All Contributors
• 8/6/2015

Deciding on a notation standard for combo and moves lists

Hello,

So, we need to come up with a standard notation for all the character pages. 

You can see what we currently use here:

Use this thread to share what you feel is optimal, so we can arrive at something that is both efficient yet accessible.

0 9
  • Upvote
  • Reply
0
• 8/6/2015

Guiding principals for notation

I feel this is a conversation worth having. 

I'd like whatever we use to be:

  • Efficient
  • Friendly to people who may not have much or any fighting game experience. 

That may seem like it can't be done, but it can be. 

In terms of notation, there's a good post on that here going over the different types. (Kind of important to look at that, since it gives context to the rest of what I say here.) Though that only covers buttons and directional notation and doesn't include cancelling. 

Re: actual notation discussion

Someone on reddit suggested:

cl.H xx S1 xx KADC, cr.H

I think that's good (i.e. it uses actual English, just abbreviations), though I think we can go a step further.  "xx" may be standard, but it's sort of... jargony, and seems a bit redundant (with the KADC, which is in fact a cancel). 



If we do go with something like "xx", I'd want to at least have it so it has dotted underlines under it, and when people mouse-over it, it shows "Cancel" so they know what xx means. 

KADC seems like it should have an image that uses colouring, or something, that somehow reflects what a KADC looks like (like the great joystick motions here )--maybe a clickable image that goes to a "Kinetic advance" page, that explains the mechanic. 

We could use wiki templates for that, which allow us to do things like this  (mouse over the "citation needed" part).  

Note: if we use graphics / templates, people who add things to the wiki don't have to know how to use the graphics/templates I'm proposing. 

But it will be up to someone (or a group or people) to then go through what people have added, and convert it to the format the wiki uses. Which is standard wiki practice: improving things over time.

0
• 8/7/2015

Having been a Blazblue player for a long time, I'm pretty partial to the numpad notation, but I feel like in keeping with the accessibility that Rising Thunder strives for that "Forward Medium" and the like work best for new players to understand

It would probably help to standardize the notation for cancels, links, and KADCs also. It may not be a bad idea to just have a glossary of terms at the start of each character's Moves and Combos section

">" Denotes a link

"xx" denotes a cancel

"KADC" denotes Kinetic Advance Dash Cancel


I've just been using ">" universally, or writing out Kinetic Advance Dash in full when it comes up (For example, Cold Drill > Kinetic Advance Dash > Standing Light)

0
• 8/8/2015

I just created a page listing the notation we need .

Feel free to add any I missed.

0
• 8/8/2015
Dougboard wrote:
Having been a Blazblue player for a long time, I'm pretty partial to the numpad notation, but I feel like in keeping with the accessibility that Rising Thunder strives for that "Forward Medium" and the like work best for new players to understand


Right now "M" looks like it might be best for medium in terms of accessibility and efficiency.

Any reason why you don't like an arrow for "Forward"?

E.g. ->

(We'd have a nice arrow graphic that looks better.)

Dougboard wrote:
It would probably help to standardize the notation for cancels, links, and KADCs also. It may not be a bad idea to just have a glossary of terms at the start of each character's Moves and Combos section


Yep, we should do that.

I'm very much leaning towards a notation that uses graphics.

People don't have to write in that format. We'll edit what people have written later.

The idea is that graphics are nicer to understand. E.g. http://wiki.shoryuken.com/Skullgirls/Squigly

1
• 8/10/2015

First off, I do not think we should have a combo directory on this wiki. Information on moves and such, OK, but with how evolving fighting games are on a whole, combos change almost daily to be more effective and quickly get outdated. And this doesn't count on Character Specific combos, which change drastically, especially when new fighters come out. There's a reason why most character profiles on most wikis have empty combo lists or excluding them all together. It's far too much information to have it continiously updated, especially if a special or a  significant normal gets changed.  

Bruce, I think they way you want the wiki to be is like the Skullgirls wiki. Take a look at Ms. Fortune from the game. http://skullgirls.wikia.com/wiki/Ms._Fortune

You start off on the fluff page, describing the character and all that fun stuff. But above the portrait there's links to Miss Fortune's Gallery(which is a feast for the eyes in this game), Quotes, and Move List. In the Move List, they go over every single thing, with a visual notation, description, and a picture acompanying it

This is contrasted by Shoryuken Wiki's way of doing it for Skullgirls. They go over EVERY single detail for every move. In a very neat and clean way of presenting it it allows beginners, after some time studying it, to understand it. This is, of course, quite ridiculous to do at the moment since we have literally no idea what the frame data is.


Anyways, it's currently up to us to decide. Do we want a bit more casual, beginner friendly way of presenting the characters, or do we want to provide a insane level of information at the cost of being hard to get into?

0
• 8/10/2015
Almkrona wrote:
First off, I do not think we should have a combo directory on this wiki. Information on moves and such, OK, but with how evolving fighting games are on a whole, combos change almost daily to be more effective and quickly get outdated. And this doesn't count on Character Specific combos, which change drastically, especially when new fighters come out. There's a reason why most character profiles on most wikis have empty combo lists or excluding them all together. It's far too much information to have it continiously updated, especially if a special or a significant normal gets changed.


Hmmm, if what you say is accurate, that's a good point. Though is it really accurate that combos change so often that they get invalidated?

It seems more likely to me that, eventually, there will be a fixed cast of characters (I imagine they'll stop adding new characters eventually), and there will be a few really good, basic combos that are good to use.

Until that time, the combos on the wiki will reflect what we know so far--and I think there's huge benefit having something people can reference to get started with a character, like a life-raft they can crab onto in the sea of endless combo possibility (which isn't endless, but seems that way when you start).

I think that's one of the reasons combo videos are so popular.

You might be right, but let's see how things unfold. I'm okay with some information being inaccurate; that's always going to be the case on a wiki.

"Pretty accurate" is a good benchmark, I think. 

If your point is "combos will change greatly during alpha and beta," then yeah, sure, that's reasonable. Though if people want to add them during that period, I'm not going to stop them. 

We can design some templates that specifcally designate sections of the wiki that have information that's in flux. (I have templates for those already on another wiki. I'll start doing templates at some point in the future. They're not quite needed yet.)

Almkrona wrote:
Bruce, I think they way you want the wiki to be is like the Skullgirls wiki. Take a look at Ms. Fortune from the game. http://skullgirls.wikia.com/wiki/Ms._FortuneYou start off on the fluff page, describing the character and all that fun stuff. But above the portrait there's links to Miss Fortune's Gallery(which is a feast for the eyes in this game), Quotes, and Move List. In the Move List, they go over every single thing, with a visual notation, description, and a picture acompanying it

This is contrasted by Shoryuken Wiki's way of doing it for Skullgirls. They go over EVERY single detail for every move. In a very neat and clean way of presenting it it allows beginners, after some time studying it, to understand it. This is, of course, quite ridiculous to do at the moment since we have literally no idea what the frame data is.


Thanks for sharing the skullgirls wiki example. I really like examples; great for comparison.

Re: skullgirls wikia

I think the Skull Girls wikia method has too much visual weight. The images are nice, but have little practical value. Fighting gamers are a practical bunch, and I really want to honour that.

Re: shoryuken wikia

The Shoryuken wiki, for the most part, displays combos and moves lists pretty well.

For Rising Thunder wiki

I really want to see if we can cut down on the "after some time studying it" part, though. So, shorten the distance between "looking at the moves and combo lists" to "understanding what all those characters mean."

I think the current methods are overly jargon-y. Highly efficient if you understand them, but not very accessible to newer players. I think we can hit a better efficiency to accessibility ratio. (Not unlike Rising Thunder.)

When I get a chance I'll share my current "version 1" of a proposed notation for moves and combos.

Almkrona wrote:
Anyways, it's currently up to us to decide. Do we want a bit more casual, beginner friendly way of presenting the characters, or do we want to provide a insane level of information at the cost of being hard to get into?


I think both are not-great options: one makes the wiki less relevant to advanced players, and the other makes it less relevant to casual players.


An example from Blizzard

Blizzard have a design philosophy they use with their games called the "donut principle."

They say the "hardcore" players represent the small, inner circle of your donut. They are fewer in number, but they have great influence on the success fo the game.

The larger, outer circle represents the masses. They're less picky, and while well-meaning, mostly don't know what they're doing and will generally need lots of help.

Blizzard say design your game for the hardcore players, then make that accessible to the casual players.

That's what I want to do with the wiki. I think it's possible.


Re: making the wiki user-friendly

For the record, I'm very, very cognizant of what it's like for a new player (I just recently I helped someone learn how to block), though I also appreciate the depth that advanced players crave.

I really want the wiki to cater to both of those player groups.


Thanks for your feedback

I appreciate your feedback and input on this. I really want this to be a consultative process, while still doing what we can to "advance the craft" rather than just "doing what we've always done." Convention often has a lot of wisdom behind it (that we should take into account), but often a lot of unneccessary historical baggage that could be jettisoned (which we should improve).

1
A FANDOM User
• 8/16/2015

I think A/B/C (or G for gamma) should be used instead of S1/S2/S3.

That way you can have A1/A2 for each special variant, S for super, T for throw and everything is neat and short.

Example combos for Chel:

j.H, H xx B2 xx j.KA, T, f.S

f.H, cr.M xx C1, B1 xx f.KA, f.S

1
• 8/18/2015

Overall I feel that posting combos is a really really good idea as it gives people a reason to consult the wiki, can be updated by people who are up to date fairly easily, and is something thats fairly integral to the character (at least basic combos).  As for annotation of moves I frankly feel like there SHOULDNT be any.

As someone whose new to fighting games in general I can say that most annotations scare away 70% of people who look at them and space isnt a sufficent issue that posting two words a move for a six move string is going to crowd on space or be hard to read.  In the worst case schenario, reduce the average font for listing moves, and just list out every move for the combo.

This is especially true since people are going to be spending time analysing each combo (and I should mention practicing) and arent going to want to scroll back up to the key to see what xx means.  

0
• 8/18/2015
Geronimogilgamesh wrote:
Overall I feel that posting combos is a really really good idea as it gives people a reason to consult the wiki, can be updated by people who are up to date fairly easily, and is something thats fairly integral to the character (at least basic combos).  As for annotation of moves I frankly feel like there SHOULDNT be any.

As someone whose new to fighting games in general I can say that most annotations scare away 70% of people who look at them and space isnt a sufficent issue that posting two words a move for a six move string is going to crowd on space or be hard to read.  In the worst case schenario, reduce the average font for listing moves, and just list out every move for the combo.

This is especially true since people are going to be spending time analysing each combo (and I should mention practicing) and arent going to want to scroll back up to the key to see what xx means.  

I really value your opinion in that regard.

My non-democratic stance is that I really want the wiki to have all the expert information, but be written and formatted in a way that makes things easy to understand for people who have never played fighting games.

I really want zero of those new people to fighting games turned away because our combo lists are acrane fighting game hirogliphics. Though I also want them to be easy to read for experienced players and not super annoying for them. 

We're actually talking about this somewhere else . I'd love to talk about it all here, but people who I want feedback from won't come here, and it's also hard to do some things here. 

That thread is kind of long, so if you want to see our current idea of how to do it, see this post

Still ironing out some cinks (there's actually a lot to consider), but looking at that thread, what do you think of some of what we've proposed? 

Some points

  • We're still discussing what to do for links and followups. ">" is the current candidate, and we're trying to figure out whether a "," (comma) is necessary for followups. (I don't know if Rising Thunder has them.) Having two symbols is way more complex than what I think is good. One symbol (">") seems okay, and maybe says enough. Maybe even that's too complex and should just be "(links into)". I don't know. 
  • We might be able to get rid of "standing." Maybe, maybe not. Open to feedback on that (and all of this).
  • We will hopefully not have a key, and maybe have something where you can mouse over things and get more info about them. But that has to work on mobile. No idea how we're going to do that. CSS and HTML wizards out there, please help.
Write a reply...