Did they reduce the landing lag?

[Saikyoshi]

Robin's lag seems completely necessary to me, because he's shaping up to be a total monster in all other ways in Active Mode.

I wonder if his lag will be lower in Recharge Mode...

 

[JV5Chris]

Well that's not an issue. You just want it to be. Honestly, anyone feels this is the one who's bringing salt to the table. Again you addressed landing lag as if it's universal in Smash 4 and it's not. It's only applied to certain characters and in some cases certain attacks.

What? I'm talking about a very real problem that's present in Melee, Brawl, and so far, Smash 4. Large landing lag gaps in the roster do contribute to why historically the quicker characters fair better in the franchise.

If aerial landing lag puts your panties in a bunch, pick a character with very little of it like Sheik, Mario, or apparently Lucina. Landing lag is going to be part of our risk reward system now, and that's perfect.

I main Gannondorf, more landing lag has always been part of the equation for me. Again, a manageable amount I'm ok with. Also fine with stronger attacks having a few extra frames. I'm just not a fan when it overstretches the basic purpose, like say this Melee example:

Ganon's Nair has 40 frames of complete open vulnerability with 2+2 staggered frames of attack. Given his strength and range, it's not too terrible a trade-off. Definitely workable, but the moment you touch the ground and transition to 25 frames of lag, it starts looking a whole lot more impractical.

That's nearly a half second's worth of delay in addition to what you've already risked up to that point. The reward no longer fits the risk. Without L-canceling in their to reduce lag by half, all Ganondorf's aerials become more of a gamble than a strategic possibility in many situations.

Adding extraneous landing lag to counteract a Smash character's strength will ultimately fail them (see Brawl's Gdorf). Not to mention give characters like Meta Knight that much more of a leg up. Please, before you go off on another irrelevant hate parade, think about how this relates to each game.

 

[Rich Homie Quan]

Landing lag on Sword strike with the levin sword is extremely long. Sadly we don't see a lot of air moves from him for landing lag. Thunder doesn't seem to cancel on land but then again we didn't really expect something similar to laser cancelling to be back.

After throwing out a spell or anything there seems to be a lot of animation time/lag out of the move, look at his fireball or even his A-A-A combo finisher with a spell. He usually floats his weapons around for flair but it causes him to have a lot of end lag unless he can jump out of it (I highly doubt that)

B = Thunder, Elthunder, Arcthunder(has ZSS stun properties) Thoron (Knocks backwards and has significant end lag. Likely you'll use it like Shiek needles)
B up = Elwind, two wind blades and they knock up opponents. Apparently from what we know he can actually run out of uses for this and have to wait for them to recharge. An interesting idea in theory but I fear in practice it just means he won't have good recovery.
B right = Elfire, fireball sent forward, lots of endlag on this one so not sure if follows can be done. I can see it being used at the edge of a stage to hit enemies, but only if it travels like a regular projectile and doesn't fizzle.
B down = Nosferatu, command grab. Heals you for the damage you do, apparently curses the opponent and causes you to steal life every time you hit them while cursed. Interesting but with how slow he is I'm not sure how effectively you can use this move.

Very few air moves have been shown but if he had any fast ones (like a standing kick such as mario/links for neutral air) it might make him semi ok. Definitely needs work on landing lag and how fast he recovers after throwing out moves since style seems to have been placed over function.

Oh and for some reason he seems to be mid level speed/slow, not exactly sure how that makes sense since he isn't like Ike where he is a clear powerhouse. He is a mage, and should be a little bit faster.

Whew, thanks man! Very comprehensive.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

What's wrong with wanting a game we can both like?

We already have that. It's called Super Smash Bros. Melee.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

Whilst I actually like the idea that variable landing lag could add balance and variety to the cast, I have to argue against the point of it adding depth and strategy. Why? because if there's one thing it forces the player to do, it isn't think or adapt, it's use the same moves over and over. Using the same approaches and combos all the time simply because it's the safest option isn't just boring (subjective), but it also makes players more repetitive and predictable (objective). Then you factor in Stale Move Negation and yeah...

The only way in which you'll need to adapt, won't be to your opponent or the fight at hand, but to the (inconsistent) limitations of your character. A permanent adaptation which can be performed within one day to one week, depending on how much labbing you do.

To be fair though, isn't this what normally happens in fighting games to begin with? I doubt competitive people in Melee are going to use non-safe approaches unless they're fairly certain they know they're going to be successful. Variable landing lag will not only help quell the aerial-dominated metagame, but give people more of a reason to work with a ground game. I haven't watched too many Melee videos, but it seems like everyone treats the ground like it was a hot plate; not wanting to stay on it too long. I think that's what Sm4sh is trying to get rid of by making ground approaches now viable.

EDIT: @ E Eternal phoenix Fire : Not everyone agrees. I dislike that people keep trying to shove that opinion down everyone's throats. Honestly, the game always felt a little too fast for me, even not playing competitively. Just as I'll admit, Brawl was a little too slow. It's why I'm so excited for Sm4sh, it'll hopefully be a happy medium.

 

[Berserker.]

We'll find out whether the landing lag was fixed in that tourney Nintendo is holding (Whatever it is). I'm still unsure whether it's still existent or not but from how it looks and seems, yeah.

OR WE CAN JUST **** EVERYTHING AND SLAP THE MELEE ENGINE ONTO THE GAME *snort*

 

[Senario]

To be fair though, isn't this what normally happens in fighting games to begin with? I doubt competitive people in Melee are going to use non-safe approaches unless they're fairly certain they know they're going to be successful. Variable landing lag will not only help quell the aerial-dominated metagame, but give people more of a reason to work with a ground game. I haven't watched too many Melee videos, but it seems like everyone treats the ground like it was a hot plate; not wanting to stay on it too long. I think that's what Sm4sh is trying to get rid of by making ground approaches now viable.

EDIT: @ E Eternal phoenix Fire : Not everyone agrees. I dislike that people keep trying to shove that opinion down everyone's throats. Honestly, the game always felt a little to fast for me, even not playing competitively. Just as I'll admit, Brawl was a little too slow. It's why I'm so excited for Sm4sh, it'll hopefully be a happy medium.

People jump up in the air alot because it gives mindgames and allows you to access all your moves even if you just are going to do something ground oriented like a grab. All in all there is no point in saying ground game is a viable alternative to air game in smash mainly because of the way knockback works. You go flying INTO THE AIR. If you expect to follow that up with a ground move you probably need them at low percent, very low percent. This is the other reason why people jump so much, in addition to moves that are great for mix ups and approaches all moves that hit tend to launch people either forward or into the air, it isn't a regular fighting game where everything crashes to the ground immediately.

Take Link's dash attack, it pops people up assuming they are at mid hp, now you could try doing up smash, the only ground option that aims up and is not locked out from you because of how you execute dash attack(no bombs, you wouldn't have one in your hand if you dash attacked). And your combo ends there and usually won't kill unless they are at high percent, and usually won't hit unless they are at low percent. Or you can do a multitude of different things like neutral air, up air, down air, and so on. Balancing the game by saying "oh air moves are too good" without looking at why they are good is problematic.

With air moves being so good it also allows for a player to do empty short hops or vary up their moves so you can mindgame your opponent into thinking you will be approaching with an air move but instead it is an empty jump and simply grab them. (Btw, grabs are always part of the ground game and some of your best options, they still launch people into the air.)

tl;dr Air moves are good and need to be good because everything pops enemies into the air assuming they are at any mid percent range. Only at low percents do they not go flying far enough so that ground moves can actually hit them.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

People jump up in the air alot because it gives mindgames and allows you to access all your moves even if you just are going to do something ground oriented like a grab. All in all there is no point in saying ground game is a viable alternative to air game in smash mainly because of the way knockback works. You go flying INTO THE AIR. If you expect to follow that up with a ground move you probably need them at low percent, very low percent. This is the other reason why people jump so much, in addition to moves that are great for mix ups and approaches all moves that hit tend to launch people either forward or into the air, it isn't a regular fighting game where everything crashes to the ground immediately.

Take Link's dash attack, it pops people up assuming they are at mid hp, now you could try doing up smash, the only ground option that aims up and is not locked out from you because of how you execute dash attack(no bombs, you wouldn't have one in your hand if you dash attacked). And your combo ends there and usually won't kill unless they are at high percent, and usually won't hit unless they are at low percent. Or you can do a multitude of different things like neutral air, up air, down air, and so on. Balancing the game by saying "oh air moves are too good" without looking at why they are good is problematic.

With air moves being so good it also allows for a player to do empty short hops or vary up their moves so you can mindgame your opponent into thinking you will be approaching with an air move but instead it is an empty jump and simply grab them. (Btw, grabs are always part of the ground game and some of your best options, they still launch people into the air.)

tl;dr Air moves are good and need to be good because everything pops enemies into the air assuming they are at any mid percent range. Only at low percents do they not go flying far enough so that ground moves can actually hit them.

I get what you're saying. I guess my issue is that watching competitive Melee is a lot of SHFFL-combos, and it feels like any ground game is neglected, ignored at worst. I'm mostly referring to approaches as well; after the initial hit and someone goes flying, sure, aerial hits are what you want to do, but I just feel like everyone wants every character to be some sort of aerial type character, when that's not the way it should be. I've heard people already complaining about Little Mac's lack of air game, even though his ground moves look to be quite powerful.

I guess I just don't want the metagame to devolve into a bunch of Nintendo-themed jumping beans again. Let some characters fight from the ground.

Also, I kind of like Stale Move Negation, but that's a topic for another time.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

To be fair though, isn't this what normally happens in fighting games to begin with? I doubt competitive people in Melee are going to use non-safe approaches unless they're fairly certain they know they're going to be successful. Variable landing lag will not only help quell the aerial-dominated metagame, but give people more of a reason to work with a ground game. I haven't watched too many Melee videos, but it seems like everyone treats the ground like it was a hot plate; not wanting to stay on it too long. I think that's what Sm4sh is trying to get rid of by making ground approaches now viable.

Correct. Characters like Falco (in both Melee and Brawl) are a good example of that*. The problem is whether a player sticks to a few options because certain options trump the others, or sticks to a few options because the other options aren't viable. The former is the basis for both "bread and butter" as well as mixups. You stick to your best options when possible and then switch to other useful options when they offer something more than one's BnB or are just plain necessary in a given situation. The latter is what oftentimes leads to low-tier or straightup unviable characters; an overreliance on specific options because the others just don't help the character and their player enough, if at all. (This is what I love about Project M, the PMBR tried to replace moves that didn't help characters at all and give them new ones to fit new purposes, thus giving players a reason to use them. Compare Roy's Ftilt in Melee to PM.)

*I refer to Smash here not just because we're talking about Smash, but also because I have no real experience with any other fighting game. Though the one time I ever watched Street Fighter in real life someone was just spamming a kickwave attack with Juri... Lol.

I've heard people already complaining about Little Mac's lack of air game, even though his ground moves look to be quite powerful.

I guess I just don't want the metagame to devolve into a bunch of Nintendo-themed jumping beans again. Let some characters fight from the ground.

I think people complain about Mac because he's "even worse" in the air than they were expecting . One thing I find funny about aerial approaches with Mac is that although his aerial attacks have abysmal reach and laughable damage output, they're actually very fast. His Nair in particular looks like a combo starter. Yes, Mac of all people may be able to start combos from a short-hopped aerial attack. Go figure.

 

[Senario]

I get what you're saying. I guess my issue is that watching competitive Melee is a lot of SHFFL-combos, and it feels like any ground game is neglected, ignored at worst. I'm mostly referring to approaches as well; after the initial hit and someone goes flying, sure, aerial hits are what you want to do, but I just feel like everyone wants every character to be some sort of aerial type character, when that's not the way it should be. I've heard people already complaining about Little Mac's lack of air game, even though his ground moves look to be quite powerful.

I guess I just don't want the metagame to devolve into a bunch of Nintendo-themed jumping beans again. Let some characters fight from the ground.

Also, I kind of like Stale Move Negation, but that's a topic for another time.

It is just hard to achieve that since everybody gets launched in the air. Ground based characters would be very hard to do and I can't really think of anybody in any version of smash that can fight more on the ground than in the air. Maybe Zero Suit Samus in brawl? In general you need crazy range to get a ground game working because everybody gets launched. Sorry to say that is how the game works, the game doesn't have enough gravity or low enough launching to have people mostly be on the ground like it is in other fighting games.

Little mac probably gets complained about because he suffers from the problems with ground based characters said above. You need good range on ground moves for them to be effective followups to people being launched in the air. If ground game is all you have.

That said, ground game isn't ignored, it is just prevelant where it needs to be at low Percents for most characters. At low percents you see that people don't get launched far, this allows people to do things like...Marth and his tilts. Grab, throw, tilt up, up, they are being launched farther away now you can't reach them with any attacks, f/back air, forward air, land, ect ect. Or fox doing up tilts/jab up smash, or mario doing a similar thing where jab -> grab/down smash. Something like that. I think you may be overstating a little about how unused a ground game is as it has its place at low percents. A lot of characters have really good ground moves that you use. Marth has his right smash which is a great kill move. Mario has down smash, Peach has down smash, shiek's techchase grabs/down smash is all ground game.

I'd say shiek is the best example of a character that has a really good ground game balanced with a good air game. On the ground you have techchases and solid smashes and tilts like uptilt, upsmash, right tilt, down tilt, down smash. And you add to that the grab and techchases, oh and dash attack. She has a good ground game but has a pretty good air game too(which is necessary thanks to the way the game works).

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I think reducing landing lag as well as having solid ground would be incredible. So far the easy pivots ground attacks looks really good, and accessing grounded normals out of a dash is almost like a wavedash with infinite length, but some limits because it's a dash.

 

[Tristan_win]

I'm starting to have a scary thought... What if the demo at E3 was up to date and what if they don't change landing lag. I feel having the option to aerial attack people safely is a huge part of the game in term of speed so wouldn't that mean if they kept the current system smash4 would be slower then Brawl?

Edit: At least for most charters

 

[Yoshi Kirishima]

Ad hominem.

Please try again =/

Do you know what ad hominem even is?

If you thought it was a personal attack then you interpreted it wrong; it is a valid point and makes no attack to lessen the credibility of your points.

Now how about we start with the following quote

Stop living in the past.

with Zipzo's argument that you should NOT rule out what is possible in a new game in the unknown future by ASSUMING it will be completely the same as in past games (Hey Melee counts as a past game too right? Or is it just Brawl...)

Instead of derailing his argument by claiming he's attacking you personally, you actually explain why you can safely rule out the possibility of SSB4 having good enough assets to offset the lag.


The reasons why I think SSB4 will be better than Brawl:
Namco is helping balance the game and they are putting more focus in balancing, which is very clear to all the tweeks and redesigns they've given to characters in SSB4.

And you are wrong about Brawl characters lacking such assets. For example, Ganondorf's Fair has a lot of lag but it is strong. You may be thinking now "Well he still sucks and his fair wasn't strong enough to make up for the massive lag". Yes but once again, the balance will be much better this time.

Zeal I'm sorry but after reading more of the thread, you have terrible behavior. I like how you and others are the ones claiming he is using ad hominem but it is actually you guys who are making personal attacks. Saying that you are being obnoxious is NOT ad hominem, because you ARE being obnoxious. I'm quite disappointed that the Smash community is still so terrible after coming back so many years. Just absolutely immature and repulsive behavior.

And pizzapie the way you are derailing Zipzo's arguments by claiming he has a hollier than thou tone... are you serious... do I even need to explain myself here?

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

I'm starting to have a scary thought... What if the demo at E3 was up to date and what if they don't change landing lag. I feel having the option to aerial attack people safely is a huge part of the game in term of speed so wouldn't that mean if they kept the current system smash4 would be slower then Brawl?

Edit: At least for most charters

Let's just not have thoughts like those.

 

[Senario]

Do you know what ad hominem even is?

You do know that Namco is helping balance the game and they are putting more focus in balancing, which is very clear to all the tweeks and redesigns they've given to characters in SSB4?

And you are wrong about Brawl characters lacking such assets. For example, Ganondorf's Fair has a lot of lag but it is strong. You may be thinking now "Well he still sucks and his fair wasn't strong enough to make up for the massive lag". Yes but once again, the balance will be much better this time.

Yes he knows, Ad homenim is a common logical fallacy where you attack a person rather than making an actual argument it was fair to use there. It is fine to question the balance of the game because Sakurai has set a precedent with how well he balances and Namco may be helping but honestly they don't have that much experience with balancing a smash game either. That is why there might have been a huge disparity between KO percent and "this won't launch or kill you" It could have been balancing from a traditional fighting game sense where at a certain percent you = dead rather than what smash is being you can die at any percent.

Placing input on what is going wrong with balancing can help them revise the game and make it better. Right now good characters for what we might want out of a competitive smash game seem to be Shiek and Mario. Their moves have generally low landing lag and their air options are great. Dash mechanics need to be improved still but it is a start.

 

[Zeallyx]

stuff

1. Even if you interpret what he said as meaning 'past games are no indication of future games in the series' then it still isn't a counter argument. And the way he worded it made it a personal attack without a counter argument to refute my point: ad hominem.
2. I actually stayed civil throughout the discussion and never put my opnion above his (my first post clearly states: to each their own). The way he evaded countering the essence of my posts made me try to get him to respond to me without fallacies (which he uses quite a deal of throughout the thread). I admit that the images and calling out his fallacies were spamming (which I got rightfully infracted for and which I'd like to apologize for), but, unless you see spamming as terrible behavior, I do not think I deserve to be called having terrible behavior. And even if you think I have terrible behavior, you can't generalize that to the entire Smash community.

WIth that said, I'd like to (finally) adress the topic's question: I don't think we can conclude they reduced the landing lag from a single aerial (Lucina's Nair). I hope aerials will be mostly low(er) on lag, but it's hard to generalize to other character's aerials because they are all very diverse (in landing lag).

 

[Yoshi Kirishima]

1. Even if you interpret what he said as meaning 'past games are no indication of future games in the series' then it still isn't a counter argument. And the way he worded it made it a personal attack without a counter argument to refute my point: ad hominem.
2. I actually stayed civil throughout the discussion and never put my opnion above his (my first post clearly states: to each their own). The way he evaded countering the essence of my posts made me try to get him to respond to me without fallacies (which he uses quite a deal of throughout the thread). I admit that the images and calling out his fallacies were spamming (which I got rightfully infracted for and which I'd like to apologize for), but, unless you see spamming as terrible behavior, I do not think I deserve to be called having terrible behavior. And even if you think I have terrible behavior, you can't generalize that to the entire Smash community.

WIth that said, I'd like to (finally) adress the topic's question: I don't think we can conclude they reduced the landing lag from a single aerial (Lucina's Nair). I hope aerials will be mostly low(er) on lag, but it's hard to generalize to other character's aerials because they are all very diverse (in landing lag).

I'm glad we're getting somewhere but I don't see how it's not a counter argument. I believe you were saying that judging by past smash games, there would be no assets to offset longer landing lags in SSB4. His point, in my interpretation, was not to doubt the new game just because you may think they not have done a good enough job in the past games to offset a character's weakness in having long landing lags. Yes, his tone may have been blunt and dry, typing a short sentence with a capitalization and period. However, I can see no way in which it can be interpreted as a personal attack. Asserting your point aggressively is not ad hominem. Falsely accusing someone of having an opinion they do not actually hold would be a logical fallacy, but not a personal attack. But in this case, I do not even think he falsely accused you for "living in the past", as it seemed clear to me that you were saying SSB4 wouldn't change in regards to having good enough assets to compensate for landing lag judging from past titles.

Again yes I will say he conveyed his point in an aggressive manner, but I really really do not see how it is a personal attack. Communicating online in text form is surprisingly hard at times, so maybe I am wrong, but that's how I read the situation and it felt clear to me.

I will admit my small rant may have been unnecessary, but I was quite upset (not just with what I've seen in this thread but in general over many years). Apologies

 

[Zeallyx]

I'm glad we're getting somewhere but I don't see how it's not a counter argument. I believe you were saying that judging by past smash games, there would be no assets to offset longer landing lags in SSB4. His point, in my interpretation, was not to doubt the new game just because you may think they not have done a good enough job in the past games to offset a character's weakness in having long landing lags. Yes, his tone may have been blunt and dry, typing a short sentence with a capitalization and period. However, I can see no way in which it can be interpreted as a personal attack. Asserting your point aggressively is not ad hominem. Falsely accusing someone of having an opinion they do not actually hold would be a logical fallacy, but not a personal attack. But in this case, I do not even think he falsely accused you for "living in the past", as it seemed clear to me that you were saying SSB4 wouldn't change in regards to having good enough assets to compensate for landing lag judging from past titles.

Again yes I will say he conveyed his point in an aggressive manner, but I really really do not see how it is a personal attack. Communicating online in text form is surprisingly hard at times, so maybe I am wrong, but that's how I read the situation and it felt clear to me.

I will admit my small rant may have been unnecessary, but I was quite upset (not just with what I've seen in this thread but in general over many years). Apologies

Interpretations are complicated and, like you said, communication via only text can be even more complicated (lack of non verbal signs, to name one factor). I'll try to convey my interpretation of what he wrote as explicit as possible (with which I am NOT implying that your interpretation is wrong):
1. My interpretation was influenced by his previous posts, in which he seemed agressive and demeaning and in which he didn't bring up strong points IMO.
2. His post to me came across as this: 'You are wrong because you are living in the past.' This is not a valid counter, because: it doesn't contain a counter arguement, it adresses a negative aspect of me and not my point (ad hominem) and it's an oversimplification of my point: of course Sm4sh might turn out to be a great game despite of past installments, but my point was not that it can't be, it was that if you use the data available to us (Sakurai's past work) we have good reason to assume such compensations for long landing lag might be absent. I hope this clarifies my line of thought.
3. His later responses brought me back to point 1, at which point I got irritated.

Also, I think you are giving him too much credit. He still hasn't come out and said what you said he said after I told him he could say it in a civil manner (). Also, I'd like to point out that, even though it might seem that I'm talking down to him right now, this is all just my interpretation and an observation of mine that I'm trying to convey as objectively as I possibly can. No bad blood here, lol.

And I understand; apology accepted. I'd like to apologize for coming off the way I did too.

On-topic: landing lag might still be there for other moves, unfortunately.

 

[Yoshi Kirishima]

Interpretations are complicated and, like you said, communication via only text can be even more complicated (lack of non verbal signs, to name one factor). I'll try to convey my interpretation of what he wrote as explicit as possible (with which I am NOT implying that your interpretation is wrong):
1. My interpretation was influenced by his previous posts, in which he seemed agressive and demeaning and in which he didn't bring up strong points IMO.
2. His post to me came across as this: 'You are wrong because you are living in the past.' This is not a valid counter, because: it doesn't contain a counter arguement, it adresses a negative aspect of me and not my point (ad hominem) and it's an oversimplification of my point: of course Sm4sh might turn out to be a great game despite of past installments, but my point was not that it can't be, it was that if you use the data available to us (Sakurai's past work) we have good reason to assume such compensations for long landing lag might be absent. I hope this clarifies my line of thought.
3. His later responses brought me back to point 1, at which point I got irritated.

Also, I think you are giving him too much credit. He still hasn't come out and said what you said he said after I told him he could say it in a civil manner (). Also, I'd like to point out that, even though it might seem that I'm talking down to him right now, this is all just my interpretation and an observation of mine that I'm trying to convey as objectively as I possibly can. No bad blood here, lol.

And I understand; apology accepted. I'd like to apologize for coming off the way I did too.

On-topic: landing lag might still be there for other moves, unfortunately.

I haven't read all the posts and exchanges, and I feel we both clarified ourselves, and you say he hasn't explained himself in the way I interpreted, so I guess I will leave it at that .

Regarding landing lag, there is a new thread showing gamespot videos with a newer build. (Seen by the significantly reduced loading times between the end of a match and result screen). I was looking at the video and noticed many attacks have very short lags and many times a character performs an aerial in the air only to quickly perform a ground attack upon touching the ground.

http://smashboards.com/threads/game...new-demo-in-circulation.361443/#post-17091388

In the first video, example at 1:24 when Fox does his fair into a ftilt. In Brawl it autocanceled if you landed at the beginning or end of an aerial, but Fox lands a bit later than what was considered the "beginning" in Brawl I think. Perhaps autocanceling still works like it did in Brawl but the windows for autocanceling are bigger? He gets the first kick out nicely before landing. But Fox's fair does take quite a bit to complete in full, so maybe this is a bad example, as perhaps landing even after the first kick is still relatively early in his aerial.

1:26 has Pikachu bouncing off the ground after landing with his nair. The significant difference in lag and windows for autocanceling across many moves and characters may be interesting.

Competetive players will ditch melee for smash4 if the prizepool is enough. I know it's not even the same type of game, but look at dota2, 90% of the hon\dota1 community switched just cause of the international.

This is a very big claim you're making here. Dota1 and 2 have the same exact gameplay (except not all the heroes in dota1 are yet ported over, as well as a few minor mechanics being different due to different coding). Hon also was basically the same thing (it started off following dota 1 completely, but then stopped and started making their own heroes and items, but the majority of it is still just dota). Also the game was *released* (didn't need a beta key anymore) to play around the time of the international. Also Dota is huge in China, and most chinese did not switch over to dota2 (due to many complications and dota2 not even being prepared for china yet), so the 90% seems like a really poor estimate.

Basically 1) Not many will claim that people switched to dota2 as a direct result of the International as many factors led them to slowly switch. 2) Dota1 and 2 are the same game just on a different, updated engine, while HoN's playerbase was always decreasing. 3) Competitive players in Melee switching over to SSB4 to win prize money can't be compared to what you claim to be 90% of an entire community including casuals switching over to Dota2 for a chance to win money. The casuals aren't there to win money so that doesn't support you thinking competitive player will switch to SSB4.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Before I begin, let me just make something very clear. While my point may have been strongly asserted previously, I'm going to attempt to be nice with this one. I'm going to, in all likelihood make points you will strongly disagree with, but it is in the name of a perspective you disagree with at a base level, so keep that in mind, and we can have a real discussion. I was working all day and was unable to respond until now, so let's get this going.

@ Zeallyx argued that a precedent has been set. You've done nothing to counter that other than say essentially "what Sakurai has done in the past is irrelevant". How else do you judge someone if not by their past work? Nobody here is telling you to trust them. People are questioning your complete disregard to his actual track record. He made Smash, that's awesome. That doesn't excuse the faults he has. If we are all just "living in the past", you're living nowhere. People have seen and played his work and are judging him accordingly. That's what people do. He isn't perfect. It's not unreasonable to predict things based off past precedent. I'd argue you're the one being unreasonable here. All you're doing is expecting everything to work out, based on what exactly?

I'm not simply hoping everything will work out. Most of my current opinion is directly based off of the extensive amount of both footage and game play we were able to rack up due to the demo events. I like everything I'm seeing, so I'm going to support the current development direction. It's really as simple as that. You clearly have a differing opinion to the point of believing that its current direction is actually harmful to its potential, and that's fine, but I don't believe that's an opinion rooted in reality when you really take all things in to consideration (what makes a game really competitive, what sustains it in the limelight at platforms such as EVO, etc). We can certainly agree that Brawl took some missteps that disallowed it from carrying on in the way Melee is currently, but that is where our agreements end.

Your logic can be backwards applied because he made Melee. That means he knows the recipe in order to create a game like Melee. He knows exactly how to do it, because he made it in the first place. If he's making a deviation, he believes it's for a good cause. One could say that the deviations that led to Brawl's creation were not in the best interest of the competitive community, but we know exactly why that is, as he's told us specifically why he did it so. Smash 4, however, is different. He has acknowledged his actions and his approach towards each of the games in the franchise, and has given us a very clear cut objective with Smash 4...to appeal to everyone. Even though you might say that the previous games appealed to everyone as it was, this is concretely the first time he is actually considering the competitive community during his development of the game. Whether it's to your liking (arguments about the validity of For Glory mode and what not) is a completely different discussion, but let's just be clear that he is considering a part of the Smash base during the development of this game that we can objectively state was not part of his consideration when designing the others. This is huge in and of itself.

I tend to run on the "boy cried wolf" thematic. After multiple screw ups, I may start to question the whistle-blower, but let's look at this in a more calculated way. There are three SSB games. Only one of them (for the sake of discussion, it's Brawl in this case) is lauded as the antithesis to competitive play. That's one out of three. Not only is the sample size ridiculously small as is, but it's still a 66.66% rate of appeal to competitive players. This means I'm more inclined to trust him, than to not. It's okay to question decisions based on precedent, I have no issue with that, but to make objective declarations of the inherent negative affects of certain mechanics simply because you don't like them is another thing. It's certainly fine for you to dislike them, but as the saying goes "Don't knock it 'till you try it". Eliciting some concern is fine, but I think Sakurai has earned our trust, as he knows the secret to making a great competitive game (see:Melee).

I think we'd all benefit if you came with an actual ****ing point instead of wasting all of our time forcing us to weed through the filth of your stupid ad hominems with your holier-than-thou, better than you tone.

Yeah, like, everyone uses the term ad-hominem, but I haven't used one. Approaching a subject aggressively =| ad-hominem. I'm also not holier-than-thou, it just seems that way because it's incredibly difficult to argue a point when you're in a room full of people who disagree with you, so it's only natural sometimes to overcompensate. I apologize if that's what you interpreted but do please try to see my point here.

Sure, even casuals liked Melee, but even more casuals loved Brawl. If you're going to use the example of past game appeal as a means to shape the direction of Smash 4, it would make the most sense at all that it was closer to Brawl than it was Melee.

Besides not being related to what I said at all...Because street fighter is a completely different game than smash bros and the same rules don't apply. In street fighter people have ways to play a way that match the game. The game has significant gravity and people don't get launched in the air a bunch when being hit. Add to that the game has a significant footsie game (neutral game, hitting people with the farthest point of your move) and you have a game that can favor offensive and heavily defensive games. It is a game that is one of the most balanced fighting games simply because it is the most traditional fighting game. From the other competitive fighting games I've played, I'd compare smash(64 - melee) to a more complicated and thought out game that relies on pressuring your opponent where offense is the best defense, although defensive options aren't bad. Blazblue is kind of like this though being a traditional fighting game it isn't a perfect comparison. The style of offense/defense in blazblue is a great balance where generally most people play offensive as it is considered the best option due to mix ups and pressure which is exciting to watch. However there are some outliers that can play defensive, 13, 12, +lambda.

Smash however, is not that simple once you get into it. Much like any other fighting game it is simple at it's basic level but should be difficult to master. The game's mechanics rely heavily on air moves due to the % system and how high you pop up enemies with nearly every move as percents get higher. This is why air moves are very important in smash and this causes a historically good offensive game that needs landing lag to be low across the board. EVERYBODY has to jump and land at some time for followups, having some people be slower "Just because" or "for balance" will hurt them twice as much since being slower than some of the faster characters is already a huge punishment with how mobility in this game is even more important than it is in other fighters. Robin has extremely long animations and long landing lag and while his moveset is unique and his design is novel the details of how it is implemented lead you to believe he can't do much with his moves. He hits somebody and then has a long animation to go through and can't follow up. And he is already being punished for not being a fast character like shiek or Lucina, it is highly unlikely that the damage he does with his moves will balance this out.

inb4 "Irrelevant" or an Ad homenim attack on me or "I'm right you're wrong because I say so" responses.

Okay, with all of this it is clear that you are missing my point.

Street Fighter is a heavily defensive-oriented game, and it basically always has been. Blazblue, in contrast, is heavily based on combos and aggressive confirms in to lengthy strings. Despite this, Blazblue has historically struggled to keep up with the community-base of Street Fighter. This may partly be due to the "anime game" trope that acts as a half-insult that circulates the american-based FGC, but in essence when all things are said and done, you can draw a somewhat similar comparison between Melee and Brawl.

It is at this moment I'm going to step in to the realm of the forbidden. Brawl was deemed to be less competitively viable for some very easy to recite reasons. Let's address them real quick...I'm going to leave out tripping. The reason why is because although tripping is a direct con to competitive play, it rarely affected the outcome nor succeeded in muddying the display of a skill gap between two competitors.

- Low hit-stun resulting in very low amount of safe approach options that don't get punished, thus the "poke and run" dynamic of Brawl matches, and little potential for combos because of not being able to follow up before getting punched.
- Because of the above, Brawl is seen as a "defensive" game and as a result of that becomes less "exciting" to watch. It pulls in less viewers, eventually falls off the map and so on.
- Imbalances (Meta-Knight and stages) leading to rule discrepancies and disagreements which splintered the community even further after the Brawl community began to get shunned.

This is what I see as the definitive list for why Brawl is in the state it currently is. Let's compare that to Smash 4's current development status based on what we've actually seen and played...

- Hit stun is noticeably increased and combos, while not extensive, are present in an accessible form. We can see this in many videos such as the new Kirby videos from Italia, or the really popular thunder combo gif from Pikachu on Marth played by CT.
- Balance has been (as stated by Sakurai himself) a key point during development, and he even has a real FG developer on his side this time around to help him. He's getting all kinds of input I'm sure.
- The emphasis on brighter colors and more true-to-classic character designs, and the resulting dynamic of adding the elements mentioned in the first point help to address the exciting aesthetic and mechanic evaluations of watching a Smash 4 match.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that the things that held Brawl back have been directly addressed, and thus, have me ultimately hyped for Smash 4. For reasons stated above in response to pizzapie, and after these observations, there's no reason why Sakurai has earned our dismissal. He is still capable of pulling this off, very capable in fact.

What? I'm talking about a very real problem that's present in Melee, Brawl, and so far, Smash 4. Large landing lag gaps in the roster do contribute to why historically the quicker characters fair better in the franchise.

You mean...in Melee? Ultimately, Melee is pretty imbalanced for one thing. Plenty of characters you wouldn't consider the "speed demons" were perfectly viable in Brawl. Brawl didn't even really have speed demons due to its "slow" battle dynamic. Melee's mechanics, physics, and design as a whole contribute to the success and advantage of quicker characters. This is why Fox is such a common character. Fox is such an incredibly flexible character. He is fast & has amazing combo potential. His list of cons is about as short as it gets. The mechanics of melee combined with the AT's make Fox even more fearsome, as these techniques live to serve faster characters much better than slower ones.

I main Gannondorf, more landing lag has always been part of the equation for me. Again, a manageable amount I'm ok with. Also fine with stronger attacks having a few extra frames. I'm just not a fan when it overstretches the basic purpose, like say this Melee example:

Ganon's Nair has 40 frames of complete open vulnerability with 2+2 staggered frames of attack. Given his strength and range, it's not too terrible a trade-off. Definitely workable, but the moment you touch the ground and transition to 25 frames of lag, it starts looking a whole lot more impractical.

That's nearly a half second's worth of delay in addition to what you've already risked up to that point. The reward no longer fits the risk. Without L-canceling in their to reduce lag by half, all Ganondorf's aerials become more of a gamble than a strategic possibility in many situations.

This is all interesting, but it isn't comparable in this situation because you're using a specific attack on a specific character from Melee to make a point for landing lag being bad. As stated, Melee was and still is imbalanced. Smash 4 is being balanced as we speak, which means Smash 4 has a comparative advantage in fixing issues that would lead you to believe landing lag can only be a harmful trait in Smash.

Adding extraneous landing lag to counteract a Smash character's strength will ultimately fail them (see Brawl's Gdorf). Not to mention give characters like Meta Knight that much more of a leg up. Please, before you go off on another irrelevant hate parade, think about how this relates to each game.

You don't even know how Metaknight will perform, much less if he's even in the game...so who's the one going on the irrelevant parade?

Here's the thing. A game needs to have setbacks. Freedom of control is certainly important, but only to a point. Conceptually, you want all the freedom in the world to control your character in whatever way you want, but this doesn't actually lend itself to a good fighting game dynamic. There has to be restrictions. Restrictions in and of themselves are necessary to have something to overcome in order to gauge accomplishment from anything other than beating your opponent. You might as well not even play a game if there are no rules to be bound by, just have a fist fight with your opponent in real life and see who wins. You play the game against your opponent because you have to play under a set of rules. In Smash's case, you choose a character who's move set you become accustomed to in order to best utilize it to defeat your opponent, who has done the same and maybe even with a different character! Ultimately that's what makes Smash fun. Beating your opponent as a character in a game playing another character in a game. You had to master your restrictions to defeat your opponent. That's what's so thrilling about watching low tier characters win. They have been deemed to have more disadvantages in play than other characters, or to simply just not have the same advantages as other characters, yet we love to see someone master their mechanics and win. It is by this logic that I believe landing lag is part of a collection of concepts I would deem necessary evils for Smash, but ultimately, do not interfere with making Smash incredibly fun. Of course I could be wrong about this given the gigantic storm that landing lag has been causing on the boards lately.

1. Even if you interpret what he said as meaning 'past games are no indication of future games in the series' then it still isn't a counter argument. And the way he worded it made it a personal attack without a counter argument to refute my point: ad hominem.
2. I actually stayed civil throughout the discussion and never put my opnion above his (my first post clearly states: to each their own). The way he evaded countering the essence of my posts made me try to get him to respond to me without fallacies (which he uses quite a deal of throughout the thread). I admit that the images and calling out his fallacies were spamming (which I got rightfully infracted for and which I'd like to apologize for), but, unless you see spamming as terrible behavior, I do not think I deserve to be called having terrible behavior. And even if you think I have terrible behavior, you can't generalize that to the entire Smash community.

WIth that said, I'd like to (finally) adress the topic's question: I don't think we can conclude they reduced the landing lag from a single aerial (Lucina's Nair). I hope aerials will be mostly low(er) on lag, but it's hard to generalize to other character's aerials because they are all very diverse (in landing lag).

You're seeing a personal attack where there is none. This could be due to a variety of flaws in your chosen method of interpreting my posts, but by telling you to stop living in the past I am directly addressing your point. It's nothing close to ad-hominem, that's for sure. Spamming images just makes you seem troll-like to boot.

In conclusion...

I will not submit to believing that landing lag in Smash 4 is inherently negative. I much believe to the very contrast that it will be a balancing point that can be a fitting dynamic to even out strengths and weaknesses between characters. I believe Sakurai has a pretty good clue as to what he's doing, and while I do not blindly believe that he could essentially poop out a golden egg, that is clearly not the case with Smash 4. There is so much going in to Smash 4 that we cannot even begin to comprehend it without actually being present with the development team, and I'm hyped more than ever for a Smash Bros. with a competitive design direction being considered for the first time in the history of the franchise. Along with many of the most interesting characters we've seen to date, and glorious 1080p HD. Bring on the landing lag!

 

[Big-Cat]

The problem with massive landing lag is that it promotes defensive play. This, in a game that might already have rediculous defense options might pose a problem imo. When attacking isn't rewarded (by not being able to combo the opponent for good damage, for example) and is maybe even discouraged, it might turn into more of a waiting game instead of a more offensive game. That's also my biggest gripe with Brawl.

To each their own though, of course.

Are you forgetting the ground game? There's more than one way to approach.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Are you forgetting the ground game? There's more than one way to approach.

This.

Remember also that out of shield offensive options has been observed to be very quick and quite potent...I think the ground game is going to account for way more than folks give it credit for.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Are you forgetting the ground game? There's more than one way to approach.

True, but there are some things that I have considered through reading, though I heavily support ground game.

How do you maximize the effectiveness of ground combat, in a game where the vantage point is to send characters flying?

Not saying it isn't possible, just curious.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

True, but there are some things that I have considered through reading, though I heavily support ground game.

How do you maximize the effectiveness of ground combat, in a game where the vantage point is to send characters flying?

Not saying it isn't possible, just curious.

The ground game is the causative element that sends people flying.

The game now has a character based almost completely on this concept, called Little Mac.

 

[ferioku]

Did they reduce the landing lag?
NOPE, just look at Robin's landig lag, it's huge.
Lucina is just fast.

I'll have to be honest that's 1 character and the Levin sword is most likely the cause for that.

 

[Pazzo.]

I'll have to be honest that's 1 character and the Levin sword is most likely the cause for that.

Not to mention his huge range and ability to use Smash attacks in the air.

As far as approaching options, he have all kinds of crazy stuff going on the ground. Pivot Smashes and Tilts... rolling seems to be better, and so on.

So don't get your knickers in a know over the landing lag. I'm sure it'll be fine in the long run, as Sakurai isn't going to leave us hanging after the huge response to the demo's mechanics.

It won't be Melee or Brawl, but a new Smash game. Can we just leave it at that? Please?

 

[Renji64]

It is like people don't want this game to be sucessful more lag=good that is crazy. I see people compare brawl to chess all the time that isn't fun to watch same with a laggy defensive limited game with limited movement options only so much u can do.

 

[Big-Cat]

True, but there are some things that I have considered through reading, though I heavily support ground game.

How do you maximize the effectiveness of ground combat, in a game where the vantage point is to send characters flying?

Not saying it isn't possible, just curious.

Games like Virtua Fighter and Soul Calibur don't have a problem with this. You still have the juggles of 3D fighters to serve as edge carrying.

 

[ferioku]

Honestly, I dislike it when people are prejudice towards a game, especially when we all had a minimal time to play an outdated demo. I really do find it idiotic that Nintendo will receive feedback from players for no absolute reason. It's basically like me asking professionals if there are anyway's to improve on my cooking, but I ignore it anyway, it literally contradicts the question!

Some people complain too much and the other half suggest that changes are not needed, and I honestly think both sides are wrong because there are some things that do need adjusting, but not to the wave dashing l canceling extent. I'm pretty sure it's not that hard to improve on things such as landing lag or add movement options ( make dash dancing a tad easier).
Honestly, at this point, thoughts on how this game will be played is irrelevant because there are obviously changes that will be made to the final product and we have barely played the game in the first place, so no one should make any quick judgments. Too many people assuming that this game will be trash and it's beginning to get annoying now. It's not only in the Smash Board, it's everywhere, it's becoming so bad that I've even seen people in YouTube suggest that people shouldn't buy the game and people are actually contemplating that.

 

[Zeallyx]

I haven't read all the posts and exchanges, and I feel we both clarified ourselves, and you say he hasn't explained himself in the way I interpreted, so I guess I will leave it at that .

Yes, me too. =)

Lots of stuff

First of all: I really appreciate you being more civil now. Second, I'm all for agreeing to disagree, so let's leave it at that. But, I have to add, that you saying my interpretation was wrong or fueled by a mistake doesn't sit well with me. In something as ambigueous as a single line of text, one can't really say that it's meaning is obvious. I'm willing to believe you didn't intend it the way I interpretated it, but that doesn't make my interpretation flawed.

Are you forgetting the ground game? There's more than one way to approach.

Actually, approaching with ground moves basically amounts to a DACUS (which doesn't seem to be in Sm4sh) or a dash attack. These aren't many options and their effectiveness also varies per character (some character's dash attacks are awful while others' are quite good). Even when expanding the approach through the ground game view, we're still left with the same problem: it varies per character and per move and is also dependent on ending lag. I'm not ruling out the possibilities of course, but aerials are a BIG part of approachig in Smash. I dare say a bigger part than ground moves. Also, the best out of shield options are often aerials or up specials. I'll give you Usmash OoS though, but my point still stands as I see it. But, again, we all have to keep in mind that everything we discuss here about Sm4sh is speculation. In my opinion our best source of information is past Smash games, so that's why I based my expectations on that. We can't really say anything beyond 'time will tell' though.

 

[Big-Cat]

I don't see what the issue is. You're going to have to play the game in a more deliberate matter. I know Smash is a different kind of fighting game but other games, even those with running, don't have approach issues. Smash will be fine.

 

[JV5Chris]

You mean...in Melee? Ultimately, Melee is pretty imbalanced for one thing. Plenty of characters you wouldn't consider the "speed demons" were perfectly viable in Brawl. Brawl didn't even really have speed demons due to its "slow" battle dynamic.!

Meta Knight certainly benefited from the the greater landing lag other characters have at their disadvantage. Especially with Brawl being such an air heavy game.

This is all interesting, but it isn't comparable in this situation because you're using a specific attack on a specific character from Melee to make a point for landing lag being bad.

My example is not an issue limited to one specific move, character, or even Smash game. Gannondorf, Link, Bowser, Zelda, Donkey Kong, and a whole range of others have notable extra punishment when their average aerials touch the ground in addition to more recovery frames in the first place.

Here's the thing. A game needs to have setbacks.

I agree that some landing lag is a good thing. Having some variance is a good thing too. It's just when aerials have clearly been balanced in the air (as they should be), too much landing lag makes for a less practical moves with the excessive extra risk. That limits options and can bust the balance these attacks would otherwise have.

 

[Bladeviper]

Yes, me too. =)



First of all: I really appreciate you being more civil now. Second, I'm all for agreeing to disagree, so let's leave it at that. But, I have to add, that you saying my interpretation was wrong or fueled by a mistake doesn't sit well with me. In something as ambigueous as a single line of text, one can't really say that it's meaning is obvious. I'm willing to believe you didn't intend it the way I interpretated it, but that doesn't make my interpretation flawed.



Actually, approaching with ground moves basically amounts to a DACUS (which doesn't seem to be in Sm4sh) or a dash attack. These aren't many options and their effectiveness also varies per character (some character's dash attacks are awful while others' are quite good). Even when expanding the approach through the ground game view, we're still left with the same problem: it varies per character and per move and is also dependent on ending lag. I'm not ruling out the possibilities of course, but aerials are a BIG part of approachig in Smash. I dare say a bigger part than ground moves. Also, the best out of shield options are often aerials or up specials. I'll give you Usmash OoS though, but my point still stands as I see it. But, again, we all have to keep in mind that everything we discuss here about Sm4sh is speculation. In my opinion our best source of information is past Smash games, so that's why I based my expectations on that. We can't really say anything beyond 'time will tell' though.

it does seem like there is some ground tech in this game though, being able to turnaround cancel(not fond of this name btw) into tilts smashes and grabs brings a wider approach to the ground game imo

 

[Tristan_win]

Meta Knight certainly benefited from the the greater landing lag other characters have at their disadvantage. Especially with Brawl being such an air heavy game.


My example is not an issue limited to one specific move, character, or even Smash game. Gannondorf, Link, Bowser, Zelda, Donkey Kong, and a whole range of others have notable extra punishment when their average aerials touch the ground in addition to more recovery frames in the first place.


I agree that some landing lag is a good thing. Having some variance is a good thing too. It's just when aerials have clearly been balanced in the air (as they should be), too much landing lag makes for a less practical moves with the excessive extra risk. That limits options and can bust the balance these attacks would otherwise have.

Please don't miss quote people. I find it very offensive that people might think I said something when I never did.

 

[Zeallyx]

I don't see what the issue is. You're going to have to play the game in a more deliberate matter. I know Smash is a different kind of fighting game but other games, even those with running, don't have approach issues. Smash will be fine.

To each their own of course, but imo when approaching isn't rewarded it turns into a very defensive game, which I personally don't really like.

it does seem like there is some ground tech in this game though, being able to turnaround cancel(not fond of this name btw) into tilts smashes and grabs brings a wider approach to the ground game imo

Yeah I saw that today, that sure is cool! Again, who knows what Sm4sh has to offer; it might turn out to be extremely fun competitively (as well as casually). I'm just keeping my hopes in check for now to avoid disappointment.

 

[Big-Cat]

To each their own of course, but imo when approaching isn't rewarded it turns into a very defensive game, which I personally don't really like.

I get that, but I'm saying that there's more than one way to approach than just through jump-in attacks.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

I'm probably wrong on this, but:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ComplacentGamingSyndrome

It would almost seem to me that the complaining about the aerial lag can also be put down to this. People are so used to playing 75% or more in the air that when things are forcing them down, they dislike it. The game has been so aerial dominated, that when forced to change, people will inevitably hate it.

 

[Senario]

I get that, but I'm saying that there's more than one way to approach than just through jump-in attacks.

Yeah, there was dash attacks, grabs, shines for spacies, in melee some characters had good jab combos with their smashes like Mario/fox, tilts(marth forward and up tilt are some), regular smashes like Sheik up smash, so on and so forth. It isn't like every approach is a jump in attack. A lot of jumps can be used empty for using a different move.

You don't have to nerf jump in attacks, ground game is good already for setting up combos and in the new game you have jabs with a finisher and other stuff already. I think the amount of jumping is overstated because people watch too much fox and falco (who have to jump cancel a lot of their stuff) and that because of how launching and % work people will be invariably launched into the air eventually. The way the game moves characters can't make a character who works like say...Iron fist in UMvC3 because everybody gets launched. They can certainly try though, look at little mac. I just don't think we should be nerfing air game.

Edit: It isn't because they simply are too used to it, it is how the game works. How do you follow up on people launched in the air when your air game isn't good? Your ground moves usually don't reach all that far. I'm all for small buffs to ground game but not at the cost of air game just because people are tired of it without knowing why people do it.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Yeah, there was dash attacks, grabs, shines for spacies, in melee some characters had good jab combos with their smashes like Mario/fox, tilts(marth forward and up tilt are some), regular smashes like Sheik up smash, so on and so forth. It isn't like every approach is a jump in attack. A lot of jumps can be used empty for using a different move.

You don't have to nerf jump in attacks, ground game is good already for setting up combos and in the new game you have jabs with a finisher and other stuff already. I think the amount of jumping is overstated because people watch too much fox and falco (who have to jump cancel a lot of their stuff) and that because of how launching and % work people will be invariably launched into the air eventually. The way the game moves characters can't make a character who works like say...Iron fist in UMvC3 because everybody gets launched. They can certainly try though, look at little mac. I just don't think we should be nerfing air game.

Edit: It isn't because they simply are too used to it, it is how the game works. How do you follow up on people launched in the air when your air game isn't good? Your ground moves usually don't reach all that far. I'm all for small buffs to ground game but not at the cost of air game just because people are tired of it without knowing why people do it.

Can't wait for the balanced landing lag, personally.

Keep it up, Sakurai.

 

[Senario]

Can't wait for the balanced landing lag, personally.

Keep it up, Sakurai.

You just love to try and start fights don't you? Look at Ganon in brawl and see what happens when you try to "balance" with landing lag like you want to.