Follow TV Tropes
Looking more closely at the trope page, the definition of a game-breaker outlined here takes on a multiplayer context — something "so strong that you either have to use it yourself to compete or focus on beating it to keep up." What about defining it in a single-player context? What elements in single-player games would help distinguish a game breaker from something that's strong but fair?
So at risk of "stop having fun guys"... is it worth expanding the definition of Game Breaker from its current definition? Looking at the examples given so far (and yes, the intro does mention the kilo of salt), it's something like 20% Game Breaker, 60% "top tier", 20% powerful but actually balanced (e.g. Battlecruisers/Ultralisks/Carriers in Star Craft are not brokenly good due to the time / expense to build them, they're just the most powerful once this happens - same with various single-player late-breaking powerups). Deleting half the examples seems like it'd be controversial, so maybe just outright stating that Game Breaker is also casually "the best" but not necessarily "push everything out of the metagame best"?
My philosophy, as it relates to Game-Breaker, consists of the following:
1) It has to be an item/armor/weapon that can be acquired extremely early in the game (at least before the midway point of the story), yet retains its broken-ness through the entire game.
2) It is unintentionally overpowered compared to most other items in the game.
3) A late-stage upgrade/item that is notably powerful but takes resources/time to build is not an example.
Hello, I am a competitive Splatoon player and I'm wondering if specific meta for Splatoon 1 would count?
ie: Chainjumping strats in tower control. In which all players equip quick respawn and stealth jump and once one gets on the tower and gets killed, another takes their place and keeps pushing the objective, while the oponents dont know where theyre jumping.
What is the policy regarding user-created content? GameBreaker.Fighting Games has a bullet point for M.U.G.E.N. M.U.G.E.N. characters are user-created content which means someone with no sense of Competitive Balance could create their own super hax God-Mode Sue character and then write an entry for it on this wiki. (I attempted to discuss this on the page itself's disc page but nobody answered for months.)
Granted, the "anyone can make X and put tropes for it" can apply to game development, but I imagine it's much easier to make a M.U.G.E.N. character than it is to make a whole fighting game from scratch.
I would prefer that nothing user-created be considered for the page, considering that most of the mods produced for all games (regardless of genre) are either buggy (which leads to abuse) or unintentionally overpowered.
it's not just sheik and pikachu:
hell, robin, mega-man, pit, Wii fit trainer, Samus, Mewtwo, lucas and ness, zelda and now Duck Hunt are broken when they team up with Mr. game and watch. especially ROBIN!!!
I tested today and here's the list-
.one bucket fillers
.Robin's El-thunder- the second stage thunder. you can do it quickly if you know how long it charges to the second stage.
.Pit's fully charged arrow.
.Ness's PK thunder sparks
.(update )Duck Hunt's neutral B- trickier and give trolling a whole new level.
two bucket fillers
. Zelda- but do the dins fire further away and it can fill two buckets in one fire.
.Lucas PK freeze.
.Mega-man's fully charged Foward smash.
.Wii-Fit Trainer's Fully charged Salute The Sun.
.Sheik's Vanishing attack.
.Robin's third custom move fire wall(update)
Instant bucket fillers
.Samus fully charged neutral B
.Mewtwo's fully charge neutral B
.Ness PK Flash. ( handle with care because it's slow)
.WFT Deep breathing explosion custom-Reginald Verrier pointed it out for me.
What do they have in common when all of their attacks fill the bucket?
kills most fighters at 58-60%
add Pikachu in the list despite being nerfed along with and you can call it Mr. Game and Watch's "The broken 12".
Would Golden Snitch be a subtrope of this, or at least related in any way?
Golden Snitch is an explicit mechanic where the final event is worth the greatest weight. It doesn't derail anything, as it's basically the conclusion which can drastically change the end-result. Everyone knows that it's coming, and that it's more related to an Instant-Win Condition.
Game-Breaker results in an unexpected gameplay derailment, and is basically subjective. Such game breakers can appear at any time rather than the conclusion, to varying degrees of success.
The relation is that they both lead to a victory path, but that's more suitable to being in the same index.
I think their should be a page for tower defense games, because I've seen plenty of towers that could fall under this category. Who agree's with me?
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about my suggestion?
It seems you already created the page.
Although with Tower Defense, game breakers are generally the point of the genre - build a tower or combination thereof that can't be penetrated. There is a case where a certain tactic/tower is ridiculous, but there's almost always the ability to hold everything at bay.
By the way, about iron/bronze:
Modern research has shown that the iron that appeared in Britain at the end of the Late
Bronze Age was, in fact, inferior in its salient mechanical properties to the bronze that
preceded it. Since iron is also less dense than bronze, this metal was in every respect less
suitable for smashing skulls, whether long-headed (Nordic) or round (Mediterranean).
A lot of people seem to awesome any weapon thats powerful is O Ped, even if its the 11th hour weapon of its too awesome to use. Cleaned up a example of the m4 of Max Payne. All the enemies start using it late in the game and you are meant to use it, to defeat the enemies also using the powerful gun. Lots of cleaning up has to happen for this.
I have been doing my research on the top Game Breakers in the history of Video Games, but I can't seem to find any site featuring the top ten most Egregious Game Breakers in video game history, and as well in other media.
The reason: there's a site called Gamebreaker.com which gives solutions to the most vicious Guide Dang Its ever seen. That's not what I'm looking for.
What I'm looking for are these:
- The top 10 most popular Game Breakers ever known in videogame history.
- The top 10 most broken superpowers ever known in each media (Anime, Live Action TV, Film, etc.)
That's all. I would appreciate it if somebody can help me find these lists. Thanks.
What was wrong with "En garde, bitch!" ?
Nothing, as far as I can see. No edit reason was given. Changing it back now.
Is this subjective or not?
Well, see, that's where the guys in charge of this have opened a bit of a can of worms. Almost every trope is subjective to a degree. Almost. Every. Dang. One. But everyone judges them differently.
However, on this trope, it splits both ways. There are examples that everyone on the wiki and Word of God can agree on being Game Breakers. There are examples like the trope's picture, which, as of now, depicts a fencer pulling a revolver on his opponent in the middle of a match. In a professional fencing match, a pistol will almost always be considered a Game-Breaker, hence why it is illegal to do so.
I don't like the Subjective Trope Exile. I'll make no secret of that. However, this wouldn't have happened unless Fast Eddie supported it. For now, it's Subjective. There aren't enough non-subjective examples to change the controlling minority's stance on the matter. Like it or not, what FE says, goes. Hopefully, though, if this doesn't pan out, it'll be changed back to the good ol' days.
Damn, I'm realizing how good of practice the operations on this wiki can be for politics...
In Lufia II: Rise of the Sinistrals on the SNES, the Dual Blade comes with an IP called "Wave Motion". By the time you get it, you only have the final four bosses left, and all four give you 100 IP, which is how much you need to use it. Upon using it, all of Maxim's stats shoot up by 999 and make the Sinistrals ridiculously pathetic. So the Dual Blade's "Wave Motion" should be considered a Game Breaker.
In GTA Online, you had a set of wheels that were very expensive, and those got cheaper after completing a series of stunts, or something like that. They cost $10.000 or any value like it before unlocking the event, and $1.000 after that. No problems so far.
Cars that are bought, not stolen, can be re-sold to the Los Santos Customs without a timer, with added value if you equipped them with any upgrade, but you never recover the full value of whatever you equipped in the vehicle. No problems there either...
One tiny little problem: the wheels never lost their sale value, after becoming cheaper to buy.
Now combine everything: you could buy a Karin Rebel for $3.000 (the cheapest buyable vehicle, FREE vehicles can't be sold), buy the special wheel set for $1.000, and sell the truck for $10.000, with a net profit of $6.000. Then order another truck, rinse and repeat.
If you had only $1.000 to begin with, you could steal any car and add $10.000 to its value by buying a $1.000 set of wheels as well.
It was patched before you could even tell your friends about it.
The Game-Breaker page for The Elder Scrolls needs some cleaning up; it's far too wordy.
Should there be a section/page for game breakers in actual sports? I was pretty surprised not to see them anywhere. There have been many instances in which the rules of a game have had to be changed because someone discovered a strategy that made the game completely unfair. I don't know if I could come up with enough for an entire page, but I feel like having them just as another aspect of the "other" page would make it too easy for them to get lost.
Okay, Master Knight, we'll discuss things here if you prefer. So, would you care to respond to my earlier PM on the subject of whether Meta Knight is a Game-Breaker? Just saying that you "don't play Meta Knight" isn't really enough to establish the validity of your argument that he's not a game breaker—it's a matter of one person against a whole group, and it's probably better to convince that group rather than just keep removing edits.
:I said I don't actively play Meta Knight. But I have played enough of him to be sure that he's not broken. Olimar, on the other hand, is more deserving of being considered this. And I should know, it took me next to no effort to combat a human Shiek player when I first played him, when he's supposed to be a Lethal Joke Character.
:Oh, by the way, check the archived discussion.
I can see Master Knight's point that there's a difference between being Top Tier and being a Game-Breaker. And the fact is that if he really was a game breaker, he would have been banned.
Still, be aware Master Knight that you aren't the be all and end all of SSBB knowledge.
Let's look at this in terms of tournament statistics, as recorded through the links to the individual character pages here. Meta Knight is S-tier, and the only inhabitant of that tier. He wins 60% of the time, and that's only because he wins 55% of the time against most of the A tier—everything below A except Kirby, and including Olimar, he can beat at least 60% of the time. Olimar is B-tier. He has a 50% win rate against some of the A-tier members, but he does badly against several other characters—the D-tier Luigi can beat him as often as Meta Knight can! Overall, his win rate is only 55%, comparable to Falco. Olimar is a bit of an irritant due to his Schrödinger Fu, but since he's easy to juggle or knock off the screen, he's not as bad as he could have been. As for the points you make in the archived discussion, I don't really think they stand up. For instance, regarding your argument that Pit is more of a game breaker, he's C-tier because his Annoying Arrows are easy to dodge and don't deal much damage, and his melee is sub-par. Besides, it's entirely possible for multiple characters to be different degrees of broken—consider Brawl Minus, which breaks every character in the game! So yes, I do think Meta Knight is overpowered, because of the statistics I linked. He may not be the most blatant sort of game breaker, but as a character with no bad matchups he at least deserves a mention.
Oh yes, because tier lists cannot possibly flawed. And people are certainly smart in general and glitch-fighting is such a cool, non-hypocritical thing.
Even if Meta Knight was the strongest character without glitch-fighting or whatnot, he's not broken enough at all to warrant mention outside of bugs. And Olimar being knocked silly? Good luck hitting him to begin with. Like I said, Olimar takes no real effort to combat human players with. As for Pit's Annoying Arrows, while you dodge them, I attack you or shoot you with another arrow. Sure you could close the distance as fast as you can anyway, but Pit's melee, while sub-par like you say, is far from an absolute joke.
My points stand until you dispute every single one of them. Good luck with that.
By the way, before you go ahead and stubbornly believe that glitch-fighting should be a standard anyway, okay then, I'll just bring up the player ADHD. Do I need to say more? And how do you know Meta Knight isn't simply popular to the point where it skews the tier list? Pit's far more popular in Japan and he's up there in Japan's tier list. Hell, he got C-Tier on your tier list despite poor popularity.
I notice a much higher level of hostility displayed towards me than I have so far displayed towards you. I would like to request politeness, since the goal here is not necessarily to "win," but rather to come to a conclusion. As for your points, I don't actually know what you're talking about with half of them. I just watch the kids at my school as they play Brawl on the console in the psychology classroom and the Meta Knight players smash everyone else. So what if he's beatable if you're really good compared to your opponent? This trope is difficult to measure objectively, given the varying levels of player skill. The best we can do is list the characters who seem broken to most of us, and my impression is that you're the only one removing him while a large number of other people are adding him. This is a group project, so to me, that seems wrong. (I will admit that I have a history of removing negative comments regarding Twilight. However, I stopped when I realized there was no way to keep everyone else from putting them back up. If I get sufficiently pissed off, I'll leave the site. In the meantime, I'll go along and try not to burst a blood vessel.)
"I just watch the kids at my school as they play Brawl on the console in the psychology classroom and the Meta Knight players smash everyone else."
So why did my Meta Knight get torn to shreds by a less skilled player? By all accounts, even without taking stock in matchup BS, I should have at least held out longer if not outright win. No, I lose quickly to a Link who didn't even actively shell me with projectiles. And this is a player I regularly beat.
Okay, I sent a PM to Fast Eddie. He says these issues are usually resolved by putting up the example, but noting the controversy over it. He doesn't think it's a big issue, though, so if you're not giving in, I'm not pressing it.
Actually,as a long-time player (no tourneys, though) I have to agree that metaknight is pretty broken. It's a simple matter of the ratio of how fast he his compared to the power of his attacks. He's a certified lightning bruiser. I'm not particularly good with him, but one of my friends is. Until he started using meta knight, we all countered his ass to death because he just attacked constantly to the point that he got predictable. With meta, it doesn't matter how predictable he is, since he's lighting fast, super powerful, and his attacks have almost no cooldown, making hard to hit him, or get away from the SOB.
Why does Oblivion have its own section? Shouldn't it be cleaned up then moved to RP Gs?
Ok, perhaps we should instead rename the page to Elder Scrolls and move the stuff from RP Gs to there?
Good thinking Unknown Troper. I went ahead and just did it.
God to admit, that was pretty epic trolling right there.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?