-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Scar on the Melee vs Brawl debate: What does competitive really mean?
- Thread starter Scar
- Start date
- Status
Giga Hand
Smash Journeyman
Brawl does have AT's, at least in my definition of them. They're just character-specific, and this, I believe, will be a great boon to the metagame. If you want me to explain my definition, sorry, but I'm no wordsmith.
dark-war-cloud
Smash Journeyman
this thread was TL;DR.
so i'll just say this, how can we come to the conclusion that brawl isnt as competetive?
we have only had the game for a week~,. nobody was really "good" at melee for 3~ months (but melee skills reflect on our brawl skills so we will get better faster), and nobody was as rediculously good at the game as M2K, ken, or isai, untill.. a LONG time later.
if a reason that this game isnt as competetive is that we can't go as fast, then figure out ways to beat the speed loss.
i say, melee=BRAWl, not brawl>melee or melee>brawl, because when does the defining of competetiveness end?
so i'll just say this, how can we come to the conclusion that brawl isnt as competetive?
we have only had the game for a week~,. nobody was really "good" at melee for 3~ months (but melee skills reflect on our brawl skills so we will get better faster), and nobody was as rediculously good at the game as M2K, ken, or isai, untill.. a LONG time later.
if a reason that this game isnt as competetive is that we can't go as fast, then figure out ways to beat the speed loss.
i say, melee=BRAWl, not brawl>melee or melee>brawl, because when does the defining of competetiveness end?
AngryJimmy
Smash Cadet
You dense filthy little uneducated ******* - a word is merely a symbolic representation in what we want to communicate - any one word has too many defintions for any argument and thus what is done in practice (if you have any kind of education you should know this) is that we define what our words mean in the context of that argument.
If you find this too difficult to understand then you need to either go play in traffic or die in a fire.
BigRick
Smash Master
Come to think of it...
Melee to Brawl equals SF2 to SF3.
Melee to Brawl equals SF2 to SF3.
My hat's off to you Scar, this thread is pure gold.
Here's my two cents.
I enjoy playing Brawl. It is a fun game, and I love the new characters, stages, and music it brings to the table. And, to those saying "Brawl will be competitive"...it already is. There have been a number of tournaments already, most notably one in which Gimpy beat DSF in the finals. No one here is arguing against Brawl as a game, competitively or casually. All the "pro-melee" posters are saying is that Brawl, regardless of any AT's that are discovered, has no semblance of a possibility to become AS competitively deep a game as Melee. The reasons for this have already been posted by Scar, almightypancake, and others, so I won't argue them here. Point is, it's not up for debate; Melee is obviously deeper, gives players more options, and allows the more skilled player to win far more consistently, and the only way Brawl could reach Melee's competitive level is not with AT's, but with a change in mechanics.
That said, Brawl should be played WAY different from Melee and former Melee pros need to start thinking outside the box more. This concept of airguarding rather than edgeguarding has me intrigued, and opens up a lot of interesting possibilities, ALTHOUGH (and let's not kid ourselves here) it is not terribly difficult for an opponent to predict and counter an approach off the stage. Players will simply have to get creative and find ways to approach their opponents off the ledge that they won't expect.
Here's the deal: Brawl is going to be very competitive, indefinitely. The addition of online capabilities certainly doesn't hurt, although don't expect it to be implemented very much in the competitive scene, with how laggy it is. A LOT of players, old and new, are going to flock to Brawl. But where does that leave Melee? Correct me if I'm wrong, but competitive melee players will want to keep the melee tournament scene alive and well (I know I certainly will). If Brawl's competitive scene is going to be infinitely larger than Melee's now, what happens to Melee? Will Brawl's tournament scene completely eat it alive, or will at least SOME players want to stick with Melee for tournaments? I'm exaggerating slightly, but I think perhaps a large concern of the "pro-melee" crowd is that melee's tournament scene will suffer substantially due to Brawl's popularity and online capabilities. Given that Melee is the deeper, more competitive, more complex game, I find this upsetting. I hope that the smash community will embrace Brawl with open arms, but simultaneously continue to take those who want to stick to melee for tournaments seriously.
Apologies for the big arse wall o' text type thing.
Here's my two cents.
I enjoy playing Brawl. It is a fun game, and I love the new characters, stages, and music it brings to the table. And, to those saying "Brawl will be competitive"...it already is. There have been a number of tournaments already, most notably one in which Gimpy beat DSF in the finals. No one here is arguing against Brawl as a game, competitively or casually. All the "pro-melee" posters are saying is that Brawl, regardless of any AT's that are discovered, has no semblance of a possibility to become AS competitively deep a game as Melee. The reasons for this have already been posted by Scar, almightypancake, and others, so I won't argue them here. Point is, it's not up for debate; Melee is obviously deeper, gives players more options, and allows the more skilled player to win far more consistently, and the only way Brawl could reach Melee's competitive level is not with AT's, but with a change in mechanics.
That said, Brawl should be played WAY different from Melee and former Melee pros need to start thinking outside the box more. This concept of airguarding rather than edgeguarding has me intrigued, and opens up a lot of interesting possibilities, ALTHOUGH (and let's not kid ourselves here) it is not terribly difficult for an opponent to predict and counter an approach off the stage. Players will simply have to get creative and find ways to approach their opponents off the ledge that they won't expect.
Here's the deal: Brawl is going to be very competitive, indefinitely. The addition of online capabilities certainly doesn't hurt, although don't expect it to be implemented very much in the competitive scene, with how laggy it is. A LOT of players, old and new, are going to flock to Brawl. But where does that leave Melee? Correct me if I'm wrong, but competitive melee players will want to keep the melee tournament scene alive and well (I know I certainly will). If Brawl's competitive scene is going to be infinitely larger than Melee's now, what happens to Melee? Will Brawl's tournament scene completely eat it alive, or will at least SOME players want to stick with Melee for tournaments? I'm exaggerating slightly, but I think perhaps a large concern of the "pro-melee" crowd is that melee's tournament scene will suffer substantially due to Brawl's popularity and online capabilities. Given that Melee is the deeper, more competitive, more complex game, I find this upsetting. I hope that the smash community will embrace Brawl with open arms, but simultaneously continue to take those who want to stick to melee for tournaments seriously.
Apologies for the big arse wall o' text type thing.
Tinkerer
Smash Ace
While I agree on quite some points, this is just a pure fallacy. "You're all wrong!" Yeah, good luck proving that.
Also, sorry if I repeated a lot of what people have already mentioned, but it seemed like some of the more recent posters may have missed a few of the more enlightening posts in this thread.
Also also, to almightypancake: do you go to W&M? You wouldn't happen to know Jake or Mark from Dinwiddie, would you?
Edit: Also x 3, has anyone here tried high-gravity mode in brawl? I know it was mentioned by a handful of people for a more competitive possibility, but I haven't been able to test it out yet. Wondering what you guys think.
Also also, to almightypancake: do you go to W&M? You wouldn't happen to know Jake or Mark from Dinwiddie, would you?
Edit: Also x 3, has anyone here tried high-gravity mode in brawl? I know it was mentioned by a handful of people for a more competitive possibility, but I haven't been able to test it out yet. Wondering what you guys think.
Midguy
Smash Cadet
Scar,
This thread is stupid and pointless. After all this Melee v. Brawl and Competitive v. Competition crap you post, you state that you want to see the evolution of Brawl. No you don't. You want everyone to accept your way of thinking and to keep in the back of their minds that Melee is a more advanced game at the competitive level than Brawl. How does this serve the purpose of evolving Brawl? It doesn't.
All it sounds like is a bunch of whining from someone who thought they were good at Melee and then got upset when the reset button got hit on Brawl. There's so much contradiction in the posts that I'm reading that its ridiculous. How can you say that the ability to punish your opponent more in Melee and kill at any % offers for more competitive gameplay than a game that has a structure similar to Brawl? They're not a good balance there and anybody who plays any other real fighting game competitively will tell you that that doesn't make for good competition. There has to be a good balance and resetting to "nuetral" has to happen more often. Extreme example: If you have two players who are only able to punish the other by getting off one hit for the same % damage when the other makes a mistake, then the better player will win (the person who makes the least mistakes). That is more balanced gameplay and offers higher levels of competition. That's an extreme example, but hopefully you get my point.
Also, entertaining this argument when the game hasn't even been out 3 months is just ignorant.
When everything is said and done, all of us will be playing Brawl in a year and no one will be playing Melee competitively. Some of the "good" players in Melee will be on top in Brawl, and some who are not able to adapt, will become nobodies. New people will make a name for themselves as good Brawl players. Don't belittle them and insult them by saying "Well this game isn't as competitive as Melee."
All your opinions that you've posted do nothing to advance or evolve the community and honestly, I wish you and people like you would just let it go and move on.
This thread is stupid and pointless. After all this Melee v. Brawl and Competitive v. Competition crap you post, you state that you want to see the evolution of Brawl. No you don't. You want everyone to accept your way of thinking and to keep in the back of their minds that Melee is a more advanced game at the competitive level than Brawl. How does this serve the purpose of evolving Brawl? It doesn't.
All it sounds like is a bunch of whining from someone who thought they were good at Melee and then got upset when the reset button got hit on Brawl. There's so much contradiction in the posts that I'm reading that its ridiculous. How can you say that the ability to punish your opponent more in Melee and kill at any % offers for more competitive gameplay than a game that has a structure similar to Brawl? They're not a good balance there and anybody who plays any other real fighting game competitively will tell you that that doesn't make for good competition. There has to be a good balance and resetting to "nuetral" has to happen more often. Extreme example: If you have two players who are only able to punish the other by getting off one hit for the same % damage when the other makes a mistake, then the better player will win (the person who makes the least mistakes). That is more balanced gameplay and offers higher levels of competition. That's an extreme example, but hopefully you get my point.
Also, entertaining this argument when the game hasn't even been out 3 months is just ignorant.
When everything is said and done, all of us will be playing Brawl in a year and no one will be playing Melee competitively. Some of the "good" players in Melee will be on top in Brawl, and some who are not able to adapt, will become nobodies. New people will make a name for themselves as good Brawl players. Don't belittle them and insult them by saying "Well this game isn't as competitive as Melee."
All your opinions that you've posted do nothing to advance or evolve the community and honestly, I wish you and people like you would just let it go and move on.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
I do not know them by name; if they smash, I've almost certainly played against them. I was one of the top 3 smashers here until recently--I can still hold my game against most people, but I've definitely spent much more time on Halo 3.
And a lot of the more recent posters really seem to be missing the point.
Brawl is competitive.
Brawl is not, in its current state, more competitive than melee.
The reason we can say this as fact is because the dominant, most effective strategy can be done by both highly skilled and moderately skilled players. It doesn't matter if one person is faster, snarter, better at teching, etc, when the best strategy in the game consists of spamming.
Brawl does have advanced techniques, but none that have made the game more competitive; that is to say, none that have rewarded players for practicing or being a better player.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
Dear god, I don't think you read a single **** post.
I'm going to summarize my long post explaining exactly why Brawl is more competitive.
1. The risk outweighs the reward on any action aside from projectile spamming.
2. Projectile spamming is very easy to do. It doesn't matter if you practice for hours to learn how to Hydroplane with Squirtle, or hover infinitely with beez, or rise with luigi's tornado, you'll still lose to this simple, shallow strategy. This is how unskilled players are able to beat skilled players.
3. Not a single **** person in this thread has claimed to be a skilled Brawl player. However, observation supports our argument.
4. No one is saying Brawl will never be as competitive as melee. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've made the most convincing post advocating the likelihood of Brawl becoming more competitive as soon as we learn to look at it a different way.
Scar
#HarveyDent
I'm going to try to respond to the best of my ability to all posts that seem to be intelligently written and haven't already been addressed. I've been getting a good bit of help (which I greatly apprecite) and was a bit upset by page 9 (holy fawken **** so many fawken *s), but the debate returned to civility so it's all good.
Melee is too in depth to say how good a person is based on a few matches. I'm sure you know all the factors. Silent Wolf is probably the BEST IN THE WORLD technically, and he does well at tournaments but he's not one of the very top pros. Magus, locally, is one of the smartest, most knowledgeable, experienced smashers, but I'm sure you've never heard of him.
In the end, though, we do know who is better than who. The Melee community is very tight, we all know eachother, we all know our records in tourney, we are a community. So yes, we know who is better than who, and even when people are REALLY CLOSE in overall skill, there is usually a very consistent winner.
This is because Melee allows us to see these small differences in skill. It translates them into results, honest to God it does.
The "pro Melee debaters" are generally 4 or 5 respected and knowledgeable members of the community.
First of all, this simply doesn't happen. This is the beauty of Melee IMO, you almost never win luckily. It's always because your level of skill is higher than the other person! I have had to argue this with non-gamers, too. They seem to think, from their limited video game experience, that anyone can win at any game, you're just pushing your fingers. It's not like a sport.
I argue that Melee is different from other video games. You need to condition your body (muscle memory) before you can even move like the others. You need this movement to increase your options and your overall speed. Then when you're playing the same game, you need experience. You cannot win without both.
My arguments for why Brawl is not as competitive lie here. I don't think Brawl has that.
I mean that's just the difference between smart people and not so smart people. Ryoko is one of the most technical Melee players there is, he never messes up. His deal is mostly frame perfection and being one pixel away from getting hit.
He's just the kind of player who would find something like that. The people who imported Brawl aren't that way, in the Melee community at least. So I mean this point is going to show that people who are good at Smash are good at Smash. Not a point I'm trying to make, but it's there.
This is a fine assumption to make, but it is false. Everyone has been playing every game mode, and there are lots of FFAs and teams going on due to limited supply of Brawl setups and ridiculously large demand for Brawl. I prefer items off, but people nearby are playing with items on.
I thought you said you weren't going to preach? Well I'll let that one slide. Competitive players are competitive players, established as such by the community. If you're going to argue that the whole community is competitive by their own decree then go for it.
Anyways, I mean my buddy Chocobo came up with a C4 trick with Snake in teams. He puts it on his teammate, the teammate gives it to an enemy and then they blow him up. Again, you're working with false assumptions. Good points if your assumptions were true, but they simply aren't.
For the first part, I don't think anyone is ever going to play Brawl for money if there is a chance that a heart drops in front of their enemy who has 100%. Items are too random and unfair. And yes, we realize how bizarre Snake is. Lots of people are playing with him, trying to figure stuff out, myself included.
The depth I speak of MOSTLY has to do with lack of l-cancelling and hitstun on aerials. The former gets rid of too many safe approaches. Any good player realizes that you cannot approach in Brawl without being punished unless you're playing someone who isn't going to use the best strategy available.
No hitstun gimps a critical aspect of fighting games, the punishment part. This is discussed on page 6, I think, but it's important.
Midguy
Smash Cadet
Um, yeah, I've read every post. Did you bother reading mine?
So when did this become about projectile spamming? Not everyone has this problem, you know. So you think that if you lose to someone who projectile spammed you, that you are the more skilled player and they are automatically unskilled? That's funny.
I really don't think you read or understood my post at all. My point was that the original post by Scar and many subsequent posts in this thread do absolutely nothing to advance the evolution of this game or the community. Until you quit trying to make comparisons to this game and Melee, you're gonna be stuck in the past and blinding yourselves to what this game is. The game is still so fresh, but you still see all this whining on what Brawl is/isn't in comparison to Melee. Adapt and master the game for what it is, or just take a backseat and be quiet.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
Again, you didn't actually read the post.
Skill comes from experience and capability. You don't need either to adopt the current most powerful strategy. That's the end of it. I don't see what you don't get about that. One person is not "more skilled" as spamming b, then rolling away.
The current system does not reward players for making intelligent game decisions in terms of approach or punishment.
No man, I don't think you've read my posts. I'm probably much more of a pro-brawl advocate than you are. I think there's a lot to this game we haven't discovered because we think a certain way. This thread was created to foster interesting discussion. In the meantime, we're all playing oodles of Brawl, which, I HAVE ARGUED CAN, AND WILL LIKELY BE, AS OR MORE COMPETITIVE THAN MELEE.
Well said Drums, and while I've been defending Brawl I agree with a lot of what you said. Melee is currently deeper, but it's my opinion that Brawl is also deep enough. And I think in certain less technical elements Brawl is even deeper (Well...air dodging mostly). Anyway, well said.
One more thing I had to nitpick Scar about. I think his love for melee blinds him to it's problems a bit, but that's what love does, eh
. Melee did have lot of stocks where the better player would lose due to somewhat random elements. In the MLG new York match finals, for example, where PC Chris was trying to defend his recent win over Ken (unsuccessfully) he suicided at the 20% in his first Falco stock and dropped the whole game just by running off the edge... He just literally ran off and died. Hay guyz....thud. Normally you'd say ZOMG NOOB, but in melee you don't, because that kinda thing happens to even the very best player because of the way the game controls. The edges on Battlefield are another one, and personally I think edgehogging in general was a pretty lame finish because it's so easy once you know how it works. Should one of the best players in the world really suicide so lamely in on of the most important matches of his career?
One more thing I had to nitpick Scar about. I think his love for melee blinds him to it's problems a bit, but that's what love does, eh
. Melee did have lot of stocks where the better player would lose due to somewhat random elements. In the MLG new York match finals, for example, where PC Chris was trying to defend his recent win over Ken (unsuccessfully) he suicided at the 20% in his first Falco stock and dropped the whole game just by running off the edge... He just literally ran off and died. Hay guyz....thud. Normally you'd say ZOMG NOOB, but in melee you don't, because that kinda thing happens to even the very best player because of the way the game controls. The edges on Battlefield are another one, and personally I think edgehogging in general was a pretty lame finish because it's so easy once you know how it works. Should one of the best players in the world really suicide so lamely in on of the most important matches of his career?Midguy
Smash Cadet
AlmightyPancake,
You suck at reading comprehension. My posts was not directed at you originally, nor did I say anything about projectile spamming or claiming you were not an advocate of competitive Brawl. If you're not going to even comment on points that I make and just decide to make up your own points to argue, please don't quote my posts or respond to them.
You suck at reading comprehension. My posts was not directed at you originally, nor did I say anything about projectile spamming or claiming you were not an advocate of competitive Brawl. If you're not going to even comment on points that I make and just decide to make up your own points to argue, please don't quote my posts or respond to them.
Beat
Smash Ace
Scar, I keep reading your thread. I've come to the realization that if Brawlers simply say "there will be a lot of competition in the Brawl scene" as opposed to "there's a lot of competition", you'll be able to sleep peacefully.
This thread is simply Scar's Grammar Corner Mark II. You're too good.
Edit: It's called Chocobombing, kthx.
This thread is simply Scar's Grammar Corner Mark II. You're too good.
Edit: It's called Chocobombing, kthx.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
Wrong. You came into this thread saying that we shouldn't be allowed to foster intelligent discussion and opinion on a relevant topic we find interesting.
And in reference to your first post, almost every other "real fighting game" REVOLVES around 0-death combos.
Beat
Smash Ace
o.O? Really? News to me. I <3 Cactus.
Midguy
Smash Cadet
Ok, think about this. Your definition of "skill" that you obtained from playing Melee involves playstyles and techniques that a handful of characters can pull off effectively (Fox, Falco, Shiek, Marth, etc.). Meaning that some characters are just not as suitable for "advanced" play, am I correct?
With that said, if you think that there is a trend of projectile spamming being the "most powerful strategy" then yes, you need to adapt. I didn't say adopt it yourself, but you do need to adapt. There are "skilled" players in melee who have a strong understanding of the technical aspect of that game, but in order to win, they HAVE to play with a top tier character. Thieir favorite character could be DK, for example. They may not like Fox, but they like to win, so they play with him. That's an example of a skilled player who adapts to win.
If projectile spamming is SUCH a problem to you (which is hilarious to me), then you just need to learn to adapt and play with someone who isn't as vulnerable. For example, don't pick Ike, pick Fox. Don't pick Bowser, pick Pit. If you are truly skilled, then you can adapt and still win.
You have severly sidetracked the point of my original post though (since i never even mentioned anything about projectile spamming, or pancakes), but I felt the need to address this, since you felt the need to bring it up and associate my name with it.
Show me one 0-death combo. Like, a video or something.
Midguy
Smash Cadet
Thanks, for once again proving my point about you and reading comprehension. No clue what real fighting games you're playing.
You need to get over this spamming thing because it's total ****ing bull****. Seriously. if that video evidence you posted is of you playing then you have no need to fear brawls lack of depth because you still have a ****ing lot to learn. Seriously, even when pressed on this the strongest naysayers will say "well, it doesn't happen yet, but it will happen! I am so awesome at this game that I can predict the future, even if I can't quite pull off the prediction myself." HUR. God, that's the lamest thing ever.
BigRick
Smash Master
IMO the amount of technical skill required should not have something to do with a fighting game's competitiveness. To me the mental aspect of the game is much more interesting and having a high tech skill requirement is simply a barrier that blocks certain players. But this is just an opinion thing... insane tech should be left to DDR competions lol.
But yea, since Brawl has a lower tech skill requirement... the lack of competitiveness of the game on a technical standpoint must be compensated with a increased requirement in tactical skill. Cause like you said, Melee had both a technical and a tactical facet to it.
Brawl doesn't seem to have a stronger tactical aspect than Melee... it actually looks weaker so far due to the nerfed edgeguarding/gimping strats which ends up also hurting the zoning game at the same time. On the other hand, the reduced overall mobility of chars should help the establishment of a solid zoning game in the first place (looks at Olimar).
Lack of L-canceling can be compensated by a mastery of your aerial timings in order to generate auto-cancels... Some chars will definitely have some safe approaches. What I think is sad is that the new players don't focus enough on trying to find safe pressure strings and stuff like that... the game would get much more deeper, faster.
If I had the game on my hands with my friends that's like the first thing I would check out when picking up a new char... whats safe and what isnt
Hmm this is why I said ''Melee to Brawl looks like SF2 to SF3'' in my previous post. We need to accept the fact that after a certain effective setup, damage isn't 80-100% guaranteed anymore and we need to work from there (I'm not a big fan of this but eh we gotta deal with it). Conditionning/guessing seems to be a more important aspect of Brawl now so a part of the competitiveness will have to be drawn from there (it's hard to measure... but yea some players are better at Yomi than others).
I was watching a Zelda playing against a MK... after a dthrow the MK DIed away so the zelda could chain a dash attack. After that the MK made an adjustment and started to DI in another direction so zelda always tried to bair the MK but the MK always recovered and punished with a Dair... if the Zelda just tried to punish the dair instead of trying to land the lightning kick, the seemingly nonprofitable situation would have been turning into a mixup to squeeze more damage
So yea, I don't know why I made this post... I guess it's just a few suggestions about what should be done with Brawl in order to make it more competitive.
Beat
Smash Ace
This sounds like the ravings of some Melee failure who couldn't cut it in the old tourney scene, or never even took part in it. You're a perfect example of all the people who are pissing off the creator of this thread. While you're entitled to your opinion of Brawl's level of depth, know that your opinion is terrible and stupid. People who enjoy Brawl and want to compete (like myself) are laying out the reasons why it's not nearly as deep as it should be.
Brawl is fun, and yes, by definition we CAN COMPETE in tournaments, but it isn't competitive. What you can do is limited to an insane degree, and camping harder than the opponent is the only vetted stratedy to win somewhat consistently. However, even if you do camp harder, random things like tripping can ruin a match!
I understand that you can probably beat all of your friends, the ones who are fulljumping Kirby 5 times and then using DownB, or firing lasers as Fox while standing in place. Bravo. However, if you play anyone who was good at Melee and understands how to efficiently camp, prepare to weep.
Edit: Also, on the note of becoming a relic, that's really up to the community, now isn't it?
BigRick
Smash Master
Just watched a Falcon vs Marth vid... lol the Falcon always tried to dthrow knee Marth without success.
Dthrow -> knee doesn't work anymore but it always cause Marth to dbl-jump or try a counter.
Work from there. >_>
Dthrow -> knee doesn't work anymore but it always cause Marth to dbl-jump or try a counter.
Work from there. >_>
Scar
#HarveyDent
I'm going to go back and read all the other things, I just updated the OP with posts I thought were important added as a last section. But @ BigRick
Bad players are still trying to do Melee things. Most good Melee players have stopped trying to dthrow knee. When I hit someone, I don't try to combo them like I would in Melee. I wait for them to do something defensive since I can't hit them then, and then I try to attack afterwards.
The point is that I understand that some people aren't moving on, but most people are.
edit: LOL @ kevc.
Bad players are still trying to do Melee things. Most good Melee players have stopped trying to dthrow knee. When I hit someone, I don't try to combo them like I would in Melee. I wait for them to do something defensive since I can't hit them then, and then I try to attack afterwards.
The point is that I understand that some people aren't moving on, but most people are.
edit: LOL @ kevc.
lol u mad?
couldnt resist haahaha
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
eh he showed now what you got son?
JesiahTEG
Smash Master
Go Scar woo! You totally rock and stuff! Way to show em!
/support scar
Anyways, I also agree that Brawl is less competitive than Melee. I no longer find myself 4 stocking my friends, even though I'm much "better" than them at Brawl. I understand spacing better, I know how to attack out of shield, and how not to get attacked out of shield. I understand ledge invincibility in this game, and abuse it. (the best it can be abused anyways.) I still can't beat my friends as bad as I could beat them in Melee.
I haven't gone out of town yet for Brawl, but I don't see myself losing nearly as horribly as I used to in Melee. I remember the first time I played M2K, I couldn't touch him. 4 stocked every match. Although he is better than me at Brawl now, I just don't see myself losing as horribly to him, due to the fact that there are not as many things in this game to learn and abuse. I don't have that many things to watch out for, there's not hundreds of different ways he can kill me anymore.
In Melee, if I got grabbed by M2K near the ledge, it was over, since he is amazing at edgeguarding. He knew of every possible way to kill me, the safest options for edgeguarding, the different ways to attack from not only on the stage, but the ledge also. He mastered ledge invincibility, and timed his attacks perfectly so he could hit me through my Up B, using ledge invincibility. He KNEW how to trap my recovery, limiting my options down to just one choice, in which he would punish horribly.
Now, I don't care if you're some random noob or M2K. The game mechanics just don't allow for anyone to be that good at edgeguarding. If M2K throws me off the edge backwards...I'll just...Grab the ledge. And there's not a **** thing he can do about it, since auto sweetspot allows me to grab the ledge from a mile away. The best choice you have in Brawl to edgeguard is A.) jump out and attack your opponent, or B.) let them grab the ledge, and do as much damage to them as they recover from the ledge as possible.
I just used edgeguarding as an example, but there are plenty more examples that show how Melee is more competitive than Brawl.
Now, I like Brawl, I really do. I don't even like it because it's fun, I like it because I like discovering new things. Fact is, I don't really discover that much, even though I'm working my *** off to find new techniques/strategies. I WANT to argue that Brawl is going to be competitive, I WANT to see myself in the near future struggling to keep up with professionals, I WANT to debate for Brawl...But all too often, I find myself struggling to find reasons why Brawl is going to be as competitive as Melee...But deep down inside, I know these reasons are just...Not practical. Here are some reasons that give me hope that Brawl will be as competitive as Melee:
1. The attack depreciation system hasn't been looked into enough, and could prove to be a HUGE part of the game, as it will allow for combos, and will make players think more during the matches...It will make them remember how depreciated a certain attack is, and when to recharge it using other attacks.
This is my main argument. I REALLY hope that this will change the game in a huge way, making it more competitive than even Melee...But, deep down inside, I know that while this is a possibility, it probably won't happen. Stun time in Brawl just doesn't allow for combos, no matter how small the knockback. You can airdodge out of anything. I'm still going to work my *** off to try and make this work, but the reality is, it probably won't.
Ok, so that's just one reason. I'm too lazy to type more reasons.
Something else I thought I might add: I used to watch Melee videos and try to copy my opponent's strategies. When I was semi-noobish, I remember the main thing I tried to copy was chaingrabbing fox with Marth. I practiced all the time. First, it was the timing that threw me off. After I got the timing down, I had to worry about what percent Fox was at. After that, I practiced knowing when to pivot grab, utilt, regrab...Which moves to use depending on the percent. Lastly, I practiced uair comboing, to finish off the combo. With Uair comboing, I had to worry about spacing my uairs, knowing when to tip and when not to tip; Following my opponent's DI, so I could end with an Fsmash or Reverse Up B, then spacing my killing move. There is just so much to worry about while just doing one of the many combos Melee has to offer.
Now, I decided to try the same thing with Brawl. I wanted to look into Metaknight, even though I main Snake. (<3 Snake) I looked at Forte's MK, and decided to copy some of his strategies. The main strategy I saw that impressed me the most was his "combos."I decided to try his main way of killing people...This is how it went.
1. Choose Metaknight at character select screen
2. Uair my opponent
3. Press Up B
It's just not that hard. It's just not. I can copy anyone's video, and replicate anything they do. Now, I may be overexaggerating this just a little bit, but you get my point.
IMO, Brawl just isn't as competitive in Melee, due to most of the technical aspects being taken out, which limits one's options, which in turn makes the game more narrow, less deep, and overall less competitive.
/support scar
Anyways, I also agree that Brawl is less competitive than Melee. I no longer find myself 4 stocking my friends, even though I'm much "better" than them at Brawl. I understand spacing better, I know how to attack out of shield, and how not to get attacked out of shield. I understand ledge invincibility in this game, and abuse it. (the best it can be abused anyways.) I still can't beat my friends as bad as I could beat them in Melee.
I haven't gone out of town yet for Brawl, but I don't see myself losing nearly as horribly as I used to in Melee. I remember the first time I played M2K, I couldn't touch him. 4 stocked every match. Although he is better than me at Brawl now, I just don't see myself losing as horribly to him, due to the fact that there are not as many things in this game to learn and abuse. I don't have that many things to watch out for, there's not hundreds of different ways he can kill me anymore.
In Melee, if I got grabbed by M2K near the ledge, it was over, since he is amazing at edgeguarding. He knew of every possible way to kill me, the safest options for edgeguarding, the different ways to attack from not only on the stage, but the ledge also. He mastered ledge invincibility, and timed his attacks perfectly so he could hit me through my Up B, using ledge invincibility. He KNEW how to trap my recovery, limiting my options down to just one choice, in which he would punish horribly.
Now, I don't care if you're some random noob or M2K. The game mechanics just don't allow for anyone to be that good at edgeguarding. If M2K throws me off the edge backwards...I'll just...Grab the ledge. And there's not a **** thing he can do about it, since auto sweetspot allows me to grab the ledge from a mile away. The best choice you have in Brawl to edgeguard is A.) jump out and attack your opponent, or B.) let them grab the ledge, and do as much damage to them as they recover from the ledge as possible.
I just used edgeguarding as an example, but there are plenty more examples that show how Melee is more competitive than Brawl.
Now, I like Brawl, I really do. I don't even like it because it's fun, I like it because I like discovering new things. Fact is, I don't really discover that much, even though I'm working my *** off to find new techniques/strategies. I WANT to argue that Brawl is going to be competitive, I WANT to see myself in the near future struggling to keep up with professionals, I WANT to debate for Brawl...But all too often, I find myself struggling to find reasons why Brawl is going to be as competitive as Melee...But deep down inside, I know these reasons are just...Not practical. Here are some reasons that give me hope that Brawl will be as competitive as Melee:
1. The attack depreciation system hasn't been looked into enough, and could prove to be a HUGE part of the game, as it will allow for combos, and will make players think more during the matches...It will make them remember how depreciated a certain attack is, and when to recharge it using other attacks.
This is my main argument. I REALLY hope that this will change the game in a huge way, making it more competitive than even Melee...But, deep down inside, I know that while this is a possibility, it probably won't happen. Stun time in Brawl just doesn't allow for combos, no matter how small the knockback. You can airdodge out of anything. I'm still going to work my *** off to try and make this work, but the reality is, it probably won't.
Ok, so that's just one reason. I'm too lazy to type more reasons.
Something else I thought I might add: I used to watch Melee videos and try to copy my opponent's strategies. When I was semi-noobish, I remember the main thing I tried to copy was chaingrabbing fox with Marth. I practiced all the time. First, it was the timing that threw me off. After I got the timing down, I had to worry about what percent Fox was at. After that, I practiced knowing when to pivot grab, utilt, regrab...Which moves to use depending on the percent. Lastly, I practiced uair comboing, to finish off the combo. With Uair comboing, I had to worry about spacing my uairs, knowing when to tip and when not to tip; Following my opponent's DI, so I could end with an Fsmash or Reverse Up B, then spacing my killing move. There is just so much to worry about while just doing one of the many combos Melee has to offer.
Now, I decided to try the same thing with Brawl. I wanted to look into Metaknight, even though I main Snake. (<3 Snake) I looked at Forte's MK, and decided to copy some of his strategies. The main strategy I saw that impressed me the most was his "combos."I decided to try his main way of killing people...This is how it went.
1. Choose Metaknight at character select screen
2. Uair my opponent
3. Press Up B
It's just not that hard. It's just not. I can copy anyone's video, and replicate anything they do. Now, I may be overexaggerating this just a little bit, but you get my point.
IMO, Brawl just isn't as competitive in Melee, due to most of the technical aspects being taken out, which limits one's options, which in turn makes the game more narrow, less deep, and overall less competitive.
Scar
#HarveyDent
The amount of tech skill needed for a good game is clearly not fact but opinion. It is my opinion that Melee is so good because of how much of both was required. A lot of people are talking about how they don't like the punishment part of fighting games. I think that punishment should be proportional to the mistake made and the skill of the punisher.
Melee is beautiful because if you make a bad mistake vs a very skilled player they will kill you. You will lose that stock. New players should not be able to punish that strongly, or else the game is too easy. Veterans, however, should be able to reach that level of mastery.
So to everyone that complains that you don't like to be hit over and over without being able to do anything about it, in Melee new players cannot do that to you. If you are being 0-death combod consistently, you either need to work on your DI or you are fighting one of 20 or 30 people in the world.
In Brawl, it is clear and evident that no one will every be able to reach that level of mastery. It is impossible to punish anyone to death, even if they make an awful blunder, unless you're talking about DDD's chaingrab, which can be done by anyone.
I disagree with this. The point of shffling an aerial is to attack someone at ground level with an aerial attack, essentially changing your air moves into ground moves. Autocancelling requires you to start the aerial at a height that will not necessarily hit a standing opponent, and certainly won't hit a crouching opponent. Dairs would have, but Brawl fastfalls most dairs for you. Thanks Brawl.
I agree. We need to accept it and go from there. But I don't have to like it, and I certainly don't have to say that it in any way translates into depth.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
Sure. That has nothing at all to do with my point... but sure.
Here's where you don't understand what I'm saying. I'll happily adapt. Hell, I'll happily not adapt. I'd prefer to keep trying to find new ways to play rather than succumb to campfests, but in a tournament, right now, I would be a campy little *****. Gladly.
My point is that a novice can adapt to win with the same strategy. Even if I've played more games and play smarter, the simplicity of the overwhelmingly powerful strategy dissolves the game into a battle of who projectiles/avoids projectiles better.
AT NOT POINT HAVE I SAID THIS IS NOT COMPETITIVE. IT IS, HOWEVER, MUCH MUCH LESS COMPETITIVE THAN A GAME THAT REVOLVES AROUND A BALANCE BETWEEN APPROACHES, PROJECTILES, DEFENSES, PUNISHMENTS, AND MINDGAMES. WHEN A GAME HAS ONLY ONE TRULY EFFECTIVE STRATEGY, AND THAT STRATEGY MUST EITHER BE ADOPTED OR DEFENDED AGAINST, THE GAME HAS LOST DEPTH.
Fine. Why don't you go ahead and play HaiImFearless' Olimar over on wifi wars. Tell me that you can adopt another strategy aside from projectile spamming. Play bacon's lucas. How about Unkn0wn's Wolf. My point is, the currently top ranked players on one of the fastest up-and-coming smash leagues have gotten to where they are by spamming projectiles, then punishing approaches.
I have no problem joining them. However, that doesn't nullify the point of this thread, and the discussion it has fostered.
Mixed in this thread, along with the debating about which is more competitive, we've also talked about ways to solve the current situation. I know I've made people think about the game a bit differently when I said we had to think outside the Melee box. I gave some people hope with my CS example. Some people have also helped me understand some of the finer points of melee's competitive aspects.
We are making progress, even if you don't think so. If you think this thread is pointless, stop posting.
Midguy
Smash Cadet
MvC2 is widely regarded as one of the most imbalanced fighting games of all time. The SF videos were impractical situations and used on non-live opponents.
I think you missed the point.
Papapaint
Just your average kind of Luigi.
No. We're saying punishment is good. When there's no reward for outsmarting your opponent aside from a small amount of damage, the game has lost depth.
BigRick
Smash Master
In terms of what you can do... if you look at the mobility side of things, then it's not necessarily a bad thing since it increases the overall effectiveness of a zoning strategy. Some ppl like that kind of stuff... some would say that Toon Link vs Pit is a ******** matchup, while others would say that Guile vs Sagat is the most exciting one.
Being able to zone effectively with projectiles and stuff doesn't require lots of technical ability... however it still requires plenty of another kind of ability.
About camping: it is the case with many chars so far, but I think that it has been demonstrated that some characters' offense can be pretty effective, MK for example.
Any new fighting game is played defensively at the beginning because the strong offensive options need to be developped.
To almightypancake: yes there is definitely less reward, but you can't go around saying that there is no reward... that's exaggerating stuff
EDIT: nvm pancake misread your post
- Status