A combat animations rule?

[Antvasima]

There is a current discussion about the combat animation feats of the game Mugen Souls:

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/785331

Building on this, I wonder if we should write an official discussion rule regarding that combat animations should only be used if they do not severely contradict the scale of the rest of the story, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Might be a good idea to have such a rule.

 

[JustSomeWeirdo]

I agree that attack animations should not be used unless the story backs it up, making a rule about this is a good idea

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I agree that such rule would be a good idea.

 

[Reppuzan]

The only issue I have with this is the fact that only a handful of games depict the damage the attack would deal to the environment.

For example, in Disgaea, nameless characters can recreate the big bang, but the actual battleground is completely unaffected in the aftermath for gameplay purposes.

While this is consistent with various other feats, where do we draw the line for this? This is particularly prevalent in RPGs and Shooters.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

I'm vehemently agaainst the idea that combat animations cannot be used, as it shows severe bias against games, specifically RPGs

 

[Reppuzan]

As Cal stated, I'd rather we evaluate these feats on a case by case basis, since many series (such as Final Fantasy) have their best feats in Attack Animations.

By creating a blanket rule, we'd be dismissing many series' best feats overall, such as Zodiark's Final Eclipse.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

Yeah, having feats discussed on a case by case basis is fine as we can get a reasonable solution on whether it's fair or not. Straight up disallowing feats from animations is outright unfair.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Hmm, having a blanket rule might not be a good idea, should probably be taken on a case by case basis, instead of outright banning combat animations.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we preferably need to address the issue somehow, but an outright ban was never going to be imposed.

If I remember correctly, in Mugen Souls it seems like the final villain was somebody that might destroy the planet, and this was regarded as a serious threat, which would strongly contradict galaxy-destroying battle animations.

 

[Reppuzan]

@Antvasima

I suppose so. But there are also things like colony crashes in Mega Man X being considered a huge threat even though their are characters who can casually twist space-time and create black holes.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

@Antvasima In that case the lore of the series outweighs the combat animation, things such as lore or how the story builds up a villains power or on screen feats and statements, would outweigh battle animation i think, unless nothing contradicts the animations, and they add to the lore, like in the case of disgaea where you have statements of big bang attacks and you then see them in the combat animation.

 

[Reppuzan]

@Celestial

There's also things like characters being afraid to fall off cliffs even though they've tanked much worse before (very common in RPGs) and being injured by relatively weak attacks (i.e. MegaMan.EXE being harmed by fodder viruses despite taking attacks from the Cyber World busting Bass.EXE).

While they should be a general guideline for the power of the verse, we need to take this carefully to avoid needlessly lowballing characters.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

@Reppuzan I agree

 

[Antvasima]

I also agree. If we reach the conclusion that we have to count the combat animations in Mugen Souls for the sake of consistency, I will ask LazyHunter to adjust the profiles accordingly.

 

[Sera_EX]

Case-by-case is better.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Do you have suggestions for how to word a regulation?

 

[ArbitraryNumbers]

I'm with everyone else on this. Combat animations should be a case-by-case basis.

 

[Saikou_The_Lewd_King]

I'm honestly not sure why we would ban Combat animations in the first place. Yes, they often end up with the highest feats of the verse, but that's the whole goddamn point. A lot of games have their feats in such animation.

 

[Antoniofer]

I would prefer case-by-case, special/chareacteristic attacks should have priority above the most common attacks, and cinematic ones above the last one.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I 100% agree with Howard, Sera and Saikou. There is no reason to reject combat animations other than "They look to impressive for my tastes, so they must be hyperbolic and not literal".

I also agree with Reppuzan that while lower feats being treated as more impressive by the narrative might be an argument, it is often not legitimate, such as with Megaman which has numerous Tier 5 and 4 feats that the writers never realize are there.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

I agree with Cal, Sera, Saikou, Matt and Reppu here.

 

[Antvasima]

So, any suggestions regarding how to word a regulation?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

A paragraph explaining that we usually accepted them as legitimate in things such as JRPGs, but that they should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis and on occasion, they can be contradictory outliers.

 

[Antvasima]

That seems fine to me.

 

[Antvasima]

So, any further input here?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I can try writing a way to say this.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

"Generally we will accept Attack and Special Move animatons for things such as JRPGs and Fighting Games, as they are demonstrations of a character's powers and abilities through a visually dynamic way, and are often proven to be literal in sources such as guidebooks (For instance, Final Fantasy's Summons and Limit Breaks). However, they can occasionally be proven to be contradictory with the overal power level of a verse, and should therefore be analyzed on a case-by-case basis."

Sound good?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I think that's ok

 

[Antvasima]

I rewrote the regulation somewhat:

"We tend to accept attack and special move animations for computer games, as they are generally legitimate demonstrations of different characters' powers and abilities, that are recurrently confirmed within guidebooks and similar sources. However, they can severely contradict the othervise displayed scale of a verse, and should therefore be evaluated on a case-by-case basis."

 

[Antvasima]

So, are the rest of you okay with if I add the above text as a new discussion rule?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Go ahead.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Antvasima]

After inspecting both the Discussion Rules and Editing Rules pages, I thought that it seemed more appropriate to add the regulation to the latter mention instead. My apologies for being forgetful:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/index.php?title=Editing_Rules&diff=1344329&oldid=1332028

 

[Reppuzan]

@Ant

Not a problem with me.