After the SDCC tournament yesterday... I'm having doubts Smash 4 will be a good competitive game.

[Cassio]

In addition to Shayas statement, to those repeatedly stating that criticism is good for the game, let me make an important distinction here.

There are those critiquing and those being critical. S.Panda provided a great critique, he made observations and used critical thinking to arrive at interesting and fairly unique ideas, and when questioned on his ideas he was able to elaborate and accept the existence of well reasoned alternative perspectives. This is useful discussion that we can use towards analyzing the game and perhaps hope for requested changes on a healthy consensus. Either this case or even if someone is mistaken but genuinely trying to observe, listen, and understand merits worthwhile discussion and response.

Either treating opinion as fact and/or statements with no factual basis and not being able to expand on them when questioned is not useful preemptive criticism (especially if the former is true AND theyve come from common opinion or parroting someone elses perspective), its just annoying and a harmful spread of stubborn ignorance. It often relies on personal testimony which only merits a response questioning credibility. Unfortunately this habit frequently has repeat offenders.

Before you hit the reply button, you should assess whether your post is the former or latter.

 

[cheddarsword]

first off, i'm not worried. if defense is king, defense is king. i'll go with it. besides, shields are a bit unreliable. don't they also suffer some knockback with a decently strong attack? and let's face it, certain characters won't let a shield stay up for long. i mean, heck, marth and lucina both have a special called shield breaker! LOL! (yeah, i know, but still...) and you can't tell me that captain falcon is gonna be defensive, or even let others be defensive. you put up a shield, he brings out knee of justice.

defense will only get you so far. you can't win by hiding under a rock. my above point, was that even with better defense via shield being upgraded, offense is upped too, so shields are only a temporary respite. besides... grabs and tether grabs my friend.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

The issue is that it is actually a big deal. There are a lot of people (myself included) that want this game to be successful. When you look at Brawl and Melee it's obvious which has survived the test of time. I myself am a Brawl player, that being said, I think Melee is one of the most fantastic mistakes that will happen within my lifetime. People can say all they want about it, but the fact of the matter is, it's still going strong. In fact, not only is it still going strong, it's actually gaining in its popularity. There's a reason for this, it's not just a random chance. When people look at Smash 4 they want to see similar characteristics to Melee because that's truly our best definition of success in a Super Smash Bros game.

Let me, step by step, explain why much of what you're saying is slightly inaccurate.

Melee isn't "still" going strong. It hasn't been continually peaking repeatedly and consistently, it actually went through a lull where it basically fell off the map, after it's stint during the MLG days. When it was brought back to EVO in 2013, is when the "platinum" age began. Now Melee is strong because I think a huge sum of people have finally since recognized what most of the at-the-time Melee community had already recognized years ago. The general populace was incredibly late to catch up. Melee requires extreme technical finesse to be in the top ranks, and when that got put on blast at EVO 2013, it became apparent that Melee was worth more than perceived back in the day when it was "current".

I see the past year and a half of Melee's platinum age as a sort of...the age of Smash that Smash never got during its prime. It deserved this spotlight long ago, it shouldn't have needed to take this long, and you'd be silly to disagree.

However, unfortunately there are side-effects. Melee is an old game, and regardless of how deserving it is of the attention it is getting (that it should have already gotten in the past), a lot of people want something new, and not everyone wants another Melee-similar game. There are many types of Smashers, and I hate to say it but there are even plenty of competitive Smashers who wish for the formula to move to something different. I hate to say it, but it is only a very tiny (although loud) vocal minority of folks who go blue in the face screaming for Smash 4 to be a near copy-paste of Melee with new characters and shiny 1080p graphics, so it is inaccurate to judge the "correct" direction that the next game should go based on just them.

Smash is a profoundly flexible formula, and can be successful in many different ways, so the whole concept of being closed off to innovation makes the hardcore-melee crowd look pretentious when this is looking like one of the best Smash games yet.

Let me start by saying that Smash 4 does not need to be the same game as Melee. It does, however, need to be competitive. Oftentimes, when reading posts that critique the game, people confuse the desire for faster game play, more combos, and less camping with the desire for a Melee 2.0. All these people really want is a game that's equally amazing! Like I said before, these characteristics just happen to have the highest chance of bringing this game towards that goal. In the end, if it reaches it by other means that's fine, it's just scary to rely on something new when we don't know it will play out.

It actually doesn't need to be competitive, but it will still end up being so anyway. The former is almost precisely the definition of Brawl's development creed, in a nutshell.

Of course we all want an amazing game, but many of us believe a melee copy would not be amazing. In fact, we'd find it boring, un-inventive, and repetitious.

The real issue with these kinds of threads is that deep down everyone is scared that this game isn't going to succeed. Because of this, unwarranted panic and defense alike spread throughout it leaving knowledgeable comments behind. There is reason for concern, the demo being an unfinished product does not mean that issues will be fixed. However, It’s equally important to understand that worrying too much won’t change the outcome of the game. Take this information in stride, think about what it could mean for the game, and move on and enjoy your day.

You're missing a few spots. There are many who don't care if it succeeds or not because the game has already shown to lack the qualities they desire in Smash (present in Melee). These people already know they'll be sticking with Melee, but still take it upon themselves to waltz in here and **** in everyone's cheerios because it's a form of validation when they get likes and corroboration.

 

[A2ZOMG]

I mean...you stated how this will be punish heavy...isn't that how Melee already is?

For example, if you're Zelda and you just in the air into a Marth, if he gets a f-air off on you, you really have no options until you land or he misses, because he's just going to keep fairing you, and you won't be able to do anything but take it. How is that fair? (No pun intended)

Isn't that severe punishment? Couldn't think game's version of this in fact be shield dropping? Doesn't it level the playing field knowing you can shield drop just as fast as your enemy?

Does that make this game more competitive? I'm not finding anything to be upset about.

Melee isn't punish heavy except in extremely campy matchups like Ylink/Samus vs almost anyone or Mario vs himself/Doc/Luigi. Melee otherwise is really "FREE SHFFL SPAM" heavy. You don't actually look for punishes QUITE that much even if it's universally part of fighting games. You more just look for a random hit to connect when running around then try to confirm something big from it.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Melee isn't punish heavy except in extremely campy matchups like Ylink/Samus vs almost anyone or Mario vs himself/Doc/Luigi. Melee otherwise is really "FREE SHFFL SPAM" heavy. You don't actually look for punishes QUITE that much even if it's universally part of fighting games. You more just look for a random hit to connect when running around then try to confirm something big from it.

This is precisely why quick, agile characters that possess aerials with the least amount of punish are the most popular, and even when characters who do not fit that description are used, are abusing an according move that falls in line with such.

It makes for such a narrow form of play, that while exciting and fun to watch, gets old pretty quick once you recognize the imbalances.

It puts a bad taste in my mouth to say this, but this is actually the one part of that horrible Destructoid article that I agree with...

When every character in a fighter has this many abilities, the game becomes not so much what strategies you choose, but how fast and efficient you are in implementing them. This eventually turned most high level Smash Bros. Melee play into a race to get in there then start a poke and fake routine until your opponent makes a mistake. Any sort of long distance game, alternating between closing in and backing off, or anything but fast, short range normal attacks has been mostly thrown out the window. The most statistically successful and commonly used characters (Fox, Sheik, Captain Falcon) all are all about speed and risk reduction, making the game a contest of reflexes and dexterity more than anything else.

While I disagree with a few specific things, I think his ultimate point is pretty sound.

 

[A2ZOMG]

Melee is pretty overrated competitively and the Destructoid analysis is mostly spot on. As I've said before, Melee actually gets really autopilot in high level play especially because defensive options are poorly designed (ESPECIALLY a lack of grab teching) and because character balance is just bad.

Melee would be a good competitive game if it had grab teching, characters were about Captain Falcon's power level, and if shield drop time was around 9 frames instead of 14. Not to mention if ledgestalling wasn't a thing. But yeah...that's just hypothetical.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Melee is pretty overrated competitively and the Destructoid analysis is mostly spot on. As I've said before, Melee actually gets really autopilot in high level play especially because defensive options are poorly designed (ESPECIALLY a lack of grab teching) and because character balance is just bad.

Now this is a conversation I'd like to see take place...has anyone ever considered that Melee has poor defensive options?

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

Now this is a conversation I'd like to see take place...has anyone ever considered that Melee has poor defensive options?

Ye Gods, do you have any idea the ****storm you've just unleashed?

Though, you do have a very good point...maybe people got too used to Melee's poor defensive options that when good ones are implemented, some people just can't handle...

 

[The Slayer]

Destructoid

I wouldn't trust them on anything Smash. This is the same group of people who are not only ok (and even loves) mechanics like tripping in Brawl, but tries their best to downplays Melee's viability for competitiveness. I would take their analysis with a grain of salt.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

I wouldn't trust them on anything Smash. This is the same group of people who are not only ok (and even loves) mechanics like tripping in Brawl, but tries their best to downplays Melee's viability for competitiveness. I would take their analysis with a grain of salt.

It's not about trusting them on anything. It's analyzing a piece of text and recognizing that it makes sense. It's not really an interpretive category here, I quoted the piece I did because I believed it to be true, before Destructoid ever even wrote that article.

 

[Devil G.]

I don't understand why people are now noticing this.

Like, for real. You guys should have figured it out when Sakurai said at E3 that all the 3DS needs to be finished is debugging.

That means mechanics, game speed, all that other stuff is done.....Its kinda late to even try to do anything about it.



Lets go brawl 2.0. Good for 1 year maybe 2 years in the competitive smash community with probably not being featured at most-any major tournament (like evo or mlg) before people are like screw this I'm going back to melee and pm. We could have done something, we could have spoke out more towards nintendo and sakurai so we could have a game more people would like and preserve a large active competitive community. But it's pretty much too late now.


PS: Either way IDC I know I will love this game and I will show up to tournaments always until the game dies like brawl has.

Talk about defeatism, I'll never understand people being so negative before the game has even been released.

 

[Vkrm]

Does somebody want to do me a solid and link the destructoid article?

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

not really the build is old, just because it launches soon does not mean what we had at e3 is going to be the same, it might mind you but its pretty well known at this point the build we got was from march or earlier

Oh yeah, good point.

 

[Renji64]

dat autosnap is real.

 

[The Slayer]

It's not about trusting them on anything. It's analyzing a piece of text and recognizing that it makes sense. It's not really an interpretive category here, I quoted the piece I did because I believed it to be true, before Destructoid ever even wrote that article.

But like I said, it's probably just to be made out of spite even if it is to make sense. Hence why I wouldn't take their context so seriously.

 

[JV5Chris]

Posts dedicated to complaining about a thread's existence are pretty asinine. Emphasis on the as.
We'll let you know when the thread is going somewhere negative, or close it if it gets completely cyclical. A very solid conversation has been happening in this thread and to come in here to post your one sentence "opinion" (literally a rule breaking one) and coerce people to be distracted by it? Quite rude, consider stopping.

Just to reiterate, here's what someone at Neo-Gaf said about this very thread; yes for a while there they were talking about the state of smashboards.

Now this is a conversation I'd like to see take place...has anyone ever considered that Melee has poor defensive options?

Crouch canceling, wavedashing back (yes a defensive maneuver), using attacks on shield defensively to build space (less effective in Brawl with its power shield), projectile pressure, baiting attacks with dash dancing, walls of aerials with characters like Jigglypuff, reliable out of shield attacks such as Samus' up-B. I don't think any of what I just mentioned is particularly poor, some of it is probably a little too good in fact. Overall it's not as easy to punish someone out of shield in Melee, but lets not forget what that shield's primary purpose is, blocking attacks.

So what about top 8 players like HungryBox and Armada? Armada, for example, methodically controls the stage and punishes players very hard that play him aggressively. It doesn't fit the description of what some here are trying to peg Melee as. Yes, the game does have a strong offensive element, but the defensive options are hardly weak. I would agree that the balance between the two could be better, but trying to sell Melee's defensive game short is not helping anyone's case here. Just ask around, there are plenty of people critical of Melee's stronger defensive options.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Just to reiterate, here's what someone at Neo-Gaf said about this very thread; yes for a while there they were talking about the state of smashboards.


Crouch canceling, wavedashing back (yes a defensive maneuver), using attacks on shield defensively to build space (less effective in Brawl with its power shield), projectile pressure, baiting attacks with dash dancing, walls of aerials with characters like Jigglypuff, reliable out of shield attacks such as Samus' up-B. I don't think any of what I just mentioned is particularly poor, some of it is probably a little too good in fact. Yes, it's not as easy to punish someone out of shield in Melee, but lets not forget what that shield's primary purpose is, blocking attacks.

So what about top 8 players like HungryBox and Armada? Armada, for example, methodically controls the stage and punishes players very hard that play him aggressively. It doesn't fit the description of what some here are trying to peg Melee as. Yes, the game does have a strong offensiveness element, but the defensive options are hardly weak. I would agree that the balance between the two could be better, but trying to sell Melee's defensive game short is not helping anyone's case here. Just ask around, there are plenty of people critical of Melee's stronger defensive options.

There are a number of people here who could play up Brawl's offensive game (with facts an educated opinions) in the same way you've done right here for Melee's defensive game...

 

[TheKk-47]

I'm getting pretty tired of seeing this logic: Melee = Competitive Smash. They want Smash 4 to = Competitive Smash. SO THEY WANT SMASH 4 = MELEE HERPPP DERp. That's dumb, and flawed. You can't ignore the fact that 64 and Brawl are competitive, they just aren't as popular as Melee . When somebody says they want a competitive Smash I think what they mean to say is that they want a Smash where aggressive and offensive play can beat out defensive play. Many people find Brawl's gameplay to be boring to watch and play, and THAT'S why it isn't successful, not because Melee peeps shun it. When somebody watches it they just see MK's waiting in neutral for a punish that doesn't even get them that much damage. As we've heard and seen not many people like this style of play, Sakurai said he disliked camping strats, and there's a reason Zero got boos during the invitational.

The only way to get rid of this style of play is to make defense not as attractive as offense. That's it. You don't need wavedashing or l-cancelling to do that. And to people who say "It's a demo, and old build!! Wait to game come out and then talk!" That logic is also dumb, we are 2 months away from the 3DS release and 4(at most) from the Wii U launch. Not a whole lot is going to change unless we're vocal. And if we wait til the game comes out to judge it, it'll be too late and pointless. Because that'll be the final product and there won't be a patch that'll change the game-engine like that.

 

[JV5Chris]

There are a number of people here who could play up Brawl's offensive game (with facts an educated opinions) in the same way you've done right here for Melee's defensive game...

Well then, do you disagree with anything I said?

 

[DraginHikari]

Being someone who has never played in a tournment scene, I can't speak too heavily on the offense and defensive gameplay and I'll be honest trying to decipher the differences in the way others here have here would be pretty hard for me to pull off. I won't try to talk about something I have no frame of reference for but something else crossed my mind in relation to the tournment scene as an observer.

However recently I came to kind of an interesting observation, when I was watching the Melee event at EVO which has been the first time I've watched a Melee Tournment live. Even though the gameplay was faster and more technical, as much as I hate to say it I was regularly found myself bored, not the entire time, but just enough that it was definitely noticable. Compared to the E3 Invitational and the 3DS tournment this weekend where I had a much different reaction. At first I thought it was hype for Smash 4 but the more I thought about it, it wasn't just that.

It raised a question for me, is simply being the more competitive viable and offensive oriented gameplay enough to keep attention on it ongoing? Almost every game at EVO as far as I was aware was a newer game or at least more recent then Melee. It's not that Melee looked awful by any sense of the word, when compared to the others games, it did feel more dull in the regards. Now I enjoy playing Melee, but I'm not sure at this point that I enjoy 'watching' Melee as Spectator. With the way Smash 4 pops and the way the actions play out I found myself more interested as a spectator then I was during EVO beacuse if it wasn't as technical as the stuff going on at EVO, it never felt monotonus to me as a viewer. I think the other factor is the fact that Melee has been anaylized to the point of minimal changes accruing. I mean for me the most exciting matches that I enjoyed at EVO when I would see a character for a different tier then the top like the Pikachu matches or other such characters, simply that it shook things up to little. It's hard to put my finger on what exactly was boring me so much but that's just what I observed.

I know a lot of this is a taste thing and it may be the result of me only watching the EVO event alone but it's something that did cross my mind a bit when talking about tournment viability as when your talking larger events the Spectators role is definitely important in some ways.

 

[Cassio]

Not really sure if this is the place for that discussion, but I've played basically nothing but melee for the last year and while I definitely have some thoughts on its weaknesses, I do not think it has to do with its poor defensive options. If anything its the opposite, as Melee develops the general consensus is its likely to become more and more defensive which I agree with.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

Not really sure if this is the place for that discussion, but I've played basically nothing but melee for the last year and while I definitely have some thoughts on its weaknesses, I do not think it has to do with its poor defensive options. If anything its the opposite, as Melee develops the general consensus is its likely to become more and more defensive which I agree with.

Yea, competitive Melee has gotten campier. I agree. Camping and baiting the opponent has become the better option than just going in and being aggressive all the time. Even Mango realizes the importance of not always being aggressive. Characters that have a good camping game will generally win more. That's part of the reason why Falcon is getting worse and Fox and Falco are getting better.

 

[Senario]

Yea, competitive Melee has gotten campier. I agree. Camping and baiting the opponent has become the better option than just going in and being aggressive all the time. Even Mango realizes the importance of not always being aggressive. Characters that have a good camping game will generally win more. That's part of the reason why Falcon is getting worse and Fox and Falco are getting better.

I think the main thing here is that the key is Melee is not just campy playstyles, it is well balanced by having really good offense too which I think is what makes it a lot more interesting. It is uninteresting to watch somebody simply camp out, but when there is a good chance for offensive play as well then it works. Fox and falco are less about only doing laser spam until you can kill and more about using lasers to supplement your damage a bit. You still have combos to balance out that campy play.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

Crouch canceling, wavedashing back (yes a defensive maneuver), using attacks on shield defensively to build space (less effective in Brawl with its power shield), projectile pressure, baiting attacks with dash dancing, walls of aerials with characters like Jigglypuff, reliable out of shield attacks such as Samus' up-B. I don't think any of what I just mentioned is particularly poor, some of it is probably a little too good in fact. Overall it's not as easy to punish someone out of shield in Melee, but lets not forget what that shield's primary purpose is, blocking attacks.

If half of those things are defensive options, then you and I have VERY different opinions on what defensive options mean.

And my issue with Melee's defenses is that everyone talks about how bad they are to do. Shielding? Too slow. Rolling? Too slow. Airdodge? Too slow, unless used for wavedashing.

Everything you listed just seems like alternate forms offense, and I won't allow the whole statement of "the best defense is a good offense" in this claim. The ONLY thing that I can see Melee having over Brawl defensively is power/reflect shielding, which, in all honest, should be brought back.

 

[Senario]

If half of those things are defensive options, then you and I have VERY different opinions on what defensive options mean.

And my issue with Melee's defenses is that everyone talks about how bad they are to do. Shielding? Too slow. Rolling? Too slow. Airdodge? Too slow, unless used for wavedashing.

Everything you listed just seems like alternate forms offense, and I won't allow the whole statement of "the best defense is a good offense" in this claim. The ONLY thing that I can see Melee having over Brawl defensively is power/reflect shielding, which, in all honest, should be brought back.

Shielding -> Used against pressure options for shield grab also used against projectiles. It isn't useless, you just can't keep it up all the time.
Rolling -> I'll give you that one in a way, rolling is generally not great but that is mainly because it always goes a set distance and thus is easily punished, not because it is too slow.
Airdodge -> Recover onto stage with airdodge. Avoids hits from opponent and can be very effective if they aren't used to you doing it (also known as mix it up).

All of that stuff is legitimate defensive options though in the quote. Just because they aren't specifically stated in the manual for defensive options that doesn't mean they are bad ones or invalid ones. They are still used defensively.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

If half of those things are defensive options, then you and I have VERY different opinions on what defensive options mean.

And my issue with Melee's defenses is that everyone talks about how bad they are to do. Shielding? Too slow. Rolling? Too slow. Airdodge? Too slow, unless used for wavedashing.

Everything you listed just seems like alternate forms offense, and I won't allow the whole statement of "the best defense is a good offense" in this claim. The ONLY thing that I can see Melee having over Brawl defensively is power/reflect shielding, which, in all honest, should be brought back.

No one says shielding is too slow, especially when it's one of your main defensive options. And yeah, Wavedashing may have more utility than rolling, but it's far from useless, it's just easier to punish because of the end lag. Air dodging is good if you are trying to mix up your recovery or trying to space away from a bait.

Also, aren't you being vague? Alternate forms of offense? Can't that basically describe how you use everything in the game? If I run up to an opponent and shield an attack to shield grab, wouldn't that be an alternate form of offense? If anything that just gives credit to the flexibility of the Melee engine.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

No one says shielding is too slow, especially when it's one of your main defensive options. And yeah, Wavedashing may have more utility than rolling, but it's far from useless, it's just easier to punish because of the end lag. Air dodging is good if you are trying to mix up your recovery or trying to space away from a bait.

Also, aren't you being vague? Alternate forms of offense? Can't that basically describe how you use everything in the game? If I run up to an opponent and shield an attack to shield grab, wouldn't that be an alternate form of offense? If anything that just gives credit to the flexibility of the Melee engine.

Sorry, I can be a bit verbally obtuse at times. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I view things such as blocking, dodging or putting space between you and your opponent as defensive. Most of the things that had been listed previously just seem to me like things you'd do offensively, to either attack, or make an attack faster.

 

[pizzapie7]

Sorry, I can be a bit verbally obtuse at times. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I view things such as blocking, dodging or putting space between you and your opponent as defensive. Most of the things that had been listed previously just seem to me like things you'd do offensively, to either attack, or make an attack faster.

Wavedashing back is just as defensive as rolling back. Defensive play in Melee isn't based around using the classic defensive options because they are pretty underpowered.

But any commentary about how they could be buffed potentially making Melee better would just be met with "B-BUT THAT'S MELEE 2.0 WE CAN'T HAVE THAT GAMES SHOULDN'T IMPROVE".

 

[Animage]

What bugs me the most is how incredibly easily Sakurai can fix this entire thing.
The key is L-cancelling.

I'm going to assume that all these changes made in favor of defensive play, such as increased aerial landing lag, are made to make the game easier for casual players (people with "casual-level reactions" can more easily punish whiffed attacks). The obvious, apparently overlooked solution to this is implementing L-cancels. Casual players will still have their "accessibility", since they don't know about L-cancels, whereas competitive players can play at a slightly higher speed.

It is the easiest way to create some kind of much needed divide between competitive and casual players, and it is one of the few things that can be done right now that will actually make everyone happy.

 

[Senario]

What bugs me the most is how incredibly easily Sakurai can fix this entire thing.
The key is L-cancelling.

I'm going to assume that all these changes made in favor of defensive play, such as increased aerial landing lag, are made to make the game easier for casual players (people with "casual-level reactions" can more easily punish whiffed attacks). The obvious, apparently overlooked solution to this is implementing L-cancels. Casual players will still have their "accessibility", since they don't know about L-cancels, whereas competitive players can play at a slightly higher speed.

It is the easiest way to create some kind of much needed divide between competitive and casual players, and it is one of the few things that can be done right now that will actually make everyone happy.

Or decrease landing lag to L cancel levels across the board. Everybody wins. Simple, lets you play fast, ect ect.

 

[Animage]

The thing is, obviously Sakurai doesn't want to decrease landing lag for casual players, because those are the people he is making the game for in the first place. If he wanted to "let people play fast, etc etc." then he would've just made everything melee speed by now.
Which is why this divide is necessary

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

I'm kind of losing hope in the 3DS version receiving any gameplay changes, seeing as how the game has to go gold next month for the Japan release. The current build may have received some necessary changes to the engine, but I think most things are set in stone.

 

[Raijinken]

I tried going back and watching pro Melee once I started getting into spectating pro PM. I got bored fast due to the lack of character versatility, and how every match looked like the exact same combos. Competitive, it may be, but in the end it was just camp and punish with L-Canceling and higher base game speed to make the camping look more intense.

So, either the hardcore Streetfighter players are right and Smash isn't a competitive fighter anyway, or a lot of what we're doing is trying to disguise a type of competitive play and degrade a more obvious implementation of it.

I'm still expecting Smash4 to catch on competitively.

I'm kind of losing hope in the 3DS version receiving any gameplay changes, seeing as how the game has to go gold next month for the Japan release. The current build may have received some necessary changes to the engine, but I think most things are set in stone.

There's always the hope that Sakurai will act on his expressed interest in balance patches.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Sorry, I can be a bit verbally obtuse at times. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I view things such as blocking, dodging or putting space between you and your opponent as defensive. Most of the things that had been listed previously just seem to me like things you'd do offensively, to either attack, or make an attack faster.

Well, that's the beauty of the game, you are not restricted to using something like a wavedash in just one way.

Let's compare it to a Dash attack cancel, it's an offensive sliding maneuver that gives you access to neutral 1 neutral option, an up smash, and one dashing option, a pivot grab.

While the dash attack cancel does allow you to use one of there options defensively (the pivot grab, as you can maneuver away from the opponent), it forces you to commit to a singular option, but a wavedash is similar, except it gives you access to all of your grounded options post execution, allowing for some unique follow ups.

There is some beauty to the DACUS though, as it does force a player to commit to an action, something that wavedashing and dash dancing don't force you to do, so you had to be aware of utilizing it.

Melee's movement options, in my opinion, are also it's greatest vice. As they can be used offensively or defensively, but the fact that they can be executed without commiting to a specified action may potentially make them more defensive, as Cassio pointed out earlier. The only thing going for then is that defensive play is also punishable with the same techniques.

So the issue lies in how you can balance this out so your neutral options are not punishable, yet effect enough to promote offensive and defensive, without making them susceptible to being punished easily if the opponent is being offensive? Well, that's hard, but it isn't impossible. Maybe make wavedashing the same input as a trot (a la pivot attack cancel) to access neutral options, as you still have them, but the fact that a slide is accessed out of dash does force to make a commitment if you are trying to pressure from across the stage or something. Treat dash dancing like wall jumping, similarly to how you lose height with every jump, make every continuous pivot you execute have lower initial dash speed, initial turn around speed and a smaller input window per repetition, so you can possibly pivot away from attacks and reposition, but you can't spam it. There is no guarantee these things will work out perfectly, but what does?

I do play Melee, but I don't believe it's the perfect game, but I feel that if we can revision certain elements from the game as core aspects then it would undoubtably enhance the experience of smash 4 for everyone, well, in my opinion at least.

 

[TheKk-47]

I tried going back and watching pro Melee once I started getting into spectating pro PM. I got bored fast due to the lack of character versatility, and how every match looked like the exact same combos. Competitive, it may be, but in the end it was just camp and punish with L-Canceling and higher base game speed to make the camping look more intense.

So, either the hardcore Streetfighter players are right and Smash isn't a competitive fighter anyway, or a lot of what we're doing is trying to disguise a type of competitive play and degrade a more obvious implementation of it.

I'm still expecting Smash4 to catch on competitively.



There's always the hope that Sakurai will act on his expressed interest in balance patches.

Yeah I feel you on that one. Melee doesn't interest me now because of Project M. I love that game. 41 completely viable characters. It's like every character has notable main and any character can do well. It gets tiring seeing the same Fox dittos, or Fox vs Falco, Fox vs Jiggs, Fox vs Marth, etc. etc. PM is my favorite smash now because of the variety.

 

[Raijinken]

Yeah I feel you on that one. Melee doesn't interest me now because of Project M. I love that game. 41 completely viable characters. It's like every character has notable main and any character can do well. It gets tiring seeing the same Fox dittos, or Fox vs Falco, Fox vs Jiggs, Fox vs Marth, etc. etc. PM is my favorite smash now because of the variety.

Pretty much, though each patch improves it (currently, at least at S@X, Diddy seems to win a disproportionate amount of games). And that sort of example is why I really hope Sakurai uses balance patches to adjust things gradually in SmashThrough. Not like Dota and the like where they aim to add content every so often to support a freemium game, but like Starcraft or something where they can focus on balancing the existing game until it's about time to make the next, and go into that one with the previous one's balance as a basis.

 

[Cassio]

People like to talk about "movement options" but dont really know what they mean by this. One of the biggest differences between melee and brawl is their commitment. In melee you can cancel almost anything. Dash forward, cancel it backwards. Jump up, cancel it on a platform. Rush in, crouch cancel or wave dash back. Brawl has a couple options to cancel movement but for the most part the game takes a lot more commitment in your choices.

For the most part this is something Im glad for. I've posted this image before, but it applies very well here (Nintendos philosophy)

Having greater commitments gave Brawl a completely different feel than melee. Some didnt enjoy it, others prefered it, but theres was an extremely large group of people who were able to enjoy both. Brawl had flaws in other ways.

Thats also why I prefer that smash 4 does not pull elements directly from melee just to suit a certain preference for certain players. Look at Turn Canceling, ledge invincibility, ledge stealing, etc. These are outstanding examples of a game that provides a unique experience and what many would consider improvements without falling into the trap of 64/melee/brawl 2.0. This is what good game designers do, instead of accepting the request of its customers suggesting the return of melee stuff i.e. dash dancing, etc.


As far as melee flaws, heres a couple things off the top of my head
Dash dancing: While a really interesting and fun mechanic for the user, it also provides a lot of unbalance in the game in defensive way that can suck for the characters that suffer against it or lose out to characters with a better one. The only way to fix this sort of speed deficiency are through weird buffs to the slow character that leads to annoying slow MU's like anyone vs jiggs (PM is the perfect example of suffering greatly from this issue)

Shine: Really, the single dumbest move to exist in any smash game. People like to say MK is a melee character in Brawl; well Fox/Falco are 64 character in melee. Shields mean nothing to fox and falco, and it breaks the basic dynamic of Rock Paper Scissors in smash (Attack, Shield, Grab) since shielding is no longer a real option vs these characters.

Fox/Falco: Make the game fairly unbalanced, in part bc of things mentioned above too, lol.

 

[SSBBDaisy]

Talk about defeatism, I'll never understand people being so negative before the game has even been released.

Its called a learning experience.

I started playing brawl competitively back in 2012 all the way till it died as of right now. I saw how people lost interest because of the mechanics and saw PM with the mechanics they wanted and watched countless people in FL move on.

 

[Raijinken]

Its called a learning experience.

I started playing brawl competitively back in 2012 all the way till it died as of right now. I saw how people lost interest because of the mechanics and saw PM with the mechanics they wanted and watched countless people in FL move on.

In a similar vein, many Melee players are going on to PM for similar reasons. Ongoing balance goes a very long way.

 

[Veggi]

Project M is actually my favorite thing to watch as well. Compared to both Brawl and Melee, there is way more character variety and every character plays much more differently from each other. In Melee, I felt like most of the best characters were very similar with the exception of Jigglypuff and Peach, sort of. Then in Brawl characters like Snake, Olimar, Diddy Kong, and Ice Climbers were all way different than each other and made up a decent portion of the not-Metaknight metagame. Still, there were too many Metaknights for that to matter as much. But in Project M, the characters are also super weird and crazy. They all have things that make them super unique. Most Melee play, I feel like there are a few moves that outshine (lol) the rest of a character's moveset and the player just repeatedly uses those moves. They're usually aerials. That's why I hate the suggestion to reduce landing lag on aerials. Even in Brawl, they're already used way more than any other move unless you're Snake. There are a lot of moves used in Project M, so I feel like the character and move variety is way higher than in any other Smash game.