URBANA, Ill. — According to a recent study from the University of Illinois, scientists have found a direct correlating relationship between the fairness of fighting games and whether or not I won the match.
Fighting games are famously unfair, with button mashers and cheap combos being able to cheese skilled opponents into an easy, unearned win in an incredibly short period of time. Fighting games were never about skill or practice, just a cocktail of luck and third-rate strategies. A win in fighting games is a hollow victory, merely the result of benevolent random number generation or flat-out cheating. Fighting games have never been truly fair, and don’t test a player’s fighting acumen or gamesense any more than a scratch-off lottery ticket does. Fighting games, plain and simple, are just not fair to both players.
Unless I won the match.
If I am the winner of the match, it can clearly be seen by scientific evidence that the fighting game match was a war of intellect and razor-tight reflexes. If I won, it was simply because my opponent could not adjust to my lightning-fast combos and mental head games that could rival a chess grandmaster. Yes, if I’ve won the match, it was a showcase of my superior talent and effort, something my poor measly competitor could never attempt to understand, much less replicate. If I’ve won, it’s obvious that fighting games are the most fair form of gaming around, a one-on-one realtime competition between two people matching wits. The study proves without a shadow of a doubt that anyone claiming that fighting games are unfair when I win is just a pathetic sore loser who can’t cope with the empirical fact that I bested them in combat.
Additionally, the study shows that if I lose, it’s only because I’m tired and my controller is fucked up and also the character you’re playing is total bullshit.
