Critical Edge: A Brief History of Banning...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know I'll end up regretting this, but here I go...

Balance: As I understand it, there are some reputable folks that have had a lot of hands-on experience and claim DJ is imbalanced. While I think that sounds pretty reasonable, we don't know 100% how imbalanced or balanced it is just yet(one or two reputable people's opinions should not automatically be equated as indisputable truth). Yes; all of us commenting on balance are talking out of our asses with no solid data to back it up. Which side of the fence is better to go to? Fuck if I know. Sitting on the fence has huge potential downsides, neither side of it really has grass that is *THAT* green.

CAS in Tourneys: Yeah, it's banned. So Devil Jin is banned as well until Harada TEKKEN becomes a full-fledged character or something similar happens. This should *PROBABLY* be the only argument anyone pays attention to currently. EVO allows DJ CAS? Meh.

Tedium for TOs: This shouldn't be an issue. Backing up saves is easy and still neglects the fact that CASes are banned.


Ups and downs of all these wacky hypotheses? Moot. Unless DJ's style becomes a full-fledged character or CASes are suddenly unbanned, it's all moot.



*raises flame shield, then instead drops it and runs away in fear*
 
I initially agreed with Jaxel's decision. The purpose behind it is good. It's to make sure you don't make the wrong decision. Keep a "character" alive by keeping him in minor tournaments that way those that are competitive will have a secondary character so that when he/she finds out the primary is dead, he/she can easily switch. This would theoretically prevent the backlash that happened after Hilde was banned. It makes sense.

The second point is the possibility of bringing Tekken players. That is a definite plus for both the community, competition, and ad revenue. It would work if in the ideal situation Devil Jin was balanced and he made it to the majors.

However, after reading the comments from Malice, IdleMind, and Hates. It seems this is the wrong decision based on history. We must look to the past to prevent future mistakes. I stand by this as a history lover. I find it useful when making long-term, down-the-road decisions in relations to finances, living standards, marriage, relationships, expectations and the like.

Having two rulesets regardless of officialness, authority, popularity, or support of the decision will hinder the competitiveness and unity of a community. I'd like to parallel to the competitive TF2 scene that catered to the casuals by keeping criticals for so long in the NA scene that it hurt the competitive community and many clans quit outright. Euro scene efficiently created unified rulesets and NA followed months after, which handicapped them from then on. NA did learn their lesson. They now outright ban first, then see if it is balanced or not afterward when it comes to unlocks. This makes it so that outcomes aren't based on unbalanced equipment because if they were banned after the event, then it would make it seem like the victory was undeserved. But more importantly, it unified the competitive community and created a rigid structure in dealing with constant unlockables/patches. This created efficiency in a good way. There was no controversy in the decisions thereafter. It was how it was done for every other update/new-fangled thing and it was expected to be the way it was done and should be done. It prevented disputes as well as creating a unified community due to proper rulesets by the leaders of the community.

But Valve (developers of Team Fortress 2) continued to pander to the casual market, which inevitably led to the competitive community creating their own subculture that was fiercely independent of the casuals. And this pandering only hurt the competitive community because it was Valve's decision to keep critical hits and support them even to this date. Why did they do so? Because the game was targeted to casuals for the most part. It's what was most profitable and which is also the reason why it's free now, but with microtransactions. However, the longevity of any multiplayer game is with the competitive community. That is why CS 1.6 is more popular than CoD on the PC.

Now, seeing how this is FPS. It's irrelevant right? No, I think it holds true for any competitive game. And seeing as how the other veterans of Soul Calibur are trying to persuade you into making the harder decision of hardbanning Devil Jin's soul. I think that is the right decision. I would really love to see Devil Jin unbanned, but as the others have wisely said: "If Devil Jin was balanced, why is he CaS and not a character? Probably because he wasn't balanced." And as others said, it's probably a cash grab marketed towards casuals and as such, we as the competitive-oriented (not exclusive) community should ban Devil Jin to prevent any divisions.

I hope you make the right decision, Jaxel. Soul Calibur V already has some parts holding it back already (game mechanics, smaller scene, shitty previewers from IGN, same console generation, etc). Let's not make this Devil Jin's soul thing something bigger than it should've been.
 
Disclaimer: I realize my opinion is virtually irrelevant.

That being said, please have a unified set of rules. I've been a SC player since the first Soul Calibur game. I've watched an awful lot of %$#&-ups continuously eat away at the SC community over the years. While it would be nice to gank some players from Tekken, I flat-out can't stomach another fiasco that ruins the credibility of the SC franchise. And to be quite honest, a somewhat smaller unified community is infinitely preferable to a larger divided community.

I also see no particular reason to make an exception to the "No CaS" rule just for one allegedly unbalanced character.
 
So now that people have had a day to calm down, lets do a summary of the rules I posted....
  1. Devil-Jin is ABSOLUTELY BANNED from the only events that matter.
  2. TOs are free to allow him at locals using a predetermined official design.
So whats the problem? Rule #1 clearly states the official stance is that he's banned. A lot of local TOs were not going to follow that ban anyways. For instance, DrDogg has previously stated that no matter the ruling, he will allow DJ at his locals. Nothing forces a TO from following 8wayrun rules. Local TOs are also free to re-ban DJ from their own events whenever they wish, and they have the official ban stance from 8wayrun to fall back on.

Rule #2 can help legitimize local TOs decisions in unbanning DJ. In addition, it helps standardize DJ in local events. Would you rather a dozen different tournaments running different versions of DJ? This way there is at least a standard. Not to mention, it will better prepare people for a day in which DJ becomes unbanned if it ever comes down to it. We will also more quickly determine his tournament viability.

What if Namco suddenly releases a DLC for Harada_TEKKEN (which I've been asking them for several months now; I've told them over and over that the community will NEVER accept DJ without an official design, and this has proved it)... then EVO announces their official rules that DJ is legal using the Harada_TEKKEN design. Then we MUST allow DJ, as all the complaints I've been seeing are using this as an excuse to ban DJ. Then people who are really complaining because of balance will eat their words.
 
So how is the DJ model being decided?

I still disagree with having a CaS only moveset legal. If they release a Harada we'll deal with it like we would deal with any new character.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top