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

[Deleted member 245254]

You want proof?

Landing Lag: (M2K)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkRp1bNg738&list=UU5WNBHwgluAwWJE5QV-5_TA
PPMD On how the game feels to play:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIcb25IM8Zc&list=UU5WNBHwgluAwWJE5QV-5_TA
D1 on general concerns with the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJH0NdmEP5M&list=UU5WNBHwgluAwWJE5QV-5_TA
HugS on general game mobility
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXjjWSZP3lU&list=UU5WNBHwgluAwWJE5QV-5_TA
Ken and KDJ ledge and general things that could improve(mobility again makes an appearance)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBHnNTkzygU

Need I go on? I am certainly not alone in my opinions of the game. And I am certainly not dismissing it but rather being concerned about it's longterm ability to be a good fighting game. A lot of melee players want a new game to sink their teeth into but if Smash 4 does not allow that you can't expect people to move on to a game they don't enjoy.

In general it feels like you are attributing "Intelligent" posters to ones that agree with you and while I would say some are good like Amazing Ampharos and Cassius(though I don't agree with him sometimes) your posts I personally do not consider among them at their level of sophistication due to the inflammatory nature of your posts every single time. It isn't even with criticism of the game itself which is fine, it is close to blatant hate for fans who do care about the game just as much as any other player but happen to like melee.

If you really must insinuate that I am not an "intelligent" poster or that I'm "delusional" You really need to stop because that is not what this thread is about, it is not about ad homenim attacks it is about concern about the longterm competitive viability of the game. And if you don't particularly care or like the game as is why bother even going to this thread? Go do something else. You clearly like the game as is, why bother taking time to complain about people who to you are "complaining"?

Christ, we just got done talking about how melee pros do not possess the ability to provide any more of a valid idea on the games status than you or I do, then you go and link a bunch of their opinions on Smash 4 to validate yourself. Do you watch each of those at least once before you go to sleep every night or something?

Yes. I attribute intelligent posters to those who believe in the concept of potential and allow themselves to be separated from Melee's success when judging the competitive potential of Smash 4.

You're always using the term ad hominem, it's so stereotypical of forum smart-asses to spend entire posts degrading and objectifying the content of a post for how insulted they feel rather than actually interpreting and consuming the content for what it means. This isn't candy land, not everything is going to come out sugar coated, especially when you are as dedicated as you appear to be to blindly promoting the death of any game that chooses to veer from Melee's path.

Your "concern" is duly noted, but Sakurai doesn't give two pence for your concerns. He knows how to make a game, he MADE Melee.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

That ***** Bill is the truth tho

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

All hail Bill Trinen. Truly an inspiration to Smashers everywhere.

 

[Senario]

All hail Bill Trinen. Truly an inspiration to Smashers everywhere.

Trinen tier needs to be a thing, seriously too godlike for the likes of us mere mortals. I mean, look at how good he is at the lost levels, D1 was insanely shocked with the level of awesome. (More seriously, that part of the stream might have been boring but D1's stream made it a bucket of laughs.)

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Trinen tier needs to be a thing, seriously too godlike for the likes of us mere mortals. I mean, look at how good he is at the lost levels, D1 was insanely shocked with the level of awesome. (More seriously, that part of the stream might have been boring but D1's stream made it a bucket of laughs.)

First JV 4 stock live in smash 4. Good ****.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

Because you talk people down like a vindictive arm chair psychologist doesn't solidify anything you perceive about a person as a fact.

Instead of putting emphasis on why others beliefs are delusional, you should take down that barrier of yours, and see that these people truly have something to contribute. Many of the doctrine in politics are created on the census of the people, though many of them know nothing of politics. Ideally, in your world, the only people who would be allowed to vote for government are those who are in government, as they are the only ones who have experience in it. That's some strait up hierarchical bull****. And you know what that leads to? Totalitarianism.

Everyone's opinion matters, not only the few who decide to step on that pedestal. No one is saying the game is bad because it doesn't mimic the exact qualities of the previous games, but if there are redeeming qualities found in a game that can be improved upon, why not have them?

My peace with Zipzo or anyone like him is this: They can talk all of the **** they want as long as I continue to collect their money at tournaments.

Smash 4 will be a fun game with some new areas to explore but in competition it's going to leave people hungry for something they've had or developed a taste for (Project M being the fruit of that). The game is pretty naked. Most of the game has been stripped down in favor of taking turns hitting each other once or twice.

Going back to the OP, it's okay to prefer a defensive playstyle but only if it's part of the character. If the game design dictates that a defensive playstyle is almost always superior then you end up with a game where no one really wants to use any moves that commit. The cost doesn't offset the reward. There's hardly anything such as pressure and since you're hitting each other one at a time there's hardly such a thing as tight, well-done plays.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I've been thinking about it, and I think I've discovered what my real problem is with the new direction of the series. This new smash template is simply not as intuitive to control on a fundamental level. There's a direct connection between player and character in both Melee and Smash 64 that is instantly gratifying. You truly feel as if the character is an extension of your mind; if you can think it, you can do it. Brawl simply didn't have this intuitive feel. It was clunky, it was messy, and it was imprecise. Simply put, it was less fun to control. I felt like I was fighting against the engine, rather than flowing with it.

I'm not talking about advanced mechanics here, I'm talking about basic movement options and functionality. Hugs summed it up best when he said Smash 4, like Brawl, does not allow you to go where you want and do what you want to do with ease. Your mind and the game are not simpatico as they were in the earlier iterations. Dashing is stunted, and gimped. In Melee and 64, there's an immediate responsiveness and precision in directing your character. Dash dancing feels right, because the input you're performing is reflected by the character. Air movement feels good, because it's directly influenced by your momentum. It made sense. When you performed an action, it was carried out immediately, and acted in a way that felt right. Your character grabs the ledge at a times that are contextually and physically appropriate... There was no jarring magnet like pull that defied the physics of the games themselves. Brawl is full of these strange mechanisms. It doesn't feel, or look, right.

All observations and reports indicate that this is once again the case in Smash 4. So... why? Why is this being done? Everyone appreciates agency. Casuals and pros alike want a game that makes them feel like they're in control. You want to lower the barrier for entry? Slow the game down, take away advanced techniques... but is it really necessary to sand down the edges on the freedom of movement the series is beloved for?

I've even had a few casual players play Brawl and Project M one after the other to test this theory, and they all agreed that Project M simply felt better. They used terms like "stiff" and "clumsy" to describe Brawl in comparison. Sure, it was a small sample size, but it did confirm that it wasn't a mere matter of my personal bias.

Anything is competitively viable if you want it to be. The speed of the game doesn't bother me. The number of advanced tactics don't concern me. I just want Smash to feel good again.

I just wanted to quote this. It's a really good post that describes why people loved Smash 64 and Melee so much.

Honestly, the ledge snaps do kill me, not only that, the fact that I can't let to immediately sucks, as I feel restricted, or vulnerable to a frame trap. It seems like people are just going to pop people off the ledge once they recover and force them into a risky spot given the ledge trumps, but it may be harder since the amount of time you hang on the ledge has been reduced.

 

[D-idara]

I've been thinking about it, and I think I've discovered what my real problem is with the new direction of the series. This new smash template is simply not as intuitive to control on a fundamental level. There's a direct connection between player and character in both Melee and Smash 64 that is instantly gratifying. You truly feel as if the character is an extension of your mind; if you can think it, you can do it. Brawl simply didn't have this intuitive feel. It was clunky, it was messy, and it was imprecise. Simply put, it was less fun to control. I felt like I was fighting against the engine, rather than flowing with it.

I'm not talking about advanced mechanics here, I'm talking about basic movement options and functionality. Hugs summed it up best when he said Smash 4, like Brawl, does not allow you to go where you want and do what you want to do with ease. Your mind and the game are not simpatico as they were in the earlier iterations. Dashing is stunted, and gimped. In Melee and 64, there's an immediate responsiveness and precision in directing your character. Dash dancing feels right, because the input you're performing is reflected by the character. Air movement feels good, because it's directly influenced by your momentum. It made sense. When you performed an action, it was carried out immediately, and acted in a way that felt right. Your character grabs the ledge at a times that are contextually and physically appropriate... There was no jarring magnet like pull that defied the physics of the games themselves. Brawl is full of these strange mechanisms. It doesn't feel, or look, right.

All observations and reports indicate that this is once again the case in Smash 4. So... why? Why is this being done? Everyone appreciates agency. Casuals and pros alike want a game that makes them feel like they're in control. You want to lower the barrier for entry? Slow the game down, take away advanced techniques... but is it really necessary to sand down the edges on the freedom of movement the series is beloved for?

I've even had a few casual players play Brawl and Project M one after the other to test this theory, and they all agreed that Project M simply felt better. They used terms like "stiff" and "clumsy" to describe Brawl in comparison. Sure, it was a small sample size, but it did confirm that it wasn't a mere matter of my personal bias.

Anything is competitively viable if you want it to be. The speed of the game doesn't bother me. The number of advanced tactics don't concern me. I just want Smash to feel good again.

BRAWL WAS THE CLUNKY AND MESSY ONE!? That's a great one, quite the comedian!

Smash4 plays perfectly fluid.

 

[Cassio]

Character Attacks
Theres a difference between just attacking someones character and challenging credibility. If someone makes a statement with no argument, theyre relying on their credibility to support that argument. But if you attack someones personal character or as a way to make an argument theyve made seem bad then its ad hominem. Even though I've questioned Senario before his latest posts have much more thought behind them (even if I think theyre wrong, lol, but thats something I need to explain why).

Game Comparisons
Also, I would say on a fundamental level you can compare various competitive games. For instance you can compare the game of chance in Brawls punish game to poker. Theres obviously going to be tons of other differences, but the process of finding things like this is called abstraction and is very important to theorycrafting.

I also think people are confusing my initial post. I think smash 4 will be much more offensive oriented than USF4 based on what we've seen so far. I only used it as an example to show that defensive play is not inherently bad (also, anyone who's a connoisseur of Brawl top level play can understand how strikingly similar USF4's neutral game looks between the 2).

Cancels vs Commitment

I've been thinking about it, and I think I've discovered what my real problem is with the new direction of the series. This new smash template is simply not as intuitive to control on a fundamental level. There's a direct connection between player and character in both Melee and Smash 64 that is instantly gratifying. You truly feel as if the character is an extension of your mind; if you can think it, you can do it. Brawl simply didn't have this intuitive feel. It was clunky, it was messy, and it was imprecise. Simply put, it was less fun to control. I felt like I was fighting against the engine, rather than flowing with it.

No offense to that guy or anyone who shares that opinion, but I think more than anything thats indicative of bias people have for a certain type of game. I made a post earlier about commitment vs cancel based games (what hes describing). Its completely understandable of people like cancel based games and anyone who's a die-hard fan of melee will probably have a bit of a bias for that, but its not the only way to design a game. I think more than anything this is what people who want more cancels in the game need to understand, that the game might have mechanics that arent bad but that they simply wont enjoy as much as melee even if others do. (For the record, smash 4 seems to have the second most amount of cancels in the series and be in the middle of melee and brawl in terms of movement cancels).

As I keep repeating thats the beauty of the smash series, that each game has distinct differences. Its very likely youre going to have a favorite game and if its the only type of game you enjoy then theres a chance youre not going to enjoy mechanics of another one as much. But a lot of people will enjoy all of them.

Also even Brawl had waaaaay more movement options than 64, and anyone whos played all 3 games I dont think could reasonably argue that Brawl isnt much more fluid than Melee though slower. Its one of the reasons you hear M2K complain about controllers all the time for melee.

Smash 4 Analysis by Pros
Lastly, I dont think its intentional but a lot of melee players who analyzed the game only play melee, which is why I think its very easy for them to fall into the bias of believing cancels (aka movement options in their words) are a necessity for the game. I also would definitely say that their lack of time with the game is definitely a reason to question their input. Since the invitational their input has been found to be less and less relevant and correct. Anyways, this is why their input into game improvements isnt the most reliable, and should 100% be questioned and taken with a grain of salt. But you have people like Hugs who say they already know what the games gonna be like. I mean really, Hugs is cool but whos going to take analysis like that seriously?

Heres an example of good analysis by Larry (DEHF) whos not only played a lot of different fighting games in and outside smash, but provided adequate caveats. His AMA has a several good gems.

I like the game, I feel as though the best comparison I can give to the game is a mix between Brawl and Smash 64.

The dash grabs in the game seem to resemble Smash 64 more than any other game as they're less ending lag for most characters compared to the other games.

Edge guarding is going to be different with the ability to be knocked off the edge by someone else grabbing it combined with not having a lot of invincibility frames from excessive edge grabbing. The way I see it playing out is at the beginning of being offstage it will be more Brawl like with the edge magnet on recoveries and the invincibility, but the more offstage you are the more like Smash 64 and Melee the edge guarding will be. I'm not 100% certain on this though since I don't completely understand this mechanic yet, but that is what I got from playing it.

I think the stock count at 3 is fine, I honestly feel like matches are going be a lot faster than Brawl based off the characters that I've seen. The main reason as to why a lot of 1v1 matches seem so long is because no one actually understands the game very well. In competitive Smash games low level play usually doesn't look that good watch because they're missing so many follow ups and opportunities better players wouldn't, which causing the match to drag on. I also feel the the way the game is designed edge play is not going to be as strong as it was in the previous Smash games, which could also play a factor in getting more exciting sets. We need to actually get the final product before we can say how exactly the game is going to play for sure since, so many factors can play on how the meta game turns out, things we wouldn't even think of.

I like how there are more hit stun on attacks. This could lead to there being a lot of true combos in this game and a lot more frame traps than Brawl had. I also like how they nerfed air dodging to the ground by giving you a large amount of lag for doing it. I didn't like Fox's nerfed Up Smash, Fox doesn't KO until like over 100% now, like come on!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Deleted member 245254]

My peace with Zipzo or anyone like him is this: They can talk all of the **** they want as long as I continue to collect their money at tournaments.

Smash 4 will be a fun game with some new areas to explore but in competition it's going to leave people hungry for something they've had or developed a taste for (Project M being the fruit of that). The game is pretty naked. Most of the game has been stripped down in favor of taking turns hitting each other once or twice.

Going back to the OP, it's okay to prefer a defensive playstyle but only if it's part of the character. If the game design dictates that a defensive playstyle is almost always superior then you end up with a game where no one really wants to use any moves that commit. The cost doesn't offset the reward. There's hardly anything such as pressure and since you're hitting each other one at a time there's hardly such a thing as tight, well-done plays.

Haha! That's quite presumptuous!

And what if I'm the one collecting the money from you? What then?

 

[JediLink]

BRAWL WAS THE CLUNKY AND MESSY ONE!? That's a great one, quite the comedian!

No comedians here, man. It's pretty near universally agreed that Brawl's movement is clunky in comparison to the first two games. Also this thread is srs bsns.

 

[Cassio]

Actually Melee is more clunky, but thats why the game moves so fast too.

Smash 4 will be a fun game with some new areas to explore but in competition it's going to leave people hungry for something they've had or developed a taste for (Project M being the fruit of that). The game is pretty naked. Most of the game has been stripped down in favor of taking turns hitting each other once or twice.

Project M is fun, but I dont think theres any serious competitors who actually prefer that game. In any case, the statements on smash 4 competitively are incorrect. In particular, your assessment of the punishment game which in itself is wrong, seems to come from the context of PM where everything is handed to you, which provides a more accurate comparison to a bare bones game.

 

[Veggi]

Uhh...I'm pretty sure how clunky each game feels is completely opinion based. Melee and Brawl definitely don't feel clunky to me, but I know I've never had a problem with controlling Brawl. 64 on the other hand definitely feels super clunky to me. However, I'm not sure if I can attribute that to the game or the N64 control stick being horrible.

 

[Cassio]

Yeah after awhile you dont really feel it anyways. The reason I say melee feels clunky is because movement is very strict and fast and you drop like a rock. Imagine a car turning a curve vs making a hard right. Clunky probably isnt the right words since it has a negative connotation.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Actually Melee is more clunky, but thats why the game moves so fast too.

Project M is fun, but I dont think theres any serious competitors who actually prefer that game. In any case, the statements on smash 4 competitively are incorrect. In particular, your assessment of the punishment game seems to come from the context of PM where everything is handed to you, which provides a more accurate comparison to a bare bones game.

I would agree, but given the fact that none of us have the game or played the final product(?) these base statements are merely observations , and an observation can't be proven wrong. More or less, there are things that we see that indicate possible restrictions in gameplay, but it's all subjected to change. No one is wrong, really.

Also, I believe the reasoning behind why many feel Brawl's "Clunkiness" is because of some inherent designs. Apparently, there is a frame of input lag when you do commands, this occurs naturally, the fact that you must fully press down L or R to shield instead of lightly holding it, hitting the C-stick down at the apex of your jump forced your character to fast fall, and characters being more slippery on the ground than others ( though this does pay to the benefit of the more advanced player), and mandatory time to hang on the ledge before you can act (unless you tether on the ledge). Those are the only things I can possibly think of, but movement did feel smooth for the most part. I mean Melee is "Clunky" too, but in a way that's effective, so I guess you can call it...Janky? The word "Clunky" is clunky in itself. lol

Personally, I feel with adequate hitstun and generally low landing lag on aerial attacks, we wouldn't necessarily need cancels, but some cancels like wavelanding/ platform canceling are very unique and logical tactics given that this is a platform based fighter.

 

[guedes the brawler]

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

except that would make the game too fast for everyone, causing balance issues to the core of smash bros. Melee wasn't made with L-cancelling in mind, and if we had to have smash 4 or so implementing that, we'd need drastic changes across the board.

not to mention it goes against the idea behind the tech. it's called "smooth landing" in japanese, and think about it like irl: if you jump and do something, but do not land appropriately, you could hurt yourself or land in a way that's harder to get up from. Auto -lcancel ruins that quit a bit.

i think giving L-cancel a con, like eating your shield, and allowing it to happen only if you actually hit someone would be ideal, but making L-cacnel a less powerful tech (30% of lag covered, maybe) and adding a bit of natural l-cancel to everyone ( just a bit, maybe 10%)

 

[Saikyoshi]

Hopefully, throws will be a viable option.

The classic weapon triangle of fighting games is:

Attack (Rock) v

Block (Paper)^..................<Throw (Scissors)​

Right now, Paper is too tough for Scissors to cut through. Scissors never wins, Scissors never gets chosen, so no reason to choose Rock. So everybody chooses Paper forever and the match never ends. The eight minutes feel like several hours.

If they strengthen throws to balance that triangle again, that means attacking will be a viable option again, too.

Yes, I'm being sickeningly optimistic, I know, but honestly, who wants this game to die as painfully as Brawl did from the day it's released?

Actually Melee is more clunky, but thats why the game moves so fast too.

Project M is fun, but I dont think theres any serious competitors who actually prefer that game. In any case, the statements on smash 4 competitively are incorrect. In particular, your assessment of the punishment game which in itself is wrong, seems to come from the context of PM where everything is handed to you, which provides a more accurate comparison to a bare bones game.

You're assuming EVO is the only tournament in the world.

Remember Peachyhime? You know, the serious Project M player who got invited to the Invitational?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Sigh, I would like it if the personal just stopped since I don't want to lock this either.

The main reason throws are the way they are is pretty simple. It's to stop Chain grabs. Also to prevent massive rewards off a single grab which to be fair is a real problem In some fighting games.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

No comedians here, man. It's pretty near universally agreed that Brawl's movement is clunky in comparison to the first two games. Also this thread is srs bsns.

Brawl is much more fluid than Melee. There's a lot more time to think about your next move. It's got kind of a flow to it more so than Melee. I wouldn't call Melee "clunky" but Brawl has more refined movement in my opinion.

 

[smashbroskilla]

This thread is just what the forum needs. Yet another thread complaining about the viability of competition for a game that no one has had a chance to even play. Bravo.

I've watched several hours and hundreds of different people/channels break down the options of the different builds so far that we have seen. Those people don't count?

 

[Saikyoshi]

Sigh, I would like it if the personal just stopped since I don't want to lock this either.

The main reason throws are the way they are is pretty simple. It's to stop Chain grabs. Also to prevent massive rewards off a single grab which to be fair is a real problem In some fighting games.

Then they should make Block weaker.

Because right now, there's no reason to even try to attack at all, except to try to bump up the enemy's damage a bit while you wait out the timer.

 

[Katy Parry]

Sigh, I would like it if the personal just stopped since I don't want to lock this either.

The main reason throws are the way they are is pretty simple. It's to stop Chain grabs. Also to prevent massive rewards off a single grab which to be fair is a real problem In some fighting games.

I have to agree with you there. A throw is to simply get someone off of you and out of your space.

 

[Terotrous]

None of the pro players commenting on the game at E3 were using either form of dash cancel (pivot cancel or shield cancel), so their opinions about how the game is going to play at a high level are basically valueless. The SDCC tournament proved that ground combat is really strong now, so we're probably going to have to look at this game in a very different way than past Smash games where aerial combat was everything.

 

[Saikyoshi]

None of the pro players commenting on the game at E3 were using either form of dash cancel (pivot cancel or shield cancel), so their opinions about how the game is going to play at a high level are basically valueless. The SDCC tournament proved that ground combat is really strong now, so we're probably going to have to look at this game in a very different way than past Smash games where aerial combat was everything.

Yeah, the generally better ground game is why I think Final Destination will be a lot more fair and neutral of a stage this time around.

 

[Terotrous]

Yeah, the generally better ground game is why I think Final Destination will be a lot more fair and neutral of a stage this time around.

That's a good point. I was kind of bummed out that For Glory only allowed FD because in Melee and PM it's not neutral for all characters, but this time around it may work a bit better.

 

[Leonyx]

I found it interesting that all of the Nintendo tournaments featured Battlefield for their finals, instead of Final Destination. I suppose it's a nod to US competitive play, but still.

 

[Diabolical]

That's a good point. I was kind of bummed out that For Glory only allowed FD because in Melee and PM it's not neutral for all characters, but this time around it may work a bit better.

Although the balance will be broken if there is a new Metanight in Smash4. There just has to be one character good in the air to make FD unbalanced

 

[Saikyoshi]

Although the balance will be broken if there is a new Metanight in Smash4. There just has to be one character good in the air to make FD unbalanced

I disagree. A good ground game implies a good anti-air game, just like a good air game implies a good anti-ground game.

 

[Diabolical]

I disagree. A good ground game implies a good anti-air game, just like a good air game implies a good anti-ground game.

Broken characters change the metagame

 

[DraginHikari]

I found it interesting that all of the Nintendo tournaments featured Battlefield for their finals, instead of Final Destination. I suppose it's a nod to US competitive play, but still.

I think that was just because they were using the E3 demo which didn't have Final Destination included.

 

[RODO]

@ Cassio While you might think that the pro's opinions aren't really worthwhile there is no denying that they have played enough Smash to realize how certain things work and what makes Smash appealing in general for competitive play. Now I'm not so sure that Sakurai understands competitive play and what makes it appealing so getting some input would still be warranted imo.

 

[Chimera]

I've watched several hours and hundreds of different people/channels break down the options of the different builds so far that we have seen. Those people don't count?

We've seen one build of each version of the game, neither of them are final. And neither you nor the OP have have had much time to the play the game. So, I don't know who you mean by "hundreds of different people" but I can say that you, nor the OP "count"

This topic is tired. Real tired.

 

[pizzapie7]

There are so many intelligent posters (such as Shaya, Cassius, or Amazing Ampharos) who spend a hell of a lot more time than I would explaining why these people are delusional, but I haven't nearly the capacity to deal with it at the level they can so I try to make it simple, most of the time I'm typing on my phone too, which isn't always easy...but no johns.

lmao the only intelligent posters are the ones who agree with most of the time?



And I thought we all agreed that Melee is clunky as **** and that clunky being a negative is an opinion. Melee can be fluid and polished but that doesn't stop your Fox from running around with bricks in his pockets.

 

[Leonyx]

I think that was just because they were using the E3 demo which didn't have Final Destination included.

Oh, yeah...that makes sense. I guess it's just weird to me that they put Battlefield in instead of Final Destination despite the emphasis on it, but perhaps it just wasn't ready yet.

 

[Cassio]

Personally, I feel with adequate hitstun and generally low landing lag on aerial attacks, we wouldn't necessarily need cancels, but some cancels like wavelanding/ platform canceling are very unique and logical tactics given that this is a platform based fighter.

Agree with your post, just wanted to add while Id definitely enjoy some platform AT's, with the game's fall speed being slower it doesnt make it as essential as it would be for melee. At least thats my experience with Brawl compared to Melee. That being said it does add some cool stuff to the game though thatd be nice to have, I think I have to agree that itd be my first choice of something to add.

@ Cassio While you might think that the pro's opinions aren't really worthwhile there is no denying that they have played enough Smash to realize how certain things work and what makes Smash appealing in general for competitive play. Now I'm not so sure that Sakurai understands competitive play and what makes it appealing so getting some input would still be warranted imo.

That depends on who you mean. The biggest issue I have are from people who are so dedicated to one game competitively is they dont do a good job of removing this context from their analysis. Sort of like how you see some TFG players bash smash games. Im not saying this just to say it, it typically comes across in their analysis of the game. I think itd be more accurate to say "theyve played enough melee to realize how melee works and what makes melee appealing". If this were a melee sequel then Id agree forsure. But note how players like Larry, Zero, and M2K all seem to have pretty favorable opinions of the game, while its the die-hard melee players that are critical. I think Id rather have someone that has that sort of broad experience as opposed to someone who needs something to be very specific for them to like it.

You're assuming EVO is the only tournament in the world.

Remember Peachyhime? You know, the serious Project M player who got invited to the Invitational?

Yeah I was too critical, my bad.

 

[Senario]

Agree with your post, just wanted to add while Id definitely enjoy some platform AT's, with the game's fall speed being slower it doesnt make it as essential as it would be for melee. At least thats my experience with Brawl compared to Melee. That being said it does add some cool stuff to the game though thatd be nice to have, I think I have to agree that itd be my first choice of something to add.

That depends on who you mean. The biggest issue I have are from people who are so dedicated to one game competitively is they dont do a good job of removing this context from their analysis. Sort of like how you see some TFG players bash smash games. Im not saying this just to say it, it typically comes across in their analysis of the game. I think itd be more accurate to say "theyve played enough melee to realize how melee works and what makes melee appealing". If this were a melee sequel then Id agree forsure. But note how players like Larry, Zero, and M2K all seem to have pretty favorable opinions of the game, while its the die-hard melee players that are critical. I think Id rather have someone that has that sort of broad experience as opposed to someone who needs something to be very specific for them to like it.

Yeah I was too critical, my bad.

To be perfectly fair, look at some of the videos I linked in the page before. Opinions on the game are positive and other interviews from invitational are less critical but they all still had valid criticism. M2K did comment on landing lag after all.

Even I'm sure it'll be a fun party game. Competitive play is the only thing that is in question. Also as a side note I really don't care to have to reply to this point. Questioning the person's credibility is not a valid argument as that is poisoning the well rather than responding to their point, not saying you don't respond to their point I just don't agree that questioning credibility is a good argument as opposed to addressing the point.

 

[Cassio]

The topic at hand is whether or not smash pros can give good critiques based off very minimal gameplay. Thats directly asking for an assessment of their credibility. Poisoning the well is if someone made an argument, and instead of addressing the argument I attacked the person (i.e. if instead I told Rodo his post/point doesnt matter bc he's a mean jerk, thatd be poisoning the well).

If you want me to touch on individual points they have made you want to bring up I can do that as something separate.

 

[RODO]

That depends on who you mean. The biggest issue I have are from people who are so dedicated to one game competitively is they dont do a good job of removing this context from their analysis. Sort of like how you see some TFG players bash smash games. Im not saying this just to say it, it typically comes across in their analysis of the game. I think itd be more accurate to say "theyve played enough melee to realize how melee works and what makes melee appealing". If this were a melee sequel then Id agree forsure. But note how players like Larry, Zero, and M2K all seem to have pretty favorable opinions of the game, while its the die-hard melee players that are critical. I think Id rather have someone that has that sort of broad experience as opposed to someone who needs something to be very specific for them to like it.

Melee is the more successful game (competitively) though. When trying to find a good competitive base for Smash 4 I don't think it's ad to get an opinion from someone who has only played Melee and that's coming from someone who has only played Brawl and PM competitively.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

Hopefully, throws will be a viable option.

The classic weapon triangle of fighting games is:

Attack (Rock) v

Block (Paper)^..................<Throw (Scissors)​

Right now, Paper is too tough for Scissors to cut through. Scissors never wins, Scissors never gets chosen, so no reason to choose Rock. So everybody chooses Paper forever and the match never ends. The eight minutes feel like several hours.

If they strengthen throws to balance that triangle again, that means attacking will be a viable option again, too.

Yes, I'm being sickeningly optimistic, I know, but honestly, who wants this game to die as painfully as Brawl did from the day it's released?



You're assuming EVO is the only tournament in the world.

Remember Peachyhime? You know, the serious Project M player who got invited to the Invitational?

Interesting analogy, but blocking doesn't win because blocking doesn't get KOs. So attack is always viable because attacking is the only way to get points on the board.

Then again, I tend to play defense a lot so... yeah.

 

[Cassio]

I think its fine to get theirs or anyones opinion. Even a casual noob's opinion can be helpful. They just need to be take with a grain of salt for reasons I mentioned.