everyone find Matt Deezie...

[araknophobik]

there needs to be a TG7 before brawl comes out ^_^
what better way to end melee than with the tournament series that started the large tournament scene

 

[choknater]

despite how ridiculous and unprobable that speculation may sound.... it's an awesome idea. lol.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

You should go back and read the TG6 thread. Then you'll understand why it's not gonna happen.

 

[NeighborhoodP]

Melee's going to end just because brawl comes out? What if Brawl flops, which looks highly probable?

 

[araknophobik]

You should go back and read the TG6 thread. Then you'll understand why it's not gonna happen.

ic, well it would be nice if we could get ahold of him somehow, being that he hasn't posted on smashboards in almost 2 years

The reason i think a TG7 would be great is that, the community has grown so much these past 2 years, that it would be nice for some of the newer smashers to experience TG. Also, the drama of housing would be less stressful, being that there are more smashers in norcal to house i would guess, but housing is always an issue for large tourny's like oc2 =/

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

Melee's going to end just because brawl comes out? What if Brawl flops, which looks highly probable?

"Highly probable" based on what evidence?

 

[NeighborhoodP]

"Highly probable" based on what evidence?

All evidence available?

 

[Shmooguy]

Melee's going to end just because brawl comes out? What if Brawl flops, which looks highly probable?

For once I have to agree. If you've heard what they're changing in Brawl it doesn't sound very appealing. It will be huge in Japan regardless, but by no means will it be the same game we play now.

 

[WhiteOblv]

wut are they changing?

 

[DEHF]

i heard rumors that they were taking off L cancelling and wavedashing

 

[Shmooguy]

No edgehogging, no shieldgrabbing, ssb64 DI, 30 FPS.

"This time, we'd like to stress easiness over the small details of combat, so overall it might become somewhat easier."
-Joystiq

Apparently it'll be more combo based instead of trying to mindgame to get hits in. Of course there are more changes than this, but I think those help the game more than detract from it (such as improved aerial combat).

And I doubt they'll have it online. Even if they do, it'll lag like hell and be near unplayable. All online fighters lag, and smash is much faster than the rest of them.

As far as I know, L cancelling and wavedashing are still in. There's always been cancelling in smash (Z or L).

 

[SuperRad]

Where did you get "No edgehogging, no shieldgrabbing" from?

To me, it seems like edgehogging would be unavoidable without a more flawed system.

And to "but by no means will it be the same game we play now.":

Smash 64->Melee is almost a total rehaul of the game. I don't see why people expected Brawl to just add some new characters and levels in.

And honestly, even if its a less worthy tournament game, I would expect to see tournaments for it. Look at the precedent set by Halo2.

 

[araknophobik]

And honestly, even if its a less worthy tournament game, I would expect to see tournaments for it. Look at the precedent set by Halo2.

yup, halo 1 ***** halo 2 multiplayer wise, but halo 1 didn't have online play and mlg was barely coming up
i wouldve perfered halo 2 to be more like halo 1 =/

 

[Shmooguy]

For edgehogging the ledge will break if u stay on it and there will be less invincibility frames.

Admittedly, i heard the shieldgrabbing part from someone else, not an article so I'm not 100% sure on that.

But the part about DI and moderated speed... that's the biggest thing. That means that you can't use speed to your advantage as much. The increased difficulty of DI means that combos can last for a long time, making the game more technical based rather than mindgame based. Of course there will be mindgames, but once you're in a combo you're stuck in it. Hopefully they'll add something else into the game to get out of combos (they did say they'd make aerial combat more balanced), but otherwise matches will just be one long combo video.

Of course there will be tourneys but I don't think that will have anything to do with how deep the game is. I still have high hopes, but as it stands right now it seems like it's more catered to the masses.

EDIT: I agree I like Halo 1 more =)

 

[$ick]

Anticipation to dismay so quickly.. If Brawl does flop I'd be very disappointed, that sucks how apparently there will be lag for the online play, I've always heard that there will be online play.... I guess the worst case scenario is I just start using as many characters as I can in Melee to prevent bordem...

 

[NeighborhoodP]

Smash 64->Melee is almost a total rehaul of the game. I don't see why people expected Brawl to just add some new characters and levels in.

That's exactly the point. SSB64 was good, but SSBM was / is the greatest game ever. If they're going to change so many things, what are the chances they hit the bulls eye like they did with Melee? It's quite impossible to sustain near-perfection when you're making changes all over the place.

I also believe making a bunch of changes is a bad investment for Nintendo. Melee is by far the GameCube's best selling game. If you keep messing with the formula that made it so great, expect sales to decline.

And I won't believe anything associated with Nintendo will be online until it happens. Remember how GameCube was supposed to get online?

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

All evidence available?

Explain how the evidence supports your claim. If you just state things like this a priori without reasoning then your claim is worthless. Jesus.

And where the hell are people getting these details about game mechanics? There are 2 videos and a couple interviews with Sakurai with which to base conclusions on. Having read everything Sakurai has said about the game (that I can find, and also having 3 years of Japanese), there is just a bunch of vague statements about "game speed" and "details of combat," none of which can be construed into taking out edgehogging, etc.

Face it, you all don't know anything about game mechanics at this point. Don't say things like "I heard a rumor that..." unless you can supply some godda

mned specific evidence, for ****'s sake. Otherwise you're making the entire community more misinformed.

 

[Rickety]

Go Sheridan! :]

Hospitality Champion and Bridget player! :]

 

[NeighborhoodP]

Explain how the evidence supports your claim. If you just state things like this a priori without reasoning then your claim is worthless. Jesus.

And where the hell are people getting these details about game mechanics? There are 2 videos and a couple interviews with Sakurai with which to base conclusions on. Having read everything Sakurai has said about the game (that I can find, and also having 3 years of Japanese), there is just a bunch of vague statements about "game speed" and "details of combat," none of which can be construed into taking out edgehogging, etc.

Face it, you all don't know anything about game mechanics at this point. Don't say things like "I heard a rumor that..." unless you can supply some godda

mned specific evidence, for ****'s sake. Otherwise you're making the entire community more misinformed.

All evidence to go on supports that a lot of change is going to happen in Brawl.

"It's quite impossible to sustain near-perfection when you're making changes all over the place."

Simple. History is also an example: when you have something of such a high quality, changing various things about it invariably leads to a lesser game...

 

[SuperRad]

That's exactly the point. SSB64 was good, but SSBM was / is the greatest game ever. If they're going to change so many things, what are the chances they hit the bulls eye like they did with Melee? It's quite impossible to sustain near-perfection when you're making changes all over the place.

I also believe making a bunch of changes is a bad investment for Nintendo. Melee is by far the GameCube's best selling game. If you keep messing with the formula that made it so great, expect sales to decline.

And I won't believe anything associated with Nintendo will be online until it happens. Remember how GameCube was supposed to get online?

if you think major changes in game mechanics will affect sales on a major level, i lolz at you.

again, look at halo2. Halo1 was by far the best game XBox had to offer. It's sequel rode the hype train (partially off the popularity of the first and partially off of media exposure) and sold hundreds of thousands of copies on the first day alone. First day, as in, no one had played it yet first day.*

*There was actually a french leak of the game you could play on a modded XBox, but thats a different story. I remember reading that people played it on the french leak, thought it was weak compared to halo1 and still went out and bought it first day.


All I'm saying, is that doing an overhaul of the game mechanics doesn't mean jack **** for sales.




Oh, and sheridan wins this topic.

 

[demoncaterpie]

I can't see Brawl being anything less then better then Melee.

Nintendo is doing everything they can to make Brawl the best game ever. They gave the game its own studio, they brought the original director back, they gave them as much time as possible to make it.

Honestly, it's going to be great, no matter what anyone says.

 

[araknophobik]

that DI **** is pretty lame, DI is what makes the game more challenging. without DI, isai would be unstoppable just as he was in ssb64 =/

back to the topic though
does anyone have dezzie's s/n or some way to be subtle and contact him?

 

[NeighborhoodP]

if you think major changes in game mechanics will affect sales on a major level, i lolz at you.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lesser reviews almost always equate in lesser sales. The gaming business is one of the few (only?) where the quality of a game almost always results into positive sales. Very rarely do you find bad games logging big sales numbers (and only then with licensed titles, like Harry Potter or something), and games no one knew about months before get good reviews and therefore good sales (Katamari Demacy).

As I said in my earlier post, changing many game mechanics from wildly successful games -- in this case, SSBM -- results in a lesser quality of game. Connect the dots -- if HAL changes many things about Melee, the quality will likely suffer. If the quality suffers, game sales will decline.

again, look at halo2. Halo1 was by far the best game XBox had to offer. It's sequel rode the hype train (partially off the popularity of the first and partially off of media exposure) and sold hundreds of thousands of copies on the first day alone. First day, as in, no one had played it yet first day.

Um, Halo 2 got GOTY all over the place, and has an aggregate review score of 95 at Metacritic, with the original Halo coming in at 97. It rode the hype train but also surpassed the hype... It was everything everyone expected and more, and the online play alone was worth it.

Oh, and sheridan wins this topic.

You definitely lose, sir.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

All evidence to go on supports that a lot of change is going to happen in Brawl.

"It's quite impossible to sustain near-perfection when you're making changes all over the place."

Simple. History is also an example: when you have something of such a high quality, changing various things about it invariably leads to a lesser game...

First, "a lot" and "improvement" are subjective terms. I do think there are a lot of points where people would generally agree about "improvement," but I also think that there are important points of contention in that matter. As far as the degree of change, personally, based on what I have seen, it seems that Brawl vs Melee will be a smaller change than Melee vs 64. Based on your logic that "changing many game mechanics from wildly successful games -- in this case, SSBM -- results in a lesser quality of game," that would mean that it is in fact more probable that Brawl will surpass Melee by a larger margin than Melee did 64.

"It's quite impossible to sustain near-perfection when you're making changes all over the place."

A "witty" quote proves nothing. I think that's a rather ignorant argument to make. Your (or anyone's, not to single you out in particular) inability to conceive of further improvements has no bearing on the actual metaphysical possibility of improvement. That's kind of like saying "Well, since Led Zeppelin (or whatever) is the best rock band ever, it's highly probable that anything after them in that genre will flop."

Check this out. Watch the "Character Parade" video:
http://media.cube.ign.com/media/016/016387/vids_5.html
Offhand there are like 4 or 5 things one can see in this movie that are different from the real game.

So let's try not to make so many judgements about the game till we actually get it.

PS Hi Rickety ^_^ and Brian.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

i heard rumors that they were taking off L cancelling and wavedashing

No edgehogging, no shieldgrabbing, ssb64 DI, 30 FPS.

For edgehogging the ledge will break if u stay on it and there will be less invincibility frames.

Admittedly, i heard the shieldgrabbing part from someone else, not an article so I'm not 100% sure on that.

Until evidence happens, this is all garbage, don't listen to them. Especially 30 FPS. If you believe that then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[Evilnemesis]

WTF, led zeppeling is a band? I thought it was a person =/

 

[araknophobik]

WTF, led zeppeling is a band? I thought it was a person =/

=/ atleast you dont go to subway and order a meatball sandwhich with no vegitables

 

[EzynJAY]

i thought it was an architect, who built a stairway to heaven

at least u dont go to subway and order a sandwich and not be able to pay for it afterwards...

 

[araknophobik]

jay is gaying it up through my tag =/ stop rewording my ****

 

[SuperRad]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lesser reviews almost always equate in lesser sales. The gaming business is one of the few (only?) where the quality of a game almost always results into positive sales. Very rarely do you find bad games logging big sales numbers (and only then with licensed titles, like Harry Potter or something), and games no one knew about months before get good reviews and therefore good sales (Katamari Demacy).

As I said in my earlier post, changing many game mechanics from wildly successful games -- in this case, SSBM -- results in a lesser quality of game. Connect the dots -- if HAL changes many things about Melee, the quality will likely suffer. If the quality suffers, game sales will decline.



Um, Halo 2 got GOTY all over the place, and has an aggregate review score of 95 at Metacritic, with the original Halo coming in at 97. It rode the hype train but also surpassed the hype... It was everything everyone expected and more, and the online play alone was worth it.



You definitely lose, sir.

Halo 1 and Halo 2 had completely different physics engines. Halo 1 was considered by many to be the best console FPS ever, or behind Goldeneye. They did a complete revamp and the game became more popular.

I don't hold this belief that you can't change something thats great for the better.


What it sounds like is happening to smash from the small generalizations and even the stupid rumors people have been throwing around, is that the game is going to be slowed down, possibly making it a game less suited for competitive play. If this is true, then the people that review games will probably still like it. They review on behalf of the majority of gamers, not for the tourney oriented few. So a game that is worse to you because you want to play compettively can be a whole world better to someone else who just wants to have some casual, easy fun.

My point is not that brawl will be better, but that it will still sell a ****-ton of copies even if its overhauled for casual play.

 

[choknater]

evidence? lol.

last time i checked, ssbb's the #2 game on ign's "lust list." second only to Halo 3. it's funny how people debate the future success levels of sequels to a couple of the best games ever made.

isn't this topic about MattDeezie? xDDD!!

 

[CAOTIC]

Sheridan is too good ^_____^

 

[NeighborhoodP]

As far as the degree of change, personally, based on what I have seen, it seems that Brawl vs Melee will be a smaller change than Melee vs 64. Based on your logic that "changing many game mechanics from wildly successful games -- in this case, SSBM -- results in a lesser quality of game," that would mean that it is in fact more probable that Brawl will surpass Melee by a larger margin than Melee did 64.

You missed one not-so-minor point: the requisite for change equaling a declining game is when the game has already achieved greatness. The original SSB was nothing close to great. It had holes all over the place, and it is quite amazing to see what HAL did with Melee from SSB64. But once you already have something that's great, changing many things -- some of which will definitely be things that MADE Melee great -- means you have to change them into things that are equally good or better. That very rarely happens. Looking at most successful long-term franchises, change is done over a longer period of time, with a couple of individual gameplay mechanics tweaked. When more than a couple are tweaked, it is usually not nearly as good. (See: Super Mario Sunshine.) It is the exception, not the rule. Based on what (admittedly little, especially for such a high-profile game, though you could easily interpret that to mean a LOT is going to be changed) evidence we have available, I have seen nothing to suggest that Brawl will be an exception. I hope it is, but I am not expecting it.

A "witty" quote proves nothing. I think that's a rather ignorant argument to make. Your (or anyone's, not to single you out in particular) inability to conceive of further improvements has no bearing on the actual metaphysical possibility of improvement. That's kind of like saying "Well, since Led Zeppelin (or whatever) is the best rock band ever, it's highly probable that anything after them in that genre will flop."

Inability to conceive of further improvements? There are a couple of potential improvements to better Melee. That's not the point, though. You yourself just stated it looks as if Brawl is going to see as many changes as Melee did from 64. My point is that when you are already dealing with a baseline of a great game, as Melee is, a significant amount of changes almost invariably results in a weaker game. This isn't some theoretical statement; history serves as proof. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Halo 1 and Halo 2 had completely different physics engines. Halo 1 was considered by many to be the best console FPS ever, or behind Goldeneye. They did a complete revamp and the game became more popular.

I seriously hope you're not trying to imply Halo 2 is not similar to Halo in terms of game play. Epic Games rehauls the Unreal engine all the time; are you trying to argue that the successive sequels of the Unreal series are not similar games at heart? Because the graphics engine has been greatly improved, the gameplay differs? I think not.

lollerskates Halo only became more popular because it got online play, wtf?

I don't hold this belief that you can't change something thats great for the better.

I am struggling to think of successful, viable video game franchises that have a history of superb games and that had sequels that changed many FUNDAMENTAL gameplay mechanics and came out with an end product that was equal or superior to the previous product. Zelda, GTA, MGS, they're all quite similar. The only thing that is remotely coming to mind is the Final Fantasy series, and one can see throughout the series' history that many of the core mechanics EnixSquare toyed with were not well liked (see: Final Fantasy VIII).

My point is not that brawl will be better, but that it will still sell a ****-ton of copies even if its overhauled for casual play.

My point is that the very overhaul in question will lessen the game, not with what aim the overhaul takes place (i.e. to make it "more competitive" or "more casual"). The reviews will reflect that.

 

[ender]

history serves as proof. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

This is not really true. Look at something. anywhere. That thing didnt spring into existance. it was created based on something earlier. it was improved.

If you go back to when ssb came out and started talking about wavedashes and such people would think that would be strange and foreign and not want to talk about it. I think thats what is happening here.

Personally, I havn't made an opinion about SSBB, but I know I have not purchased a wii, and dont plan on it. I will also first play it at a friends before purchasing SSBB.

blargh

 

[SuperRad]

Halo2 and Halo1 are extremely different. All the glitches and tricks from Halo1 didn't carry over to Halo2, so it would be like if wavedashing, l-canceling and teching were all removed. on a casual level, this means jack ****. Thats why the reviews were equally as high, because they were both great casual shooters. But Halo1 was a much more complex competitive shooter, and had many facets (quite a few unintentional, or rather, not meant to be discovered) that made it great. Stuff like timing weapon/power-up respawns, forcing people to spawn on certain parts of the map through elaborate positioning, double melees, backpack reloading, etc.

[Honestly, there are only three games I would say I know a good deal about: Halo (1+2), WoW and Melee. And I know more about Halo then either of those two. If you want to talk about Halo I can talk up a storm.]

The only reason I keep looking at the halo franchise is that i see the SSB franchise heading that same way. A game that is not as well refined for the competitive players but will be a more "fun" game.


And another hearty "lolz" if you think mainstream reviewers will evaluate it for competitive play. Unless they play competitive melee. But I doubt that the reviewers for IGN, gamespot, etc play competitive smash.

 

[NeighborhoodP]

[Honestly, there are only three games I would say I know a good deal about: Halo (1+2), WoW and Melee. And I know more about Halo then either of those two. If you want to talk about Halo I can talk up a storm.]

Gears of War or Halo? I'd take Gears.

The only reason I keep looking at the halo franchise is that i see the SSB franchise heading that same way. A game that is not as well refined for the competitive players but will be a more "fun" game.

I don't know Halo magnificently well, but hypothetically speaking, you think the loss of l-canceling / slower speed / etc. are equal to the removal of the so-called "glitches" from Halo 1 to Halo 2?

And another hearty "lolz" if you think mainstream reviewers will evaluate it for competitive play. Unless they play competitive melee. But I doubt that the reviewers for IGN, gamespot, etc play competitive smash.

If SSBB ends up "dumbed down," so to speak, to casual-gamer play, it's going to be a worse game in the process. It's not like it's the same game, but there are a bunch of little technicalities that, on a competitive level, stand out, but don't stand out when reviewed. I don't think it's as black and white as you are making it. If it's "casualized," for a hearty lack of a better term, a reviewer -- who are definitely not casual gamers, by the way -- will see.