered controllers, that many motions are mainly replaced by "pressing a few buttons". i wont deny that theres some truth in the matter, but i think you gloss over the fact that the input style is just as much privy to human error as any other. it takes effort to get good with this control style too! other than that, loved the video.
Interestingly enough their closing remarks on why they enjoy joysticks are very much subjective. "I like how they look/sound and look at this sick standing 720". Why do they have to act like leverless players come to steal their enjoyment of the controller you use? I play on the keyboard and respect any form of input, because I understand that we should celebrate our differences with input method. The last thing I would want for leverless to be banned and being enforced to buy a joystick bacsue "well it started with arcades".
While the Hitbox was intended as an optimized version of an arcade stick, I feel like recently it really became just another tool one player can use. Notably, I remember seeing that only 1 winner from the past 2-3 years from the major FG games tournaments used a leverless, while the rest were split between pad and arcade stick. Is it optimal? Maybe, but in fighting games where at a high level mind games and overall gameplan play a much bigger role, its hard to make a case that leverless is just better for everyone. One other thing that leverless has allowed, is PC players to more easily join the community, making the transition from keyboard to leverless is trivial, and it doesn't require weeks or months of building the necessary muscle to not cramp up while holding the stick or a small pad. I've tried all the methods, and I can literally play leverless 8h+ a day because I'm just so used to a keyboard. It feels like finally we have a controller available for each major style of gamer, which is awesome.
same, I'm a pc gamer and always wanted to get into fighting games and play on keyboard despite everyone saying it's bad until I discovered the leverless
Really, the last point in the video kinda misses that too. Players still use levers and still will. Hitboxes arent going to phase out levers and especially not pads anytime soon. Top players still use them and plenty of people at locals.
Anti-leverless arguments always make the argument that they're "cheating" while omitting the fact that very few people win with them at high levels. The people who win with leverless were already winning. With all the money and all the clout on the line you'd expect nearly universal adoption by high-level players. It isn't there. Games are now designed with built-in SOCD cleaning. This means games are now built to be played with leverless. Also, 360 inputs are 4 button inputs regardless of the controller. Sticks only have 4 actuators and controllers have 4 buttons in their d-pad. All the anti-leverless arguments are moot. Cheating is hardware agnostic and banning a controller doesn't solve anything in the time of the online major.
@@zackswitch9656 I think that was the point of the very last clip, that "sick fucking standing 720." No matter what controller is used, great players are gonna optimize the heck out of it, e.g.: a standing 720. :) I have a Slab Mini on its way to my house but moreso as a curiosity. I learned to play SFIV and beyond on a Hori RAP 3 and still really enjoy moving the stick around while slapping buttons. I'm not gonna even attempt to win EVO, so I'll just have fun churning butter in my computer room. :D
@@ButsMcgee Tourney winners are not irrelevent. The smallest skill gaps can be found at the highest level of play. There are tournament winners who use leverless, pad, and stick. Since we don't see leverless dominance among tournament winners we can conclude it doesn't provide a substantial advantage. Whether you can beat your neighbor is irrelevent. Low-level play is where the greatest skill gaps exist and crying that your opponents controller is why you lost is, and always has been, pure cope. If your friend can input commands three times faster than you, that's a skill issue. Until your inputs are optimal and your opponents inputs are optimal, it's a skill issue. It only matters when comparing optimally efficient inputs. When you compare those, you are looking at a difference of a few frames. That's 1/20 of a second, at most. There are no instant hadoukens. If the controller can't be demonstrated to provide a significant advantage at the highest level of skill (where the skill gap is the smallest) then there is no argument that isn't just salt in disguise. Salt from people who, almost universally, have never learned to play on a leverless controller.
Great vid. My only issue with it is that there's an automatic assumption that specific controllers are mainly used/chosen just for efficiency and injury related reasons, when a lot of people I know play on the peripheral they grew up with or the one they just enjoy using. Obviously this is still a discussion that should be had and there are people who do change for optimization but the way you don't address personal preference kinda irks me
The general focus of the video was that he found them unfair. I don't think he needed to celebrate all the positives and reasons of a hitbox. Someone else can make that video.
@@ButsMcgee valid. If I wanted someone to sing the praises of Anklegator, Initial T and Luffy I would watch Core-A-Gaming. I'm just saying that he seemingly undervalued the role personal preference plays in picking a controller
i think the accessibility argument is really strong, but i like how you argue it in terms of sports requiring standards. i feel like hitboxes are less of a corked bat and more like an improvement in safety gear. joysticks are beautiful, but they can blast hands. my brother played american football in high school and college, and he suffers from injuries sustained because of the misuse of helmets as safety gear; players would hit their helmets together in tackles, which is naturally problematic for neck health. similarly (but of course not nearly as equal to my anecdote), joysticks can destroy wrists. i think keeping leverless controllers, not as a efficiency thing but as a safety thing, is really important to make sure we keep quality players playing the game. ultimately, execution still takes a lot of effort; the trade off to keep people from nuking their hands is worth it to me.
while i agree with alot of the points you are making i think you are looking at it from a wrong angle when it comes to sports, the difference between Fighting games and for example running is that you don't use any external hardware when running the 100 meter sprint. Instead it would make more sense to look at things like Nascar, Biking, or Archery, where technology is always advancing and the highest level of competition require the highest level of hardware, but none of them are going to carry you to an easy finish. the people competing at a top level are still immensely talented, and their better gear doesn't in any way make them worse than the people that competed in the same sports 20 years ago. Even in sports that don't use external hardware, we are always coming up with more advanced training methods, specialized diets and more to make sure they stay at the highest competitive level, but none of that is taking away from their skill. If we are gonna drag a line between traditional sports and E-sports as a whole we have to understand that technology is going to come along and make certain things easier so humans can compete at a higher level at all times, and i for one think that's cool.
unless proven by tournament results, the advantages of leverless are grossly overstated. simple as that. maybe you can do a followup on that? in the long run, I do believe leverless will erode the "marketshare" of arcade stick users because of ergonomics (something like a Snackbox is so much easier to store/carry/travel with), but I don't think it will impact the number of pad players because pads are also easy to handle. also as a critique, I feel the sports gear argument is disingenuous since it focuses solely on equipment optimizations that has been banned by sports regulations, while many other optimizations have been allowed. sporting gear and rulesets are ever changing.
Great video. I'm pretty old for a fighting game player at 48. I believe stick movements absolutely will cause carpal tunnel. Granted I was an electrician for 20 years, but also a Nina main on stick from Tekken 1-5. Back then the way to get optimal damage with her was butterfly combos which were rough on my wrists using stick. I ended up getting carpal tunnel and quitting in Tekken 6. Never played Tag 2. When Tekken 7 came out I picked up a pad and never looked back. Sure I can't KBD like I used to, but I still have fun. I plan on trying to make the switch to hitbox for Tekken 8. SOCD neutral cleaning is just too good. I'll be able to KBD again and execute tighter inputs. IMO it's the devs and TOs jobs to make sure their tournaments are fair. Until then if it's legal I'm going to use it if it improves my game.
"If developers account for leverless controllers to make them less efficient, then what was the f***ing point of even having them in the first place??" Strong disagree here. The point of leverless controllers' existence (i.e. why I believe they must remain), is that it allows disabled players to compete with a method that produces the same output in-game without requiring actions that their out-of-game disability constrains or implicitly disadvantages for them. Even very common disabilities like arthritis have SIGNIFICANT differences in discomfort and pain when exerting pressure on a button without flexing the finger, versus moving the finger/wrist along a surface to find different buttons. "We don't allow people with a leg injury to ride their bike in a marathon" We don't force people born without legs to run a marathon unassisted either. They're permitted to use prosthetics. And to be honest... I don't want to have to PROVE my disability if I go to a fighting game tournament, or to be treated as an ''exception", because I KNOW how much discrimination that produces and I want to engage with the game I love without being subject to that BS. Moreover, developers can account for leverless controllers in ways that don't 'shift the line' as you demonstrated - there are ways which can selectively reduce leverless efficiency MORE than other control methods, NARROWING the gap. If you give a player a Modern-like control scheme that gives them 1-button DP's, but also applies a 6-ish frame delay on executing that DP in contexts where it couldn't be buffered, then you have reduced the execution barrier AND maintained gameplay parity between control schemes AND allowed for potentially better results in-game by high execution players than are provided by the 'easy' method. That's just an off-the-dome example but my point is, you can modify the game and input rules in nuanced ways that can compensate for any 'implicit' differences between control methods. And regardless, I want to reiterate that forcing a player to 'prove they're disabled enough to use an alternate control method to compete' is a really... awful system that normalizes othering and viewing disability as exclusively impairment and some people as 'more disabled' than others. I think that the topic needs to be approached with empathy - rejecting people from engaging with their passion, even though a way for them to do so is right there, feels cruel even WITH the comparison to real life sports injuries, because injuries and disabilities are ALSO arbitrary. So it would... amount to, in a sense, an exclusion of some players for fundamentally arbitrary and uncontrolled reasons, and that doesn't sit right with me, not to mention people born with disabilities to begin with. I use leverless to avoid hand issues related to my disability (congenital). I also, technically, benefit from it in the ways you've outlined - but I would argue, I benefit less FROM leverless than I would be disadvantaged by having to use pad or stick. Even in acknowledgement of the 'unfairness', it is still the lesser of two evils, and moreover may not bring me up to par input-wise with an abled player using one of the 'harder' control methods anyway. Is there the possibility that a fully abled player could 'exploit' those advantages? Sure, I guess, but even then, not all disabilities are visible, and I don't want to create a culture where a player's input method justifies forcing them to divulge personal (and often very charged, private and painful) experiences to 'justify' their group membership in a way that is selectively applied just to disabled players. I'd rather have a baseline of acceptance that can potentially be exploited by some unfair inclusion, than risk excluding anyone with an approach that is baseline exclusionary with exceptions made for people's disabilities. Innocent until proven guilty rather than the other way around, so to speak.
100% agree with you, it's not wrong to try to make something more accessible and it will definitely not kill the fun of a game. This is a well constructed video, I really like the explanations and everything, but I disagree with a lot that was said on it.
Agreed. No human being decides you are too injured to continue competing in sports, that's all down to how your injury affects your health and body. Denying people, who thanks to these controllers, can compete on par with everyone else would be the same like banning running blades, which there is some debate around. It's just unfair gatekeeping.
The game's integrity and ruleset shouldn't sacrificed for the people who are disabled or are incapable. Should soccer let the wheelchair dude carry the ball? Games are designed around the norm. Any advantage given to a disabled player should be careful to not be in such a way that it would enhance a normal player to a higher degree. If there is a game designed around the disabled, that's fine, but there is a clear and obvious reason why it would need to be separated from normal. Just like how woman and men are separated. I say this as a person born with arthritis and another affliction associated with people 3 times my age.
@@Xenozillex except leverless controllers aren't equivalent to allowing a player in a wheelchair to carry the soccer ball, they're closer to allowing a player with an amputated foot play with a prosthetic. The prosthetic could potentially give them some advantage if it allowed them to kick the ball more effectively due to being made of more rigid material than a human foot, but even if that did become an issue the solution wouldn't be to ban prosthetic limbs in soccer, it would be something like requiring softer materials for prosthetic feet worn during a match. Granted, this example fails in that prosthetics can't generally be worn by people *without* an amputated limb, but even if they could it wouldn't really change what I'd consider an ideal solution. Similarly, if leverless controllers do give certain players an unfair advantage currently then the ideal solution would be to mitigate their advantage only as much as necessary to create a fair competition. If the current regulations in any given tournament are inadequate then they can be updated. If companies can balance patch the overpowered characters in their games to keep them fair then I think they and the tournament organizers can patch their rules to keep leverless controllers fair as well.
Not just disabled players but also it's just an alternate control scheme. Not everyone has good lever dexterity, or just that some people might really prefer arcade-style buttons. Especially for long play sessions - sometimes if you're playing a long time on pad it can strain your wrists or chafe your hands, I've had a couple instances of blisters from grinding out 3D action games. Choosing leverless strictly for ergonomic purposes or even if it works better for you is fine.
The only thing I would have added here is a bit about how some people may just prefer how Hitbox feels. How much we value that is debatable of course. Great video!
Really good vid. It’s very comprehensive and balanced. I have to admit that as someone who values the consistency of leverless and has RSI in both hands I am a bit biased but I think you would be surprised just how many people have hand strain issues in the FGC. I suspect it’s more than you think. Not to mention that there are some disabilities that make using a pad nearly impossible, but a highly customised leverless controller would enable them to compete. In general, though this was very compelling and enjoyable.
I think there's certainly a possibility that I am uninformed when it comes to the amount of players partaking in the hobby with hand issues. Sadly a hard topic to gather data on. I also wonder if discrete access to all directional inputs is an essential quality for more ergonomic controllers? Perhaps there is a solution that is less "meta-warping" for lack of better wording. That being said, I do recognize the fact that leverless being more efficient and having a widespread adoption has made these more ergonomic peripherals vastly more available and affordable. I can definitely see a world where ergonomic options were bundled with no apparent "upside" and thus relegated to a niche market of scarcity and high costs. It's a tricky topic. Thanks for watching.
Boss, that was a 44 minute ramble. The issue you have seems to be a complex you've developed rather than anything personally actually against buttonboxes.
You made some really interesting arguments but I feel you didn’t do justice to the accessibility angle. First of all, PC gaming is getting bigger and bigger, and the pack-in controller for your PC is your keyboard. The keyboard is a leverless controller, so we already have more and more people coming into the scene for the first time on a leverless controller through online who will never come out to in-person tournaments if they’re forced to learn a wildly different control scheme. As far as ergonomics are concerned, there’s reasons to care about ergonomics beyond “is it guaranteed to injure me” flat leverless controllers are more comfortable and reduce strain for all people, although to be honest, accessibility for people with motor disabilities should really be enough. Finally I think the reasons you gave that someone might say they like their snackbox micro aren’t really accurate to the answers you’d hear if you asked actual players. That thing is popular primarily because it’s so portable. It literally fits in a purse, which is something no stick could reasonably do. Even setting that aside I think things like “I like tapping buttons” and “it’s really comfortable to use” would be up there with “it’s easy to use” in terms of the most common answers.
I got one of the earliest hitboxes because it was an upgrade from the keyboard I learned fighting games on; amusingly the fact the buttons were bigger and clickier made a distinct kinaesthetic difference to the experience of playing - it felt more like drumming with your fingers. I would never have attended a tournament if I had to use an arcade stick but could on a hitbox; does that have some value? Yeah, some. Was it also obvious that arcade sticks were a *less good* way of controlling most characters? Yeah. A subset of the hardest stuff in many FGs is about timing in any case rather than input efficiency (although they are related) - eg timing 1f links in sf4 is hard with any input method - though the design of recent FGs has moved very much away from that. My broad feeling is sort out the edge cases with SOCD and game specific issues and until there's a really major issue it's mostly minor enough of an advantage that it's not going to affect things too much. If you take a player like punk on his controller putting up the results he does - it's relatively clear raw input efficiency gains aren't enough to destroy things. Games like SFV and VI have, in any case, tried to make inputs easy enough to hit that input efficiency is less of a marginal advantage. RE: ultra low-latency setups. Ultimately input latency is inherently a feature of whatever version of the technology not of the underlying logical structure of the game itself (slightly muddied by input latency being a result of implementation choices in code that are a result of hardware but you can see the rough direction of this argument). The intuitive idea that one should be able to react AT THE SPLIT SECOND you realise what is happening is both understandable and desirable; the main difficulty noted in the video is that it is exclusionary to have it as the de facto standard due to cost, but it seems reasonably obvious that in the limiting case - play x game with zero input latency or some, the zero input latency version is more satisfactory to interact with. So really it's just a question of "is it an appropriate standard to have *right now*" rather than "input latency doesn't really matter". Games are about matching intent to action as closely as the limitations of not being literally melded into the game allows - this is a fairly straightforward extension of that logic.
I want to say the presentation was great but so much of your final arguments were colored with so much bias. In your running argument, a leverless would be better new sneakers, not a bike. In every sport there is multiple updates of peripherals. Baseball uses bats of new materials they don’t only use wooden ones. I think the beauty of fighting games is in out thinking your opponent, being caught up on how they did it, is just an excuse and a shameful way to gatekeep.
Great video as always but you end it saying we should have had this conversation 10 years ago, which I hear a lot. The thing is WE DID ! I've been on hitbox for over a decade and I remember when I picked it up. Some tournaments actually banned it at the time. Obviously it is an advantage but it's been agreed upon that the advantage isn't substantial enough to warrant a ban. I understand the whole not sharing the same experience thing but acting like everything hard is "just pressing some buttons" is very reductive, playing on hitbox is easier but that doesn't mean it's always easy. I love the look and feel of stick too, the arcade culture they remind people of, I hope stick doesn't go away too but that doesn't mean we can't move on to having something new be the main way to play at high level
The mental gymnastics I had to go through to get used to the up button when I first tried out a leverless controller. I thought it'll be nothing because I'm used to pressing the space bar to jump, but it's something else when playing something as intense as a fighting game.
hey, one of those hand injury sufferers here. I use a leverless myself as it's what lets me play fighting games. I find the bicycle analogy that you used as part of the accessibility section to be, frankly, not well reasoned. The marginal capability difference of a bicycle and running is far, far, far, far, far greater than which controller you use. And anyway, a video game, unlike a sprint, is not a contest of physical execution. Physical execution is part of it, but the hard part of fighting games is not pressing the buttons anyway. I am hesitant to even entertain the suggestion that users of sticks/pads are negatively impacted as to me it seems kind of ridiculous. If someone else thinks a leverless really will make some difference in how they win, by all means let them use one. This concern becomes more practical to me as the conversation impacts things like CPT and ArcRevo IF locals try to enforce the rules identically to the big competitions the way it often works in other games (e.g. CS tournaments and round timers).
The point is that leverless is arguably an unfair advantage, so I think the analogy is fine, but maybe the corked bat is a better example. You could argue that there's more to baseball than just hitting, but that still doesn't change the fact that it gives players a distinct advantage.
@@hijster479 the purpose of a corked bat is purely for performance enhancement so it is also a bad analogy. Far more accurate would be a prosthetic limb. If we're going to engage with accessibility concerns as an argument we need good, accurate analogies to help folks understand. The empirical reality of whether or not these devices even offer an advantage, rather than it just being supposed or even likely, is not even a given. But, that some devices may allow players to play the game that may not have is actually inarguable.
@@TCMx3Prosthetics aren't equivalent in any way. They're not even a peripheral, I can't really trial a prosthetic arm or pick and choose when or when not to use it. In some places elective amputation is outright criminal, so the potential for cheating is negligible. Peripherals are different, we can have as many as we want and switch them out as we please, so the potential for abuse is way higher. How can we separate players like you with legitimate health concerns, from players like me who have occasional aches and pains after lengthy sessions? And that's to say nothing for players that only care about the execution advantages. And these advantages aren't just theoretical, they've been demonstrated several times at this point, the only thing up for debate is whether or not they're ban worthy. Personally I think leverless is fine for most games, but new games or even just new characters could change that. And in this event what recourse will stick and pad players have?
I love your videos, specifically your editing style which most commenters seem to be dazzled by but I can't really say the content you put forward (either the correctness of it or the bias in portrayal) always hits for me (even though the videos are very entertaining to watch). For example, I struggled to understand what this video was really getting at. Was it just generic commentary on hitbox controllers? You mentioned in passing that their legality relied on pads being able to do socd style inputs which isn't accurate since that only applies to the legality of things like the crossup which has 2 sets of directional inputs available (which is probably what you're referring to and not the standard single set of udlr inputs available in stuff like hitbox, snackbox, mpress, etc). Also a lot of the narrative of the video seems to anchor itself on the speed of access to directional inputs in leverless vs pad or stick, where in reality pads and sticks have inherent advantages for people picking them up and intuitively being able to input commands that are not intuitive to a leverless controller (something you don't cover at all). One can make an argument that the fight stick is actually the worst peripheral since in technicality it offers the fewest advantages over pad and leverless while having a lot of its own drawbacks (also something you didn't cover and it seemed appropriate for this topic). Also the sidenote of comparing fighting game players with physical sports and the "if you're injured that's it I guess" is such a disingenuous comparison that I'm kind of disappointed that you (who I'm sure is very aware of why it's disingenuous) would make it in the first place. Should we expand that conversation to the fairness of real sports? A lot of real sports are inherently unfair almost by design, there are no "balance patches". I mean hell basketball hasn't had a major "balance patch" in frickkin decades. Ice Hockey players are hugely determined (or preselected) by the combination of their month of birth and the most common school schedule (sept to may) because the kids born closer to January will be the most physically developed in school and thus most likely to be recruited or trained by coaches in order to eventually make it to a major league. TLDR: competition in video games is wayyyy more fair and not even remotely comparable to real sports which are inherently unbalanced by design and said imbalance is further worsened by the selection pressure (coaches, media, professional teams, etc). Anyway, that was a lot to type out but I felt it was necessary. Thanks for the video.
One thing you skipped over in the injury discussion is that some people have disabilities that make using certain controllers impossible. If leverless controllers let them compete, that's a good thing. I agree that Devs need to account for SOCD.
I don’t ever plan on competing, but with my medical issues with my hands it’s physically painful to play most fighting games. But SF6 with modern controls is by far the most comfortable fighting game to play. Regardless of the physical controller I’m using, other games literally make my hands feel like they’re burning after trying to play for a few minutes but not SF6 with modern controls. For someone like me, just playing casually online, it’s a huge blessing to be able to enjoy gaming without physical pain.
Besides the main point, I just really appreciate the production throughout the video, from the 3d renders of the Astro City Cab, MAS, Snackbox Micro up to the PCBs like the SOCD cleaner and the Pico Board as well as the green screened gameplay! Just discovered your channel and it's an instant sub for me, looking forward to your next videos!
I gave you a like because the production value and quality are unparalleled but I pretty much disagreed with all of your conclusions, even as someone that's played fighting games since the 90s. All of the comparisons you made to leverless controllers such as darts with lasers etc. were way more egregious than the thing itself, and the idea that "it is what it is" when it comes to injury and people with carpal tunnel should just get fucked is kind of a disgusting attitude tbh. It's one thing when there *aren't* any solutions to allow them compete anymore such as with bad knees and torn ACLs, but we *have* a solution for the competitive gaming scene, you just don't like it out of some outdated sense of "purity". Moreover sports have always evolved over time, both to push the standard of competition and to make them more exciting to watch. The FGC is relatively young compared to Basketball, and just look at how much the rules of Basketball have changed over time in regards to dribbling, 3-pointers, etc. - you sound like the kind of people who were opposed to those changes at the time simply because it's not how the sport started, and that's pretty short sighted.
I'll be honest, I use a hitbox and it was my entry into the fgc. I guess I'm a part of the new generation of fighting game players and I never experienced the arcade Era. I appreciate the stick users and it is incredible what some people can do, but in the end I think hitboxes are a tribute to how competition is. Someone will always look for a stratedy, a breathing technique, a new controller that transforms the scene it is placed in and because the new standard. Also, the standing 720 killed me lol, thank you for this essay.
input lag reduction is something everyone should be happy to have, it's not about pushing the envelope so much as achieving parity with the old arcade machines and their CRTs. there's a reason why melee is played on CRTs to this day. additionally, i like my snack box micro because it's small and easy to travel with, in addition to being the most efficient way to interact with the games. there's nothing more freeing than throwing a slim little controller into my backpack and having room for literally anything else i might need, over lugging around a clunky fightstick, or even a traditional hitbox which by now imo are super outdated being made so thick and heavy. i'm so glad i never have to do that again. it's also not a hypothetical that people use the joystick + dpad SOCD combo on pad. people really do these things, nuckledu being a prime example. no one is taking away your joystick! keep playing on it and focus more on the gameplay decisions your opponent is making over how they're doing them, i think you'll have more fun that way. I'm sad you're a hater but the video was good, keep it up.
The biggest mark vs. Stick is just how much of a burden they are to lug around. Snackbox has great formfactor and multi system compatibility. Travel is so much better, I could not go back. And yeah I personally know pad players they use socd it's not a myth.
There is a third option for why to use a leverless controller: "I like that there is a controller available that uses an input scheme I am familiar with.". Having grown up without a console, pads and sticks are virtually unusable for me, and without a Hitbox I would not be able to play fighting games at all (most keyboards are not designed for the type of multi-button inputs these games have for various reasons).
Nah you are just lazy and searching for excuses, I also grew up without consoles and I taught myself how to play both on pad and stick. 2-3 years ago I had no idea how to hold the joystick of an arcade stick but now it's my weapon of choice. Replacing a pre-established standard for something that can eliminate learning time and execution skill that has been trained for years is just sad and cheap.
@@drunkboi5887 why are you gatekeeping accessibility? let people play how they want never seen such a backwards ass take jesus man how ignorant can you be.
This entire video feels like bad faith arguments stacked on top of each other to induce a perfect rage bait sandwich, with slick production value on top to hide the truth under a vague sense of authority/competency.
I'm pretty sure in competitive sports they are also always aiming for the highest efficiency, pushing the boundaries of rules. See sport gears, shoes and even baseball bats (your example) have changed over time.
This is a much more apt comparison. Comparing the frame advantages of hitbox is much more relative to adidas making grippier gloves for football catchers and lightweight shinguards. Not laser darts and spring loaded shoes.
@@zackswitch9656not at all. Many shoes get banned in track events for the unfair advantage the give. The hydro suit in swimming was banned as records kept getting smashed. All that plus drug testing, rule changes to unfair techniques, etc are done to preserve the spirit of the game and not have it devolve into a race for the most augmented competitor.
No sports also have regulations to what equipment can be brought into the game. Baseball players can definitely get stronger homeruns with a steel bat but they use wood for a reason. These things change over time but they're made a standard for an even playing field. It shouldn't just be the wild west like it is with the fgc.
@@Krystalmyth but they are not using stuff they old players used to wear, right? Since we are comparing FGC to a physical sport we need to agree that there is progress related to efficiency in almost every sport. I think the point is that this is a fair discussion, but just brushing it off and saying "the old way is the right way" is not the right approach
Amazing video! Production quality especially high! I do have an issue with your examples of cheating in other sports though. I see what you're trying to say about more efficiency not always being better, but you ignored a key difference between those examples and something like lever-less controllers. Lever-less controllers undeniably provide a significant advantage, but unlike your examples given (spring-loaded shoes, Lazer-guided dart, etc) the player is still doing all the work themselves, even if it's more efficient to do so. The actual gaming equivalent to such cheating methods would be turbo or macros, since they outright do things for you when triggered. (Also modern mode controls falls into this imo, as it completely bypasses entire inputs instantly) Using lever-less is more comparable to wearing expensive basketball shoes. Better grip, properly cushioned soles, and correct ankle support can help you accelerate faster, turn sharper, and jump higher than you could with cheaper shoes, making many techniques faster or stronger, and potentially making new ones possible that weren't otherwise without slipping or your ankles buckling. Even factoring in the large advantages of SOCD, I see no legitimate reason to ban lever-less controllers. Almost every sport has certain allowed choices that are just better than others, like equipment, formations in team sports, or simply using different techniques. No-one's gonna complain because you didn't use a scissor-kick to win high-jump. Heck, being left-handed makes table-tennis players 3X more likely to go pro, so should we ban playing left-handed in table tennis? To make matters worse, the benefit of the left handed "input method" ISN'T from making your own inputs easier. It's actively making the game HARDER for your opponents, because your weak/strong spots are reversed to the norm. Imagine if you could go to a SF6 tournament, and force everyone who plays against you to play SF5 instead. That's what playing table-tennis left-handed is like. So yeah. I think in terms of sportsmanship a better controller is the least of our worries. Sincerely, a nerd who's only ever played pad
although last input wins was a consideration for some time, it was mostly considered unfair for the reason highlighted so the main form of SOCD cleaning pioneered by hitbox was for up to beat down and left and right turning into neutral, so a combination of the two to some extent. Also as others have highlighted, blocking in tekken is either neutral or down for low block. backdashes are simply safe!
If you feel that bodily limitation and injury is just a natural part of sports, why doesn't that extend to the type of controller people use? Even if both players are using the same controller, or even control scheme or character, there are still countless other factors that will make the same things a different amount of difficulty for each player, just because of the variation from being to being. Fighting games naturally have options that create uneven amounts of difficulty between players as a part of the game, people still pick low-tiers sometimes, even pro players. We empathize with the part at the end about loving the joystick controller and anticipating missing it when it's gone, but we don't think it will ever fully go away, if nothing else specifically from people like you who have a fondness for it.
I think Rubbish’s argument is that other competitive sports have standardized equipment, so ideally fighting games should’ve followed that same vein. Allowing for peripherals that abuse exploits in the game’s input system just shifts the goalpost for execution, which ultimately hurts the competitive integrity of the game by dumbing down execution at the software level, or implementing inclusive game design (like modern controls). He acknowledges that by allowing button macros and leverless controllers, we opened Pandora’s box, and it’s futile to try to “go back” to the arcade days. Personally, I’m sure somebody could design an ergonomic controller that doesn’t have individual discrete movement buttons, thus allowing players with disabilities to play without having the ability to skip neutral (teleport inputs, as Rubbish calls it). However, there’s no point in creating that peripheral now since we made Hitbox legal 10 years ago.
@@ivanperez295 Look at formula 1. The standard changes between seasons. It's never: "Hey, we have to use the same stuff from back in the 60s... BECAUSE!". Sticks are objectively worse for performance and health, so why should we ban the alternatives?
I take umbrage with your assessment that "sticks aren't long for this world" Personally, I love my arcade stick, leverless controllers feel like typing to me. I've never touched a fighting game arcade cabinet until AFTER I bought a stick for SF4 and I've never looked back. Nostalgia has nothing to do with why I love stick, and this is and will always be the case for at least a percentage of the FGC. I can guarantee that sticks are just as much here to stay as hitboxes. And to circle back around to leverless, I think you left out THE MOST COMMON REASON people play on leverless, or any controller for that matter, comfort and preference. A lot of comments have already mentioned that they came to FGs from playing PC games, so they hitbox/mixbox layout feels comfortable/right to them. Some people get wrist pain from playing on a stick, and they don't on a box. And, as other people have mentioned, per l there are people with disabilities who are physically unable to play on stick or pad. So I feel like saying, "no, fuck your disability, fuck your wrist pain, fuck your preference, you should only be able to play on a controller *I* like!" Is like banning red shoes from a basketball game. There are some tricks on leverless devices that make certain inputs faster and easier yes, but ultimately, I don't know about you, but a super coming out 2-3 frames earlier isn't going to make much of a difference, I'm still getting hit by that shit. Do I think SOCDeez could be better handled? Absolutely. Do I think that's anyone's problem but the developer? Absolutely not. "Two button" tricks are also more often than not, odd and unintuitive. At least as odd and unintuitive as learning how to do a DP, so it still takes skill to not only learn and get used to the tricks, but also to know when to apply them in a match. As for modern controls. If top players are demonstrably getting an advantage from them, Capcom will nerf them. If they're not intended to be an advantage, the developers will keep them from being an advantage. Damn, that ended up being way longer than I expected. tl;dr: you're wrong and I'm right neener neener
Amazing presentation as always but I really think you missed the mark on the actual content. Other people in the comments have made criticisms that I largely agree with such as the comparisons you make to traditional sports being very misrepresentative but one thing in particular that really stood out for me was you saying that execution typically doesn't get easier and it just raises the bar with things like leverless but then later on in the video you talk about how we lose the spectacle from things being made easier and I'm worried I'm missing something here but aren't they diametrically opposed? Like how can you simultaneously say "leverless doesn't make execution easier" and "it's bad that leverless makes execution easier". if the bar for execution gets raised then what is difficult enough to gain spectacle also goes up going by what your saying
These things aren't diametrically opposed at all, they are part of the same process. The things you make easier become more commonplace and therefore- over time way less cool. They are then replaced by new things. Said things will in time also be made easy and commonplace by the next inevitable wave of efficiency boosting and the cycle continues.
So comfort, ergonomics, and accessibility aren't good enough reasons for you to accept leverless controllers, but tradition and "I like how it sounds" are your only reasons for preferring arcade sticks? Weak ass argument, dude.
As a TO, I inherently do not think you are characterizing the push for low-lag input monitors & setups appropriately. Low-input lag monitors increase responsiveness for all player regardless of controllers. It is a net benefit to playability. Also, it is expected that tournament venues have standardized setups owned either by TOs or venues; it is not exclusionary for a TO organization to provide, say, thousands of PS5s + Inzone monitors for massive events like EVO or Combo Breaker. Sure, these setups are pricey that's out of reach for a lot of people, but they A) ensure baseline of competitive integrity across all tournament setups B) Nobody I've ever met has told me that having more responsive control over a fighting game is a bad thing. Players in my city prioritize IRL Strive & SF6 tournaments solely for response offline play.
The main issue is simple - it's against tradition. Progress is inherently disrespectful to the tradition that the FGC has grown with. Cheatboxes are the epitome of this, being a representation of everything the FGC traditionally stood against - ergonomics, optimization, etc. It's simply not fun.
I think you are confusing the idea of aiming for a reasonable middle-ground standard with not having a standard at all. Of course competitive standards are great, I'm all for standards. I however don't think we ought to aim for standards that are extremely cutting edge- specifically because they end up being less egalitarian. Maybe everyone agrees that playing on a FGC OS optimized PC and 400hz screen feels slightly better than a console setup. But most players will not have access to that even remotely as readily as they do the alternatives. And I'd argue the gain in game-feel is immensely outweighed in the fairness of the standard.
@@HQRubbish Please understand, I view this as a systemic issue, one placing the FGC against developer oversight/ignorance/indifference. In my personal opinion (no data to back this up), the push for cutting edge low latency setups, combine with the outcry from specific communities (namely SFV) have yielded positive results, like Street Fighter 6's amazing 120hz/low latency toggles native to the PS5. You even have companies like Epic publicly claiming that they've "heard your feedback about Strive's input delay, we're looking into it" (to my knowledge they never looked into it) I know it can be cringe to hear some streamer go "Your GPU doesn't have 69 Gigashits per terrafart? you only game at 2000Hz? LOL", but to my knowledge nobody is saying this? Moreso I think this push has netted benefits for everyone, including the baseline of regular people who can't afford fancy toys as the world is plunged into a cost-of-living crisis. I do not think this push is ruining the spectacle of fighting games, as you suggest
@@SuuBrainrot As a person who picked up a Hitbox due to hand pain+ergonomics, I always apologize to everyone I beat in bracket for being a godless cheater, and for disrespecting the sanctity of a video game where a punchy man shoots fireballs out of his hands. I am truly ruining the competitive integrity of this tradition.
@@HQRubbishIf we can't offer one standard that's accessable to everyone, then we offer multiple tiers of standards. What are the best, cheapest, most accessible options for a community that provide a certain level of performance? The current landscape isn't completely standardized, and we'll never know when optimization of setups is complete. If a tournament can say "every setup has N frames of input delay and M frames of display latency", that's great. Perfection isn't expected.
As a person who plays leverless because of my fucked up hands I was waiting to see what you would say about it but didn’t expect “fuck you, you shouldn’t get to play actually.”
sorry bro, you have to play on stick and do a standing 720 to prove you're worthy enough to play or quit fighting games forever because you're making them less cool
Controllers are instruments with which to enjoy videogames, this is resembling a lot the discourse between Classical and Electric instruments in music, it will take 100 years to understand that both have their place.
As someone who gave away my fightstick to a friend and got a snackbox micro, I agree. I didn't get the snackbox to "be better," it certainly has made me better, but thats more the ease of use. Even using a gamepad is extremely foreign to me, as someone who has always used keyboards for everything (on pc). I got to a pretty high rank in GGST with a keyboard (didnt hit celestial though before mostly moving to BBCF), and when I got my own stick, it was nice but it felt even more foreign to me than a gamepad. I stuck with my keyboard still and let the stick collect dust before finally deciding to bite the bullet and get a snackbox micro, when I sent the stick to a friend who was just getting into the FGC. Since then, I've used this thing for everything that could be reasonably done with the box, fighting game or not. I don't know if it gives me an advantage, and I don't care. Unless I keep grinding and get to top 16 at evo, it won't make any difference. A shitter is still a shitter, stick or box. If some new stick comes out that is more effective than box, I wouldn't get it. If boxes are forced to get some software that makes them practically unusable to most people, I would still use them. If boxes are banned entirely, I will bring my keyboard. If leverless is banned entirely, I'll find other games. Leverless is how I know the games I play, it's the only way that makes sense for my hands. And while I agree that it sucks that the way I play is "objectively better" than other controllers, it still doesn't change anything for me. Also if you actually do read this comment this far in, opinions on the anklegator box?
I feel like this essay video is fantastic, but I also think it misses out on a big point of view: using what's most comfortable to the player. I'm not talking ergonomics, I'm talking about comfort. I hate using analog controls for stuff. I'm a 1 or a 0 kind of guy. I'm running, or I'm holding a button and running so I can walk (shooters, etc). As someone that grew up only playing on PCs for any competitive game, using a pad or an arcade stick are foreign concepts to me, and going back to analog feels like a downgrade, and isn't fun. Once I got my snackbox micro, I felt like I could enjoy learning fighting games. I don't even use any shortcuts mentioned in the video, I just use it like I would use a keyboard, but more comfortably. It's my preferred way to interact with the game. To quote one of the greats: "the future is now, old man" (he said sarcastically, being almost 30 himself). Times change, and we should change with them.
Never found someone that was able to put how I felt about it until now. It was a great video, but you both worded it perfectly. I literally have always felt so uncomfortable on a controller, and I didn't realize it until I recently switched from DS4 to Keyboard in Brawlhalla. Completely just night and day execution difference, it feels like how I wish my inputs always felt. I love it to death
I wouldn’t be playing fighting games at all if there wasn’t a lever-less option. And that’s coming from a Smash player that has relied on analog directional inputs for two decades. That part at the end where he was lamenting like “or if they are just pushing two buttons” yeah, it’s way more natural, comfortable and easy to just push buttons. It was a good video, but damn if he didn’t sour me at the end.
I think what you miss here is that low success rate is not the same as "difficult". Every game must decide what skills it is going to require and what skills it isn't going to require. Accessibility is about eliminating requirements that the player isn't supposed to need. That might sound a little abstract so let me give some examples: - Running a marathon is about physical fitness and ability, which is why we don't allow bikes - First person shooters tend to be about aim, which is why we don't allow aim bot However, if somebody had a vision impairment that made it hard for them to see the track, most people would agree it's fine to add lights or tape to the marathon so they could run it. That's because the marathon isn't supposed to test your vision, that's not what it's about. The reason we've made quarter circle inputs easier over the years isn't because we think we can make everything easy and have nothing require a high level of skill. We made motion inputs easier because you're not supposed to be unable to throw a fireball. It's about whether or not you can space it properly, your risk reward tolerance, when to use it, and if you can do it fast enough. For controller latency specifically, the question isn't about whether it would give an advantage. The real question is: If you're only losing because your controller is laggy, are you the worse player? Is accounting for latency what fighting games are "about"? Is that part of the intended skillset? I think it's not. As for hitboxes and stuff, I don't have many ideas on how to even the playing field considering how different certain inputs are, but maybe they could do something like what modern controls do. If hitboxes net you wins 20% more often, maybe hitbox players take 20% more damage in-game. Who knows what the future will hold, but hopefully I at least gave you a different way of looking at things.
The major flaw as with most arguments such as this is you assume the default is arcade stick. Arcades have been dead for a long time now, and we are in an time where fighting games have been played on controller and leverless longer than they have not been. Maybe the devs will make leverless weaker and in turn also make arcade sticks weaker but who cares? Why is it everyone else's problem if someone chooses to play on an objectively weaker peripheral? Why is it that we must accomodate a small subset of players who spend the cost of more than one controller to play a very specific type of game, that is already more than playable and in fact designed around the default controller the system comes with? Do you choose a worse bat or hockey stick and then question the legality of players using a better one? Maybe there's an argument to make about competition and everyone using the same setup, but why should it be this ancient relic from a shortlived time? Maybe pads are the way to go and people who choose to play on stick are just playing in the NBA in tap shoes. Pads are the default for most systems so it makes sense that this should be the one that wins out but if we didn't have the conversation about pads back then, why would we have had the conversation about leverless ten years ago? Especially given that leverless has been around almost as long as fighting games in the form of keyboards being the default whenever they released on PC.
I really enjoyed the breakdown of the discussion around recent innovations in fighting games. I can appreciate how much effort you put into covering almost every aspect of the topic. So it was disappointing that you resulted to an oversimplified strawman for why someone might prefer modern controls or a leverless. In fact almost everything to do with supporting leverless is discussed in bad faith. I'm not sure I fully understand your response to hypothetical answer A, that the value of the more efficient option only exists because that option is not the standard. Your tone suggests it's some sort of counter point but the statement itself is just a neutral observation of fact. Yes, the value of a different option would be different if that option was the standard rather than a deviation. Really though, it's the hypothetical answer B that I take issue with. By conflating many possible reasons into an antagonistic "it lets me win more" you completely skip any nuance to the discussion. "I'm able to win more because it's easier to execute my choices" should be a conversation starter, not something to be critical of. Is it a bad thing that players are able to more effectively make and execute decisions? Is the competitive floor being raised by these options an issue? Are impressive executions only impressive because of our choice of peripheral or is there a lot more to it? Your primary counter point, that the more efficient options would diminish the value of the hard work it takes to play these games, is short sighted. It assumes the ceiling on fighting games is fixed and can go no higher while also treating the new methods as a shortcut that cheapens the work we put into these games. Is there a problem with the ceiling being raised at the highest levels by the best players using new tools? You're effectively saying that everyone who plays on leverless or uses modern controls is doing it wrong. I'm not sure if that was the actual message of the video but that was my takeaway and I just fundamentally disagree.
Well I suppose it would entirely depend on what you consider wrong or not? I am not going to fault any player for picking a more efficient option if they are presented with it. People like winning. My objection towards "strides forward" being taken in the area of efficiency is that I don't see any positive endgoal. I personally believe there is a value in impressive execution, that Fighting Games are a both mental and physical exercise at their core. But that value can only persist if we collectively share the experience. Sure, we could as you say "raise the competitive floor" but in doing so we just arrive at a new arbitrary standard- and my belief is that once you start doing that you just create justification for continuing doing so. Top players are never the people that are negatively affected by this sort of thing, seeing as they will always put in the work (it is their job to do so). But everyone else suffers from a community wide mindset that we ought to solve these "control problems" by making them more efficient and thus easier to execute. And as I touch upon, keeping a reasonably comparable control scheme to the games of yore help those games stay active and "relevant" for lack of better wording. I believe one could reasonably already make a slippery slope argument in terms of controller options when you see the experimentation being done by competitors to the Hitbox/Crossup etc. All technically very cool and forward thinking stuff, but to me; completely missing the point.
@@HQRubbishThe Melee community's adoption of the Universal Controller Fix mod is an example of the competitive community raising the reliability of inputs across the board, independent of what controllers competitors buy & use. It's perfectly reasonable for communities to determine that they're happier with a higher average level of execution, and IMO the Melee community has benefitted from UCF. I expect they'll continue to largely benefit from the introduction of leverless controllers, as they both allow for healthier play (both preventing injury & allowing injured players to execute at a high level) and further raise the average level of execution, allowing more access to higher-execution Melee (which, IMO, is more fun & deep) to more of the community. Cost is a very real factor for leverless, but UCF is virtually free.
Great essay, really like the approach you took with this issue that appears time and time again every few months. Altough its true that part of the facination of executing demanding or hard inputs on the stick are always sick to see, and thats how the genre started using, i think one issue you didt adress was simply comodity of the user. Preference is very subjective, i know, and yes, you can make the point that a easier input method is of course be more confortable in general. But you cant also ignore those who by feeling alone, feel more comfortable with other layouts of controls. Many people started playing on pad, many newcomers decided to buy a hitbox because they didt feel comfortable to a stick or pad. And me for example, who started to play fighting games in the early 00s on my PC, didt had the money or accesibility to get a stick or controller. I started playing FGs on the keyboard, playing flash games as a introduction. Even after getting the options to buy a stick or a simple generic pad the keyboard was already years of experience and confort in my hands, something that you seem to agree, is that it sucks to obligate many players to get the time they spent completly wasted. Even after getting a Mix-box, witch was the combination of a keyboard with a arcade stick, even though the input had less delay, my hands didt get use to it, and i went back to the keyboard. A keyboard, that ALSO has many of the advantages of a hitbox. Especially if your keyboard is mechanical and not membrane. So, i think its also wise to include in the argument that your love for sticks, and how they look, feel and play, can also be true for other controller to another person. Even if "better performance" its at risk. Not to mention, the accesibilty, many players got play on stick simply because they cant, they are expensive, even more so in certain countrys like mine. Thats why i dont agree with the vision of "everyone should use sticks because that how its intended to play". Yeah, but not everyone is playing sports or practicing them with professional or approved gear, my opinion is to let the people play in whatever controller they want, because even though is true that many do it for better performance and easier execution, is also true that many do it for simple preference or inaccebility to a stick.
Here's a random thought: Would "first input wins" work? Just ignoring the second input, even after the first is released? I think ergonomics is something to consider deeper though? I think that people should not be forced to be forced out of their livelihood because of injury. That's something we _don't_ need to bring over from sports.
I will never touch a stick ever again simply due to wrist pain. Leverless actually made fighting games fun again for me. I really strongly disagree with a lot of your reasoning and conclusions, but there are a lot of other really good comments here that go into that. I just wanted to say that while i loved sticks (they are iconic), staying tied to hardware from the past that doesnt have a modern day context is silly. I don't think we should be forced to standardize competition with a controller used for Pac-Man, a controller style whose popular use died off 20 years ago.
You can do the SOCD stuff on pads too, you just need to use the analog stick as well. Several pros use this for specific moves. Fighting games should have always been thinking about SOCD from the moment that they started releasing on consoles and accepted inputs from both the Dpad and analog stick. Yes, it's alot more accessible than the pad when it's in button form, I agree, but if something was so messed up about SOCD that it would warp the game, pad players could learn how to do it too.
This video is a really good overview of the issue, but it is a little bit shortsighted in that, yes. Standard sports already deal with all of those problems you are mentioning with trying to make fighting game gameplay more efficient (through leverless controllers or otherwise). There's many examples like baseball players applying sticky adhesive to their hands to throw faster than players otherwise could, or new shoes being developed that helped athletes break world records in 100m dash, This technological arms race is NOT exclusive to fighting games and neither is the discourse surrounding it. I personally think that banning leverless controllers would be an incredibly naive thing to do, specially since it's helped fighting games become more accessible to an audience that has never touched an arcade stick in their life. I also think it's a good thing that there's a variety of input methods accepted in the fgc bc there are people who can't play on leverless controllers but can play on a stick, and there's also people who can't play on a stick but can play on a leverless for different reasons. I also think that whatever advantages that are given to someone with a leverless pad with socd-n can be outplayed by someone with more experience and game knowledge. In the long run, I genuinely believe that being given more control options instead of less is a good thing.
Good thoughts, interesting to think about since im new to the community. Ive pretty much only used leverless since ive started playing not that long ago. They are really comfortable compared to pad and keyboard, the other option in had easy access to when trying put different configurations. I think there are other solutions to the issues you presented with leverless, or at least help a few of them. It seems like it would be a good idea to make it so, if an input gets cleaned, it needs to be reinputed on neutral sodc cleaning. Just would completely get rid of the kbd issue. Alot of the guys i talk to at my locals also mention that a big benefit to their leverless is the portability. And i agree with that too! That level of, i guess i would call it efficiency, lets me play with real people more than I would normally. Its interesting that OP thinks about what controller is used, and how it's used. Maybe im just too new, but i rarely think about input methods for other players I might have to buy a stick when i get some extra cash and give it a shot I forgot one last thing. The point on injury is kinda shitty, not to mention wrong. There have been Olympic athletes who competed using mobility aids, specifically running prosthetics. I also think that if a competition can be designed to be more accessible, and still fair, than it should be. I don't think the difference between as stick/pad and leverless is nearly as much as a person running and a bicycle.
I of course agree with your last statement, I also think accessibility is good if it can be implemented fairly and without considerable obstruction. I obviously don't consider leverless controllers in their current state to fall in that category, hence the comparison to a non-fair and obstructive running aid. Afaik the current science indicates that running blades do not offer any measurable advantage so making said comparison would be contradictory, no?
18:23 that's not how backdash works in Tekken 7. In previous games it was like that I think (not sure, I didn't play them) but in Tekken 7 you are not vulnerable during backdash even if you don't hold the back input. I actually tested this, you automatically guard during the duration of the whole backdash even if you don't press inputs. So it's not true that a stick user and a leverless user would have different times of vulnerability because of not holding back. Also I have to say that nobody would do the kbd input on a stick as shown in the video. It's a small nitpick, but during the kbd you're not supposed to manually do a back input after down-back. On a stick you can release the down-back input in a way that creates a back input "for free", which is much faster and comfortable to do. So the correct sequence is: b, n, b, db (release to get a free b), n (repeate the last 3 movements) I'm saying this just in case someone wants to try the kbd as shown in the video and ends up hurting themselves.
I feel like there was too much comparisons to traditional sports. Getting a few frames more efficient while blocking and walking forward isnt the same as using a bike in track events.
I love how no matter how well thought out and articulated a person idea is, there will always be someone who laser focuses on 1 thing and uses it as an excuse to miss the whole point the person was trying to make. Really remarkable.
You overstate the advantages of leverless by a loooong mile. The whole video is greatly produced but ends up feeling line a copium Reddit post with extra steps.
What I really hope for, and this is inherently difficult I understand, is for the inherent advantages of leverless to be be reduced, and leverless controllers to continue to be allowed, because I do think that people having more options for play is strictly better than fewer. The specfic example of an injured runner not being able to use a bike is an illustrative exaggerated example, but the question has come up in a legitimate context with amputee runners and blades. It was argued that the accomodation actually gave the amputee runners an advantage, and that was far from an open, shut discussion.
This debate of leverless is just a bunch of old guys who grew up playing in the arcades not accepting that things changed. Just as the arcade stick was a familiar choice for those who played in the arcade, the leverless is the same for people who grew up playing in the pc. I remember trying to play street fighter 4 and having a hard time executing some inputs on pad, i then played in my keyboard and instantly had a way better experience... I then bought an arcade stick, i found it was a great deal of fun, but i always found the keyboard to be better, that's why i bought the hitbox... I don't even know any shortcuts, and i couldn't care less to learn then, you can play just fine without it, and to be honest the better player still wins at the end, no matter the input method. All i have to say to the old guys in the FGC is, get good bro... The input method is not the problem. As said in the video "1-2 inputs are not making any difference in the grand scheme of things", if there's no difference, this discussion in pointless.
And the argument that the benefits of playing hitbox because it only exists when other methods exist given in the video, is flawed. The argument ignores the material reality and proposes something that simply just not exist, there is no reality where other inputs methods do not exist. Value is relative, relative to other similar things, relative to society and culture, relative to past experiences in life, and specially to the material reality that we're inserted, nothing has any innate value. A more marxist analysis of the matter would be more suitable.
THE POINT OF HAVING LEVERLESS IS NOT NECESSARILY EFFICIENCY IT IS ABOUT CONFORT. If you reduce the efficiency boost, people are still going to use the fucking controller, you are making a point that is just wrong, people don't use leverless solely for efficiency, they use for a variety of reasons.
28:35 - 28:57 "I think you would struggle to currently find a modern fighting game that is inherently crippled when it comes to input lag" Sakurai punching the air bc SSBU isn't considered a modern fighting game Also y'all remember the -acendhigher launch option on the steam release of Skullgirls? lmao Edit: 29:34 Is he trying to say doing 40 multishines in a row is easy?
Fantastic video! I just wanted to provide my thoughts as someone who began playing fighting games after leverless controllers had seen widespread popularity. I began playing fighting games less than 5 years ago in my freshman year of high school, where a senior I met had introduced me to Guilty Gear XRD. I thought it was the sickest shit ever so I immediately went home and bought it on my laptop. I had almost zero clue of what the standard was for competitive play, so I just practiced on what was most convenient for me: my keyboard. While I would eventually switch to a leverless controller in order to play with people in person, it was not done at all with intention of having more consistent and efficient input device, but more because it resembled what I was most familiar with. I found your video to be fascinating, as it gives me further insight on a perspective far different than mine. I'd also like to mention that I come from Super Smash Bros Melee, where one of its largest draws is it's inherently analog beauty. This question exists as well within Melee, with many recently beginning to use Melee's version of a Hit Box style controller. Something that's excited me a lot recently is the development of an analog box controller, where the controller accounts for how far down a movement button is being pressed. This allows people who prefer this style input device (ergonomics is a far worse issue in Melee, due to its ridiculously high APM and the terrible ergonomics of a GameCube controller) to interact with Melee's analog nature. This also appeases many members of the community who dislike the "teleporting inputs" that a traditional box controller allows you to do. While it isn't a perfect solution, I definitely think it's very exciting and cool. Great video :) eagerly looking forward to more!
Thanks for taking the stances that you did, it was really brave, but also needed to be said. While I know a lot of these discussions have somewhat shaken out (Modern isn't that good, many tournaments are being won on stick, and the disadvantage of SRK on leverless or repeated KBD may be enough to keep stick in play), I still appreciate the thought behind stating everything. I agree with you that it's too late now to change things. I'm not sure if it should be changed because I think leverless being an option is cool (I've used all 3 and competed with all 3, but went back to stick for the love it it like you), but we should at least move forward as a community (both developers and TOs) with more intention.
A really great video! You made really great points, and, as others have mentioned, blew me away with the visuals of the video. Some points that weren't mentioned that I think are important to consider in the discussion of controller types and why I don't agree with "joysticks are not long for this world" - Firstly, there are reasonable arguments for certain motions/inputs that are still objectively easier on a joystick than an all-digital 4 button setup. Due to how diagonals are input, half-circles, up to 360s, and more in-depth motions (while not as common, are still around, especially in older games) are objectively harder on all-button, since they're designed with the joystick in mind. As an example, SF6 blanka's heavy punch into his install level 2 or Rainbow Roll (2x qc back, half-circle back respectively). It's a lot hardrr to consistently time the inputs on all-button, since you "have" to hit the diagonals to make it count, which involves timing both the pressing and letting go of the directions rhythmically. Whereas with a joystick, it's a fluid motion, that isn't objectively easier, but is way simpler and can be more consistent starting out. And don't even get me started on kof's qc into half-circle super motions. Sure, you can "shortcut" those inputs, but those shortcuts can be patched out if necessary, and they're still designed at their core with a joystick or analogue stick in mind. Second, pure taste - there is tangibly a difference in experience between joystick and leverless and controller, and i think that'll always be key component keeping all three as realistic options for any player. Unless the game leans into controller specifically (like the MK series), the tangible feeling and engagment of a joystick, a leverless, a controller with a d-pad or analogue stick being used can still play an important part in playerbase choice. It all hinges on "efficiency" and "competition" versus "fun factor" and "enjoyment". I swapped from controller to a joystick because i was more consistent (less dropped motions), i switched to all-button because it felt more natural (i've been a pc gamer for a decade), and i've recently dove back inro joystick because it's just, imo, more fun and engaging to control that way. It "feels" right to me. Sure, i could theoretically optimize beyond belief to try and eek out a few more wins, but at some point it turns into what makes me "better" and what gives me more satisfaction or makes me happier, and the diminishing returns of optimization settles the debate for me - i'm not just playing fighting games just to win, i'm playing tjem because they're fun, my friends and i love them.
What I like is when the dificulty is set by the fact I'm fighting an itelligent, strong, fallible but challenging, voluntary oponent. What I don't like is when the dificulty is set by inputs, and if I can surpase such dificulty, then the game allows me to minimize the participation of my opponent, allowing me to win by solo gaming. Yes, that means I dont like combo heavy games or overpowered moves balanced by being "hard". Its sad some people feel bad for losing the prevalence of their beloved sticks... Personally, after decades struggling trying to get better in fighting games using stick, I discovered what a relief is to play with pad or leverless. I'm so happy having a controller that finally allows me to enjoy those fast and directional heavy games without innecesary hand strain and forced dificulty in the inputs.
Actually, in keeping with the themes of the video, I primarily used rickety Blender addons in conjunction with the truly, heinously inefficient Adobe Suite. A combination that made sure I was mentally transported to a frozen hellscape any time I felt like getting some work done.
I very much agree that fighting games like many competitive gaming communities. Moving towards efficiency i think, takes away something of the experience and joy of these games. Although it is worth noting that this has the benefit of allowing more people to enjoy games in ways they possibly couldn't without them.
I disagree about increasing the average execution level of players being bad-Melee, for example, is a much more interesting game when you have access to higher-execution options. Allowing everyone access to those high-execution options, without long-term damage to their bodies, makes Melee more enjoyable and makes its community healthier.
@@bb010g I think Rubbish’s analogy of the corked baseball bat explains very well his and many’s reasoning behind having prejudice against something that literally makes certain tasks objectively easier to understand and preform physically in a sport where everyone else uses the approved sports equipment. Like sure, you hit a home run with a metal bat, but it’s not that impressive + it defeats what makes a sport entertaining in the first place.
@@Flo-zj9tg Baseball has a standard set of tools, dictated by the community. Let's take a look at another sport with a standard set of tools, cycling. Electronic shifters were first used in professional cycling in 2009. The cycling community decided this was acceptable in competition. In Formula 1, there's a lot of variance between cars, within defined limits. In competition aerobatics, there is no standard plane, but far less money is poured into plane development compared to what F1 teams pour into their cars. In robot competitions, the tools often vary wildly, while operator skill & strategy remains an important factor. Each fighting game within the FGC gets to decide how much they want to allow their tools to vary. Baseball is just one sport to compare against.
While i don't think giving people (easier excess) to certain things like the melee dash or the kbd in tekken is necessarily bad in general. Nor would i say giving people a controller option that puts less strain on their bodies is not objectively good thing. However these controller are not free, and do require new muscle memory. These things are not exactly insurmountable problems but not everyone can just and or wants to do that. More crucially to me at least is if the skill floor rises because of a controller type then using anything but that controller puts you at a disadvantage competitively speaking. Its just that the more the skill floor rises the more and more a person needs to know and own just to play a game to me at least that sound uninviting.While in theory, everyone more easily being able to perform more tricks more easily sounds like a breeding ground for better higher level matches. However as Rubbish says at the end, are you watching a person have crazy good reactions.. or is the person pressing 2 buttons, are you watching someone with incredible execution.. or are they pressing 2 buttons. In fairness what I'm saying might just be a form of Able-ism or elite-ism, I'm not sure. Its cool more people can play a game at a higher level, its cool that some people who couldn't compete know can. I just think something else is being lost and that sucks.
It is an interesting topic, and possibly if fighting games keep growing at the rate that they are we could divisions of competitive play for different peripherals. I do like the comparison to other sports as physical performance, however, since video games are linked to evolving technology. It only makes sense to change the way we engage. What was once difficult is more standard but since fighting games have such a depth there are more players that can focus on the great depth of the games we enjoy. As far as catering to people who have wrist injuries, I strongly believe the use of lever less controllers will reduce the amount of dedicated players becoming injured. I switched to using a keyboard, after being a stick and controller player, because it caused me pain to consistently do dash cancels before the patch in SF6 that made it a button input. I was able to get over that barrier and then move into more advanced development into the game. if you are going to compare video games to a sports look at the baseball glove in the 1900s, football before pads, Wooden tennis rackets, or running shoes. fighting games is still relatively young in the scheme of competitive sports, and I have no doubt that there will more changes to come. Rubbish Thank you for taking the time to make this video it is encouraging to see people who are passionate about competitive nature of fighting games.
I believe comparing modern controls to leverless only shows that this video was made with bad faith. It really just comes down to preference. If you choose to use a stick you understand the pros and cons.
I'll just say that keyboard allowed me to enter FG's because I didn't need to buy anything more to play, also you gotta admit that ergonomic wise the leverless clearly wins, and longterm i prefer to be able to play as good as i was able to at the start, see some Smash Melee dudes and their hands after years of gamecube controller action
NGL, while the presentation and production on the video is great, I don't really understand why you made this video. Your point seems to be that leverless gives an unfair advantage compared to both pad and stick players, yet sticks and pads are both represented at all levels of play after a decade of them existing. You outright suggest that if you suffer hand injuries due to extended use of controllers that aren't leverless, you should just not be allowed to compete. It all comes off as a 40 minute rant, venting your frustrations that leverless controllers weren't banned a decade ago so sticks could remain the perceived best choice for fighting games.
I developed early stages of arthritis in my left index finger because of fighting games. It’s partially due to genetic deposition, but watching such a video feels like a punch in the face
I've been hearing this argument since 2014 in Melee. That pros can just BUY controllers in lots, and then put together the one that works for them out of that lot. The problem with your entire argument about standardizing setups is that the absolute MOST competitive people WILL spend more money, and more time than everyone else to be the best. There are a bazillion Hit Box knockoffs. So why did Daigo and Tokido - two severely historied players sign up with Hit Box? It wasn't because we offered them the most money, it's because they KNEW we are always on the lookout for ways to improve your game and they wanted to be right there with us when they did. You know, F1 has practice sessions. They also have standardized equipment. Drivers that qualify don't get any more time in their practice than the ones who don't. Imagine if we made competitions like that. You can't actually play the game until you're in the practice session. Stupid right? Alright. So how do the teams that consistently place in F1 do so? They're spending a lot of money, and a lot of time in planning, simulation, tuning. The resources that Red Bull and Mercedes have are vastly larger than most of the other competitors. Their drivers are the most expensive, too. Yes, at the end of the day - talent wins. But competitors trying to push as far as they can WILL spend money on better setups, will travel, will set up meetings with other high level competitors, will hire coaches and managers. Saying that allowing people a choice in peripherals is flawed, or ultimately a waste of time is a slap in the face of history. EVERY serious competitor in any sport puts everything they can into it. "Standardizing" setups doesn't level a playing field when the people who are making it their priority to be the best are still going to expend every resource they can to win. In short: let the people use whatever they want. At the end of the day, the winners will still be lined up by their performances.
You are awake that multi shines are harder than god fist right? There is a reason top players use god fist in every. single. match. But NOONE uses multishines.
Not everything is literal, the visual was moreso representing the propensity for Spacie-players to push the execution heavy aspect of their character to the forefront while Mishimas' are often approached as if their execution heavy niche is something that needs to be played around, and not with.
I think the argument against leverless falls flat when pad is so common and so regularly tops events. Hell Sonic Fox, the player with the most majors wins in fgc history, is exclusively a pad player. Edit: And sticks aren't going anywhere. They're consistently topping and always will.
This video is a work of art comprising so many constituent works of art, it could go in an art gallery but it would make the other art in there look bad
For not profesdional gamers hitbox is just another option which could be more comfirtable and satisfying than pads and sticks I'm from a country with no arcade era so both sticks and hitboxes are new to me compared to pads. So that "old vs new" thing doesn't seem convincing. Each of these controllers has got their pros and cons for different people. So the more types of controllers, the better
the best argument for leverless is that the spirit of fighting games does reside in leverless. lets be honest, FGC was a happy accident sparked by the happy accident that was sf2. arcade sticks were never specifically made for fighting games, and if the developers knew that this was gonna be some players religion, there is a real chance leverless wouldve existed even earlier. leverless is more of, people learning more what fighting games are, an inevitable idea given enough time and people playing. leverless players drop inputs, make mistakes, and it requires practice, just as any controller would. i think a clear way to kill the spirit of video games is more like, having a neural controller that sends thoughts electronically as commands. then we are in another space, totally unique from the fgc as it is today. you can easily tell, the spirit is no longer there, as buttons= video games is a great foundation to use when trying to define something as abstract as "the spirit of the thing". ive used all three peripherals extensively, and for me, leverless FEELS more fun, but im still the same scrub regardless of what i use. i think increasing the fun of an activity, as long as we can agree the spirit isnt diminished, should be legal. i guess the argument is, where do you draw the line? if leverless players drop inputs, make mistakes, and it requires practice, then id say, that leverless falls within legality (obviously you cant have any blocking on both sides nonsense, etc) this topic can get even deeper, as you can argue: 1. street fighter walk/block having less "travel time" is a better experience for everyone, and allows for efficient access to a certain playstyle, especially when considering gief. (insane to think snake eyes is a pad player). this makes the game's ability to represent different playstyles and tactics stronger, and forces every pro player to consider these legit tactics and how to counter them. 2. modern controls and being able to block and be ready with a super simultaneously goes against the spirit of street fighter specifically since it removes buffering. when on defense/trying to react to something, most times you CANT buffer and block simultaneously. that IS squarely part of the game as it forces a balanced give and take of decision-making, a core fundamental of street fighter. Personally, id like to see modern controls nerfed, it should be a frustration free way to learn street fighter, as players can jump to classic when they feel ready, or stay as modern casuals, the real heroes of the fgc as they support the developers by buying costumes en masse. would make sense if they were made illegal in pro play as well. notice how, different aspects being made more efficient can arguably make a game better or worse. other games like smash, has always been all modern controls, and gains their execution ceiling in other ways. so for them, modern controls is fine. Each game has a unique spirit, and different things "feel right" for different games/events/sports. let me know if you feel like i missed some point, or if you see a flaw in my counter arguments. also dont try to compare to other events TOO much, as ultimately, FGC needs the numbers to go up, a major reason these allowances even happened in the first place. If street fighter and tekken had millions of players in them daily before, during and after switching to consoles, a debate on controller uniformity likely wouldve happened sooner. if we hit our golden age with hitboxes and project L, then its safe to say rulesets will become more rigid, cemented in wherever we are as the FGC is at the time. (as in im sure any other controller iteration will be banned, unless it can satisfy the spirit of fighting games, as in not have any broken tactics available, require just as much practice as any other controller, have buttons, etc.) Also other events, like baseball, have had MUCH more time to iron out its kinks, and are STILL trying to update the game without damaging the spirit of baseball. (id argue leverless is the pitch clock, a positive increase in efficiency, and NOT corked bats/aluminum bats, a negative increase in efficiency. modern controls, if they arent nerfed in sf6, is closer to that negative efficiency) We WILL get back to scarce tactics being awesome, even if it is on leverless. and while you use that as a way to argue against leverless, technically, all you did was prove the fgc's spirit will remain intact.
great production but it all boils down to your biases tl;dr, old good, new bad i understand that youre more proficient with sticks but for people like me -- i have this mental disease that i cant understand the positioning of the sticks relative to my perception -- the leverless controllers is a godsend.
I believe the best realistic solution is for devs to account for leverless controlers to put them on par with classic controlers. I'm currently doing it in the fighting game I'm working on (NASB2). Partially because leverless controlers are already widely adopted, and partially because keyboars are already the default controler for PC players. As someone who got into fighting games through Melee I started out with pads and then moved on to a hitbox to minimize latteral finger movements. I even dislike 6-button games because I can't rest a finger on each button (unless I'm playing on keyboard where I use my left pinkie).
As someone who doesn't care about the competitive side, having a different layout is what got me to get deep into fighting games and the addition of modern controls/simplified inputs allowed me to drag friends along for our casual play. That being said, I do agree with the idea of having tournaments with dedicated setups like in an arcade where everything is essentially identical. However the logistics of this would be difficult to pull off. This idea actually came out of an argument I was having with someone about modern and classic controls or simplified inputs and ranked. I wouldn't care if a player who was playing couldn't play ranked with the simplified inputs. That I would be fine if I was relegated to playing casual matches if I used my mixbox setup online and if I wanted to play ranked I would have to learn to play with traditional inputs and on an arcade stick or gamepad. Similarly I would be ok if tournaments had a system where once you reached a certain point you had to use the provided controller. That could also lead to more sponsorship since a controller sponsor could be used for the top X onward. I could also see this get interesting with invitationals where players don't know which option they will use if the sponsor is someone like Victrix which has a gamepad, hitbox, and arcade stick. While the ergonomic argument comes off as a harsh one I do agree with it. It is similar to the argument against PEDS and TRT in the UFC. However I was growing up during the steroid era in baseball and I also watch non-drug tested sporting events like ADCC or strong man and I can tell you that those were and are some exciting events so I can certainly see why someone might want to watch what amounts to the steroid league of fighting games.
In tekken You also can do instant whilestanding , by holding db , until you see the crouch, and then press up + a button, to get the while standing move. Makes punishing strings , that end in a difficult to punish high, pretty easy. Steves strings for example (sway left f+1,1,1 becomes relatively easy to launch punish) (i am writing this while i am at the backdash segement, if it’s mentioned later, sorry )
The cheap and good enough alternative IS the keyboard. A lot of players don't have access to a stick, they just play on their laptop and want to play a game they have. These people, just to compete in a local would HAVE to put in money for a peripheral just to participate since not every game support multiple keyboards as unique input devices that can differentiate the spacebar from one keyboard and a different keyboard. I see this a lot with long time fighting game players who just assume everyone ever has played on the arcade machine, but most players play on controller and on a keyboard because it's not an extra peripheral for their device. people in the arcade days played on a stick because it's what is available to them. Fighting games are clearly not about what control method you're using and it for sure isn't what makes them beautiful. People play with joysticks because it's intuitive to them or they grew up on them, people play with "leverless" because it's available to them because it's on their laptop. On no planet will joysticks die just because one input method is "better" people like joysticks because they are nice, they are satisfying, and they are intuitive. What a bunch of FUD This point of view that people play leverless to be more "efficient" is genuinely a privileged one and it's out of touch and it's sad to see it keep getting thrown about.
The only sensible comment here. This whole video just reeks of gatekeeping and is completely forgetting that not everyone has equal access to these peripherals. Most people just got comfortable with what they had.
Great video. I do wanna add that if the unlevel playing field of the stick, pad, and leverless controller landscape is something community figureheads and developers are truly concerned about, we should just standardize rules towards a first input priority instead of socd neutral cleaning. Levels users would be taking a hit, but they would still have unique advantages over other options. I think that more options for different ways of play to suit different players’ preferences are a good thing
Awesome video! I used to play on controllers myself, mainly because I played on consoles, but those things broke too easily, and when I swapped to PC and bought my favorite games, I was out of money, and soon, out of controllers too. I play on keyboard now, and even though I currently own functioning controllers, I love the sound of my keyboard, the feel, and the fact that after 5 years it still hasn't broken. It has saved me money and time, and it also makes switching between genres easier, since I now use the same input method for almost every game I play, shooters, platformers, and whatever else. I've got no reason to switch. I'm happy with the poor man's hitbox. On another note, I find the accessibility of fighting games to be a beautiful thing about the genre, and of esports in general. The fact that a blind person (Sven) and a person without arms (BrolyLegs) can still play fighting games with us is something no real life sport can do, and I find it to be something truly awesome about these games. I think that's a discussion for another time though. Me personally, I found that my thumbs hurt after playing charge characters on a controller for long periods of time. Thanks to my keyboard, I can actually enjoy long sets with charge characters. I think it will be very difficult to truly establish what advantages are unfair or necessary. There probably never will be a good answer to it, ever, and that's just the reality of competition. Ultimately, time will tell, as it's up to the TOs what is and isn't allowed.
Yeyeyeye you caught me, it wasn't first try - ua-cam.com/video/Gv0br8aIyEM/v-deo.html
I’ve only done it twice ever so this is still unbelievably impressive
Many good points in the video, however I feel the statement at 38:38 "If developers reduce the effectiveness of leverless controllers, then what was the point of them in the first place?" is very off the mark.
I don't use keyboard to play fighting games because it makes me win more; I use keyboard because it's right in front of me and I don't need to buy a dedicated peripheral to play the game. It's cheaper and more accessible for me, and many many other PC gamers to just play the game this way. If leverless controllers were nerfed by developers, I'd still use keyboard, and still choose to buy leverless once I feel I've invested enough because that's what I'm *familiar* with.
Arcade sticks were the standard input option because they were previously the most accessible and familiar input option. Fighting games used to be primarily on arcades, so at the time, most players first exposure to the genre was at an arcade cabinet.
Now, arcades are mostly gone in the west, so the scenario of using the control scheme before going out of your way to buy an arcade stick is *impossible* for many players. The entire point of arcade sticks, from the beginning, was *familiarity,* but now in the current market, it no longer serves that purpose to new players going forward. The purpose of arcade sticks as the default input method is reliant on context that no longer exists; the very same familiarity that *now* exists between keyboard and leverless controllers.
This isn't to say that the inputs are balanced. The advantages of directional buttons is undeniable. But the truth is that banning leverless controllers gates out a huge amount of possible players from the scene. From the viewpoint of growing the community, AND the business viewpoint of maximizing sales, embracing leverless controllers is the logical answer. There will be concessions and compromises, but the presence of leverless controllers *has* contributed to the FGC's recent surge in popularity. I think things like the crossup hybrid controller and developer tweaking are more than worth it as compromises.
literally. It's what I'm comfortable with. It doesn't give me free wins but I have an easier time and it doesn't hurt my hands to use as opposed to a sanwa-style lever.
you right i agree its just worth noteing the business viewpoint of maximizing sales will cannibalize all else, it is not an argument that works and is bad retoric to have echo within you
The final couple of minutes really drive the point home. This isn't a call to action, so much as a yearning for a more arcade-centric era of gaming. But that's also why I think, even if leverless was banned early on, said ban would've eventually been overturned because leverless' prominence is to fundamentally tied to wider shifts in the gaming industry. It certainly would've been overturned by COVID. The FGC never had the strength to say "screw the money, we'll set our own rules!"
A lot of comments have pointed out the problems with comparing esports to sports. I'll add that I think the anger over leverless is more properly analogized by the Luddites. Anxiety over how new technology destroys cultures and livelihoods, or in this case, how PC gaming helped destroy arcade gaming.
Wow, genuinely impressed with this. Presentation alone is insane levels of quality but beyond that, the amount of fighting game history that is covered here is a genuine love letter. Every single time I thought of something to add to the subject you were one step ahead and it would start playing on the screen. While at the end of the day my want for anyone and everyone to enjoy the genre trumps the need for any kind of *standard* (even if the only way someone can enjoy the game is *technically* better), the controller arms race discussion is still a fascinating one to me. War has changed!!!! Great job!!
They just always make bangers. It's insane how they don't have 100k subs by now
Game recognize game
This guy never mention right handed joysticks so he should not be allowed to talk-quote that
I agree, I am really impressed with this entire video.
Oooorrr, you can suplex him.
I don't really buy the arguments made at 38:38 (If we reduce effectiveness of leverless, then what was the point in the first place?) and 41:43 (A ruling would set players back in time and money.) Both of these are sunk-cost arguments. If you invest in a control method that cracks the game to some degree and that method eventually loses its effectiveness for the sake of fairness and fun, then that's a risk that you signed up for. It's kind of like saying that top tiers shouldn't be too nerfed because high-level players have already invested so much time in mastering the best characters. But I don't care about that. In the age of patching issues later down the road, it's on you to do whatever will lead to long-term enjoyment rather than short-term gains. In fact, I think that's a good thing. It encourages players to use what they personally prefer rather than what's currently optimal.
As for how to make leverless more fair, I've heard that first input priority would be a good solution, as it requires commitment to a single input until you release it. I wonder if there's something I'm overlooking, however. Maybe no cleaning on the hardware side and first input priority on the software side is the way to go.
Really don't agree with the (honestly callous) take on accessibility controllers with leveless setups. That genuinely caught me off guard.
One of the best aspects of competitive video games is their massively increased accessibility compared to other sports. Regardless of physical fitness or ability, if you have a way to interface with the game you have the ability to practice and compete. The way you do that is up to the player. Obviously fighting games are in a unique position with their various motion inputs, but as long as people aren't using a macro to outright skip the input is it worth antagonising an entire control scheme over? People can have hand health issues for all kinds of reasons. It could be genetic, or it could be environmental. Someone could have a serious injury, they could have a job that strains their hands. They might already be a fan of fighting games, and then what they're forced out because we banned their leverless accessibility controller? Responding to people with physical handicaps with "Sorry, shouldn't have injured your hands then lol" makes you sound like a dick.
I think if I had to give an overarching criticism, I feel like you do a lot of "making up a guy to get mad at". In a couple of places you come up with an incredibly binary answer to a question or scenario that has way more nuance and depth than you're giving credit for. "Why have leverless if the game is just going to account for them to even the playing field?" is kind of a stupid take. Maybe people have hand health issues. Maybe they find digital buttons easier to use than interpreting the direction of an analog stick. Maybe they're used to keyboard games and leverless is more intuitive. Maybe they like that buttons have fewer moving parts and therefore less points of failure. Maybe they just think it looks cool because they don't have pre-existing bias due to arcade nostalgia. You've assumed the only reason ANYONE would pick up leverless is to optimise their gameplay, then argued everything from there.
There should be rules for healthy people and the ones with clinical disabilities. The disability should be confirmed and official. Only then should they be allowed to use accessability extensions to the rules. Otherwise we'd need to go for the worst possible case and all play with our mouth like that one dude with no hands nor legs (kudos to him, he would whoop my ass like its nobody's business). I'm sure half of leverless users who claim to have issues are really just looking for an excuse them wanting an unfair advantage (something FGC is so keen on being against).
Notice how I've never mentioned hitbox? That's because hitbox is the opposite of ergonomic. In fact its even worse than keyboards in that respect. So I think they should ban leverlesses (with clinical cases as an exception) or do something creative and smart, like having two brackets, each for stick/pad & leverless and having the winners of each fight each other in grand finals. Fat chance on that though!
@@Dizintegrator Everything you just suggested sounds like a logistical nightmare. Besides the obvious issues with asking people to disclose personal medical information to "prove" they're allowed leverless, has anyone actually proven that swapping to leverless will let you beat people you couldn't before? There are so many aspects to any fighting game beyond those execution gates. I could be playing Tekken with a macro that lets me do perfect wavedashes, KBDs and electrics and I would still lose to the players I was losing to before.
@@thesporehero professional athletes must disclose their conditions, so I dont see how that is any different. Ifthe rules are that its either stick or pad, unless you just cant because of health, then the latter must be proven. Dont see any logistical issues there either, since medical inspection is only required once per athlete.
You're right, swapping to leverlrss doesnt magically unscrub you, but it certainly does make an already goodplayer even better. More importantly it makes other pros at a potential disadvantage if they refuse to switch. Shit's cancer and it used to be banned for a reason. The devs also seem not to care, ex sf6 nor t8 do ANYTHING to mitigate the advantage you loose by not playing leverless.
Mind you, Im talking purely about competitive scene. Online warriors will use whatever they want anyway and theres no way of stoping them.
Other reason is cost.
Since I started, I used a Xbox One/PS4 controller/fightpad. They cost around $60. Then, when looking for more arcade-ish controllers, I see that lever controllers cost over $150 for a not so great one, while a quite good leverless can be bought at $60.
Also, in my case, I have quite big hands, and my hand (specially thumbs) feels cramped after a while, and also I can't get around at inputting some motions with the dpad.
@@Dizintegrator pros with stick and pad are still winning. The perceived advantage sounds like sourgrapes
All the emotional und subjective opinions aside, let's just talk facts.
1. Leverless enables the player to execute certain inputs easier und with higher precision compared to a stick.
2. Continuous play with a stick, a couple of hours or more in a week over decades, will damage your wrist. The human wrist isn't designed for such continous and repetetive movement. You're asking for evidance, yet the evidence is there in abudence. Maybe not exactly for Arcade stick use, but for other tasks like tennis players, factory workers etc. Repeating continuosly tasks in a frequenzy and strain for which the affected bodypart isn't designed for will damage it over time, and it highly increases the chance to devolop a chronic disease in that area.
The leverless has a definitive competitive advantege over the stick. The leverless beeing the much more health-concious option though, leads to the rational conclusion, that the leverless should become the new standard, and the stick an option for those, that want to use it for their subjective reasons.
Is funny tho how many champions lately just use Xbox/PS standard/elite controllers.
@@Pestigirioso also a way more ergonomic option that using a stick
That's like saying F1 should still use stick shift instead of paddle shit. We've made a better controller and now it's time for games to adjust. This is called progress. There's more to fighters than just execution. Easier execution opens us up to focus more on the other aspects. Also easier didn't mean easy. Certain aspects of driving an F1 car are easier today than years ago but that doesn't make it easy. At the highest levels of competition you still see a lot of the same names. The evolution hasn't changed the talent and skill needed to be at the top.
The third option is 'I'm a pc gamer but I'd like something more ergonomic for fighting games, while retaining the familiarity of a keyboard'. It's cynical and disingenuous to assume the only reason anyone would go for leverless is to 'win more'. You mentioned yourself that the pc scene for fighting games has grown exponentially in the last decade, fourteen years to be more precise (SF4), so it's baffling to me that outside of that small mention you would then neglect that key bit of information for the rest of the video.
I thought of something similar, I'm buying a hitbox simply because I'm tired of missing inputs on gamepad d-pads
39:36
The video has a lot of good stuff in it, but this whole section is just so wild to me. To say that injury is an inevitable part of any competition, and that having an injury preventing you from competing just "is what it is" seems so callous to me, when the entire video is about alternate controllers that can help alleviate or entirely prevent these injuries. A runner developing a leg injury and someone playing fighting games developing wrist/hand injury over a long period of time because they are using a controller that doesn't work for them, are presented as equally unavoidable things. I'm biased because I like using leverless to play the games I love without my wrist feeling like garbage, but I think the advantages that leverless offers pale in comparison to the chance to be included at all, no matter how "miniscule" the people in my position are.
It's the weirdest bit in this entire video. So is he saying that these people who found better alternative for their injuries should fuck off? Is he really taking the ableist route because he dislikes leverless controllers?
@@tamaskalem1492and his argument there makes no sense. Like yes obviously giving someone a bike in a foot race is dumb but that isn’t comparable to using a hitbox. A hitbox can give you a mechanical advantage but there are so many other things you have to consider when playing a fighting game. A bike would just give you an objective and massive advantage in every way
yeah that was actually so ignorant and gross. I'm glad i saw your comment first because i don't want to hear anything else this person has to say if this is something they believe.
@@Linguinex all so he can proceed to show off his standing 720 😳
I don't agree with him but from the way he worded it it seems like he is conflicted on the issue. It's not like he's sitting here demanding things of people, he's just sounding out ideas in a video. I took inevitability to mean the inevitability of having to balance competition between regular players and players needing assistive inputs that arguably give an advantage. Basically finding the point at which assistive technology becomes unfair and if the difference is too far maybe there should be separate competitions. It seems kind of similar like the debate over whether or not runners on prosthetics are significantly advantaged compared to able-bodied runners. It is clearly something the community is still trying to figure out and this dude's just giving his 2c. I don't get how people are reading callousness and even maliciousness into it.
18:25 tekken has neutral guarding and backdash guarding (aka, backdashes are safe, you can block during them) so the only time you are vulnerable while doing a korean backdash is during the downback input, and only to mid attacks, highs will never hit you while kbding properly, you will either back block, neutral block or be crouching and the high will whiff, and mids will be blocked while you hold back, are neutral and hit if you are holding db to crouch
Doesn't Tekken also have guard break moves that you can't block from the neutral position? I guess technically KBD is insurance against those attacks as well
@@MrCactuar13 Neutral guarding in Tekken is extremely weird. It reduces pushback on certain moves but, as you said, your guard can be broken. If you hit someone who is neutral guarding with a plus enough attack (be it a low or just a plus on block high/mid) they won't be able to block the next one by neutral guarding. This only really comes into play if you rely on neutral blocking as your main form of defence, with KBD you are only using neutral for movement and those that use it will immediately switch to holding back after they block something.
This is false as you can get hit by everything during a backdash. Performing a backdash will actually break your neutral guard if you don't hold back during it. (b, b = vulnerable, b/B = not vulnerable.) This means that the time spent not holding back in order to go to down/back you will get hit by highs and mids.
@@MrCactuar13 there are a few wonky moves you can't neutral guard but they are always the hits after the first hit in a string, for instance the 2nd hit of heihachi's hunting hawk move, neutral guard just wont block it, but it will block the first hit, so by the time you see them using a move you'd have stopped kbding and just started blocking normally again
@@Idontwantyourcookie precisely, so the amount of frames that you are vulnerable during normal KBD and "cheated" is almost identical.
this has been mentioned by some commenters already, but this video seems to fail to address the fact that theres a lot of other factors that come into play when it comes to what controller you use, mostly focusing on the two reasons you presented in the video -- selectively winning more and being able to do something you weren't able to do something easier. these two reasons are definitely the responses some would give as to why they would prefer one controller over the other, but i think it glosses over other complexities that come into play when you consider controller choice. to draw from my own experience as an example, i play primarily on keyboard, a control scheme that pretty much can replicate anything a leverless can do, but this is because ive been playing this way for my entire fighting game career, and other control methods feel unintuitive and less responsive to me.
i dont want to gloss over the fact that you do in fact address reasons other than the two major ones you focused on in the video; ergonomics, accessibility, and developer intention are probably a much more objective standard to consider in terms of the debate, but i think its important to consider the subjective angle of the debate too. the core of the argument id say for a lot of players is that certain control schemes are more comfortable to use for many people, and to some that comfort means utilizing the most "efficient" control scheme. there's definitely some muddiness to the matter due to the subjectivity involved, but the overall comfort allows players to get more into the gameplay loop of fighting games, and also aspire to be the best player they can, and, to add some personal perspective on the matter, i think this is the most important part of the debate.
i also wanted to address your closing thoughts in the video, as its really the only genuine criticism i have for it. the rest of the discussion was really interesting to consider. you express lament in the phasing out of levered controllers, that many motions are mainly replaced by "pressing a few buttons". i wont deny that theres some truth in the matter, but i think you gloss over the fact that the input style is just as much privy to human error as any other. it takes effort to get good with this control style too! other than that, loved the video.
Interestingly enough their closing remarks on why they enjoy joysticks are very much subjective. "I like how they look/sound and look at this sick standing 720". Why do they have to act like leverless players come to steal their enjoyment of the controller you use? I play on the keyboard and respect any form of input, because I understand that we should celebrate our differences with input method. The last thing I would want for leverless to be banned and being enforced to buy a joystick bacsue "well it started with arcades".
Nice work. Best way to have people watch your shit takes is through a strong presentation.
While the Hitbox was intended as an optimized version of an arcade stick, I feel like recently it really became just another tool one player can use. Notably, I remember seeing that only 1 winner from the past 2-3 years from the major FG games tournaments used a leverless, while the rest were split between pad and arcade stick. Is it optimal? Maybe, but in fighting games where at a high level mind games and overall gameplan play a much bigger role, its hard to make a case that leverless is just better for everyone.
One other thing that leverless has allowed, is PC players to more easily join the community, making the transition from keyboard to leverless is trivial, and it doesn't require weeks or months of building the necessary muscle to not cramp up while holding the stick or a small pad. I've tried all the methods, and I can literally play leverless 8h+ a day because I'm just so used to a keyboard. It feels like finally we have a controller available for each major style of gamer, which is awesome.
same, I'm a pc gamer and always wanted to get into fighting games and play on keyboard despite everyone saying it's bad until I discovered the leverless
Really, the last point in the video kinda misses that too. Players still use levers and still will. Hitboxes arent going to phase out levers and especially not pads anytime soon. Top players still use them and plenty of people at locals.
Anti-leverless arguments always make the argument that they're "cheating" while omitting the fact that very few people win with them at high levels. The people who win with leverless were already winning.
With all the money and all the clout on the line you'd expect nearly universal adoption by high-level players. It isn't there.
Games are now designed with built-in SOCD cleaning. This means games are now built to be played with leverless. Also, 360 inputs are 4 button inputs regardless of the controller. Sticks only have 4 actuators and controllers have 4 buttons in their d-pad.
All the anti-leverless arguments are moot. Cheating is hardware agnostic and banning a controller doesn't solve anything in the time of the online major.
@@zackswitch9656 I think that was the point of the very last clip, that "sick fucking standing 720." No matter what controller is used, great players are gonna optimize the heck out of it, e.g.: a standing 720. :)
I have a Slab Mini on its way to my house but moreso as a curiosity. I learned to play SFIV and beyond on a Hori RAP 3 and still really enjoy moving the stick around while slapping buttons. I'm not gonna even attempt to win EVO, so I'll just have fun churning butter in my computer room. :D
@@ButsMcgee Tourney winners are not irrelevent. The smallest skill gaps can be found at the highest level of play. There are tournament winners who use leverless, pad, and stick. Since we don't see leverless dominance among tournament winners we can conclude it doesn't provide a substantial advantage.
Whether you can beat your neighbor is irrelevent. Low-level play is where the greatest skill gaps exist and crying that your opponents controller is why you lost is, and always has been, pure cope. If your friend can input commands three times faster than you, that's a skill issue. Until your inputs are optimal and your opponents inputs are optimal, it's a skill issue. It only matters when comparing optimally efficient inputs. When you compare those, you are looking at a difference of a few frames. That's 1/20 of a second, at most. There are no instant hadoukens.
If the controller can't be demonstrated to provide a significant advantage at the highest level of skill (where the skill gap is the smallest) then there is no argument that isn't just salt in disguise. Salt from people who, almost universally, have never learned to play on a leverless controller.
Great vid. My only issue with it is that there's an automatic assumption that specific controllers are mainly used/chosen just for efficiency and injury related reasons, when a lot of people I know play on the peripheral they grew up with or the one they just enjoy using. Obviously this is still a discussion that should be had and there are people who do change for optimization but the way you don't address personal preference kinda irks me
Like one of my best friend is a long time PC gamer who never clicked with the genre until trying leverless,
Agreed. The efficiency isn't what makes or breaks the hitbox for me, I just don't enjoy playing fighting games on a stick or a gamepad.
The general focus of the video was that he found them unfair. I don't think he needed to celebrate all the positives and reasons of a hitbox. Someone else can make that video.
@@ButsMcgee valid. If I wanted someone to sing the praises of Anklegator, Initial T and Luffy I would watch Core-A-Gaming.
I'm just saying that he seemingly undervalued the role personal preference plays in picking a controller
@@Mr.9 thats fair brother.
i think the accessibility argument is really strong, but i like how you argue it in terms of sports requiring standards. i feel like hitboxes are less of a corked bat and more like an improvement in safety gear. joysticks are beautiful, but they can blast hands. my brother played american football in high school and college, and he suffers from injuries sustained because of the misuse of helmets as safety gear; players would hit their helmets together in tackles, which is naturally problematic for neck health. similarly (but of course not nearly as equal to my anecdote), joysticks can destroy wrists. i think keeping leverless controllers, not as a efficiency thing but as a safety thing, is really important to make sure we keep quality players playing the game. ultimately, execution still takes a lot of effort; the trade off to keep people from nuking their hands is worth it to me.
while i agree with alot of the points you are making i think you are looking at it from a wrong angle when it comes to sports, the difference between Fighting games and for example running is that you don't use any external hardware when running the 100 meter sprint.
Instead it would make more sense to look at things like Nascar, Biking, or Archery, where technology is always advancing and the highest level of competition require the highest level of hardware, but none of them are going to carry you to an easy finish.
the people competing at a top level are still immensely talented, and their better gear doesn't in any way make them worse than the people that competed in the same sports 20 years ago.
Even in sports that don't use external hardware, we are always coming up with more advanced training methods, specialized diets and more to make sure they stay at the highest competitive level, but none of that is taking away from their skill.
If we are gonna drag a line between traditional sports and E-sports as a whole we have to understand that technology is going to come along and make certain things easier so humans can compete at a higher level at all times, and i for one think that's cool.
unless proven by tournament results, the advantages of leverless are grossly overstated. simple as that. maybe you can do a followup on that?
in the long run, I do believe leverless will erode the "marketshare" of arcade stick users because of ergonomics (something like a Snackbox is so much easier to store/carry/travel with), but I don't think it will impact the number of pad players because pads are also easy to handle.
also as a critique, I feel the sports gear argument is disingenuous since it focuses solely on equipment optimizations that has been banned by sports regulations, while many other optimizations have been allowed. sporting gear and rulesets are ever changing.
@@pokeshark this, i dont recall any hard data shown on the tournament results. And even then it would a correlation
Great video. I'm pretty old for a fighting game player at 48. I believe stick movements absolutely will cause carpal tunnel. Granted I was an electrician for 20 years, but also a Nina main on stick from Tekken 1-5. Back then the way to get optimal damage with her was butterfly combos which were rough on my wrists using stick. I ended up getting carpal tunnel and quitting in Tekken 6. Never played Tag 2. When Tekken 7 came out I picked up a pad and never looked back. Sure I can't KBD like I used to, but I still have fun. I plan on trying to make the switch to hitbox for Tekken 8. SOCD neutral cleaning is just too good. I'll be able to KBD again and execute tighter inputs.
IMO it's the devs and TOs jobs to make sure their tournaments are fair. Until then if it's legal I'm going to use it if it improves my game.
According to this UA-camr " if you got injured by playing arcade stick, fuck you, that's the way it is"... How dumb is that?
Controllers are okay because it is consoles default option
Keyboards are not okay cause it gives advantages even though its computers default option
Yeah, those arguments are pretty shitty.
"If developers account for leverless controllers to make them less efficient, then what was the f***ing point of even having them in the first place??"
Strong disagree here. The point of leverless controllers' existence (i.e. why I believe they must remain), is that it allows disabled players to compete with a method that produces the same output in-game without requiring actions that their out-of-game disability constrains or implicitly disadvantages for them. Even very common disabilities like arthritis have SIGNIFICANT differences in discomfort and pain when exerting pressure on a button without flexing the finger, versus moving the finger/wrist along a surface to find different buttons.
"We don't allow people with a leg injury to ride their bike in a marathon"
We don't force people born without legs to run a marathon unassisted either. They're permitted to use prosthetics. And to be honest... I don't want to have to PROVE my disability if I go to a fighting game tournament, or to be treated as an ''exception", because I KNOW how much discrimination that produces and I want to engage with the game I love without being subject to that BS. Moreover, developers can account for leverless controllers in ways that don't 'shift the line' as you demonstrated - there are ways which can selectively reduce leverless efficiency MORE than other control methods, NARROWING the gap. If you give a player a Modern-like control scheme that gives them 1-button DP's, but also applies a 6-ish frame delay on executing that DP in contexts where it couldn't be buffered, then you have reduced the execution barrier AND maintained gameplay parity between control schemes AND allowed for potentially better results in-game by high execution players than are provided by the 'easy' method. That's just an off-the-dome example but my point is, you can modify the game and input rules in nuanced ways that can compensate for any 'implicit' differences between control methods. And regardless, I want to reiterate that forcing a player to 'prove they're disabled enough to use an alternate control method to compete' is a really... awful system that normalizes othering and viewing disability as exclusively impairment and some people as 'more disabled' than others. I think that the topic needs to be approached with empathy - rejecting people from engaging with their passion, even though a way for them to do so is right there, feels cruel even WITH the comparison to real life sports injuries, because injuries and disabilities are ALSO arbitrary. So it would... amount to, in a sense, an exclusion of some players for fundamentally arbitrary and uncontrolled reasons, and that doesn't sit right with me, not to mention people born with disabilities to begin with.
I use leverless to avoid hand issues related to my disability (congenital). I also, technically, benefit from it in the ways you've outlined - but I would argue, I benefit less FROM leverless than I would be disadvantaged by having to use pad or stick. Even in acknowledgement of the 'unfairness', it is still the lesser of two evils, and moreover may not bring me up to par input-wise with an abled player using one of the 'harder' control methods anyway. Is there the possibility that a fully abled player could 'exploit' those advantages? Sure, I guess, but even then, not all disabilities are visible, and I don't want to create a culture where a player's input method justifies forcing them to divulge personal (and often very charged, private and painful) experiences to 'justify' their group membership in a way that is selectively applied just to disabled players. I'd rather have a baseline of acceptance that can potentially be exploited by some unfair inclusion, than risk excluding anyone with an approach that is baseline exclusionary with exceptions made for people's disabilities. Innocent until proven guilty rather than the other way around, so to speak.
100% agree with you, it's not wrong to try to make something more accessible and it will definitely not kill the fun of a game.
This is a well constructed video, I really like the explanations and everything, but I disagree with a lot that was said on it.
Agreed.
No human being decides you are too injured to continue competing in sports, that's all down to how your injury affects your health and body. Denying people, who thanks to these controllers, can compete on par with everyone else would be the same like banning running blades, which there is some debate around.
It's just unfair gatekeeping.
The game's integrity and ruleset shouldn't sacrificed for the people who are disabled or are incapable. Should soccer let the wheelchair dude carry the ball? Games are designed around the norm. Any advantage given to a disabled player should be careful to not be in such a way that it would enhance a normal player to a higher degree.
If there is a game designed around the disabled, that's fine, but there is a clear and obvious reason why it would need to be separated from normal. Just like how woman and men are separated.
I say this as a person born with arthritis and another affliction associated with people 3 times my age.
@@Xenozillex except leverless controllers aren't equivalent to allowing a player in a wheelchair to carry the soccer ball, they're closer to allowing a player with an amputated foot play with a prosthetic. The prosthetic could potentially give them some advantage if it allowed them to kick the ball more effectively due to being made of more rigid material than a human foot, but even if that did become an issue the solution wouldn't be to ban prosthetic limbs in soccer, it would be something like requiring softer materials for prosthetic feet worn during a match. Granted, this example fails in that prosthetics can't generally be worn by people *without* an amputated limb, but even if they could it wouldn't really change what I'd consider an ideal solution. Similarly, if leverless controllers do give certain players an unfair advantage currently then the ideal solution would be to mitigate their advantage only as much as necessary to create a fair competition. If the current regulations in any given tournament are inadequate then they can be updated. If companies can balance patch the overpowered characters in their games to keep them fair then I think they and the tournament organizers can patch their rules to keep leverless controllers fair as well.
Not just disabled players but also it's just an alternate control scheme. Not everyone has good lever dexterity, or just that some people might really prefer arcade-style buttons. Especially for long play sessions - sometimes if you're playing a long time on pad it can strain your wrists or chafe your hands, I've had a couple instances of blisters from grinding out 3D action games. Choosing leverless strictly for ergonomic purposes or even if it works better for you is fine.
The only thing I would have added here is a bit about how some people may just prefer how Hitbox feels. How much we value that is debatable of course. Great video!
Yea that's me. I love smacking keys and piano ing on leverless.
Really good vid. It’s very comprehensive and balanced. I have to admit that as someone who values the consistency of leverless and has RSI in both hands I am a bit biased but I think you would be surprised just how many people have hand strain issues in the FGC. I suspect it’s more than you think. Not to mention that there are some disabilities that make using a pad nearly impossible, but a highly customised leverless controller would enable them to compete.
In general, though this was very compelling and enjoyable.
I think there's certainly a possibility that I am uninformed when it comes to the amount of players partaking in the hobby with hand issues. Sadly a hard topic to gather data on.
I also wonder if discrete access to all directional inputs is an essential quality for more ergonomic controllers? Perhaps there is a solution that is less "meta-warping" for lack of better wording.
That being said, I do recognize the fact that leverless being more efficient and having a widespread adoption has made these more ergonomic peripherals vastly more available and affordable. I can definitely see a world where ergonomic options were bundled with no apparent "upside" and thus relegated to a niche market of scarcity and high costs. It's a tricky topic.
Thanks for watching.
Boss, that was a 44 minute ramble. The issue you have seems to be a complex you've developed rather than anything personally actually against buttonboxes.
Yeah lol especially that stretch in the end about "how am I supposed to know if my opponent did that or is just pressing buttons?"
You made some really interesting arguments but I feel you didn’t do justice to the accessibility angle.
First of all, PC gaming is getting bigger and bigger, and the pack-in controller for your PC is your keyboard. The keyboard is a leverless controller, so we already have more and more people coming into the scene for the first time on a leverless controller through online who will never come out to in-person tournaments if they’re forced to learn a wildly different control scheme.
As far as ergonomics are concerned, there’s reasons to care about ergonomics beyond “is it guaranteed to injure me” flat leverless controllers are more comfortable and reduce strain for all people, although to be honest, accessibility for people with motor disabilities should really be enough.
Finally I think the reasons you gave that someone might say they like their snackbox micro aren’t really accurate to the answers you’d hear if you asked actual players. That thing is popular primarily because it’s so portable. It literally fits in a purse, which is something no stick could reasonably do. Even setting that aside I think things like “I like tapping buttons” and “it’s really comfortable to use” would be up there with “it’s easy to use” in terms of the most common answers.
I got one of the earliest hitboxes because it was an upgrade from the keyboard I learned fighting games on; amusingly the fact the buttons were bigger and clickier made a distinct kinaesthetic difference to the experience of playing - it felt more like drumming with your fingers. I would never have attended a tournament if I had to use an arcade stick but could on a hitbox; does that have some value? Yeah, some. Was it also obvious that arcade sticks were a *less good* way of controlling most characters? Yeah. A subset of the hardest stuff in many FGs is about timing in any case rather than input efficiency (although they are related) - eg timing 1f links in sf4 is hard with any input method - though the design of recent FGs has moved very much away from that. My broad feeling is sort out the edge cases with SOCD and game specific issues and until there's a really major issue it's mostly minor enough of an advantage that it's not going to affect things too much. If you take a player like punk on his controller putting up the results he does - it's relatively clear raw input efficiency gains aren't enough to destroy things. Games like SFV and VI have, in any case, tried to make inputs easy enough to hit that input efficiency is less of a marginal advantage.
RE: ultra low-latency setups. Ultimately input latency is inherently a feature of whatever version of the technology not of the underlying logical structure of the game itself (slightly muddied by input latency being a result of implementation choices in code that are a result of hardware but you can see the rough direction of this argument). The intuitive idea that one should be able to react AT THE SPLIT SECOND you realise what is happening is both understandable and desirable; the main difficulty noted in the video is that it is exclusionary to have it as the de facto standard due to cost, but it seems reasonably obvious that in the limiting case - play x game with zero input latency or some, the zero input latency version is more satisfactory to interact with. So really it's just a question of "is it an appropriate standard to have *right now*" rather than "input latency doesn't really matter". Games are about matching intent to action as closely as the limitations of not being literally melded into the game allows - this is a fairly straightforward extension of that logic.
I want to say the presentation was great but so much of your final arguments were colored with so much bias.
In your running argument, a leverless would be better new sneakers, not a bike. In every sport there is multiple updates of peripherals. Baseball uses bats of new materials they don’t only use wooden ones.
I think the beauty of fighting games is in out thinking your opponent, being caught up on how they did it, is just an excuse and a shameful way to gatekeep.
Great video as always but you end it saying we should have had this conversation 10 years ago, which I hear a lot. The thing is WE DID ! I've been on hitbox for over a decade and I remember when I picked it up. Some tournaments actually banned it at the time. Obviously it is an advantage but it's been agreed upon that the advantage isn't substantial enough to warrant a ban. I understand the whole not sharing the same experience thing but acting like everything hard is "just pressing some buttons" is very reductive, playing on hitbox is easier but that doesn't mean it's always easy. I love the look and feel of stick too, the arcade culture they remind people of, I hope stick doesn't go away too but that doesn't mean we can't move on to having something new be the main way to play at high level
The mental gymnastics I had to go through to get used to the up button when I first tried out a leverless controller. I thought it'll be nothing because I'm used to pressing the space bar to jump, but it's something else when playing something as intense as a fighting game.
hey, one of those hand injury sufferers here. I use a leverless myself as it's what lets me play fighting games. I find the bicycle analogy that you used as part of the accessibility section to be, frankly, not well reasoned. The marginal capability difference of a bicycle and running is far, far, far, far, far greater than which controller you use. And anyway, a video game, unlike a sprint, is not a contest of physical execution. Physical execution is part of it, but the hard part of fighting games is not pressing the buttons anyway. I am hesitant to even entertain the suggestion that users of sticks/pads are negatively impacted as to me it seems kind of ridiculous. If someone else thinks a leverless really will make some difference in how they win, by all means let them use one.
This concern becomes more practical to me as the conversation impacts things like CPT and ArcRevo IF locals try to enforce the rules identically to the big competitions the way it often works in other games (e.g. CS tournaments and round timers).
glad you said something, i found the comparison borderline offensive.
The point is that leverless is arguably an unfair advantage, so I think the analogy is fine, but maybe the corked bat is a better example. You could argue that there's more to baseball than just hitting, but that still doesn't change the fact that it gives players a distinct advantage.
@@hijster479 the purpose of a corked bat is purely for performance enhancement so it is also a bad analogy. Far more accurate would be a prosthetic limb. If we're going to engage with accessibility concerns as an argument we need good, accurate analogies to help folks understand. The empirical reality of whether or not these devices even offer an advantage, rather than it just being supposed or even likely, is not even a given. But, that some devices may allow players to play the game that may not have is actually inarguable.
@@TCMx3Prosthetics aren't equivalent in any way. They're not even a peripheral, I can't really trial a prosthetic arm or pick and choose when or when not to use it. In some places elective amputation is outright criminal, so the potential for cheating is negligible.
Peripherals are different, we can have as many as we want and switch them out as we please, so the potential for abuse is way higher. How can we separate players like you with legitimate health concerns, from players like me who have occasional aches and pains after lengthy sessions? And that's to say nothing for players that only care about the execution advantages.
And these advantages aren't just theoretical, they've been demonstrated several times at this point, the only thing up for debate is whether or not they're ban worthy. Personally I think leverless is fine for most games, but new games or even just new characters could change that. And in this event what recourse will stick and pad players have?
I love your videos, specifically your editing style which most commenters seem to be dazzled by but I can't really say the content you put forward (either the correctness of it or the bias in portrayal) always hits for me (even though the videos are very entertaining to watch).
For example, I struggled to understand what this video was really getting at. Was it just generic commentary on hitbox controllers? You mentioned in passing that their legality relied on pads being able to do socd style inputs which isn't accurate since that only applies to the legality of things like the crossup which has 2 sets of directional inputs available (which is probably what you're referring to and not the standard single set of udlr inputs available in stuff like hitbox, snackbox, mpress, etc).
Also a lot of the narrative of the video seems to anchor itself on the speed of access to directional inputs in leverless vs pad or stick, where in reality pads and sticks have inherent advantages for people picking them up and intuitively being able to input commands that are not intuitive to a leverless controller (something you don't cover at all). One can make an argument that the fight stick is actually the worst peripheral since in technicality it offers the fewest advantages over pad and leverless while having a lot of its own drawbacks (also something you didn't cover and it seemed appropriate for this topic).
Also the sidenote of comparing fighting game players with physical sports and the "if you're injured that's it I guess" is such a disingenuous comparison that I'm kind of disappointed that you (who I'm sure is very aware of why it's disingenuous) would make it in the first place. Should we expand that conversation to the fairness of real sports? A lot of real sports are inherently unfair almost by design, there are no "balance patches". I mean hell basketball hasn't had a major "balance patch" in frickkin decades. Ice Hockey players are hugely determined (or preselected) by the combination of their month of birth and the most common school schedule (sept to may) because the kids born closer to January will be the most physically developed in school and thus most likely to be recruited or trained by coaches in order to eventually make it to a major league.
TLDR: competition in video games is wayyyy more fair and not even remotely comparable to real sports which are inherently unbalanced by design and said imbalance is further worsened by the selection pressure (coaches, media, professional teams, etc).
Anyway, that was a lot to type out but I felt it was necessary. Thanks for the video.
I really appreciate the production and the editing in these videos, but i feel. similarly about the content
I have the same feeling about this video. Amazing editing, I usually agree with Rubbish ma here I have some criticism
Yeah I've never seen anything so slickly polished that I vehemently disagreed with lmao
One thing you skipped over in the injury discussion is that some people have disabilities that make using certain controllers impossible. If leverless controllers let them compete, that's a good thing.
I agree that Devs need to account for SOCD.
I don’t ever plan on competing, but with my medical issues with my hands it’s physically painful to play most fighting games. But SF6 with modern controls is by far the most comfortable fighting game to play. Regardless of the physical controller I’m using, other games literally make my hands feel like they’re burning after trying to play for a few minutes but not SF6 with modern controls. For someone like me, just playing casually online, it’s a huge blessing to be able to enjoy gaming without physical pain.
Did you not hear him? If you have any sort of physical restrictions you just shouldn't be allowed to play :D
Besides the main point, I just really appreciate the production throughout the video, from the 3d renders of the Astro City Cab, MAS, Snackbox Micro up to the PCBs like the SOCD cleaner and the Pico Board as well as the green screened gameplay!
Just discovered your channel and it's an instant sub for me, looking forward to your next videos!
the production quality is honestly mindboggling for something that you publish so regularly
Very generous definition of the word regularly.
I gave you a like because the production value and quality are unparalleled but I pretty much disagreed with all of your conclusions, even as someone that's played fighting games since the 90s. All of the comparisons you made to leverless controllers such as darts with lasers etc. were way more egregious than the thing itself, and the idea that "it is what it is" when it comes to injury and people with carpal tunnel should just get fucked is kind of a disgusting attitude tbh. It's one thing when there *aren't* any solutions to allow them compete anymore such as with bad knees and torn ACLs, but we *have* a solution for the competitive gaming scene, you just don't like it out of some outdated sense of "purity". Moreover sports have always evolved over time, both to push the standard of competition and to make them more exciting to watch. The FGC is relatively young compared to Basketball, and just look at how much the rules of Basketball have changed over time in regards to dribbling, 3-pointers, etc. - you sound like the kind of people who were opposed to those changes at the time simply because it's not how the sport started, and that's pretty short sighted.
I'll be honest, I use a hitbox and it was my entry into the fgc. I guess I'm a part of the new generation of fighting game players and I never experienced the arcade Era. I appreciate the stick users and it is incredible what some people can do, but in the end I think hitboxes are a tribute to how competition is. Someone will always look for a stratedy, a breathing technique, a new controller that transforms the scene it is placed in and because the new standard. Also, the standing 720 killed me lol, thank you for this essay.
input lag reduction is something everyone should be happy to have, it's not about pushing the envelope so much as achieving parity with the old arcade machines and their CRTs. there's a reason why melee is played on CRTs to this day.
additionally, i like my snack box micro because it's small and easy to travel with, in addition to being the most efficient way to interact with the games. there's nothing more freeing than throwing a slim little controller into my backpack and having room for literally anything else i might need, over lugging around a clunky fightstick, or even a traditional hitbox which by now imo are super outdated being made so thick and heavy. i'm so glad i never have to do that again.
it's also not a hypothetical that people use the joystick + dpad SOCD combo on pad. people really do these things, nuckledu being a prime example. no one is taking away your joystick! keep playing on it and focus more on the gameplay decisions your opponent is making over how they're doing them, i think you'll have more fun that way. I'm sad you're a hater but the video was good, keep it up.
The biggest mark vs. Stick is just how much of a burden they are to lug around. Snackbox has great formfactor and multi system compatibility. Travel is so much better, I could not go back.
And yeah I personally know pad players they use socd it's not a myth.
There is a third option for why to use a leverless controller: "I like that there is a controller available that uses an input scheme I am familiar with.". Having grown up without a console, pads and sticks are virtually unusable for me, and without a Hitbox I would not be able to play fighting games at all (most keyboards are not designed for the type of multi-button inputs these games have for various reasons).
Nah you are just lazy and searching for excuses, I also grew up without consoles and I taught myself how to play both on pad and stick. 2-3 years ago I had no idea how to hold the joystick of an arcade stick but now it's my weapon of choice. Replacing a pre-established standard for something that can eliminate learning time and execution skill that has been trained for years is just sad and cheap.
@@drunkboi5887 or maybe he just like to use what is the most enjoyable tools to play with, no need to gatekeep the guy
@@drunkboi5887 why are you gatekeeping accessibility? let people play how they want never seen such a backwards ass take jesus man how ignorant can you be.
@@drunkboi5887nobody gives a fuck
@@drunkboi5887it’s actually efficient and smart
This entire video feels like bad faith arguments stacked on top of each other to induce a perfect rage bait sandwich, with slick production value on top to hide the truth under a vague sense of authority/competency.
The slick production is pretty slick though lol.
I'm pretty sure in competitive sports they are also always aiming for the highest efficiency, pushing the boundaries of rules. See sport gears, shoes and even baseball bats (your example) have changed over time.
This is a much more apt comparison. Comparing the frame advantages of hitbox is much more relative to adidas making grippier gloves for football catchers and lightweight shinguards. Not laser darts and spring loaded shoes.
@@zackswitch9656not at all. Many shoes get banned in track events for the unfair advantage the give. The hydro suit in swimming was banned as records kept getting smashed. All that plus drug testing, rule changes to unfair techniques, etc are done to preserve the spirit of the game and not have it devolve into a race for the most augmented competitor.
No sports also have regulations to what equipment can be brought into the game. Baseball players can definitely get stronger homeruns with a steel bat but they use wood for a reason. These things change over time but they're made a standard for an even playing field. It shouldn't just be the wild west like it is with the fgc.
When you scrape the bowl eagerly trying to challenge something you dislike.
@@Krystalmyth but they are not using stuff they old players used to wear, right? Since we are comparing FGC to a physical sport we need to agree that there is progress related to efficiency in almost every sport.
I think the point is that this is a fair discussion, but just brushing it off and saying "the old way is the right way" is not the right approach
Amazing video! Production quality especially high!
I do have an issue with your examples of cheating in other sports though. I see what you're trying to say about more efficiency not always being better, but you ignored a key difference between those examples and something like lever-less controllers.
Lever-less controllers undeniably provide a significant advantage, but unlike your examples given (spring-loaded shoes, Lazer-guided dart, etc) the player is still doing all the work themselves, even if it's more efficient to do so. The actual gaming equivalent to such cheating methods would be turbo or macros, since they outright do things for you when triggered. (Also modern mode controls falls into this imo, as it completely bypasses entire inputs instantly)
Using lever-less is more comparable to wearing expensive basketball shoes. Better grip, properly cushioned soles, and correct ankle support can help you accelerate faster, turn sharper, and jump higher than you could with cheaper shoes, making many techniques faster or stronger, and potentially making new ones possible that weren't otherwise without slipping or your ankles buckling.
Even factoring in the large advantages of SOCD, I see no legitimate reason to ban lever-less controllers. Almost every sport has certain allowed choices that are just better than others, like equipment, formations in team sports, or simply using different techniques. No-one's gonna complain because you didn't use a scissor-kick to win high-jump.
Heck, being left-handed makes table-tennis players 3X more likely to go pro, so should we ban playing left-handed in table tennis?
To make matters worse, the benefit of the left handed "input method" ISN'T from making your own inputs easier. It's actively making the game HARDER for your opponents, because your weak/strong spots are reversed to the norm.
Imagine if you could go to a SF6 tournament, and force everyone who plays against you to play SF5 instead. That's what playing table-tennis left-handed is like.
So yeah. I think in terms of sportsmanship a better controller is the least of our worries.
Sincerely,
a nerd who's only ever played pad
although last input wins was a consideration for some time, it was mostly considered unfair for the reason highlighted so the main form of SOCD cleaning pioneered by hitbox was for up to beat down and left and right turning into neutral, so a combination of the two to some extent.
Also as others have highlighted, blocking in tekken is either neutral or down for low block. backdashes are simply safe!
If you feel that bodily limitation and injury is just a natural part of sports, why doesn't that extend to the type of controller people use? Even if both players are using the same controller, or even control scheme or character, there are still countless other factors that will make the same things a different amount of difficulty for each player, just because of the variation from being to being. Fighting games naturally have options that create uneven amounts of difficulty between players as a part of the game, people still pick low-tiers sometimes, even pro players. We empathize with the part at the end about loving the joystick controller and anticipating missing it when it's gone, but we don't think it will ever fully go away, if nothing else specifically from people like you who have a fondness for it.
I think Rubbish’s argument is that other competitive sports have standardized equipment, so ideally fighting games should’ve followed that same vein. Allowing for peripherals that abuse exploits in the game’s input system just shifts the goalpost for execution, which ultimately hurts the competitive integrity of the game by dumbing down execution at the software level, or implementing inclusive game design (like modern controls).
He acknowledges that by allowing button macros and leverless controllers, we opened Pandora’s box, and it’s futile to try to “go back” to the arcade days.
Personally, I’m sure somebody could design an ergonomic controller that doesn’t have individual discrete movement buttons, thus allowing players with disabilities to play without having the ability to skip neutral (teleport inputs, as Rubbish calls it). However, there’s no point in creating that peripheral now since we made Hitbox legal 10 years ago.
@@ivanperez295 Can I hire you to answer comments for me or smth?
@@HQRubbish Already got a 9 to 5, but I appreciate the shoutout.
@@HQRubbish I'll repost my comment as standalone in case you wanna pin it or something though
@@ivanperez295 Look at formula 1. The standard changes between seasons. It's never: "Hey, we have to use the same stuff from back in the 60s... BECAUSE!". Sticks are objectively worse for performance and health, so why should we ban the alternatives?
I take umbrage with your assessment that "sticks aren't long for this world"
Personally, I love my arcade stick, leverless controllers feel like typing to me. I've never touched a fighting game arcade cabinet until AFTER I bought a stick for SF4 and I've never looked back. Nostalgia has nothing to do with why I love stick, and this is and will always be the case for at least a percentage of the FGC. I can guarantee that sticks are just as much here to stay as hitboxes.
And to circle back around to leverless, I think you left out THE MOST COMMON REASON people play on leverless, or any controller for that matter, comfort and preference.
A lot of comments have already mentioned that they came to FGs from playing PC games, so they hitbox/mixbox layout feels comfortable/right to them. Some people get wrist pain from playing on a stick, and they don't on a box. And, as other people have mentioned, per l there are people with disabilities who are physically unable to play on stick or pad. So I feel like saying, "no, fuck your disability, fuck your wrist pain, fuck your preference, you should only be able to play on a controller *I* like!" Is like banning red shoes from a basketball game.
There are some tricks on leverless devices that make certain inputs faster and easier yes, but ultimately, I don't know about you, but a super coming out 2-3 frames earlier isn't going to make much of a difference, I'm still getting hit by that shit.
Do I think SOCDeez could be better handled? Absolutely. Do I think that's anyone's problem but the developer? Absolutely not. "Two button" tricks are also more often than not, odd and unintuitive. At least as odd and unintuitive as learning how to do a DP, so it still takes skill to not only learn and get used to the tricks, but also to know when to apply them in a match.
As for modern controls. If top players are demonstrably getting an advantage from them, Capcom will nerf them. If they're not intended to be an advantage, the developers will keep them from being an advantage.
Damn, that ended up being way longer than I expected. tl;dr: you're wrong and I'm right neener neener
its shocking to me how much you push the production of your essays every time. looking forward to more as always!
You know when a new Rubbish video drops it's going to be top-tier quality... and I'm going to disagree with it probably.
based
thank you, you put it into words
@@WhiteNorthStar1 ? Why did you reply to this comment ?
Amazing presentation as always but I really think you missed the mark on the actual content. Other people in the comments have made criticisms that I largely agree with such as the comparisons you make to traditional sports being very misrepresentative but one thing in particular that really stood out for me was you saying that execution typically doesn't get easier and it just raises the bar with things like leverless but then later on in the video you talk about how we lose the spectacle from things being made easier and I'm worried I'm missing something here but aren't they diametrically opposed? Like how can you simultaneously say "leverless doesn't make execution easier" and "it's bad that leverless makes execution easier". if the bar for execution gets raised then what is difficult enough to gain spectacle also goes up going by what your saying
These things aren't diametrically opposed at all, they are part of the same process. The things you make easier become more commonplace and therefore- over time way less cool. They are then replaced by new things. Said things will in time also be made easy and commonplace by the next inevitable wave of efficiency boosting and the cycle continues.
@@HQRubbish you didnt address the counter point. The comparison you made at the end is asinine. Accessibility =\= auto win.
@@HQRubbish and also, Broly legs was disabled, was he wasnt supposed to play?
Wait till this guy finds out about keyboards...
So comfort, ergonomics, and accessibility aren't good enough reasons for you to accept leverless controllers, but tradition and "I like how it sounds" are your only reasons for preferring arcade sticks? Weak ass argument, dude.
As a TO, I inherently do not think you are characterizing the push for low-lag input monitors & setups appropriately.
Low-input lag monitors increase responsiveness for all player regardless of controllers. It is a net benefit to playability.
Also, it is expected that tournament venues have standardized setups owned either by TOs or venues; it is not exclusionary for a TO organization to provide, say, thousands of PS5s + Inzone monitors for massive events like EVO or Combo Breaker. Sure, these setups are pricey that's out of reach for a lot of people, but they
A) ensure baseline of competitive integrity across all tournament setups
B) Nobody I've ever met has told me that having more responsive control over a fighting game is a bad thing. Players in my city prioritize IRL Strive & SF6 tournaments solely for response offline play.
The main issue is simple - it's against tradition. Progress is inherently disrespectful to the tradition that the FGC has grown with. Cheatboxes are the epitome of this, being a representation of everything the FGC traditionally stood against - ergonomics, optimization, etc.
It's simply not fun.
I think you are confusing the idea of aiming for a reasonable middle-ground standard with not having a standard at all.
Of course competitive standards are great, I'm all for standards. I however don't think we ought to aim for standards that are extremely cutting edge- specifically because they end up being less egalitarian.
Maybe everyone agrees that playing on a FGC OS optimized PC and 400hz screen feels slightly better than a console setup. But most players will not have access to that even remotely as readily as they do the alternatives. And I'd argue the gain in game-feel is immensely outweighed in the fairness of the standard.
@@HQRubbish Please understand, I view this as a systemic issue, one placing the FGC against developer oversight/ignorance/indifference.
In my personal opinion (no data to back this up), the push for cutting edge low latency setups, combine with the outcry from specific communities (namely SFV) have yielded positive results, like Street Fighter 6's amazing 120hz/low latency toggles native to the PS5. You even have companies like Epic publicly claiming that they've "heard your feedback about Strive's input delay, we're looking into it" (to my knowledge they never looked into it)
I know it can be cringe to hear some streamer go "Your GPU doesn't have 69 Gigashits per terrafart? you only game at 2000Hz? LOL", but to my knowledge nobody is saying this?
Moreso I think this push has netted benefits for everyone, including the baseline of regular people who can't afford fancy toys as the world is plunged into a cost-of-living crisis.
I do not think this push is ruining the spectacle of fighting games, as you suggest
@@SuuBrainrot As a person who picked up a Hitbox due to hand pain+ergonomics, I always apologize to everyone I beat in bracket for being a godless cheater, and for disrespecting the sanctity of a video game where a punchy man shoots fireballs out of his hands. I am truly ruining the competitive integrity of this tradition.
@@HQRubbishIf we can't offer one standard that's accessable to everyone, then we offer multiple tiers of standards. What are the best, cheapest, most accessible options for a community that provide a certain level of performance? The current landscape isn't completely standardized, and we'll never know when optimization of setups is complete. If a tournament can say "every setup has N frames of input delay and M frames of display latency", that's great. Perfection isn't expected.
As a person who plays leverless because of my fucked up hands I was waiting to see what you would say about it but didn’t expect “fuck you, you shouldn’t get to play actually.”
more like "f you, you shouldn't play in tournament" nothing you can do online about it
yeah, that was a jarring part of the video. unexpected and shitty take
sorry bro, you have to play on stick and do a standing 720 to prove you're worthy enough to play or quit fighting games forever because you're making them less cool
@@gvulture1277 "f you, you shouldn't play in tournament" is also a dumbass statement tho, even if that was his point, is still wrong
I was on board with the rest of the video until I got to that part lol, what a shitty and self-centered take
Controllers are instruments with which to enjoy videogames, this is resembling a lot the discourse between Classical and Electric instruments in music, it will take 100 years to understand that both have their place.
As someone who gave away my fightstick to a friend and got a snackbox micro, I agree. I didn't get the snackbox to "be better," it certainly has made me better, but thats more the ease of use. Even using a gamepad is extremely foreign to me, as someone who has always used keyboards for everything (on pc). I got to a pretty high rank in GGST with a keyboard (didnt hit celestial though before mostly moving to BBCF), and when I got my own stick, it was nice but it felt even more foreign to me than a gamepad. I stuck with my keyboard still and let the stick collect dust before finally deciding to bite the bullet and get a snackbox micro, when I sent the stick to a friend who was just getting into the FGC.
Since then, I've used this thing for everything that could be reasonably done with the box, fighting game or not. I don't know if it gives me an advantage, and I don't care. Unless I keep grinding and get to top 16 at evo, it won't make any difference. A shitter is still a shitter, stick or box. If some new stick comes out that is more effective than box, I wouldn't get it. If boxes are forced to get some software that makes them practically unusable to most people, I would still use them. If boxes are banned entirely, I will bring my keyboard. If leverless is banned entirely, I'll find other games.
Leverless is how I know the games I play, it's the only way that makes sense for my hands. And while I agree that it sucks that the way I play is "objectively better" than other controllers, it still doesn't change anything for me. Also if you actually do read this comment this far in, opinions on the anklegator box?
I feel like this essay video is fantastic, but I also think it misses out on a big point of view: using what's most comfortable to the player. I'm not talking ergonomics, I'm talking about comfort.
I hate using analog controls for stuff. I'm a 1 or a 0 kind of guy. I'm running, or I'm holding a button and running so I can walk (shooters, etc). As someone that grew up only playing on PCs for any competitive game, using a pad or an arcade stick are foreign concepts to me, and going back to analog feels like a downgrade, and isn't fun.
Once I got my snackbox micro, I felt like I could enjoy learning fighting games. I don't even use any shortcuts mentioned in the video, I just use it like I would use a keyboard, but more comfortably. It's my preferred way to interact with the game.
To quote one of the greats: "the future is now, old man" (he said sarcastically, being almost 30 himself). Times change, and we should change with them.
Never found someone that was able to put how I felt about it until now. It was a great video, but you both worded it perfectly. I literally have always felt so uncomfortable on a controller, and I didn't realize it until I recently switched from DS4 to Keyboard in Brawlhalla. Completely just night and day execution difference, it feels like how I wish my inputs always felt. I love it to death
I wouldn’t be playing fighting games at all if there wasn’t a lever-less option. And that’s coming from a Smash player that has relied on analog directional inputs for two decades.
That part at the end where he was lamenting like “or if they are just pushing two buttons” yeah, it’s way more natural, comfortable and easy to just push buttons.
It was a good video, but damn if he didn’t sour me at the end.
Dont feel sorry for being "objectively better".
Should mouse and keyboard be banned from fps competitions because pads suck? Of course not
I think what you miss here is that low success rate is not the same as "difficult". Every game must decide what skills it is going to require and what skills it isn't going to require. Accessibility is about eliminating requirements that the player isn't supposed to need. That might sound a little abstract so let me give some examples:
- Running a marathon is about physical fitness and ability, which is why we don't allow bikes
- First person shooters tend to be about aim, which is why we don't allow aim bot
However, if somebody had a vision impairment that made it hard for them to see the track, most people would agree it's fine to add lights or tape to the marathon so they could run it. That's because the marathon isn't supposed to test your vision, that's not what it's about.
The reason we've made quarter circle inputs easier over the years isn't because we think we can make everything easy and have nothing require a high level of skill. We made motion inputs easier because you're not supposed to be unable to throw a fireball. It's about whether or not you can space it properly, your risk reward tolerance, when to use it, and if you can do it fast enough.
For controller latency specifically, the question isn't about whether it would give an advantage. The real question is: If you're only losing because your controller is laggy, are you the worse player? Is accounting for latency what fighting games are "about"? Is that part of the intended skillset? I think it's not.
As for hitboxes and stuff, I don't have many ideas on how to even the playing field considering how different certain inputs are, but maybe they could do something like what modern controls do. If hitboxes net you wins 20% more often, maybe hitbox players take 20% more damage in-game. Who knows what the future will hold, but hopefully I at least gave you a different way of looking at things.
The major flaw as with most arguments such as this is you assume the default is arcade stick. Arcades have been dead for a long time now, and we are in an time where fighting games have been played on controller and leverless longer than they have not been. Maybe the devs will make leverless weaker and in turn also make arcade sticks weaker but who cares? Why is it everyone else's problem if someone chooses to play on an objectively weaker peripheral? Why is it that we must accomodate a small subset of players who spend the cost of more than one controller to play a very specific type of game, that is already more than playable and in fact designed around the default controller the system comes with? Do you choose a worse bat or hockey stick and then question the legality of players using a better one? Maybe there's an argument to make about competition and everyone using the same setup, but why should it be this ancient relic from a shortlived time?
Maybe pads are the way to go and people who choose to play on stick are just playing in the NBA in tap shoes. Pads are the default for most systems so it makes sense that this should be the one that wins out but if we didn't have the conversation about pads back then, why would we have had the conversation about leverless ten years ago? Especially given that leverless has been around almost as long as fighting games in the form of keyboards being the default whenever they released on PC.
All standards are at the end of the day arbitrary. The FGC just happened to land on stick first, that's just how it be do.
I really enjoyed the breakdown of the discussion around recent innovations in fighting games. I can appreciate how much effort you put into covering almost every aspect of the topic. So it was disappointing that you resulted to an oversimplified strawman for why someone might prefer modern controls or a leverless. In fact almost everything to do with supporting leverless is discussed in bad faith.
I'm not sure I fully understand your response to hypothetical answer A, that the value of the more efficient option only exists because that option is not the standard. Your tone suggests it's some sort of counter point but the statement itself is just a neutral observation of fact. Yes, the value of a different option would be different if that option was the standard rather than a deviation.
Really though, it's the hypothetical answer B that I take issue with. By conflating many possible reasons into an antagonistic "it lets me win more" you completely skip any nuance to the discussion. "I'm able to win more because it's easier to execute my choices" should be a conversation starter, not something to be critical of. Is it a bad thing that players are able to more effectively make and execute decisions? Is the competitive floor being raised by these options an issue? Are impressive executions only impressive because of our choice of peripheral or is there a lot more to it?
Your primary counter point, that the more efficient options would diminish the value of the hard work it takes to play these games, is short sighted. It assumes the ceiling on fighting games is fixed and can go no higher while also treating the new methods as a shortcut that cheapens the work we put into these games. Is there a problem with the ceiling being raised at the highest levels by the best players using new tools? You're effectively saying that everyone who plays on leverless or uses modern controls is doing it wrong. I'm not sure if that was the actual message of the video but that was my takeaway and I just fundamentally disagree.
Well I suppose it would entirely depend on what you consider wrong or not? I am not going to fault any player for picking a more efficient option if they are presented with it. People like winning. My objection towards "strides forward" being taken in the area of efficiency is that I don't see any positive endgoal.
I personally believe there is a value in impressive execution, that Fighting Games are a both mental and physical exercise at their core. But that value can only persist if we collectively share the experience. Sure, we could as you say "raise the competitive floor" but in doing so we just arrive at a new arbitrary standard- and my belief is that once you start doing that you just create justification for continuing doing so. Top players are never the people that are negatively affected by this sort of thing, seeing as they will always put in the work (it is their job to do so). But everyone else suffers from a community wide mindset that we ought to solve these "control problems" by making them more efficient and thus easier to execute. And as I touch upon, keeping a reasonably comparable control scheme to the games of yore help those games stay active and "relevant" for lack of better wording.
I believe one could reasonably already make a slippery slope argument in terms of controller options when you see the experimentation being done by competitors to the Hitbox/Crossup etc. All technically very cool and forward thinking stuff, but to me; completely missing the point.
@@HQRubbishThe Melee community's adoption of the Universal Controller Fix mod is an example of the competitive community raising the reliability of inputs across the board, independent of what controllers competitors buy & use. It's perfectly reasonable for communities to determine that they're happier with a higher average level of execution, and IMO the Melee community has benefitted from UCF. I expect they'll continue to largely benefit from the introduction of leverless controllers, as they both allow for healthier play (both preventing injury & allowing injured players to execute at a high level) and further raise the average level of execution, allowing more access to higher-execution Melee (which, IMO, is more fun & deep) to more of the community. Cost is a very real factor for leverless, but UCF is virtually free.
Great essay, really like the approach you took with this issue that appears time and time again every few months. Altough its true that part of the facination of executing demanding or hard inputs on the stick are always sick to see, and thats how the genre started using, i think one issue you didt adress was simply comodity of the user. Preference is very subjective, i know, and yes, you can make the point that a easier input method is of course be more confortable in general. But you cant also ignore those who by feeling alone, feel more comfortable with other layouts of controls. Many people started playing on pad, many newcomers decided to buy a hitbox because they didt feel comfortable to a stick or pad. And me for example, who started to play fighting games in the early 00s on my PC, didt had the money or accesibility to get a stick or controller. I started playing FGs on the keyboard, playing flash games as a introduction.
Even after getting the options to buy a stick or a simple generic pad the keyboard was already years of experience and confort in my hands, something that you seem to agree, is that it sucks to obligate many players to get the time they spent completly wasted.
Even after getting a Mix-box, witch was the combination of a keyboard with a arcade stick, even though the input had less delay, my hands didt get use to it, and i went back to the keyboard. A keyboard, that ALSO has many of the advantages of a hitbox. Especially if your keyboard is mechanical and not membrane.
So, i think its also wise to include in the argument that your love for sticks, and how they look, feel and play, can also be true for other controller to another person. Even if "better performance" its at risk. Not to mention, the accesibilty, many players got play on stick simply because they cant, they are expensive, even more so in certain countrys like mine. Thats why i dont agree with the vision of "everyone should use sticks because that how its intended to play". Yeah, but not everyone is playing sports or practicing them with professional or approved gear, my opinion is to let the people play in whatever controller they want, because even though is true that many do it for better performance and easier execution, is also true that many do it for simple preference or inaccebility to a stick.
every 10+ year player who cant win their locals loves to cry about hitboxes
Here's a random thought: Would "first input wins" work? Just ignoring the second input, even after the first is released?
I think ergonomics is something to consider deeper though? I think that people should not be forced to be forced out of their livelihood because of injury. That's something we _don't_ need to bring over from sports.
I will never touch a stick ever again simply due to wrist pain. Leverless actually made fighting games fun again for me.
I really strongly disagree with a lot of your reasoning and conclusions, but there are a lot of other really good comments here that go into that. I just wanted to say that while i loved sticks (they are iconic), staying tied to hardware from the past that doesnt have a modern day context is silly. I don't think we should be forced to standardize competition with a controller used for Pac-Man, a controller style whose popular use died off 20 years ago.
You can do the SOCD stuff on pads too, you just need to use the analog stick as well. Several pros use this for specific moves. Fighting games should have always been thinking about SOCD from the moment that they started releasing on consoles and accepted inputs from both the Dpad and analog stick. Yes, it's alot more accessible than the pad when it's in button form, I agree, but if something was so messed up about SOCD that it would warp the game, pad players could learn how to do it too.
This video is a really good overview of the issue, but it is a little bit shortsighted in that, yes. Standard sports already deal with all of those problems you are mentioning with trying to make fighting game gameplay more efficient (through leverless controllers or otherwise). There's many examples like baseball players applying sticky adhesive to their hands to throw faster than players otherwise could, or new shoes being developed that helped athletes break world records in 100m dash, This technological arms race is NOT exclusive to fighting games and neither is the discourse surrounding it.
I personally think that banning leverless controllers would be an incredibly naive thing to do, specially since it's helped fighting games become more accessible to an audience that has never touched an arcade stick in their life. I also think it's a good thing that there's a variety of input methods accepted in the fgc bc there are people who can't play on leverless controllers but can play on a stick, and there's also people who can't play on a stick but can play on a leverless for different reasons. I also think that whatever advantages that are given to someone with a leverless pad with socd-n can be outplayed by someone with more experience and game knowledge. In the long run, I genuinely believe that being given more control options instead of less is a good thing.
This is a super well made thing that will inevitably unpopular because of it's viewpoint.
Good thoughts, interesting to think about since im new to the community.
Ive pretty much only used leverless since ive started playing not that long ago. They are really comfortable compared to pad and keyboard, the other option in had easy access to when trying put different configurations.
I think there are other solutions to the issues you presented with leverless, or at least help a few of them. It seems like it would be a good idea to make it so, if an input gets cleaned, it needs to be reinputed on neutral sodc cleaning. Just would completely get rid of the kbd issue.
Alot of the guys i talk to at my locals also mention that a big benefit to their leverless is the portability. And i agree with that too! That level of, i guess i would call it efficiency, lets me play with real people more than I would normally.
Its interesting that OP thinks about what controller is used, and how it's used. Maybe im just too new, but i rarely think about input methods for other players
I might have to buy a stick when i get some extra cash and give it a shot
I forgot one last thing. The point on injury is kinda shitty, not to mention wrong. There have been Olympic athletes who competed using mobility aids, specifically running prosthetics. I also think that if a competition can be designed to be more accessible, and still fair, than it should be. I don't think the difference between as stick/pad and leverless is nearly as much as a person running and a bicycle.
I of course agree with your last statement, I also think accessibility is good if it can be implemented fairly and without considerable obstruction. I obviously don't consider leverless controllers in their current state to fall in that category, hence the comparison to a non-fair and obstructive running aid. Afaik the current science indicates that running blades do not offer any measurable advantage so making said comparison would be contradictory, no?
18:23 that's not how backdash works in Tekken 7. In previous games it was like that I think (not sure, I didn't play them) but in Tekken 7 you are not vulnerable during backdash even if you don't hold the back input. I actually tested this, you automatically guard during the duration of the whole backdash even if you don't press inputs. So it's not true that a stick user and a leverless user would have different times of vulnerability because of not holding back.
Also I have to say that nobody would do the kbd input on a stick as shown in the video. It's a small nitpick, but during the kbd you're not supposed to manually do a back input after down-back. On a stick you can release the down-back input in a way that creates a back input "for free", which is much faster and comfortable to do. So the correct sequence is:
b, n, b, db (release to get a free b), n (repeate the last 3 movements)
I'm saying this just in case someone wants to try the kbd as shown in the video and ends up hurting themselves.
I feel like there was too much comparisons to traditional sports. Getting a few frames more efficient while blocking and walking forward isnt the same as using a bike in track events.
I love how no matter how well thought out and articulated a person idea is, there will always be someone who laser focuses on 1 thing and uses it as an excuse to miss the whole point the person was trying to make. Really remarkable.
@@A-Spoto You're just being carried by the video's strong presentation. The argument here is mostly shit.
@@A-Spoto >unfocused, biased rambling
>well thought out
You overstate the advantages of leverless by a loooong mile. The whole video is greatly produced but ends up feeling line a copium Reddit post with extra steps.
This channel deserves all the love in this world.
Great work!
What I really hope for, and this is inherently difficult I understand, is for the inherent advantages of leverless to be be reduced, and leverless controllers to continue to be allowed, because I do think that people having more options for play is strictly better than fewer.
The specfic example of an injured runner not being able to use a bike is an illustrative exaggerated example, but the question has come up in a legitimate context with amputee runners and blades. It was argued that the accomodation actually gave the amputee runners an advantage, and that was far from an open, shut discussion.
This debate of leverless is just a bunch of old guys who grew up playing in the arcades not accepting that things changed. Just as the arcade stick was a familiar choice for those who played in the arcade, the leverless is the same for people who grew up playing in the pc. I remember trying to play street fighter 4 and having a hard time executing some inputs on pad, i then played in my keyboard and instantly had a way better experience... I then bought an arcade stick, i found it was a great deal of fun, but i always found the keyboard to be better, that's why i bought the hitbox... I don't even know any shortcuts, and i couldn't care less to learn then, you can play just fine without it, and to be honest the better player still wins at the end, no matter the input method.
All i have to say to the old guys in the FGC is, get good bro... The input method is not the problem. As said in the video "1-2 inputs are not making any difference in the grand scheme of things", if there's no difference, this discussion in pointless.
And leverless offer people with disabilities a way to play without hurting themselves... No downsides IMO.
And the argument that the benefits of playing hitbox because it only exists when other methods exist given in the video, is flawed. The argument ignores the material reality and proposes something that simply just not exist, there is no reality where other inputs methods do not exist. Value is relative, relative to other similar things, relative to society and culture, relative to past experiences in life, and specially to the material reality that we're inserted, nothing has any innate value. A more marxist analysis of the matter would be more suitable.
THE POINT OF HAVING LEVERLESS IS NOT NECESSARILY EFFICIENCY IT IS ABOUT CONFORT. If you reduce the efficiency boost, people are still going to use the fucking controller, you are making a point that is just wrong, people don't use leverless solely for efficiency, they use for a variety of reasons.
every leverless defender reeks of silver rank and afraid to admit they got filtered like a smasher.
The animations quality is off the charts. I thought you must have at least a million subs. You definetly got my sub now
28:35 - 28:57
"I think you would struggle to currently find a modern fighting game that is inherently crippled when it comes to input lag"
Sakurai punching the air bc SSBU isn't considered a modern fighting game
Also y'all remember the -acendhigher launch option on the steam release of Skullgirls? lmao
Edit: 29:34 Is he trying to say doing 40 multishines in a row is easy?
Also like... SFV at launch??? Hello??? It was a MEME.
@@doublevendetta I know bro I was the one who brought it up
@@Sleeepy.... How did you miss that I'm AGREEING with and SUPPLEMENTING your argument with another example? 😂
@@doublevendetta The "Hello????" seemed like it was directly responding to me, like you were telling me it was a meme
@@Sleeepy. Lol nah that was a "How did OP MISS that entire ERA" "Hello???"
Fantastic video! I just wanted to provide my thoughts as someone who began playing fighting games after leverless controllers had seen widespread popularity.
I began playing fighting games less than 5 years ago in my freshman year of high school, where a senior I met had introduced me to Guilty Gear XRD. I thought it was the sickest shit ever so I immediately went home and bought it on my laptop. I had almost zero clue of what the standard was for competitive play, so I just practiced on what was most convenient for me: my keyboard. While I would eventually switch to a leverless controller in order to play with people in person, it was not done at all with intention of having more consistent and efficient input device, but more because it resembled what I was most familiar with. I found your video to be fascinating, as it gives me further insight on a perspective far different than mine.
I'd also like to mention that I come from Super Smash Bros Melee, where one of its largest draws is it's inherently analog beauty. This question exists as well within Melee, with many recently beginning to use Melee's version of a Hit Box style controller. Something that's excited me a lot recently is the development of an analog box controller, where the controller accounts for how far down a movement button is being pressed. This allows people who prefer this style input device (ergonomics is a far worse issue in Melee, due to its ridiculously high APM and the terrible ergonomics of a GameCube controller) to interact with Melee's analog nature. This also appeases many members of the community who dislike the "teleporting inputs" that a traditional box controller allows you to do. While it isn't a perfect solution, I definitely think it's very exciting and cool.
Great video :) eagerly looking forward to more!
There's a hilarious amount of bad faith arguments in this video.
Nah
Thanks for taking the stances that you did, it was really brave, but also needed to be said. While I know a lot of these discussions have somewhat shaken out (Modern isn't that good, many tournaments are being won on stick, and the disadvantage of SRK on leverless or repeated KBD may be enough to keep stick in play), I still appreciate the thought behind stating everything.
I agree with you that it's too late now to change things. I'm not sure if it should be changed because I think leverless being an option is cool (I've used all 3 and competed with all 3, but went back to stick for the love it it like you), but we should at least move forward as a community (both developers and TOs) with more intention.
A really great video! You made really great points, and, as others have mentioned, blew me away with the visuals of the video.
Some points that weren't mentioned that I think are important to consider in the discussion of controller types and why I don't agree with "joysticks are not long for this world" -
Firstly, there are reasonable arguments for certain motions/inputs that are still objectively easier on a joystick than an all-digital 4 button setup. Due to how diagonals are input, half-circles, up to 360s, and more in-depth motions (while not as common, are still around, especially in older games) are objectively harder on all-button, since they're designed with the joystick in mind.
As an example, SF6 blanka's heavy punch into his install level 2 or Rainbow Roll (2x qc back, half-circle back respectively). It's a lot hardrr to consistently time the inputs on all-button, since you "have" to hit the diagonals to make it count, which involves timing both the pressing and letting go of the directions rhythmically. Whereas with a joystick, it's a fluid motion, that isn't objectively easier, but is way simpler and can be more consistent starting out. And don't even get me started on kof's qc into half-circle super motions.
Sure, you can "shortcut" those inputs, but those shortcuts can be patched out if necessary, and they're still designed at their core with a joystick or analogue stick in mind.
Second, pure taste - there is tangibly a difference in experience between joystick and leverless and controller, and i think that'll always be key component keeping all three as realistic options for any player. Unless the game leans into controller specifically (like the MK series), the tangible feeling and engagment of a joystick, a leverless, a controller with a d-pad or analogue stick being used can still play an important part in playerbase choice.
It all hinges on "efficiency" and "competition" versus "fun factor" and "enjoyment". I swapped from controller to a joystick because i was more consistent (less dropped motions), i switched to all-button because it felt more natural (i've been a pc gamer for a decade), and i've recently dove back inro joystick because it's just, imo, more fun and engaging to control that way. It "feels" right to me. Sure, i could theoretically optimize beyond belief to try and eek out a few more wins, but at some point it turns into what makes me "better" and what gives me more satisfaction or makes me happier, and the diminishing returns of optimization settles the debate for me - i'm not just playing fighting games just to win, i'm playing tjem because they're fun, my friends and i love them.
Valid take, I agree.
What I like is when the dificulty is set by the fact I'm fighting an itelligent, strong, fallible but challenging, voluntary oponent.
What I don't like is when the dificulty is set by inputs, and if I can surpase such dificulty, then the game allows me to minimize the participation of my opponent, allowing me to win by solo gaming. Yes, that means I dont like combo heavy games or overpowered moves balanced by being "hard".
Its sad some people feel bad for losing the prevalence of their beloved sticks... Personally, after decades struggling trying to get better in fighting games using stick, I discovered what a relief is to play with pad or leverless. I'm so happy having a controller that finally allows me to enjoy those fast and directional heavy games without innecesary hand strain and forced dificulty in the inputs.
Incredibly well edited and executed. Must have used the most efficient tools to make this video possible ;)
Actually, in keeping with the themes of the video, I primarily used rickety Blender addons in conjunction with the truly, heinously inefficient Adobe Suite.
A combination that made sure I was mentally transported to a frozen hellscape any time I felt like getting some work done.
This video is insanely well-made. Incredible.
I very much agree that fighting games like many competitive gaming communities. Moving towards efficiency i think, takes away something of the experience and joy of these games. Although it is worth noting that this has the benefit of allowing more people to enjoy games in ways they possibly couldn't without them.
The biggest benefit hitbox’s add, is making joystick victories even more savory 😋
I disagree about increasing the average execution level of players being bad-Melee, for example, is a much more interesting game when you have access to higher-execution options. Allowing everyone access to those high-execution options, without long-term damage to their bodies, makes Melee more enjoyable and makes its community healthier.
@@bb010g I think Rubbish’s analogy of the corked baseball bat explains very well his and many’s reasoning behind having prejudice against something that literally makes certain tasks objectively easier to understand and preform physically in a sport where everyone else uses the approved sports equipment.
Like sure, you hit a home run with a metal bat, but it’s not that impressive + it defeats what makes a sport entertaining in the first place.
@@Flo-zj9tg Baseball has a standard set of tools, dictated by the community. Let's take a look at another sport with a standard set of tools, cycling. Electronic shifters were first used in professional cycling in 2009. The cycling community decided this was acceptable in competition. In Formula 1, there's a lot of variance between cars, within defined limits. In competition aerobatics, there is no standard plane, but far less money is poured into plane development compared to what F1 teams pour into their cars. In robot competitions, the tools often vary wildly, while operator skill & strategy remains an important factor.
Each fighting game within the FGC gets to decide how much they want to allow their tools to vary. Baseball is just one sport to compare against.
While i don't think giving people (easier excess) to certain things like the melee dash or the kbd in tekken is necessarily bad in general. Nor would i say giving people a controller option that puts less strain on their bodies is not objectively good thing. However these controller are not free, and do require new muscle memory. These things are not exactly insurmountable problems but not everyone can just and or wants to do that. More crucially to me at least is if the skill floor rises because of a controller type then using anything but that controller puts you at a disadvantage competitively speaking. Its just that the more the skill floor rises the more and more a person needs to know and own just to play a game to me at least that sound uninviting.While in theory, everyone more easily being able to perform more tricks more easily sounds like a breeding ground for better higher level matches. However as Rubbish says at the end, are you watching a person have crazy good reactions.. or is the person pressing 2 buttons, are you watching someone with incredible execution.. or are they pressing 2 buttons.
In fairness what I'm saying might just be a form of Able-ism or elite-ism, I'm not sure. Its cool more people can play a game at a higher level, its cool that some people who couldn't compete know can. I just think something else is being lost and that sucks.
It is an interesting topic, and possibly if fighting games keep growing at the rate that they are we could divisions of competitive play for different peripherals. I do like the comparison to other sports as physical performance, however, since video games are linked to evolving technology. It only makes sense to change the way we engage. What was once difficult is more standard but since fighting games have such a depth there are more players that can focus on the great depth of the games we enjoy. As far as catering to people who have wrist injuries, I strongly believe the use of lever less controllers will reduce the amount of dedicated players becoming injured. I switched to using a keyboard, after being a stick and controller player, because it caused me pain to consistently do dash cancels before the patch in SF6 that made it a button input. I was able to get over that barrier and then move into more advanced development into the game. if you are going to compare video games to a sports look at the baseball glove in the 1900s, football before pads, Wooden tennis rackets, or running shoes. fighting games is still relatively young in the scheme of competitive sports, and I have no doubt that there will more changes to come. Rubbish Thank you for taking the time to make this video it is encouraging to see people who are passionate about competitive nature of fighting games.
I believe comparing modern controls to leverless only shows that this video was made with bad faith. It really just comes down to preference. If you choose to use a stick you understand the pros and cons.
what exactly are the pros of sticks over cheatbox?
@@SuuBrainrot Easier to pick up. More intuitive.
16:30 that transition was so clean! Great video mate. You’ve earned a new sub and a like!
I'll just say that keyboard allowed me to enter FG's because I didn't need to buy anything more to play, also you gotta admit that ergonomic wise the leverless clearly wins, and longterm i prefer to be able to play as good as i was able to at the start, see some Smash Melee dudes and their hands after years of gamecube controller action
NGL, while the presentation and production on the video is great, I don't really understand why you made this video. Your point seems to be that leverless gives an unfair advantage compared to both pad and stick players, yet sticks and pads are both represented at all levels of play after a decade of them existing. You outright suggest that if you suffer hand injuries due to extended use of controllers that aren't leverless, you should just not be allowed to compete. It all comes off as a 40 minute rant, venting your frustrations that leverless controllers weren't banned a decade ago so sticks could remain the perceived best choice for fighting games.
I developed early stages of arthritis in my left index finger because of fighting games. It’s partially due to genetic deposition, but watching such a video feels like a punch in the face
Amazing quality, you deserve more views and likes
I've been hearing this argument since 2014 in Melee. That pros can just BUY controllers in lots, and then put together the one that works for them out of that lot.
The problem with your entire argument about standardizing setups is that the absolute MOST competitive people WILL spend more money, and more time than everyone else to be the best.
There are a bazillion Hit Box knockoffs. So why did Daigo and Tokido - two severely historied players sign up with Hit Box? It wasn't because we offered them the most money, it's because they KNEW we are always on the lookout for ways to improve your game and they wanted to be right there with us when they did.
You know, F1 has practice sessions. They also have standardized equipment. Drivers that qualify don't get any more time in their practice than the ones who don't.
Imagine if we made competitions like that. You can't actually play the game until you're in the practice session. Stupid right?
Alright. So how do the teams that consistently place in F1 do so? They're spending a lot of money, and a lot of time in planning, simulation, tuning. The resources that Red Bull and Mercedes have are vastly larger than most of the other competitors. Their drivers are the most expensive, too.
Yes, at the end of the day - talent wins. But competitors trying to push as far as they can WILL spend money on better setups, will travel, will set up meetings with other high level competitors, will hire coaches and managers.
Saying that allowing people a choice in peripherals is flawed, or ultimately a waste of time is a slap in the face of history. EVERY serious competitor in any sport puts everything they can into it.
"Standardizing" setups doesn't level a playing field when the people who are making it their priority to be the best are still going to expend every resource they can to win.
In short: let the people use whatever they want. At the end of the day, the winners will still be lined up by their performances.
So happy to hear the ThorHighHeels beat at the end.
Great video
You are awake that multi shines are harder than god fist right? There is a reason top players use god fist in every. single. match. But NOONE uses multishines.
Not everything is literal, the visual was moreso representing the propensity for Spacie-players to push the execution heavy aspect of their character to the forefront while Mishimas' are often approached as if their execution heavy niche is something that needs to be played around, and not with.
I think the argument against leverless falls flat when pad is so common and so regularly tops events. Hell Sonic Fox, the player with the most majors wins in fgc history, is exclusively a pad player.
Edit: And sticks aren't going anywhere. They're consistently topping and always will.
This video is a work of art comprising so many constituent works of art, it could go in an art gallery but it would make the other art in there look bad
Which is why we need to help it succeed. Reply to more comments!!!
For not profesdional gamers hitbox is just another option which could be more comfirtable and satisfying than pads and sticks
I'm from a country with no arcade era so both sticks and hitboxes are new to me compared to pads. So that "old vs new" thing doesn't seem convincing. Each of these controllers has got their pros and cons for different people. So the more types of controllers, the better
the best argument for leverless is that the spirit of fighting games does reside in leverless. lets be honest, FGC was a happy accident sparked by the happy accident that was sf2. arcade sticks were never specifically made for fighting games, and if the developers knew that this was gonna be some players religion, there is a real chance leverless wouldve existed even earlier. leverless is more of, people learning more what fighting games are, an inevitable idea given enough time and people playing.
leverless players drop inputs, make mistakes, and it requires practice, just as any controller would.
i think a clear way to kill the spirit of video games is more like, having a neural controller that sends thoughts electronically as commands. then we are in another space, totally unique from the fgc as it is today. you can easily tell, the spirit is no longer there, as buttons= video games is a great foundation to use when trying to define something as abstract as "the spirit of the thing".
ive used all three peripherals extensively, and for me, leverless FEELS more fun, but im still the same scrub regardless of what i use. i think increasing the fun of an activity, as long as we can agree the spirit isnt diminished, should be legal.
i guess the argument is, where do you draw the line? if leverless players drop inputs, make mistakes, and it requires practice, then id say, that leverless falls within legality (obviously you cant have any blocking on both sides nonsense, etc)
this topic can get even deeper, as you can argue:
1. street fighter walk/block having less "travel time" is a better experience for everyone, and allows for efficient access to a certain playstyle, especially when considering gief. (insane to think snake eyes is a pad player). this makes the game's ability to represent different playstyles and tactics stronger, and forces every pro player to consider these legit tactics and how to counter them.
2. modern controls and being able to block and be ready with a super simultaneously goes against the spirit of street fighter specifically since it removes buffering. when on defense/trying to react to something, most times you CANT buffer and block simultaneously. that IS squarely part of the game as it forces a balanced give and take of decision-making, a core fundamental of street fighter. Personally, id like to see modern controls nerfed, it should be a frustration free way to learn street fighter, as players can jump to classic when they feel ready, or stay as modern casuals, the real heroes of the fgc as they support the developers by buying costumes en masse.
would make sense if they were made illegal in pro play as well.
notice how, different aspects being made more efficient can arguably make a game better or worse.
other games like smash, has always been all modern controls, and gains their execution ceiling in other ways. so for them, modern controls is fine. Each game has a unique spirit, and different things "feel right" for different games/events/sports.
let me know if you feel like i missed some point, or if you see a flaw in my counter arguments.
also dont try to compare to other events TOO much, as ultimately, FGC needs the numbers to go up, a major reason these allowances even happened in the first place. If street fighter and tekken had millions of players in them daily before, during and after switching to consoles, a debate on controller uniformity likely wouldve happened sooner. if we hit our golden age with hitboxes and project L, then its safe to say rulesets will become more rigid, cemented in wherever we are as the FGC is at the time. (as in im sure any other controller iteration will be banned, unless it can satisfy the spirit of fighting games, as in not have any broken tactics available, require just as much practice as any other controller, have buttons, etc.)
Also other events, like baseball, have had MUCH more time to iron out its kinks, and are STILL trying to update the game without damaging the spirit of baseball. (id argue leverless is the pitch clock, a positive increase in efficiency, and NOT corked bats/aluminum bats, a negative increase in efficiency. modern controls, if they arent nerfed in sf6, is closer to that negative efficiency)
We WILL get back to scarce tactics being awesome, even if it is on leverless. and while you use that as a way to argue against leverless, technically, all you did was prove the fgc's spirit will remain intact.
great production but it all boils down to your biases tl;dr, old good, new bad
i understand that youre more proficient with sticks but for people like me -- i have this mental disease that i cant understand the positioning of the sticks relative to my perception -- the leverless controllers is a godsend.
I believe the best realistic solution is for devs to account for leverless controlers to put them on par with classic controlers. I'm currently doing it in the fighting game I'm working on (NASB2).
Partially because leverless controlers are already widely adopted, and partially because keyboars are already the default controler for PC players.
As someone who got into fighting games through Melee I started out with pads and then moved on to a hitbox to minimize latteral finger movements.
I even dislike 6-button games because I can't rest a finger on each button (unless I'm playing on keyboard where I use my left pinkie).
As someone who doesn't care about the competitive side, having a different layout is what got me to get deep into fighting games and the addition of modern controls/simplified inputs allowed me to drag friends along for our casual play. That being said, I do agree with the idea of having tournaments with dedicated setups like in an arcade where everything is essentially identical. However the logistics of this would be difficult to pull off. This idea actually came out of an argument I was having with someone about modern and classic controls or simplified inputs and ranked. I wouldn't care if a player who was playing couldn't play ranked with the simplified inputs. That I would be fine if I was relegated to playing casual matches if I used my mixbox setup online and if I wanted to play ranked I would have to learn to play with traditional inputs and on an arcade stick or gamepad. Similarly I would be ok if tournaments had a system where once you reached a certain point you had to use the provided controller. That could also lead to more sponsorship since a controller sponsor could be used for the top X onward. I could also see this get interesting with invitationals where players don't know which option they will use if the sponsor is someone like Victrix which has a gamepad, hitbox, and arcade stick. While the ergonomic argument comes off as a harsh one I do agree with it. It is similar to the argument against PEDS and TRT in the UFC. However I was growing up during the steroid era in baseball and I also watch non-drug tested sporting events like ADCC or strong man and I can tell you that those were and are some exciting events so I can certainly see why someone might want to watch what amounts to the steroid league of fighting games.
In tekken You also can do instant whilestanding , by holding db , until you see the crouch, and then press up + a button, to get the while standing move. Makes punishing strings , that end in a difficult to punish high, pretty easy. Steves strings for example (sway left f+1,1,1 becomes relatively easy to launch punish) (i am writing this while i am at the backdash segement, if it’s mentioned later, sorry )
You: Check out this sick standing 720!
Me: Grappler player? Opinion disregarded.
The cheap and good enough alternative IS the keyboard. A lot of players don't have access to a stick, they just play on their laptop and want to play a game they have. These people, just to compete in a local would HAVE to put in money for a peripheral just to participate since not every game support multiple keyboards as unique input devices that can differentiate the spacebar from one keyboard and a different keyboard.
I see this a lot with long time fighting game players who just assume everyone ever has played on the arcade machine, but most players play on controller and on a keyboard because it's not an extra peripheral for their device. people in the arcade days played on a stick because it's what is available to them. Fighting games are clearly not about what control method you're using and it for sure isn't what makes them beautiful.
People play with joysticks because it's intuitive to them or they grew up on them, people play with "leverless" because it's available to them because it's on their laptop. On no planet will joysticks die just because one input method is "better" people like joysticks because they are nice, they are satisfying, and they are intuitive. What a bunch of FUD
This point of view that people play leverless to be more "efficient" is genuinely a privileged one and it's out of touch and it's sad to see it keep getting thrown about.
That standing 720 was sick tho
The only sensible comment here. This whole video just reeks of gatekeeping and is completely forgetting that not everyone has equal access to these peripherals. Most people just got comfortable with what they had.
Great video. I do wanna add that if the unlevel playing field of the stick, pad, and leverless controller landscape is something community figureheads and developers are truly concerned about, we should just standardize rules towards a first input priority instead of socd neutral cleaning. Levels users would be taking a hit, but they would still have unique advantages over other options. I think that more options for different ways of play to suit different players’ preferences are a good thing
You got me, the last bit fucking killed me
Awesome video! I used to play on controllers myself, mainly because I played on consoles, but those things broke too easily, and when I swapped to PC and bought my favorite games, I was out of money, and soon, out of controllers too. I play on keyboard now, and even though I currently own functioning controllers, I love the sound of my keyboard, the feel, and the fact that after 5 years it still hasn't broken. It has saved me money and time, and it also makes switching between genres easier, since I now use the same input method for almost every game I play, shooters, platformers, and whatever else.
I've got no reason to switch. I'm happy with the poor man's hitbox.
On another note, I find the accessibility of fighting games to be a beautiful thing about the genre, and of esports in general. The fact that a blind person (Sven) and a person without arms (BrolyLegs) can still play fighting games with us is something no real life sport can do, and I find it to be something truly awesome about these games. I think that's a discussion for another time though.
Me personally, I found that my thumbs hurt after playing charge characters on a controller for long periods of time. Thanks to my keyboard, I can actually enjoy long sets with charge characters.
I think it will be very difficult to truly establish what advantages are unfair or necessary. There probably never will be a good answer to it, ever, and that's just the reality of competition. Ultimately, time will tell, as it's up to the TOs what is and isn't allowed.