For former casual players: Did you realize much of a difference between Melee and Brawl?

[ZeldaMaster]

Regarding Sakurai's interview with Nintendo Dream about several aspects of Smash Nintendo 3DS/WiiU, Sakurai hit the nerve of many by saying the following:

Personally, I feel that if you want to play a fighting game seriously, there are other competitive fighting games that are more suited to that, and people like that could have fun playing those. If we direct Smash ONLY at the competitive players, it will have no future.""

If I wanted to, I'm sure I could make a more hardcore Smash Brothers game. I could make the game speed much faster, increase the number of inputs...but then, beginners would no longer be able to play the game. When the game becomes more like a sport, a tool that more strictly rewards the player with more skill, the game tapers off more, like a mountain. Just like how a mountain tapers off into its peak, that area becomes more and more narrow.

My first Smash Bros. game was Melee, which is considered to be a very viably competitive fighting game. However, when I first got the game back in my childhood, I hadn't the slightest notion of this game's competitive viability and potential. To me, it was just a game I could play with my friends and have fun, or, as Sakurai has previously stated, I saw it as a "party game". Put shortly, despite Melee being fast paced and having competitive mechanics which I now know as wavedashing and L-cancelling, I never felt that the game was hard to get into and have loads of fun with. At a surface level, Melee to me was a fun game with all my favorite Nintendo characters, and none of its mechanics interfered with how much FUN I had with the game. Fast forward to the release of Brawl. I was hype as all hell. It was a new entry in the franchise with new characters and more content. Given how much I enjoyed Melee, I picked Brawl up the first day of release. I still had no idea that Smash could be competitive, I was still oblivious to it. When I played Brawl, sure, it felt different than Melee, but like Melee, I still had a lot of fun and enjoyed it as a "party game". To me, Brawl was just the next entry in this beloved franchise, and I loved it. My point, as a dude who formerly played just for fun, I couldn't tell a significant difference between Melee and Brawl. Sure, they felt different, but at the end of the day, to me, they were both Smash Bros, aka awesome fighting/party games. Melee's plethora of competitive mechanics and Brawl's lack of competitive mechanics didn't mean jack **** to me, because I couldn't tell that they existed in the first place. It was only when I was first exposed to competitive Smash a few years ago did I realize the different mechanics Melee and Brawl had. It was then that I noticed that Melee's mechanics catered to a competitive audience, and Brawl's mechanics really didn't. But at the end of the day, back in my childhood, Melee and Brawl's differences didn't do anything to negatively affect my love of both games.

Case in point, no, Sakurai, implementing increased mechanics does not alienate casuals and people who want to just have a good time. At a surface level, Smash 64, Melee, Brawl, and Smash 3DS/Wii U are all simply Super Smash Bros, an awesome fighting game with our favorite Nintendo characters duking it out in an all out crazy game. Despite its competitive mechanics, Melee DID NOT alienate me and many others who wanted to have fun and play it as a "party game". Just look at its sales! Melee was the best selling title on the gamecube! Back in the day, Melee was a "party game", and IT STILL CAN if I choose to play it that way.

Sakurai, you need to realize that the casual/average gamer will always buy Smash despite its mechanics. As long as it features all our favorite Nintendo characters fighting it out, they WILL BUY IT.

My question is, why rid Smash of its competitive potential? Why not cater to the hardcore audience? What harm is there in doing so? If anything, Smash will become more and even more popular! Keep in mind that it is the hardcore audience that are your biggest fans. Despite Brawl lacking as much competitive mechanics as Melee, we still all bought it. Why? Because we love Smash and we want to see it is a game where skill is rewarded and winners win because of their skill. Sakurai, by implementing more mechanics, you won't be alienating anyone, you'll only be pleasing more and more people and increase Smash's impact on the gaming industry.

P.S.: To all you Sakurai haters, STOP IT. Without his insight and creation, we wouldn't even have Smash. It's because of him that we are all here on this forum discussing our beloved series.

Thoughts?

 

[PKBeam]

My question is, why rid Smash of its competitive potential? Why not cater to the hardcore audience? What harm is there in doing so?

"If I wanted to, I'm sure I could make a more hardcore Smash Brothers game. I could make the game speed much faster, increase the number of inputs...but then, beginners would no longer be able to play the game. When the game becomes more like a sport, a tool that more strictly rewards the player with more skill, the game tapers off more, like a mountain. Just like how a mountain tapers off into its peak, that area becomes more and more narrow."

 

[Kikkipoptart12]

When Sakurai or a Competitive fighting gamers see a competitive smash game all they see is that you are striping smash to it bare bones and trying to make it like a traditional fighting game. When he said "he can make the game faster and increase the number of button inputs" do that sound like melee to you? No it don't it sound like he comparing smash to other fighting games like street fighter. It's so easy to tell he just see that with the omega forms of the stages, a flat stage 1 vs 1 no items like other fighting games.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

"If I wanted to, I'm sure I could make a more hardcore Smash Brothers game. I could make the game speed much faster, increase the number of inputs...but then, beginners would no longer be able to play the game. When the game becomes more like a sport, a tool that more strictly rewards the player with more skill, the game tapers off more, like a mountain. Just like how a mountain tapers off into its peak, that area becomes more and more narrow."

But beginners played Melee too. And didn't know what they were standing on. And enjoyed it. Moronic to suggest otherwise. Plz stop

 

[Sleeplost]

Nope. Never really noticed anything different that was bad other than the artstyle. I loved all the characters, stages, the music; EVERYTHING. I still love Brawl. No amount of people telling me how "bad" it is will ever get me to dislike it. I respect it for being a game that provided a fun narrative to a game that couldn't really be explained. I feel like Sakurai is flawed in his opinion, but at the same time pretty wise in the sense too. If you presented a Melee sequel now in the present day to both casuals and comp. players you'd get an issue that most smash players have experienced with Melee. The clear division of player strength. Sakurai never intended for this to be a thing. I can respect that. This IS a game where family friendly characters fight, after all. Everyone's supposed to have fun. Not only the person who keeps up to date on the internet for the ebin "advanced techs" and checks tier lists to make sure he's playing a viable character. Beginners like myself were able to play Melee, but it wasn't nearly as fun as Brawl was to them. There, of course, is a middle ground which Sakurai has trouble reaching and likely will never reach, but even then, Smash 4 is an excellent product. Nothing will be perfect. Not even Melee was perfect.

 

[guedes the brawler]

i did find brawl to be much more chaotic, since a lot of it's new items and stages were so very threatening. but besides that no.

i disagree with sakurai's mentality on what a competitive game is. we really don't need ocmplicated inputs, it completely defeats on of smash's best characteristics. which is why i dislike some of the techs we found like dacus and perfect pivoting

 

[LancerStaff]

But beginners played Melee too. And didn't know what they were standing on. And enjoyed it. Moronic to suggest otherwise. Plz stop

Most "casual" players that were aware of competitive Melee didn't want to play competitive Melee. But if they were to be stuck in the same match together, online perhaps, the casual would either be forced to play the game in a way he doesn't want to for any shot at winning or to quit. You see rampant complaining for any remotely "techy" thing in nearly any game, up to and including "real" fighters.

As for the topic title's question, yes, I did notice. Dashing Usmashes, buffering, and generally being easy to jump out to intercept recoveries are all things I noticed right away. Of course, I had one "friend" who kept complaining that Melee was better because of Roy and Mewtwo.

So we played the game again and kicked his rear while he used those two, and he (and everybody else) came to realize how clunky Melee is to play, at a casual level at least.

 

[FalKoopa]

I noticed a few differences, notably the magnetic ledges and the spammable air-dodge. That said, I liked Brawl as much as I do Smash now. Only in the long run did I notice the imbalance and other stuff people complain about.

About his statement, I find it contradictory, considering he really put an effort to please the hardcore crowd with For Glory and the better balance.

And try to keep this thread from becoming a mess like the news article became, or a lock will follow

 

[Drippy]

As a filthy casual who played tons of Melee and good amounts of Brawl, I think I could say I didn't notice anything at all. I never was aware there was a competitive scene for Smash until maybe a year ago because that's when I got into League of Legends and the world of eSports opened up to me. The only reason I moved to Brawl wasn't because of gameplay but more characters, stages (custom stages too), cool adventure mode, and of course improved graphics.

 

[M-Z]

I enjoyed brawl more than melee. I love melee but I felt like I was playing in fast forward all the time becasue of how fast it was, smash 4 has the perfect speed imo a nice mixture of melee and brawl.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I was 13 when Brawl came out with a lot of other things on my mind, so I didn't notice at first. I did start to notice as the years passed, though, that I was losing a lot when I wasn't supposed to, and it felt kind of sluggish when Super Smash Flash 2, which is closer to SSB4, began to take shape and I began to play that more.

So, yeah, while I didn't know the details, I did feel like something was wrong.

 

[Khao]

Yup.

I've never been a competitive player, never been to any tournaments, and I didn't "research" or practice new ways to become better at the game.

But I still played Melee a lot back in the day, both alone and with friends. So I immediately noticed that Brawl was very different to Melee as soon as I simply jumped.

Everything felt different, I never really felt like it was "slow," but the floatiness was definitely there and I actually liked it. I always loved the idea of mid-air combat, so the fact that it was now more possible to the point I could jump off the edge and come back with pretty much every character made be happy. I did notice the hitstun problem, though (even when I wasn't really familiar with the term back then), and how it led to a few issues. But I liked the new airdodge.

 

[Drippy]

I enjoyed brawl more than melee. I love melee but I felt like I was playing in fast forward all the time becasue of how fast it was, smash 4 has the perfect speed imo a nice mixture of melee and brawl.

That's my opinion on Sm4sh as well, it caters to both the casual and competitive players IMO and it's good for the newbies such as myself to get into it.

 

[Wanderer from Roseyard]

After seven-ish years of Melee, the transition to Brawl was jarring. The characters felt like they couldn't move fast enough to keep up with my inputs; good thing that input buffer was put in place (and probably the reason it was added). They all felt like paper in the air and dashed like they were underwater.

Eventually I got used to that speed, but then I went back to Melee for some nostalgia and it was like the game was running in turbo mode in comparison, and the characters fell like anvils, but I loved getting back into the swing of that and didn't touch Brawl again.

 

[Woowoowhistle]

Seems to me, you don't wanna talk about it

 

[PKBeam]

But beginners played Melee too. And didn't know what they were standing on. And enjoyed it. Moronic to suggest otherwise. Plz stop

I know how stupid that was, but that was Sakurai's opinion.

 

[Xafer2468]

At first,no. I thought they were the same game until I tried mimic some m2k Marth in brawl and realized how stupid the air dodge and hit stun were, and that just drew me to project m 4? years later

 

[Raijinken]

Brawl was obviously slower, and had the whole dodging-during-hitstun thing, but otherwise just had more characters and a different stagelist. More characters meant it was more entertaining to play with my even-more-casual-than-I-was-at-the-time friends, and camping wasn't an issue since my entire group hated it, so it was plenty fun.

So was Melee, but Melee didn't have Ike, Snake, or Metaknight.

 

[Zzuxon]

I was(still am) a casual, noticed the change in speed etc. immediately.

 

[16bit]

No, I didn't. It wasn't until I tried playing sheik in brawl after watching KirbyKaze and tried to do what he did, I noticed airdodging and the likes.