Think of the I rotations -------------0000 [][][][][][][][][] [][][][][][][][][] [][][][][][][][][] [][][][][][][][][] No rotation... but it should wall kick and fall into the side.
Don't you mean it should floor kick and leave you with Code: I I I I ********* ********* ********* ********* ? (...and it does, in nearly every rotation system except for (non-TI) ARS.)
Not floor kick. Like this; Code: I I *********X *********X ********** ********** ********** Then wall kick into the hole.
A floor kick is essentially another "wall" kick system. So in essence, it does wall kick if floor kicks are allowed. Anyhow, the obstruction is on the floor so it would make more sense to shift on the vertical axis than on the horizontal axis.
There's elegant versatility and then there is inelegant versatility. The terms elegant and inelegant are very subjective. Keep in mind I'm not saying ARS is perfectly elegant. However consider a situation where you push something in one direction and it ends up moving in another direction. Something about that doesn't feel intuitive to me. The situation with the I tetromino is similar. The obstruction is pushing the piece from the bottom. Would it make sense for the piece to move left or right as a result?
It doesn't allow the floor kick because that's how the gameplay was intended. If any versatility is needed, the inclusion of a floor kick would be prioritized over a wall kick as seen in Ti.
Perhaps I should have been more clear. When I say that the inclusion of a floor kick for the I is prioritized over a wall kick, I did not mean that it'll try a floor kick and then try a wall kick. I meant that the addition of a floor kick into the game is considered first.
The lack of kicks for the I piece in TGM and TAP was intentional, and was done to hamper mobility and increase challenge. They changed that in TI, to make the I piece always "good". Truth be told, the floorkick is the proper move, not a wallkick. The floorkick enables more possibilities. Example Code: IIII XX XX XXXX XXXX With floorkick Code: I I I I XX XX XXXX XXXX and DAS into side column. With wallkick Code: I I XXI XXI XXXX XXXX and piece CANNOT REACH SIDE.
"The lack of kicks for the I piece in TGM and TAP was intentional, and was done to hamper mobility and increase challenge. They changed that in TI, to make the I piece always "good". " how come they didn't want to make it "good" in tgm and tap but they did in tgm3? they didn't want tgm3 as challenging and restricted in terms of mobility? why do you think they would do something like that?
They made Ti even more challenging, and relaxed the I and T rotations to make up for this. So the player is less challenged in some ways and more challenged in others. It's a change in focus rather than a matter of "better" or "worse" rotation. Though, it's probably also a one way trip for the series... You can't take away stuff like the extra previews, hold, and the floorkicks at this point without serious backlash from players.
