RW Forced Chemistry Discussion

[jbergey_2005]

 

Jbergey, I think mostly what has been said is using the neutral chemistry with alot of the tag teams, so that they don't get "Bad" chemistry. This is something that would work with people your not sure of, I believe...

 

 

DOTT is in good hands with you in command:) If you take on such a thing again I can help out in some way. I'm not really familiar with other federations other than the WWF and some of the wrestlers that went through the WWF at the time but I could help out with some part of it if you needed additional help.

[MrCanada]

"IF" you do really understand the concept/feature. You should note that one of the most important features of the game is that which I bolded....

 

I personally dont find that very important. I use my imagination to make games different. I use different stars, different styles of promotions, ext to "change the game play". Its almost as if random chemistry has been added simply to help urge those along who have no sense of invention or imagination to begin with. Is it really a "sky is falling" moment in peoples lives that some people enjoy booking Edd Stone vs. Mainstream Hernandez? And there must be chemistry in the game to handicap their ability to book such a match? Thats the thing about the current system I think most people have issue with. I cant even count the number of games where I've build up a feud only to have it flop because of chemistry, and then I simply quit the game because I get so angry about it.

 

The people argueing so much for the current system and calling the new ability to assign chemistry just really come off as a little snobbish to me. "I love the system and the challenge it poses when two workers must avoid working with each other at all costs out of the blue. It allows me to diversify my game playing experiance." Or... you could just do that yourself.

[djthefunkchris]

I personally dont find that very important. I use my imagination to make games different. I use different stars, different styles of promotions, ext to "change the game play". Its almost as if random chemistry has been added simply to help urge those along who have no sense of invention or imagination to begin with. Is it really a "sky is falling" moment in peoples lives that some people enjoy booking Edd Stone vs. Mainstream Hernandez? And there must be chemistry in the game to handicap their ability to book such a match? Thats the thing about the current system I think most people have issue with. I cant even count the number of games where I've build up a feud only to have it flop because of chemistry, and then I simply quit the game because I get so angry about it.

 

The people argueing so much for the current system and calling the new ability to assign chemistry just really come off as a little snobbish to me. "I love the system and the challenge it poses when two workers must avoid working with each other at all costs out of the blue. It allows me to diversify my game playing experiance." Or... you could just do that yourself.

 

Using this same logic, could you not just forget the game entirely, and just think it up yourself? I mean, you could... You could definately do what your talking about.

 

Don't get me wrong, I do understand where your coming from. I personally think that people are being a bit too worried about it that don't want the feature, as they can just bassically erase any unwanted chemistry from the database themselves (and easier with the multiple delete). So I do think people are over-reacting in that sense. I do think I get what your saying.

 

I just think your also leaning a little too far the other direction, perhaps to balance the discussion out a little? If people weren't so concerned, maybe you would be posting differently? I don't know, it's a nice little feature, and I've always been impressed with it, from the standpoint I already posted (Re-playability).

[MrCanada]

Using this same logic, could you not just forget the game entirely, and just think it up yourself? I mean, you could... You could definately do what your talking about.

 

Don't get me wrong, I do understand where your coming from. I personally think that people are being a bit too worried about it that don't want the feature, as they can just bassically erase any unwanted chemistry from the database themselves (and easier with the multiple delete). So I do think people are over-reacting in that sense. I do think I get what your saying.

 

I just think your also leaning a little too far the other direction, perhaps to balance the discussion out a little? If people weren't so concerned, maybe you would be posting differently? I don't know, it's a nice little feature, and I've always been impressed with it, from the standpoint I already posted (Re-playability).

 

I'll accept that. Arguments/debates are like a sailboat, if you think its leaning to far one way, you lean to far the other to balance it out. I think both sides (from me to Adam) are being a bit extreme for such a simple feature. In the end, as you said, it doesnt really matter. It is in the game, Adam isnt going to pull it from the game (for those sayings its a terrible idea). And since its in the game, those saying why its "good" have kind of already won since its in the game.

 

Those who dont want it, dont use, those who do, do. I think this is actually become more of an ideological debate between conservatives and liberals, lol. If you think about it. Its one side going "I like the game this way, and playing it any other way would be outrageous" and you have the other side going "we should just be more open and accepting of all (except conservatives) while having gays ruining marriages in the streets!" lol.

[lazorbeak]

I personally dont find that very important. I use my imagination to make games different. I use different stars, different styles of promotions, ext to "change the game play". Its almost as if random chemistry has been added simply to help urge those along who have no sense of invention or imagination to begin with. Is it really a "sky is falling" moment in peoples lives that some people enjoy booking Edd Stone vs. Mainstream Hernandez? And there must be chemistry in the game to handicap their ability to book such a match? Thats the thing about the current system I think most people have issue with. I cant even count the number of games where I've build up a feud only to have it flop because of chemistry, and then I simply quit the game because I get so angry about it.

 

The people argueing so much for the current system and calling the new ability to assign chemistry just really come off as a little snobbish to me. "I love the system and the challenge it poses when two workers must avoid working with each other at all costs out of the blue. It allows me to diversify my game playing experiance." Or... you could just do that yourself.

 

Seriously I love how you are arguing every game having subtle differences is a BAD thing because you would like to reserve the right to control the changes yourself.

 

Again, as an EWR vet, I figured out almost instantly "by jove if I book this AJ Styles fellow in a match with someone else who is good they will have a fantastic match every week!" And then patted myself on the back as my promotion gained in popularity every month. I was the greatest booker ever!

 

In a game that gives us access to view every nearly every ability in the game, chemistry is one of the only things you can't directly control (up to this point). I just try to imagine myself going "ugh I will just start a new save" in the event that AJ Styles and Low Ki didn't result in a 100% Match Quality EVERY TIME.

 

Besides, I'm sure it's been said to you before, but if you want to book Edd Stone vs. Mainstream Hernandez, DO IT. So you won't get a perfect grade: so what? Two good wrestlers with poor chemistry aren't going to be booed out of the building.

[crayon]

Genius idea for Ryland to announce this feature on the Friday, so there's a whole weekend for people to get it out of their system

 

Anyhow, just to totally pimp myself, I've made a suggestion about tweaking the forced chemistry feature (over in the Suggestion forums, oddly enough), and I'll ask anyone to go over there and drop a comment on it if you feel strongly for or against it. You never know, it may or may not make a difference.

[alden]

A few people have brought up how flair and steamboat should have good chem.......can they explain why they think they would have good chem? I gave my view of how they would not have good chem.........i am very curious as how adam has explained chem how people would say they would have good chem together.

[djthefunkchris]

A few people have brought up how flair and steamboat should have good chem.......can they explain why they think they would have good chem? I gave my view of how they would not have good chem.........i am very curious as how adam has explained chem how people would say they would have good chem together.

 

I think it's mostly a "Neutral" chemistry at worst for them, They definately shouldn't have a chance to have negative chemistry.

 

They were just on top of thier game, both complimented the other, in a way that was just not the same in other match's they had. As was said, both could sell a lemon and make it look like a diamond. So they complimented and enhanced each other tremendously. To be honest, I think they could still put on a match that would would impress the mass's. Matter of fact, I believe they could probably put on a better match between themselves right now, this year, then they could with anyone else. SO I guess I do think they should have good chemistry, not just neutral.

 

Could Jericho or someone else take one of their places? Probably, after many practice's and rehersals. However, they did it back then, when there wasn't alot of chance's for rehersals and such. They did it "winging" it, over and over throughout the whole country.

 

Hope that answer's your question.

[ampulator]

Ric Flair had always liked working with Ricky Steamboat and Sting. After Sting, Ricky Steamboat is the second name you think about when you mention "Ric Flair's greatest opponents".

 

One issue is... Ric Flair ALWAYS brought his best, or near-best, whenever he wrestled those two. It's hard to say it's good chemistry, but it's definitely true that he had no bad chemistry with either one.

[Moe Hunter]

Maria and Cena have great chemistry in more ways the one.

 

Id also say HBK brings out the best in Cena.

 

If their WM match is "the best" of Cena, which it should be since it's a Mania match against Michaels, then truly he really isn't much good. How long did he sell all that working on his leg before he started *leaping* about the ring?

 

And Maria's best work IMO was at the Trial of Bischoff, with Foley and Vince.

[jbergey_2005]

If their WM match is "the best" of Cena, which it should be since it's a Mania match against Michaels, then truly he really isn't much good. How long did he sell all that working on his leg before he started *leaping* about the ring?

 

And Maria's best work IMO was at the Trial of Bischoff, with Foley and Vince.

 

You must have missed the hour long HBK vs Cena match on RAW? I might have forgotten the WM match. If it was bad than obviously they dont have good chemistry. I just think back to that 1 hour RAW match and it was one of the few times they just let Cena wrestle and he looked good.

 

Cena/Maria was meant more so as a joke as Cena is always messing around with her.

[Genadi]

HBK brings out the best in anyone, even those who hate him.

[mjdgoldeneye]

Here's a question:

 

Does it seem viable to anyone to give positive chemistry to 2 workers (as a team, opponents, etc.) that have very different styles or sizes that perform well in the given case simply to cancel out the negative impact that their differing styles/sizes/stats would have?

 

For example, there's plenty of tiny guy/big guy sorts of teams where one relies on aerial stuff and the other relies on brawling. Would using chemistry at all balance the intrinsic penalties for mismatching guys like that?

 

Also, I have to say Shelton Benjamin and Shawn Michaels should have positive chemistry. Now, I know they're both capable of putting on a good match on their own, but I've seen them 1-on-1 twice and both matches were exceptional in my opinion.

[Rocland]

You must have missed the hour long HBK vs Cena match on RAW? I might have forgotten the WM match. If it was bad than obviously they dont have good chemistry. I just think back to that 1 hour RAW match and it was one of the few times they just let Cena wrestle and he looked good.

 

Cena/Maria was meant more so as a joke as Cena is always messing around with her.

 

Oh wow, I completely forgot about that match! I need to watch that Cena/HBK from raw.. now!

[jbergey_2005]

Oh wow, I completely forgot about that match! I need to watch that Cena/HBK from raw.. now!

 

I wish I still had it.

[ampulator]

Let's not get into a John Cena discussion. First off, he's the "symptom" at worst, and not the "problem". Second, he has nothing to do with this thread.

 

As for chemistries go, John Cena doesn't have a lot of chemistry with any of the current main eventers in WWE. Not that it's bad chemistry, but just neutral chemistry.

 

Against Randy Orton? Neutral Chemistry. Against Triple H? Neutral Chemistry. Against Shawn Michaels? Neutral Chemistry. He has wrestled each many, many, many times, and in many kinds of matches. Just no spark. Nothing.

 

Ironically, he has pretty good tag chemistry with Randy Orton, of all things. That's sad and funny at the same time. I find their tag matches together are way more entertaining than their matches against each other.

[alden]

I think i have found two people that would have good tag chemistry at least......the steiners......alone they are tarrible.....even when they were in there prime they were tarrible......together the steiner brothers were a dominating tag team.......i would say they have great chemistry together...

[jbergey_2005]

Let's not get into a John Cena discussion. First off, he's the "symptom" at worst, and not the "problem". Second, he has nothing to do with this thread.

 

As for chemistries go, John Cena doesn't have a lot of chemistry with any of the current main eventers in WWE. Not that it's bad chemistry, but just neutral chemistry.

 

Against Randy Orton? Neutral Chemistry. Against Triple H? Neutral Chemistry. Against Shawn Michaels? Neutral Chemistry. He has wrestled each many, many, many times, and in many kinds of matches. Just no spark. Nothing.

 

Ironically, he has pretty good tag chemistry with Randy Orton, of all things. That's sad and funny at the same time. I find their tag matches together are way more entertaining than their matches against each other.

 

Why would you start your post with "lets not get into a John Cena discussion" then follow it with 4 paragraphs about Cena?

 

Anyway, since the topic is real world chemistry which is what was being discussed I dont understand why he "has nothing to do with the thread."

[Genadi]

I think i have found two people that would have good tag chemistry at least......the steiners......alone they are tarrible....

 

I disagree on that, Steiner may have sucked to alot of smart fans but he was more over solo then his years with Rick. Suck in ring or not (I think that's subjective also as there are a bunch matches from WCW I enjoyed of his) he saw more success as a singles star. I'm not sure there are too many teams I would consider, DerekB raised a good point with the Hardy Boyz though imo.

 

I don't think even Triple H and Goldberg deserve bad chemistry, even taking into account their dissapointing series of matches. If you factor in the WWE product at the time, Hunters (and to an extent Goldbergs) physical condition, personalities, momentum and a few other things the matches didn't have much chance of being any better.

[Gigas]

The mention of Goldberg reminds me of Lesnar/Goldberg. Although that match had so many external factors to just chalk it up to bad chemistry.

 

And I think Cena has above average chemistry with Orton.

 

 

And on the topic, how many different levels of chemistry are there on the positive and negative end? (pretty good, excellent, etc)

[thatoneguy]

On positive, there's Good and Great. On negative, there's Bad and Awful.

[Karl_Kitsch]

When I think of bad chemistry, the first thing I think of is Jericho and Cena. I love Jericho, I think he is a fantastic worker. Cena is very carryable, having had good matches with JBL right before his feud with Jericho. Hell, Cena had a good set of matches with Umaga. Thing is, for reasons no one has ever explained to me, Cena and Jericho put on truly terrible matches together. I know Jericho can carry guys and that Cena can be carried, but together it is a total trainwreck. That, to me, is a perfect example of bad chemistry.

[Zakarl]

I'd give good chemistry to Warrior/Rude, Rude/Steamboat & Savage/Page for sure:

 

Warrior was simply taken up to a whole other level when he wrestled with Rude.

 

Rude & Steamboat were two great workers having matches that were even better.

 

Savage/Page is a case of one great worker and one really good worker putting on fantastic matches and meshing together amazingly.

 

I support tag chemistry as well: the Outlaws were pretty much nothing individually but together it just worked. Not necessarily giving them matches significantly better than with other partners, but in terms of playing off each other it was vastly superior. There's a reason why neither of them could ever again get anywhere close to as over as they were back then.

 

Also: I'd put Cena/Orton down as having bad opponent chemistry. Every one of their matches together has been below even their usual standards.

[Genadi]

Also: I'd put Cena/Orton down as having bad opponent chemistry.

 

As for chemistries go, John Cena doesn't have a lot of chemistry with any of the current main eventers in WWE. Not that it's bad chemistry, but just neutral chemistry.

Against Randy Orton? Neutral Chemistry.

 

And I think Cena has above average chemistry with Orton.

 

This is another reason I don't want to add them to my mods, talk about subjective.

[Phil Parent]

This is another reason I don't want to add them to my mods, talk about subjective.

 

Right. Personally I'm not touching this with a ten feet pole and I'm happy it can be turned off.