Dropping Doubles

[Waverider900]

I know doubles is a bit hard to follow, but even when I was just first getting into the scene (a year ago), and knew nothing about competitive stuff, I still enjoyed watching doubles. I had no idea people disliked it so much

 

[DLA]

I think there needs to be a big movement in the community to make static teams more common. Try to make your static team a big deal, and hype yourselves up against other static teams. I think facebook groups/MIOM would be useful for this. We should organize a community-wide "Find a Static Partner Day", and announce and make a big deal out of which teams arise from that. Jumping from partner to partner should be frowned upon. Maybe Smashboards can even make an optional "Static Teammate: " postbit under your name in posts.

Honestly, doubles don't interest me because whatever achievements are attained from winning a doubles match are kind of diluted between the two members of the winning team. Usually, the team with more overall singles skill will win doubles, and that's just the way it is. But if you view a team as a single unit, which is only possible with a static team, the achievement becomes much more real, and therefore more hype-worthy.

 

[Sovereign]

Wife's opinion on doubles is pretty hypocritical, considering that's how I even found out about someone like him. He had a static doubles partner, and did some rather amazing stuff, yet it's messy...

Saying half the people that enter singles enters doubles is rather vague, since doubles cuts in half the number of sets played, and setups used.

Doubles is pretty critical to the life of the Smash community, creating a very valuable intermingling between players who are strangers to one another.

To even consider removing doubles, entirely is trivial.

 

[AcidM]

As a smash player who loves to compete in both melee and PM doubles over singles most of the time this is just a big **** you. Im down for having the smash scene grow and go all eSports but don't segregate the players in the process. Being a viewer of smash should not matter more then being an actual player.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I agree with lowering the priority of doubles at events, but I strongly disagree with removing it outright. It is not a burden. It is a fantastic and relatively unexplored aspect of Smash. Currently, we see lots of good singles players just playing Singles x2. That means it needs more time. Truly good doubles players do things that are only possible in that environment. A well sync'd team can do amazing things and defeat teams consisting of two "good players".

 

[*Risen*]

Singles totally matter more, and doubles should always be prominent as it was an iconic part of smash history and it is still very fun to play today, but its always been a side event. If the TO doesn't want doubles, fine, no doubles. If the TO wants doubles, we're playing doubles. Its that easy. Doubles won't die. After over ten years? Its impossible. You can't just point to an entire option of playing and go "MAKE IT DEAD FOREVER", it doesn't work like that. Make it a side event, it doesn't have to go MLG.

 

[Mawalla]

this article spelled disdain wrong!!!!!!!!!!! not professional pls remove

 

[Jamie Williams]

Doubles brings out teamwork. Doubles are fine.

 

[socandrewcer]

#freedoubles

 

[WindMajor]

Brawl doubles is mega hype tho

 

[CAUP]

Coming from one of the legendary members of Husband and Wife, I feel like this should be listened too. I've never really enjoyed watching or playing doubles. And he really is right about it being a hot mess in all respects.

Anyways, that's my opinion.

 

[The Derrit]

So let's think about this rationally. Wife is best known in many circles as half of The Newlyweds, an excellent Melee team. Everyone here has been saying 'NO DON'T TAKE AWAY TEAMS.' And you might be completely right! Obviously Wife is someone who loves teams as well.

But what are people willing to do to make teams important again? Every tournament I've been to in the past half a year has either not had doubles, or had a fraction of singles entrants also enter doubles. The majority of people don't play doubles regularly, and most know they won't win so they don't enter.

While I also love teams, Wife is right in the sense that it is hard to watch and doesn't have the interest that singles does. It's what the community does to change things so that teams does have that interest that is important.

 

[Seagull Joe]

Doubles is necessary to promote growth, competition, and it's another suitable event.

I don't think that the viewers should have the final say. If they don't want to watch doubles then fine, but what happened to what the PLAYERS want...Smash isn't meant for the viewers of the game to enjoy their time at the expense of the players.

 

[Zone]

I've already dropped from going to 5 tournaments because they lacked doubles. I know I'm just one person, but I can't be the only one who finds the 4+ hour drive trip to a tournament to only experience singles to be worth it?

Doubles also requires people to have good coordination with a teamate, that's why we don't see the same results because people are constantly changing their teamates. How often do you see Falcon get to grand finals at a national?

I remember in recent memory, didn't Silent Spectre and Dark Rain make it to grand finals double falcon? There are a lot more variables in teams which makes it a little chaotic to watch.

I get it, if you want to just increase viewer ship, because you want "big money" aka you want to pay for the careers of top level pros with your time/money. We did get a 150% entrants increase since EVO happened in our local area. So I can see what viewership, and getting the light and media's attention can do. It gets people to at least try it out, thus growing it. But at the same time. I find it hard to stomach to waste hundreds of dollars to fly to a national to experience what could be a 2 hour experience.

So I'd hope for everyone's sake that loves singles enough to go just for singles, that you don't lose attendance just because teams aren't there, because entrants to a tournament being too low can kill it too.

@ AlphaZealot I understand your point. You're taking a very current day practical approach in the way you view things.

That said, if viewership grows, if more real teams pick up players, if events start getting so many viewers that major companies are ready to put in real money to advertise there then things can begin to change.

We're bringing up viewership as being extremely important because it's the enabler. I believe viewership has more potential to bring money to an event and TO than attracting a large amount of players as you have suggested. Viewership attracts companies while more players attracts a larger cost to run the event.

It is more profitable to run a 32-man event (with only top players) that gets 1 million viewers than to run a 1024-man event that gets less. I really think we should start looking at the tennis infrastructure for inspiration.

Just because other e-sports that have been successful had backing companies doesn't mean it's impossible for one that isn't so well backed. Was hockey created by a company? No, a company was built around an interesting sport. How do you think the NHL is doing? This is the level we should be talking about.

I like to be a competitor, I love to play Hockey and Football IRL. Just like I love to play smash against another person.

But I don't watch Hockey or the NFL. It's desensitizing to people like me when you're completely removed from the experience unless you can cough up money to be a part of a "team" or "school".

I watch smash, because I compete in it, and have things to learn. At anytime I can go to a tournament and test my abilities. If those "abilities" get stumped to the point where I have to be in a school's team, or need to invest a ton of money to get a shot. Well screw that. I'll instantly be done with smash if it shuts me out that hard.

Not saying it will get like that. But Football and Hockey have already shut me off. not many places these days you can just gather together with locals and play hockey/football w/o being on a official team.

 

[Zone]

whoops
double post

 

[batistabus]

If people don't really care about watching doubles, then just stream quarters/semis/finals onward.

 

[♡ⓛⓞⓥⓔ♡]

Potato

wombo combo

 

[Zone]

ya I don't care about being streamed when I'm personally playing Doubles. I don't even care about it when i'm in singles. But if the viewers want to skip doubles, don't stream? If they want to, then stream?

I know people who skip halftime at NFL, or watch NFL just for the commercials and not the game. What's wrong with letting the event be hype for the people who showed up like Half time specials, aka Doubles. And not showing the viewer at home if they'd wish to not see that?

give the viewers whatever they want, but exactly WHY does doubles have to suffer for it? I don't think anyone cares THAT hard if their doubles matches get put on stream.

 

[Baky]

So many players here fixated on nostalgia that they fail to see the bigger picture. Removing doubles could server a greater purpose for the community relative to keeping it. These decisions are much more important than your individual concerns and gripes. I trust that the TOs of major tournaments have enough insight to make the best long-term beneficial/profitable decision for our community. Not a bunch of randies with no concept of business.

 

[Deleted member]

Edit: Removed

 

[The Curious Volnutt]

Taking away doubles would make me sad. There is still so much to learn about them because most players only have single strategies, so of course they are messy. But players will eventually learn and doubles will eventually be more exciting.

 

[itsameluigi1290]

"What's a Dubbel-Battel? Can I eat it?"

 

[KayB]

I JUST WANNA LEAVE THIS HERE.

Wouldn't be pretty cool if we had a doubles only major?

I would love to see that be experimented with and see how it does with problems like solidifying team members with each other.

 

[byebye]

not on topic in anyway, but I think it would be nice to have a "smash mode" in tournaments. 4 player, FFA, random stages, all items. the way smash was developed to be played.

don't get me wrong. 1v1 battlefield no items is nice, like doing time trials (or racing with no items) in mario kart, to try and hit the best lines, perfectly time jumps and boosts. but on those modes, speed matters. and is very different from the normal mode where in accel value more and other skills are needed like item management.

I'm interested to see a smash mode in tournaments just to have a different flavor, and see how good players play the normal mode. not only that, but casuals can easily relate to that kind of mode because that's the mode they have been playing in their homes.

 

[Psychoace]

I disagree. For new people at their first tournament doubles is a great way to get to meet players and possibly team with one to learn the game. most people sit down in a singles match play their 2/3 shake hands and never see each other the rest of the tourney. If you're new and have a partner who knows a decent bit about the game they can talk to you about things you should and shouldn't do. On top of all of that you actually get to play the game as it was meant to be played, with 4 people. Doubles are great ice breakers for new players and even if teams aren't consistent anymore, it can still be used as a bonding status with other players in your region. People make time for crews, why can't we make time for doubles?

 

[Psychoace]

Brawl doubles is mega hype tho

remove brawl singles for doubles. brawl singles is to "messy and disorganized to watch". Kappa

 

[JFB (JurgaBurgaFlintines)]

I feel like Wife is contradicting himself when he said that doubles are pointless. He played doubles and was very popular at it too. The matches maybe a bit hard to follow and it may be a bit sloppy, but it's fun to watch.

 

[ranmaru]

I did not know it was even an issue these days for people. Seems like an issue popping out of no where. There probably just needs to be more separate events. I do not mean events at a single tournament. I mean literally having more tournaments dedicated to only a specific game. If anything, I think its a dreadful idea to run so many events at a single tournament.

From my perspective, I only want to enter one game type at a tournament rather than trying to do both brawl and melee at the same one.

I agree. If even, just limit it to smash/smash related.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

This is bull****. The mentality of "for the viewers" is silly. Theoretically speaking, if everything catered to viewers and not players, no-one would want to play the game anyway and there would be no-one to watch. Smash has always been about dedication. TOs shouldn't be trying to get sponsors and big money, they should be aiming to make a fun, satisfying and memorable event for their attendees. At least, that would be my goal if I were a TO. Drinks, anyone?

The only thing that kills doubles is the lack of interest in it in the first place. It needs more attention. When I played Brawl doubles, there were a few teams that were absolutely outstanding and these were the teams with good synergy. As someone mentioned earlier, too many people use their singles mentality in doubles and it isn't fun to watch or particularly effective in play. We need some sort of movement to teach people more about doubles-specific strategies and techs. But by the same token, who would want to learn and practice doubles all of the time when their main focus is singles?

One last point before I get lost. Project: M has a better camera than Brawl and Melee. So maybe there's some hope there.

 

[Spleenhunter]

I think separating Doubles and Singles tournaments is a good thing, especially for large tournaments. If enough people want to do doubles and it survives on its own, then the metagame will improve a lot and that will be far better for it than being relegated to a side event. If people don't want to go to doubles tournaments, then the singles scene will be more healthy in the long run.

 

[Djent]

What some of you are calling a "for the viewers" mentality, I'd just call selling out.

"Hey guys, let's scrap an important and unique part of our heritage for more CPM and a few more transient sponsorship opportunities!"

remove brawl singles for doubles. brawl singles is to "messy and disorganized to watch". Kappa

Not to derail this topic, but I've been thinking that Brawlers should focus on 2v2 for awhile now.

 

[AstraEDM]

Very good read. My only issue with doubles is the idea of the two best players at every tourney just teaming up with each other for easy money instead of having dedicated partners to practice with. This isn't a problem with the game itself but the mindset of people. I'm personally for doubles-only tournaments as completely separate events, so it's not infringing on the time of singles or alternate games.

 

[The Derrit]

I think there needs to be a big movement in the community to make static teams more common. Try to make your static team a big deal, and hype yourselves up against other static teams. I think facebook groups/MIOM would be useful for this. We should organize a community-wide "Find a Static Partner Day", and announce and make a big deal out of which teams arise from that. Jumping from partner to partner should be frowned upon. Maybe Smashboards can even make an optional "Static Teammate: " postbit under your name in posts.

Honestly, doubles don't interest me because whatever achievements are attained from winning a doubles match are kind of diluted between the two members of the winning team. Usually, the team with more overall singles skill will win doubles, and that's just the way it is. But if you view a team as a single unit, which is only possible with a static team, the achievement becomes much more real, and therefore more hype-worthy.

I think this is an excellent idea that adds to the value of teams.

 

[proxibomb]

Think about it, doubles means more people can play. The only thing I hate with doubles is that team attack is on.

 

[MoosyDoosy]

WOMBO COMBO! Happy Feet! That Ain't Falco!
Doubles shall exist.

 

[Luco]

I don't even.

Many players out there treat doubles as an entirely different field of vision from singles. When watching these players, no matter who they team with, it becomes incredibly apparent that their game is above and beyond and whichever game it is, most agree that these players are very enjoyable to watch in doubles.

Indeed, many of these players say they would stop playing smash if doubles were not there.

On another note (i'm not thinking straight atm so forgive my poorly constructed argument), looking at brawl, doubles is an opportunity for synergy to overcome the strengths and weaknesses of individual characters. Teams that win in doubles aren't always MK + some other character. This in itself should be attracting MORE viewers, not less. I dunno though, maybe this is more of a melee thing (OP seemed to be referring to both games).

 

[Xyro77]

For as long as I've TOed events, I've done doubles.

And for as long as I can keep TOing, I will do doubles.

 

[Manatikik]

Just a quick thought for people who are in the "for the viewer" mentality. Take the top 3 streamed/viewed eSport Games: LoL, Dota 2, and SC2. Now which one of these is the least viewed? SC2 is. Which one of these games is a 1v1 format only? SC2 is. So historically and statistically team based matches actually garner more of a viewership than 1v1's do in the whole of eSports.

I know that's not how it works for Smash but the removal of the possibility of a large viewership coming in to watch Smash cause all they see is two incredibly skilled people doing crazy **** they don't understand to each other; as opposed to four people going at it comboing with each other and bringing in the laugh-factor if teamkill situations arise.

On a side note with the arrival of top tier sponsorship from top eSport Organizations like TL or Curse out there it creates the possibility of static high tier Doubles teams that could compete on an organization level (if more teams/organizations arise in Smash). And if this emerges it would clearly influence lower tiers of competitive Smash to follow suit and make a static Doubles team to try and pull themselves up to a higher competitive standing through teamwork and synergy over personal and technical skill.

Just my thoughts on the matter coming from a mainly Dota 2 player who has followed that competitive scene as it has grown into what it is today.

 

[Joe73191]

I'm one of these people who wants Smash to become the biggest thing ever. To have a 100,000 views and people cheering from around the world. However the idea that you can have "for the player" OR "for the spectator" is wrong. Audience hype is driven by player hype. When players are excited it rubs off on watchers. Excitement and enthusiasm are contagious.

Doubles has been a part of smash history and many people love it. However from an economic standpoint one must look at the TO and their perspective. The TO is the one who makes it possible for us to all get together and place this game that we love. (All the Smash games) Getting a venue and food and set-ups cost time and money. If a particular event isn't lucrative and obviously won't bring a large enough attendance to be worth it for the TO, then the TO should skip that event. However Smash is becoming more and more popular and player attendance for any event will only rise in the coming months.

Time is also a constraint. Many smash tournies that do Melee, Brawl and Project M can take up to 9 hours without doubles if different events are not all happening at the same time. We have many games in the Smash franchise with more on the way. If we want to have time for all the events people want to play in we must be overlapping events more often. Also if necessary place a limit on how many events a person can enter for time constraints. (Though I don't like this idea)

Many tournies already do this. if you are signed up for PM and Brawl they do both at once so that while you are waiting for your round 2 of brawl you can playing your PM match. Sometimes this is slowed down to get a desired match on stream, but it is still quite efficient. I see no reason why we can't also hold all the doubles together, and the 3DS event when that comes out all at the same time. Having them all happening at once, as long as the TOs can organize it all would be very time efficient. Multi-day events are good because it allows for more time, but it's usually difficult and costly for players to be able to attend multi-day events. A balance needs to be found.

All in all as Smash grows the community must get more creative for how they run these events. An audience is important, but an audience is a result of OUR LOVE FOR THE GAME. (Good food at the venue and places for spectators to relax don't hurt either) I encourage all TOs to start theory-crafting ideas for how you will be running tournies and what new ideas you think should be tried. Players start practicing your DI, edge-guard and combo follow-ups because things are gonna get wild!

 

[Pepto]

Doubles are beautiful. Esam and Mekos, Nick Riddle and Shaky, Ryo and True Blue, and plenty of other teams have great symmetry and it's a lot of fun to watch, definitely more fun than watching 500 metaknight mirrors every year. And if anything it expands the metagame. When Salem won apex, ZSS became a thing. When Pink Fresh, Shaky, Ryo, Chibo and others started playing with unconventional characters and doing really well, it opened things up brought in a lot more fighting style diversity, and those characters are extremely useful in doubles. As a Lucas main, singles are stupid frustrating, especially against top tiers, but a good Lucas is terrifying in doubles, especially with G&W (whose bucket he can fill up easily) or Pikachu/ZSS (who both have effective healing methods). But even if doubles sucked, people like them, just like they still like Melee, a 14 year old game. If this community is good at anything, it's holding on to things that "should" be dropped. Doubles aren't going anywhere, and if anything they should get MORE attention.