RW Forced Chemistry Discussion

[ampulator]

I have to say Michaels and Cena DO NOT have good chemistry. Do they have bad chemistry? Probably not. Good? No.

[Gigas]

How about Lita and Edge?

 

Heyman and Lesnar?

 

Im not sure how the manager chemistry really works though. It seems it'd cover angles and matches.

[jbergey_2005]

I have to say Michaels and Cena DO NOT have good chemistry. Do they have bad chemistry? Probably not. Good? No.

 

Any particular reason you feel this way? Or just because you say so?

[Phantom Stranger]

Here's a wacky thought.

 

Next TEW, there's going to be this feature. It breaks down exactly what goes into calculating the results of a match.

 

How about, in order to work out how much chemistry affects things, we use this feature...

 

...and see how much chemistry affects things?

 

THEN you can apply it to your mod more effectively with knowledge of how it works.

[jbergey_2005]

How about Lita and Edge?

 

Heyman and Lesnar?

 

Im not sure how the manager chemistry really works though. It seems it'd cover angles and matches.

 

Id so no on Lita/Edge. Did Lita enhance the Edge character? IMO no. Could Michelle McCool or Trish Stratus have done the same thing as Lita? I believe so. Her heelish tramp gimmick got over well as it was what people actually felt about her because of the Matt Hardy situation.

[Historian]

Gorilla got the worst announcer several years running, because while he could be entertaining, for that era's style he was not a good 'announcer.' I for one, never liked Gorilla as an announcer, I thought he was helped by Heenan, but only because Heenan is utterly fantastic, and was great even when he didn't care.

 

But to the topic of chemistry mods... I am rather indifferent to it. I currentlyh ave two mods that I cycle back and forth between, one real world mod, and the 1975 C Verse mod... If I decide to get any of the mods for TEW 2010, I'm going to mass delete all the pre-set chemistry that comes with the games, and make my own if I think there is a situation that calls for it. Not to make the game easier, but there are some teams I think should have neutral chemistry, not good or bad... I think that is the chemistry feature I will most use, and mostly for tag teams... I think anyone who 'hates' this feature, or thinks it was a 'bad idea' really need to think hard about it. It's not a bad idea because you don't agree with it... And what you might think is a bad idea NOW, might change in a few months when you're playing the game, and you realize the feature wasn't all that bad, or that people didn't misuse the feature.

 

When I read diaries [and cheap pop for the Remi QAW diary, and James Casey's Mid-Atlantic Diary as my two favorites], I could care less if they've changed stats around to make the game more suited to them, so I doubt I'll care if they make people have good chemistry with each other.. Because, I do not believe people will do it just so they can stick with the same old same old... For instance, maybe someone really thinks Dolph Ziggler should be the new franchise heel of Smackdown [i just decided to pick him for argument's purposes], and they want to give him good chemistry with other members of the Smackdown roster, I don't think it should matter to the diary reader that they did... Because no one really wants to stick with the same story-lines, because it does get repetitive, and people who want to get the maximum experience out of their game, they're going to have to change it up. For instance, I like to do Dan Stone Jr versus Sean Mcfly, and then I also like to bring in Hell Monkey and push him to the moon against Stone Jr...

 

Just because the feature is there, does not mean people are going to misuse it so they can do the same feuds over and over again... People tend to like change, and, I'm willing to bet that most people have several workers they like, and numerous main event feuds they want the opportunity to run... I don't think this is going to hinder anyone's creativity, or give any diary writer a reason to just stick with the same thing... Because if they are writing a diary, chances are they are creative, and I don't foresee creative people sticking with the same feuds....

 

Now, this post turned out to be longer than I expected, but hopefully I conveyed my points sufficently...

 

BTW: Adam Ryland, Miss Elizabeth was not useless. While not vocal, she provided an element that Savage did not have, and the ability to run story-lines and provide finishes that weren't otherwise there. While I do not think she was not overly talented, nor would I say she and Savage had 'great chemistry' because she did not make him perform better than he did without her, I wouldn't call her useless

[djthefunkchris]

 

BTW: Adam Ryland, Miss Elizabeth was not useless. While not vocal, she provided an element that Savage did not have, and the ability to run story-lines and provide finishes that weren't otherwise there. While I do not think she was not overly talented, nor would I say she and Savage had 'great chemistry' because she did not make him perform better than he did without her, I wouldn't call her useless

 

My first thought was "Generic". The added elimants she brought to the table were "generic" in that you could have replaced her with quite a few different women, and would have had the same results (maybe even better). Just my opinion of that though.

 

I wouldn't give them bad or good chemistry..> Perhaps neutral to make sure that they do not get bad chemistry... Other then that, I don't think "who" it was mattered, as long as it was the same person for the whole storyline(s).

[EricAdams]

I'm mostly a ROHbot so off the top of my head:

 

Nigel McGuinnes vs. Bryan Danielson

Samoa Joe vs. CM Punk

Austin Aries vs. Tyler Black

Jimmy Jacobs vs. BJ Whitmer

 

other than that - Steamboat vs. Flair and HBK vs. Undertaker.

[shamelessposer]

HBK vs. Undertaker.

 

This is an example of a pair who don't need chemistry. Two guys going into the biggest pay-per-view of the year with a heavily hyped feud, a ton of momentum, B-to-B-plus popularity and high stats going all out are more often than not going to put on the match of the night. Michaels-Foley, on the other hand, might deserve chemistry since the two performed to a high standard with very little in the way of buildup or preparation.

[Genadi]

Samoa Joe vs. CM Punk

 

Agree on this 100%, their styles definitely helped mesh the matches together but that feud was the last real storyline I enjoyed from start to finish and felt paid off perfectly. They took eachother to another level.

[TeemuFoundation]

What do you guys think about Eddie Guerrero and Kurt Angle? Am I completely off by suggesting that those two would have bad chemistry in TEW terms? Two unbelievable workers who, on paper, should be able to put on the greatest match in the history or professional wrestling, given a good 20 minutes. But for some reason that didn't happen during their feud in 2004.

 

Don't get me wrong, the matches were good, no doubt, but they weren't as good as the "combined stats of the two workers", if we were to look at the matches from a TEW point of view. Those two were great workers so they could work through the problems and have a better match than most of the guys on the roster, but I do feel that the matches should have been a lot better than they were.

 

But then again Eddie was having his heart problems and sometimes couldn't go all out in the ring and that may have been a factor. Angle talked about this in his shoot interview. May his soul rest in peace.

[Zeel1]

What do you guys think about Eddie Guerrero and Kurt Angle? Am I completely off by suggesting that those two would have bad chemistry in TEW terms? Two unbelievable workers who, on paper, should be able to put on the greatest match in the history or professional wrestling, given a good 20 minutes. But for some reason that didn't happen during their feud in 2004.

 

Don't get me wrong, the matches were good, no doubt, but they weren't as good as the "combined stats of the two workers", if we were to look at the matches from a TEW point of view. Those two were great workers so they could work through the problems and have a better match than most of the guys on the roster, but I do feel that the matches should have been a lot better than they were.

 

But then again Eddie was having his heart problems and sometimes couldn't go all out in the ring and that may have been a factor. Angle talked about this in his shoot interview. May his soul rest in peace.

 

Maybe..when you have good enough workers in TEW together, they can overcome chemistry issues and still put on good matches. For instance, in a WWE updated game I ran, Jericho and Taker had bad chemistry, but still put together a B-rated match. And I know in PS's Quiet Retirement diary, Troy Tornado and Tommy Cornell still put on great matches despite not clicking, so a match-up like Angle/Guerrero should most definately be able to work through it.

[Vladamire Dracos]

I laughed so hard I cried. Thank you Vlady.

 

Awesome, that was the response I was aiming for.

 

Another example of good chemistry I feel: Tommy Dreamer vs. Raven. Raven vs. Sandman seemed to have good chemistry as well.

[BurningHamster]

But then again Eddie was having his heart problems and sometimes couldn't go all out in the ring and that may have been a factor. Angle talked about this in his shoot interview. May his soul rest in peace.

 

Yeah, not sure if it was so much a lack of chemistry as just Guerrero's health problems kind of messing him up. Plus, Angle in my mind as good as he is has never really been the kind of guy who could hold a match together in my opinion.

 

Guerrero and JBL on the other hand I would say had some chemistry. Never was a fan of JBL until he was in the ring with Guerrero.

[Phantom Stranger]

Maybe..when you have good enough workers in TEW together, they can overcome chemistry issues and still put on good matches. For instance, in a WWE updated game I ran, Jericho and Taker had bad chemistry, but still put together a B-rated match. And I know in PS's Quiet Retirement diary, Troy Tornado and Tommy Cornell still put on great matches despite not clicking, so a match-up like Angle/Guerrero should most definately be able to work through it.

 

Yeah, I've never been too horribly worried about bad chemistry - I avoid using it in future, but it doesn't stop me finishing the program I started.

 

Tornado and Cornell hit A twice despite bad chemistry.

[eayragt]

Brawler vs Brawler

Techincian vs Technician

Cruiser vs Cruiser

 

Every time someone suggests these combos as good chemistry, please stop and think. If you put a good technician against another good technician you're meant to get a great match. Kurt Angle vs Chris Beniot should have always been an outstanding match based on their skills, not chemistry. They had great matches together, yes, but did they have chemistry with one another? I have no evidence of that.

[Hive]

How about Shawn Michaels and Scott Hall? While I haven't seen any of their matches myself, I hear they had some pretty stunning encounters... and iirc, one of their matches got voted match of the year.

 

Not saying they definately *should* have good chemistry, just curious to hear what someone who may actually have seen some of their matches feel.

[djthefunkchris]

How about Shawn Michaels and Scott Hall? While I haven't seen any of their matches myself, I hear they had some pretty stunning encounters... and iirc, one of their matches got voted match of the year.

Not saying they definately *should* have good chemistry, just curious to hear what someone who may actually have seen some of their matches feel.

 

I believe that was a ladder match, and the gimmick (being the first for WWE I believe) match being what really hyped it up.

[TeemuFoundation]

Goldberg and DDP? Their matches were better than they had any right to be. Especially the one at Halloween Havoc 1998, which was actually a very good match. Something no one expected it to be. Those two had something, in my opinion.

[King Chono]

How about Shawn Michaels and Scott Hall? While I haven't seen any of their matches myself, I hear they had some pretty stunning encounters... and iirc, one of their matches got voted match of the year.

 

Not saying they definately *should* have good chemistry, just curious to hear what someone who may actually have seen some of their matches feel.

 

In terms of actual skill, Scott Hall was probably one of the most underrated workers of the 90's. People only look at his matches after he stopped caring and label him bad. On the other side of the equation was also Shawn Michaels, who is Shawn Michaels. They didn't do anything that I wouldn't expect based on their skills and overness.

[slack]

It's really hard to talk chemistry with guys like Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels, and Randy Savage, because those guys could get good matches out of anyone. For someone to have good chemistry with someone, bith guys would have to take each other to another level they otherwise might not get to. I think Lesnar and Kurt Angle had good chemistry.

[ampulator]

It's really hard to talk chemistry with guys like Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels, and Randy Savage, because those guys could get good matches out of anyone. For someone to have good chemistry with someone, bith guys would have to take each other to another level they otherwise might not get to. I think Lesnar and Kurt Angle had good chemistry.

 

You just contradicted yourself. Not trying to get your case, but just pointing it out. If you claim it's hard to talk about chemistry "with guys like Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels, and Randy Savage", then I can't see how you can say the same about Kurt Angle, maybe even Brock Lesnar. Just point it out.

 

In any case, the most important thing isn't who has GOOD chemistry, but who has BAD and NEUTRAL chemistry.

 

For example, there is no chance in hell Flair and Steamboat have bad chemistry. There just isn't. They can't wrestle each other that many times and NOT have others notice that, if they don't work well together, it actually shows.

[randomfreeze]

I had misguided hate towards this feature when it was announced Friday. I don’t actually hate that it’s included in the game, it’s been said you can delete it if you want so obviously that’s not a problem. What bothered me was the past year and a half of the boneheads who have been complaining and campaigning to make this a feature in the game. Out of the hundreds of variables that matches get graded on, every person who wanted the game to be easier gravitated towards editing chemistry because the end result is spelled out in front of you that it’s bad, awful…whatever. Some people only get a hardon for booking Flair and Steamboat or Punk and Joe and if they have bad chemistry they can’t think outside their real world box and come up with something different. It would have been easier to figure out a way to play the game with poor chemistry than complaining about it being there. I don’t care if you play the game differently than me, but trashing a feature that has such a small impact on the entire experience is what I was bothered by. But, now it’s included in the game so there really isn’t much to say in the matter except I’m glad it will shut up the grumpy guys who wanted it.

[D-Lyrium]

Mike Hogewood and Dave Prazak. Terrible chemistry.

 

Mike Hogewood is pretty terrible himself, but their commentary often sounds like they're in different rooms and can't hear each other. Many times they just completely ignore each other's points (although in Prazak's case that might be because he doesn't want to embarass his partner by bringing to light his latest gaffe).

[The Final Countdown]

I'm mostly a ROHbot so off the top of my head:

 

Nigel McGuinnes vs. Bryan Danielson

Samoa Joe vs. CM Punk

Austin Aries vs. Tyler Black

Jimmy Jacobs vs. BJ Whitmer

I'm with you on Joe/Punk--that three-match series was incredible, and I'd say a step above what either of them has managed with anyone else, so I'd give them some sort of positive chemistry. Jacobs/Whitmer is possible, because their matches always seemed to exceed my expectations. But I wouldn't give a positive chemistry note to either of the other pairings. I don't think Aries works any better with Black than he does with any number of other guys. Their matches aren't bad by any stretch--just not far above what they can and have done with others. Same with Nigel/Danielson. Every match I've seen between them was awesome--but I think that's more down to the fact that they're both ace.

 

Mike Hogewood and Dave Prazak. Terrible chemistry.

 

Mike Hogewood is pretty terrible himself, but their commentary often sounds like they're in different rooms and can't hear each other. Many times they just completely ignore each other's points (although in Prazak's case that might be because he doesn't want to embarass his partner by bringing to light his latest gaffe).

I don't think that's as much about chemistry as it is the fact that, like you said, Hogewood just doesn't know what he's talking about most of the time.