Idea: Finishing Moves

[Self]

Finishing moves are, in my opinion, a large part in getting people over. Would The Rock have been as popular without the People's Elbow? Or Randy Orton without the Diamond Cutter? Would anyone even know Petey Williams' name without the Canadian Destroyer? Similarly, poor moves can hurt a superstar. Khali's brain chop. Trevor Murdoch's rolling powerbomb thing. Even The Undertaker's Gogoplata finish seemed to hurt him for a bit, he's got the move over now, but it recieved mixed reactions for a while. Basically, I'm suggesting that you have the ability to give your guys finishing moves, much like you give them gimmicks. - Put in a database of moves, just like is found in the WreSpi series, albeit smaller, to only include moves that could conceivably end a match (which is a very subjective issue) - Each move, just like gimmicks, would require certain stats; power for example to pull off. - They would also have a version of risk/difficulty attached, which would help determine how successful it would be in getting over. - When a person debut's the move, it gives it a starting overness, based on a lot of behind-the-scenes mathematics. These probably wouldn't be the A to F- range to begin with, as no move is super-over right away... except maybe that Canadian Destroyer thing... Anyway. You get a rating, just like a gimmick. - UNLIKE a gimmick, the move can then go up or down in overness, depending on usage, wins, luck etc. A few extra agent notes could be included to allow this. "Devestating Finish" would make sure it's sold like being hit by an atomic bomb, whereas "Kick Out of Finish" would increase a match rating, but lower the Move's overness. Or something. - Profit. A really cool finish can increase match ratings, much in the same way a gimmick can. - Maybe you can have 2 moves... I don't know, sometimes I feel a little distanced from the in-ring action when I'm playing. Something like this would give me that extra bit of knowledge of what my guys are like, which would help me book. I'd also love to see if I could get a hiptoss over as a valid finish. Haven't thought it all through, but... Any feedback?

[rajde]

I think I've heard a saying from wrestlers before that goes it isn't the moves that get you over it is how you work. Meaning a guy could have the coolest moves but it doesn't matter unless he knows psychology and knows how to get over.

[Self]

[QUOTE=rajde;391537]I think I've heard a saying from wrestlers before that goes it isn't the moves that get you over it is how you work. Meaning a guy could have the coolest moves but it doesn't matter unless he knows psychology and knows how to get over.[/QUOTE] I agree. The psychology stat would therefore have a lot to do with how effective the move is on the Match Rating. What I'm suggesting isn't about cool moves giving bonuses, it's about... Let's use an example. Hogan's Leg Drop of Doom is an unimpressive, easy move, but it's popular, and his matches are all the more enjoyable when he does it. He built that up over the years. [I]I'm not saying this should be in the game[/I], I'm just saying "Does this sound fun to anyone else?" Would anyone else want to see if they can get a Headbutt over as a finishing move? Or take advantage of the fact that Mario Heroic can pull off a Shooting Star Leg Drop, and use it to get him over? It sounds like fun to me.

[RKO_HBK]

I imagine it'd be a bitch to code, but who knows? I really, really like the idea myself, I'd love to see it in, just don't know how difficult it'd be to get it in.

[praguepride]

This idea has been discussed several times before and the same argument comes up. BECAUSE finishing moves are very subjective (an elbow drop and a leg drop are two of the most popular "finishers") and because the move itself doesn't really matter, it's the person performing itthat how popular a finisher is would be directly tied to how popular the person doing it is. THEREFORE there really is nothing to be gained by adding this into the game and would probably lead to more problems. If a list was included, I'm sur several threads would immediately pop up that X is a finishing move and needs to be on the list, or Y isn't one and should be removed. Then if these moves are stated (even though the stats wouldn't have a bearing on the game because there is no "good" or "bad" finisher, there's just a popular/talented wrestler and an unpopular/talentless worker trying to do a finisher) there would be arguements that X stat should have Y stat to it. And in the end it doesn't really matter becaause everything about the finisher is tied to the the person performing it. Having to actually micromanage a workers movesets doesn't sound like fun to me, I figure the worker would have the say over what he does or doesn't do in the ring move-wise.

[Self]

You make a lot of good points. I'm going to try do some counterpoints. Please take into consideration the fact that my tone is friendly, even eager for spirited discussion. I'm coming up with stuff on the fly and I thank you for throwing your thoughts at me, forcing me to rethink certain things. [QUOTE=praguepride;391550]it's the person performing itthat how popular a finisher is would be directly tied to how popular the person doing it is.[/QUOTE] Very good point, and the main thing I feel goes against my suggestion. There are very few examples I can think of off the top of my head, of people who weren't on the same level as their moves, but I'll throw some in anyway. [B]Kane -[/B] He's always been at a steady C+ to B+ overness, right? His chokeslam is similar. Remember a few years ago when he tried using a Diving Powerbomb as his finish? How well did that get over? I really think it hurt his matches, whereas the same move performed by a debuting superstar would have been quite cool. [B]Mick Foley[/B] = Over. Mandible Claw = Over. Double Arm DDT = Comparatively Not. I suppose this might depend on the promotion. As someone who only saw Mick in WWE, I've always had a sense of apathy about the move. [B]Petey Williams.[/B] Crowds seem pretty apathetic about him, but when he sets up for that Destroyer, they're on their feet. And my favorite example, because it kind of shows a bit of the challenge involved [B]The Undertaker.[/B] Not only is the Last Ride (in my mind) not as over as the Tombstone, I'd like to point out this Gogoplata finish he's been using recently. The first few times he did it, people were like "Wha?" but by beating a few big names with it, he's gotten it over to the point that when he sets it up, the crowd pops. That's the type of challenge I'd love to see in a game. Getting a move over by booking it correctly. [QUOTE=praguepride;391550]If a list was included, I'm sure several threads would immediately pop up that X is a finishing move and needs to be on the list, or Y isn't one and should be removed.[/QUOTE] What I have in my head is that EVERY move can be conceivably put in the database. From Punch to Super Kick. Headlock to Crossface. Arm Drag to Death Valley Driver. Of course, a manageable list should be maintained for C-Verse, but if a move has/can/will/should ever finish a match, it can go in. Much like a gimmick, you would then selected one for a guy, and name it. "Sweet Chin Music" wouldn't need to be in. "Super Kick" would, which could then be used for Sweet Chin Music, Stevie Kick... um... like 5000 indie wrestlers. [QUOTE=praguepride;391550]Then if these moves are stated (even though the stats wouldn't have a bearing on the game because there is no "good" or "bad" finisher, there's just a popular/talented wrestler and an unpopular/talentless worker trying to do a finisher) there would be arguements that X stat should have Y stat to it.[/QUOTE] In my mind, Move Overness would be initially calculated using the same types of parameters that Gimmicks are rated on. [I]Suitability to the person[/I] (Remmy Skye using a Heart Punch makes no sense, but Big Smack Scott might suit it) [I]Suitability to the company[/I] (A DDT might go over great in a Traditional Promotion, but it would be fairly yawn inducing in a Super-Modern one) the [I]Quality of the Segment[/I] it was debuted in, and a bit of [I]luck[/I]. I don't actually know how Gimmicks are calculated, so forgive me for any errors in that department. The only argument stat-wise would then be what stats do you need to use each move. For example, you'd need a certain amount of Power to use a Military Press (as a finish, which is conceivably to be used on everyone) [QUOTE=praguepride;391550]Having to actually micromanage a workers movesets doesn't sound like fun to me.[/QUOTE] Perfectly valid opinion, but I think the term micromanage makes it seem like a lot more work for the player, than I would intend, were I designing the game. I would expect it to be no more work that picking out a Gimmick. Except that you don't need to change it every so often, and if you want, you can put some effort into developing it. [QUOTE=praguepride;391550]I figure the worker would have the say over what he does or doesn't do in the ring move-wise.[/QUOTE] Can't argue with this, but it's an easily ignorable fact if the feature was to turn out to increase the fun of the game. Which I'll admit is questionable. There is an over-aching lack of point to the idea. I don't figure it would DO that much beyond tweak match ratings a tad, but then what do Gimmicks actually do. Seriously? Does it matter that much if I give someone an A rated gimmick or a D? However, in terms of player immersion it might make things better (not that it's bad now). A few weeks back there was a thread about C-Verse Finishers, and I couldn't believe how much more character it gave the C-Verse guys to know what moves they did. It helped me visualise the characters and gave me another level of enjoyment in the world. I guess Real World mods may find this less use in this department. Well, it's out there. I had a fun... half an hour? I've been writing for half an hour? I'd better go eat.

[djlightning]

Is Jay Lethal's diving elbow, as popular as Randy Macho Man's? Is the Bookend as cool as The Rock Bottom? Does Bret Hart's Sharpshooter=Sting's Scropion Deathlock=everyone else that ever does a sharpshooter? Is Sharkboy's Stunner=Stone Cold's?(I'll admit I love seeing him do it, but it's not the same). Does Edge's Spear=The Gore=Goldberg's Spear? It's not the move it's the guy doing it. I reality The People's Elbow? Hogan's Legdrop? The Worm? Five Knuckle Shuffle? Would you even think of using moves like that in a fight? The are lame, but the way the wrestler pulls them off makes them work.

[Akki]

[QUOTE=Self;391585][B]Kane -[/B] He's always been at a steady C+ to B+ overness, right? His chokeslam is similar. Remember a few years ago when he tried using a Diving Powerbomb as his finish? How well did that get over? I really think it hurt his matches, whereas the same move performed by a debuting superstar would have been quite cool.[/quote] I think that's only because people were used to the Chokeslam and the Tombstone. You don't change something that's been stable for so many years and expect everyone to just roll with it. If he had kept using it, maybe people would have cared. People didn't care because they didn't know what was going on, why he changed a move that had been part of his character for years. And if someone had debuted with the move, it wouldn't have been over until the worker himself was over. [QUOTE=Self;391585][B]Mick Foley[/B] = Over. Mandible Claw = Over. Double Arm DDT = Comparatively Not. I suppose this might depend on the promotion. As someone who only saw Mick in WWE, I've always had a sense of apathy about the move.[/quote] Yeah, this is probably because of WWE. As Manking, which was his most prolific character in WWE, his finisher was the Mandible Claw. But pretty much everywhere else, he used the Double-Arm DDT. I think it also depends on which one of his characters is using it. [QUOTE=Self;391585][B]Petey Williams.[/B] Crowds seem pretty apathetic about him, but when he sets up for that Destroyer, they're on their feet.[/quote] I agree that it's impressive, but if there was nothing else about him to make the fans care, I think he would have been gone from TNA a long time ago. I think he is pretty over in TNA, and the Canadian Destroyer probably has less to do with it now than you think. He's been there for 5 years. Over that time, he's been the captain of Team Canada, X-Division champion, and plenty of other things that helped define his character more than his finisher. Hell, he doesn't even use it as his nickname anymore. Sure, TNA always puts it as their "Move of the Night" because it's impressive, but think about it. If such an impressive move really had an affect on a worker's character, wouldn't Petey be in the Main Event by now? Conversely, wouldn't someone like Umaga or Khali be nowhere NEAR the Main Event? I think that sorta puts it into perspective how much the finisher's "overness" really matters. [QUOTE=Self;391585]And my favorite example, because it kind of shows a bit of the challenge involved [B]The Undertaker.[/B] Not only is the Last Ride (in my mind) not as over as the Tombstone, I'd like to point out this Gogoplata finish he's been using recently. The first few times he did it, people were like "Wha?" but by beating a few big names with it, he's gotten it over to the point that when he sets it up, the crowd pops. That's the type of challenge I'd love to see in a game. Getting a move over by booking it correctly.[/quote] Once again, as I said about Kane, you don't just make such a radical change and expect it to get over immediately. People don't understand, but eventually they get used to it, and it becomes a part of the Undertaker character. I don't really think many finishers have a life of their own. Taker puts his own spin on the Tombstone and the Chokeslam and the Powerbomb that they just become part of the character. And I think a lot of this does come too much from your personal opinion to make an objective argument. The thing with the Last Ride was that it came with such a drastic character change. When the American Badass character got over, the Last Ride got over. When he went back to the Deadman, the Tombstone was that character's move, so he started using it more often. [QUOTE=Self;391585]Perfectly valid opinion, but I think the term micromanage makes it seem like a lot more work for the player, than I would intend, were I designing the game. I would expect it to be no more work that picking out a Gimmick. Except that you don't need to change it every so often, and if you want, you can put some effort into developing it. [/quote] I think it IS making it work, because you have to look through what move would be right for the worker, the character, the promotion, and all of that, just to add or change something that doesn't even affect the game that much. And then do that for every worker. You're doing a mountain of a job for a molehill of an effect. [QUOTE=Self;391585]Can't argue with this, but it's an easily ignorable fact if the feature was to turn out to increase the fun of the game. Which I'll admit is questionable. There is an over-aching lack of point to the idea. I don't figure it would DO that much beyond tweak match ratings a tad, but then what do Gimmicks actually do. Seriously? Does it matter that much if I give someone an A rated gimmick or a D? [/quote] I'm pretty sure it does. A bad gimmick rating, in a Sport Entertainment promotion, can really harm a guy's ability to get over. And changing a guy's gimmick too often to try to get a good one will also hurt them. Changing finishers? You can come up with plenty of excuses, but I still think it's pointless. [QUOTE=Self;391585]However, in terms of player immersion it might make things better (not that it's bad now). A few weeks back there was a thread about C-Verse Finishers, and I couldn't believe how much more character it gave the C-Verse guys to know what moves they did. It helped me visualise the characters and gave me another level of enjoyment in the world. I guess Real World mods may find this less use in this department.[/quote] You can just imagine the finisher, and then do some angles to make it seem like you're trying to get it over. In a WCW game, I did angles where Vampiro would hit his finisher onto people into the concrete floor, and I imagined that as getting the move over, as well as Vampiro. Here's the thing about this feature, and many others that are getting and will get suggested as the TEW games get better. You're asking for a huge change to the game to add just a little speck of 'realism'. It's pointless, and if I had the choice between that and a big change that might not do anything with the game's 'realism' but would be good for the playability, I'd take the latter.

[Self]

Lots of good points, and I can certainly see why people would be against the idea. I'd just like to point out that I never suggested the feature for realism sakes, I suggested it because I thought it would be [I]fun[/I], then used realism to try to explain how it could work, and what effect it could have. The bottom line is that I think I would enjoy 'micromanaging' people's moves (it would make me feel closer to them), and was wondering if anyone agreed. If people disagree, fair enough. The game should be catered towards the masses, at least in terms of features like this.

[Self]

Man, I'm posting a lot in my own thread. Just had a quick flash of what would be a very minimalist approach, that would accomplish a lot of what I'm talking about. [I]Creative > Character Details.[/I] You know where you write the names of the moves in? Put a picture box beside it, where it shows the WreSpi style picture of the move. Like the Wrestler Image, you can change this as you wish. I'd love a whole mini-game where you try to get moves over, but I'd settle for just being able to see what the Stone Hold is, without opening WreSpi or using my imagination.

[RKO_HBK]

This I like a bit more than the original idea, but I can still see the arguments concerning the work needed to make/cut the pics etc, especially for real world mods. How about just a text description? That'd be more informative than just a picture, and easier to do.

[Akki]

[QUOTE=Self;391603]Man, I'm posting a lot in my own thread. Just had a quick flash of what would be a very minimalist approach, that would accomplish a lot of what I'm talking about. [I]Creative > Character Details.[/I] You know where you write the names of the moves in? Put a picture box beside it, where it shows the WreSpi style picture of the move. Like the Wrestler Image, you can change this as you wish. I'd love a whole mini-game where you try to get moves over, but I'd settle for just being able to see what the Stone Hold is, without opening WreSpi or using my imagination.[/QUOTE] No offense, but I think that would be pretty useless. You're suggesting this feature just so you can get more involved. Sorry if I think that sounds just a bit selfish, but lots of people didn't seem to have a problem looking at WreSpi OR using their imagination. To me, this seems more like "I want to learn more about the C-Verse" than "I want this game to be better".

[Self]

[QUOTE=Akki;391606]No offense, but I think that would be pretty useless. You're suggesting this feature just so you can get more involved. Sorry if I think that sounds just a bit selfish, but lots of people didn't seem to have a problem looking at WreSpi OR using their imagination. To me, this seems more like "I want to learn more about the C-Verse" than "I want this game to be better".[/QUOTE] Selfish? I'm not demanding anything, dude. If you disagree, that's fine. It was just a suggestion I put out there. Sort of hurt my feelings there :)

[sheepy]

Personally I'd love to see a description or picture of the move to accompany a wrestler. I'll admit to personally going onto to wikipedia to read about a certain pro-wrestling finisher to see what its like and in what kind of conditions it can be used. This isn't just limited to the c-verse as well as there are plenty of finishing moves out there that a lot of TEW players won't be familiar with. As an occasional dynasty writer this would help a lot with the game. BUT to be clear, I'm not a fan of the finishing moves overness for various reasoness.

[Akki]

[QUOTE=Self;391611]Selfish? I'm not demanding anything, dude. If you disagree, that's fine. It was just a suggestion I put out there. Sort of hurt my feelings there :)[/QUOTE] Sorry. I just couldn't think of a better way to put it. Let's just say I think there are features that would make a lot more of an impact on the game than this.

[wilts]

[QUOTE=Self;391533]Finishing moves are, in my opinion, a large part in getting people over. Would The Rock have been as popular without the People's Elbow? Or Randy Orton without the Diamond Cutter? Would anyone even know Petey Williams' name without the Canadian Destroyer? Similarly, poor moves can hurt a superstar. Khali's brain chop. Trevor Murdoch's rolling powerbomb thing. Even The Undertaker's Gogoplata finish seemed to hurt him for a bit, he's got the move over now, but it recieved mixed reactions for a while. Basically, I'm suggesting that you have the ability to give your guys finishing moves, much like you give them gimmicks. - Put in a database of moves, just like is found in the WreSpi series, albeit smaller, to only include moves that could conceivably end a match (which is a very subjective issue) - Each move, just like gimmicks, would require certain stats; power for example to pull off. - They would also have a version of risk/difficulty attached, which would help determine how successful it would be in getting over. - When a person debut's the move, it gives it a starting overness, based on a lot of behind-the-scenes mathematics. These probably wouldn't be the A to F- range to begin with, as no move is super-over right away... except maybe that Canadian Destroyer thing... Anyway. You get a rating, just like a gimmick. - UNLIKE a gimmick, the move can then go up or down in overness, depending on usage, wins, luck etc. A few extra agent notes could be included to allow this. "Devestating Finish" would make sure it's sold like being hit by an atomic bomb, whereas "Kick Out of Finish" would increase a match rating, but lower the Move's overness. Or something. - Profit. A really cool finish can increase match ratings, much in the same way a gimmick can. - Maybe you can have 2 moves... I don't know, sometimes I feel a little distanced from the in-ring action when I'm playing. Something like this would give me that extra bit of knowledge of what my guys are like, which would help me book. I'd also love to see if I could get a hiptoss over as a valid finish. Haven't thought it all through, but... Any feedback?[/QUOTE] Well, contrary to what everyone else seems to be saying, I really think this is a good suggestion and could imagine it adding an extra bit of fun to the game, ot have a laugh on a long term game and try to get a 'Bitch Slap' as over as the peoples elbow of SC Stunner. Good suggestion, food for thought, will go off to make some angles now to replicate this (ish..) Cheers

[Self]

[QUOTE=Akki;391617]Sorry. I just couldn't think of a better way to put it. Let's just say I think there are features that would make a lot more of an impact on the game than this.[/QUOTE] I think I took your words a little bit too much to heart. My bad. I agree, there are more important things to work on.

[djlightning]

[QUOTE=wilts;391626]Well, contrary to what everyone else seems to be saying, I really think this is a good suggestion and could imagine it adding an extra bit of fun to the game, ot have a laugh on a long term game and try to get a 'Bitch Slap' as over as the peoples elbow of SC Stunner. Good suggestion, food for thought, will go off to make some angles now to replicate this (ish..) Cheers[/QUOTE] Wilts to you I ask the same question I asked before is Shark Boy's Stunner = to Stone Cold's Stunner? The idea that a move in and of itself has value is kind of silly. When Vince McMahon began doing his lame Stunner did it hurt Stonecold's? Not at all.

[Eddy Snow]

I'd see it as more of a superficial thing that wouldn't really add anything, tbh I can't ever thinking a match was made all the better by a finishing move being used..look at the travesty that was the 17 vs 2 match on RAW this past Monday, was it improved any because we saw lots of RKO's?

[hakk99]

There are arguments and counterarguments each way. Most finishers are over because of who does them. On the other hand the Canadian Destroyer is obviously more over than the person doing it. The Cverse has the Immortal Driver that almost single-handedly put over the average Jimmy Cox. Would Jeff Hardy be Jeff Hardy without the top rope moves? And even beyond whether a particular finisher is over, I'd say that all finishers can be booked to look strong or weak and in general kicking out of a finisher adds something to a match. I'm not sure how much it would add to the game, but I agree with the original idea that I want to feel more connected to the in-ring action. I want to book multiple finishers or sick bumps or crimson masks or something.

[Self]

[QUOTE=djlightning;391675]Wilts to you I ask the same question I asked before is Shark Boy's Stunner = to Stone Cold's Stunner? The idea that a move in and of itself has value is kind of silly. When Vince McMahon began doing his lame Stunner did it hurt Stonecold's? Not at all.[/QUOTE] You seem to be misunderstanding my idea a little. The idea I'm putting forward wouldn't give the same move the same value. It would be like a gimmick. If you were to give, for example, a Sit Out Powerbomb to both Big Smack Scott and Mario Heroic, it would generate a different value for each person's version. I'd figure Mario wouldn't have the power necessary to convincingly pull it off against much of the roster, so his value would be lower than Big Smack Scott's version of the move. In the same way that Wrestling Machine 1 using a Machine gimmick gets an A, whereas Erik Strong using it gets a D, the Stone Cold Stunner might have an A rating while the Vinny Mac Stunner might have a C, despite the same, basic "Stunner" template being selected. Each person's version of the move would get it's own value. Of course, certain, more impressive moves would have a better chance of getting over than others. Diamond Cutter vs Heart Punch for example, but it's the suitability to the guy performing it that matters most, not the move itself. It's complicated... perhaps too much so.

[The Phenom]

[QUOTE=Eddy Snow;391679]I'd see it as more of a superficial thing that wouldn't really add anything, tbh I can't ever thinking a match was made all the better by a finishing move being used..look at the travesty that was the 17 vs 2 match on RAW this past Monday, was it improved any because we saw lots of RKO's?[/QUOTE] Yes all the RKO's did help the match, tremendously in fact, as it was easily the best part of the match. I was going to go to sleep after I hap read the OP's post, but the idea just kept running through my head as a fantastic new challenge if implemented correctly. It was brought up about how any move can be built up strongly, but thats not necessarily the case or that moves don't make the wrestler and thats not true either. Imagine if Stone Cold was still using the stun gun, or the million dollar dream as a finish. Say good bye to the first stunner on Vince in MSG. If you tried to run that angle in the game and the move he was using fell flat so would the angle. I was watching the Legacy of Stone Cold DVD(cheap pop!) and during a hollywood blonds match he hit the stun gun and Tony and Larry Z. tried to put it over as this beautiful move, but it was just a stun gun. But what did help it was Ricky Steamboat who was on the receiving end of the maneuver sold it like death, which is another point in the game if you give someone a new finisher to get over and then put him in the ring with someone who can't sell, the move won't get over. Again to use Austin, imagine if his first stunner was on Linda McMahon, would that have looked impressive? Does Randy Orton's RKO on Jake Roberts have the same "wow" factor as the one he performed on RVD, when RVD bumped right on his head? RVD sold it as death, and therefore it got over as death. And in turn the RKO made Orton a more credible threat, when he was out there using the High Cross Body it wasn't getting over, it didn't fit him, wasn't flashy enough and therefore his finish bombed. He didn't have a credible way to finish guys higher on the card than him. Now imagine you were in that predicament in game. You got this young guy who you want to push to the moon (Orton) but you give him a move he can't get over, so you give him a more established move (Ace Crusher) to use. Every move would have an established rating, based on various factors such as: Difficulty, Visual Appeal, Believability. So take the leg drop for instance, you give it to Rey Mysterio and it never gets over because he is too small to conceivably beat anyone with such a move, he has to add a spring board or what have you for it to get over. Same move given to Hulk Hogan and the move is so easy he can't screw up even with his limited skills, he is such a showman any move he does is automatically more visually appealing (he adds height to the jump, plays to the crowd before hand, has a set up move, etc.), and a man of his size could believably incapacitate another man by dropping his leg on his opponents throat. Viola! You now have an equation that makes an over finish, it fits his skill level as a simple move but just as important he is simply charismatic to get it over. Put him over Andre the Giant with the leg drop, and it is now one of the most famous and over moves in all of wrestling. To this day Hogan's Leg Drop = Death. Its a friggin' leg drop, but not when Hogan does it. And that would be cool to simulated in the game. Likewise, as everything must have a downside not everyone can just do the most visually pleasing move and have it work, ability is taken into account. While Muta is good enough to get the Shining Wizard over, Hurricane is not. While the Canadian Destroyer is a visually stunning its not so much when Trevor Murdoch does it because he doesn't have the ability to make it look nice, thus he does not have the ability to get the move over. Same thing for Eddie Guerrero's frogsplash vs Chavo's, or Chris Benoit's crossface vs Sid's. Shawn Michael's Superkick vs Stevie Richards. Etc. etc. Even though the Million Dollar Dream(or the cobra clutch) has an established rating with the Ted Dibiase, Austin who became the most popular wrestler of all time couldn't get it over, it just didn't fit. And while I remember a time the Stunner couldn't put away Savio Vega, it was built up as such a feared move that it was able to put away the best in the business. Likewise Jake Roberts DDT, compared to the million other DDT's in the wrestling business, this can be attributed to their unique way of performing the move after so many years. No one does the ankle lock like Angle, Orton's RKO isn't like DDP's Diamond Cutter, they are unique. That's how Rock got over an elbow drop that started as a joke, it was unique and well protected. But imagine if no one was ever beat with it? It would still be just a (much ballyhooed) elbow drop. Even though Cena's Death Valley Driver is probably the worse looking in the business, its the most protected and therefore the most respected. And that is important if you give a guy a finish no one will job to you can never get it over, thus the wrestler never gets over because he can only win by shenanigans. Or what if you killed a move by having people kick out of it too much like Jericho's Lionsault? Imagine having Collin Delaney kick out of the Tombstone? How could Taker ever put away a big name with it again? And thats the catch 22, while having someone kick out of a finisher can add a boost to a match, have it done too often, or by the wrong person, or in the wrong match, could kill the finish. You have a guy with all the skills, the looks, the charisma, but you can't get his finish over and you can't get him up the card because his momentum and heat have stalled with the lack of a big finish. One day you tell him "hey kid try this" he does out there and does a legdrop, a friggin legdrop and it works, crowd eats it up, and the rest as they say becomes history.

[djthefunkchris]

There is no better finisher then.... "THE FINGER OF DEATH"!!

[BadFurDay]

Love the idea! Seems totally logical to me that finishers should work that way :) [QUOTE=djthefunkchris;391837]There is no better finisher then.... "THE FINGER OF DEATH"!![/QUOTE] Actually, it's the fingerpoke of doom. And I'm so using that as my character's finisher if this idea is implemented :D

[Dolfanar]

I really like this suggestion. THe only concern I have is the extra level of micro-management it would add. I'm already sick of the "Gimmicks" mini-game, where you play a constant game of musical chair of gimmicks. OTOH if it was as transparent and unintrusive as the way Title overness/prestige is implemented, it could be fine. What I like about this is how it actually does something with match booking, and adds a new level of immersion. I agree that there is a HUGE disconnect to the matches in the game, and this would help alot. I like the trade off you could have of having two over workers with over finishers trade and steal finishes (Like Rock v Austin a few years back), possibly lowering the overness of the finishers, but adding to a match. Also I would love the challenge of taking a guy like a young Bret Hart and trying to get his submission move over by having go clean over everybody for a while to build up its credibility.