Topic #2: Quality

[DEV]

We utilize a game that suffers from its own engine fighting against it and glitches throughout. People might not have the attention span to sit through an entire match. Comments in videos range from the simple "good match" to the self-glorifying message. So the topic I have today is one that has been on my mind.

What to you qualify a good match using the games? Is it spots or how clever someone can use the game's movesets to incorporate smoothness? Is it how well someone can dramatize a match by carefully injecting near-falls and the basic philosophy of wrestling? Or is it a well-put together story, the spectacle of characterization? I extend this to the forum to discuss upon, because it'd be interesting to see what everyone has to say.

[Brent Delivine]

For me, watching matches in general involves "is the story interesting going on? and if not, can this match have a story to invest me?". Some matches, if the story off the bat isn't very clear, then by around 3 minutes in i'll start thinking "this is a nothing match" and just skip to the end.

Some of my favorite matches come from Mr. Shimo, a Japanese dude who posts short matches of his comedy character of the same name, facing other japanese (Aswell as the rare gaijin). To me, he tells the story quick, Shimo is cowardly and cheats and he is infamously weak. The matches are quick, end before they start to drag out or before the story has run its course.

Fancy edits? who needs them when the match alone can invest you enough to watch till the end? That's what i always look towards when it comes to a matches quality.

[thepharaohadofo]

When it comes to this game I find that if a match is able to keep me invested and constantly build upon itself so that every moment of the match is better than the last then that is a good match. One of the things about this game is that acrobatic high flying moves are less impressive because.....well it's a game. In this game you could make the Big Show do a 630 Senton. That's why I believe that spots are used so heavily, as a way to get people's eyes stuck onto the screen. But even with a bunch of spots to get people watching you have to keep them watching. Which is where the story development comes in.

When I'm looking at a match there always has to be a baseline story or else I won't care. Now this story doesn't have to involve limb targeting or a feud to backpedal off of. The stories can be as simple as 'This is the first time they have met in a wrestling ring.' or 'Desperation'. Heck a display of character will be enough to get me watching. But if the match has no substance to it then to me it's the equivalent of filler. I look at Wrestling like books, so I also appreciate when the pacing of matches at the end are the equivalent of the rising action and climax sequences in a book. Sub stories are also quite impressive as they just add to the context of the match and keep me invested.

Of course fluency, wrestling philosophy and spots themselves are great aspects. In my mind a great match needs to include all of these aspects but it doesn't need to excel in each and everyone of them. For instance, Sami Zayn vs Shinsuke Nakumura. That match had exceptional fluency, wrestling philosophy and sequences. The pacing was also uniquely quick and depending on who you talk to they will either say they liked it or wish it was slower paced. However the story element was quite simple and not very prominent in the matchup. So in my eyes a good match is one where you create your own unique flavor to it that entices the audience and keeps then invested throughout the entire process.

[16BitJay]

I personally tend to like matches where the characters come through loud and clear, has a story and very few mistakes. Spots are cool, but I can enjoy a solid match without anything flashy in it. Though I do feel a good card would encompass all styles so there is something for everyone to take from it.

[explodeyourself]

I'm completely new here, but this topic has been on my mind a lot lately. One of the most common questions I get from people in regards to my CAW league that I'm trying to get running again is "Have you thought about upgrading to a newer game?" I'm using No Mercy in an emulator with modded textures. I think it looks fine but I've also realized over the past few years that I'm completely blind to graphic quality in games in general. I care way more about gameplay than how polished it looks. I'm all about match quality too. Using save states and a few gameshark codes, I can manpulate No Mercy engine into have phenomenonal epic matches. Don't get me wrong, they still look like video game matches, but they are as competitive and long as I need them to be. I cannot say that about any of the more recent games. Hell, if I upgraded, I would have to rerecord full matches a ton of times just to get the right winner with a good finish. It is kind of why I couldn't get into VGCW. I had spent too much time watching disappointing sim matches in find it remotely entertaining.

Here is one of my best matches. Does it get to be a little much with as many times they kick out of finishers? Normally yes, but I think it fits the story well. youtu.be/Qz5H-ezyiT8

[Tiago]

To me sometimes you can't fully tell your story by simply playing with your character, commentary fills in for a lot of the gaps the game leaves for you. No matter how good you may play this game, to me commentary is what sells everything to the audience.

[MONROE 天皇暴力]

Jul 20, 2016 13:31:44 GMT Tiago said:

To me sometimes you can't fully tell your story by simply playing with your character, commentary fills in for a lot of the gaps the game leaves for you. No matter how good you may play this game, to me commentary is what sells everything to the audience.

Terrible commentary can make or break a match, character portrayal, etc. It's just distracting to the piece as a whole when somebody isn't on point, doesn't know what they're talking about, etc. I feel it's probably one of the largest components to a great story - a great narrator.