PM 3.5....better than Smash Wii U?

[Narpas_sword]

the stage builder

Who needs that when you have brawlbox and vault =p

 

[WinterShorts]

Who needs that when you have brawlbox and vault =p

On that note, I guess the stage builder would be for people who don't know how to use Brawlvault / box.

 

[ShadowGanon]

Considering how much you like PM Ganondorf, I understand your opinion.

You cannot begin to fathom the depths of my affection for the character that is PM Ganondorf...

 

[Mach5Mike]

As a Smasher who enjoys both the competitive style of play but also equally enjoys most of the just for fun aspects of Smash Bros., I honestly can't choose between one or the other. Both PM 3.5 and Smash 4 offer things that the other does not (i.e. All Star Versus vs. 8 Player Smash), and both were designed with different types of players in mind (to an extent). But since neither is available to me at the moment, I'll just reserve my actual judgment until I can play both of them.

... Actually, I will give an slight edge to PM over Smash 4 for the time being for one major aspect as a diehard Mario main: Mario Tornado > FLUDD all day every day :D

 

[WinterShorts]

You cannot begin to fathom the depths of my affection for the character that is PM Ganondorf...

Well IDK I don't see you playing any Smash 3DS are you? means it only relates to PM....or Melee, I DON'T KNOW!

 

[ShadowGanon]

Well IDK I don't see you playing any Smash 3DS are you? means it only relates to PM....or Melee, I DON'T KNOW!

*HydreigonMuppetMaster uses confusion*

*It's super effective*

*ShadowGanon is confused*

 

[tm730]

any game that had falco as a fox clone and lucario as a street fighter character already lost with me

Wii U is my vote

 

[ShadowGanon]

any game that had falco as a fox clone and lucario as a street fighter character already lost with me

Wii U is my vote

Excluding those two characters, do you enjoy PM?

 

[Narpas_sword]

any game that had falco as a fox clone and lucario as a street fighter character already lost with me

Wii U is my vote

you dont like 'clones'

yet you're supporting smash 4 over pm?

what?

 

[WinterShorts]

*HydreigonMuppetMaster uses confusion*

*It's super effective*

*ShadowGanon is confused*

How? Ganondorf is Dark / Fighting. Psychic types don't work against him.

 

[WinterShorts]

any game that had falco as a fox clone and lucario as a street fighter character already lost with me

Wii U is my vote

Didn't Smash 4 have like......6 clones?

C. Falcon to Ganondorf
Fox to Falco
Link to Toon Link
Mario to Dr. Mario
Mario to Luigi?
Bowser Jr. to Wendy to Larry to Roy to Iggy to Morton to Ludwing to Lemmy?
Marth to Lucina
Pit to "the-totally-not-a-clone" Dark Pit

 

[ShadowGanon]

you dont like 'clones'

yet you're supporting smash 4 over pm?

what?

Didn't Smash 4 have like......6 clones?

C. Falcon to Ganondorf
Fox to Falco
Link to Toon Link
Mario to Dr. Mario
Mario to Luigi?
Bowser Jr. to Wendy to Larry to Roy to Iggy to Morton to Ludwing to Lemmy?
Marth to Lucina
Pit to "the-totally-not-a-clone" Dark Pit

To be fair, he didn't say anything about clones in general. He just said that he didn't like Falco being a clone/semi-clone of fox.

 

[1FD]

Isn't a poll in the pm section gon be superbias when it's pm vs other things?

ur mom is a 64

 

[ShadowGanon]

Isn't a poll in the PM forum going to be super bias when it's PM vs other things?

Your mom is a really good cook.

We are completely aware that opinions stated here will be bias towards PM.

And yes, my mom IS a really good cook

 

[Fortress]

Can't we just be excited for Smash as a whole to continue growing? Threads like this are bound to end up toxic. I mean, come on, just more of the community attacking one another about what's better when they can't even look past that and enjoy their series as a whole.

 

[1FD]

ur toxic
shadowganon poisoned u with mom ninja tarts

 

[tm730]

Excluding those two characters, do you enjoy PM?

it's enjoyable

but i;ve never been one to complain/argue about mechanics and competitive blah blah blah

i always thought the characters felt better in Brawl and Smash 4

Falco was damn near my main and i liked the character from starfox 64 and Lucario is my #1

so seeing my favorite characters bastardized like that in PM aint sit well with me

 

[shapular]

PM 3.5 might actually be a better casual game than Smash 4 just because of All-Star Versus mode, but Smash 4 will definitely be the better competitive game with better character designs and better stages. The balance might still be better than PM too even after the Mewtwo nerfs. So I'm looking forward to Smash 4 more.

 

[Paquito]

Another way of phrasing this thread's question is, "what is it about Smash Brother's that most appeals to you?"

Brawl and Sm4sh fans will tend to love the fan-service that's always been a feature of the series (new franchise characters available, single player modes that take you through various game-worlds, etc). Plus, when you love a game series, having the latest and greatest (especially when it has finally made the hop to HD!) means something. And competitive or not, every Smash Brother's game in the series is a whole lot of fun with a group of friends.

Project M fans love all those things too. But if someone says they prefer Project M, there's absolutely no question what they prioritize, first and foremost: strong competitive gameplay.

That said, statements like this really irk me:

As a Smasher who enjoys both the competitive style of play but also equally enjoys most of the just for fun aspects of Smash Bros., I honestly can't choose between one or the other.

Fie on Nintendo for making us choose. Fie! Say Sm4sh had Project M's gameplay, but retained its HD graphics, and all it's other new features. Would this game alienate anyone? Nope.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Another way of phrasing this thread's question is, "what is it about Smash Brother's that most appeals to you?"

Brawl and Sm4sh fans will tend to love the fan-service that's always been a feature of the series (new franchise characters available, single player modes that take you through various game-worlds, etc). Plus, when you love a game series, having the latest and greatest (especially when it has finally made the hop to HD!) means something. And competitive or not, every Smash Brother's game in the series is a whole lot of fun with a group of friends.

Project M fans love all those things too. But if someone says they prefer Project M, there's absolutely no question what they prioritize, first and foremost: strong competitive gameplay.

That said, statements like this really irk me:



Fie on Nintendo for making us choose. Fie! Say Sm4sh had Project M's gameplay, but retained its HD graphics, and all it's other new features. Would this game alienate anyone? Nope.

I don't know. I prefer Project M and part of why is that they do a much better job delivering fan service than Nintendo does. The alt costumes in Project M have more fan service appeal than the majority of them in Smash4.

 

[WinterShorts]

PM 3.5 might actually be a better casual game than Smash 4 just because of All-Star Versus mode, but Smash 4 will definitely be the better competitive game with better character designs and better stages. The balance might still be better than PM too even after the Mewtwo nerfs. So I'm looking forward to Smash 4 more.

I agree with you on the balance part of what you said, I don't think much people are on the same side when you talk about the stages.

Smash 4? Better stages? Yeah, for casual. Oh you mean competitve? Ha. Almost every stage in Smash 4 is either meant for the completley casual or just FD (with exceptions like Battlefield, possibbly Big Battlefield, Town and City, the list goes on for whats going to be legal stages).

 

[Prince Longstrok]

Aside from looking pretty and having new characters, Smash 4 has nothing worth playing for me.
I plan on buying it, of course, but I can already tell that After about a day worth of play im going to be thinking "...man.. I wonder what this new character would be like if he/she had competitive mechanics at their disposal"

Ill essentially be wishing they were all Project M-ified. x)

But, to each their own.

 

[ShadowGanon]

it's enjoyable

but i;ve never been one to complain/argue about mechanics and competitive blah blah blah

i always thought the characters felt better in Brawl and Smash 4

Falco was damn near my main and i liked the character from starfox 64 and Lucario is my #1

so seeing my favorite characters *******ized like that in PM aint sit well with me

Quite understandable.

Another way of phrasing this thread's question is, "what is it about Smash Brother's that most appeals to you?"

Brawl and Sm4sh fans will tend to love the fan-service that's always been a feature of the series (new franchise characters available, single player modes that take you through various game-worlds, etc). Plus, when you love a game series, having the latest and greatest (especially when it has finally made the hop to HD!) means something. And competitive or not, every Smash Brother's game in the series is a whole lot of fun with a group of friends.

Project M fans love all those things too. But if someone says they prefer Project M, there's absolutely no question what they prioritize, first and foremost: strong competitive gameplay.

That said, statements like this really irk me:



Fie on Nintendo for making us choose. Fie! Say Sm4sh had Project M's gameplay, but retained its HD graphics, and all it's other new features. Would this game alienate anyone? Nope.

First thought: 8-player All Star Turbo mode on Hyrule Castle HD

 

[Prince Longstrok]

Quite understandable.

First thought: 8-player Turbo mode

8 player Ice Climber dittos...

oh wait.

 

[shapular]

I agree with you on the balance part of what you said, I don't think much people are on the same side when you talk about the stages.

Smash 4? Better stages? Yeah, for casual. Oh you mean competitve? Ha. Almost every stage in Smash 4 is either meant for the completley casual or just FD (with exceptions like Battlefield, possibbly Big Battlefield, Town and City, the list goes on for whats going to be legal stages).

By "better stages", I mean "something other than a Battlefield clone is going to be legal". There are plenty of unique stages that are strong candidates for being tournament legal, unless you're one of those super conservative people that think there are actually only 10 good competitive stages in PM.

 

[Paquito]

I don't know. I prefer Project M and part of why is that they do a much better job delivering fan service than Nintendo does. The alt costumes in Project M have more fan service appeal than the majority of them in Smash4.

*shrug* I haven't played Sm4sh yet I just assume Nintendo has more time to develop stuff like that than the Project M volunteers do.

First thought: 8-player All Star Turbo mode on Hyrule Castle HD

*creams*

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

*shrug* I haven't played Sm4sh yet I just assume Nintendo has more time to develop stuff like that than the Project M volunteers do.

If that were the case, why is it that the Smash4 costumes like Farmhand Link and Fierce Deity Link seem to be nothing more than color alterations without much thought put into it? Why is pretty much everything an alternate color instead of an actual costume? Are they just waiting to nickel and dime us later like Capcom would do?

 

[Fortress]

"...man.. I wonder what this new character would be like if he/she had competitive mechanics at their disposal"

Not bashing this post or this user in particular (okay, maybe this post), but **** like this annoys the Hell out of me. "It's doesn't have X mechanic from Y game, so it's not competitive".

Bull ****, **** that noise. Sm4sh has all the reason in the world to be even more competitive than the titles before it, and for all of the right reasons, too. Sora LTD figured out in Brawl that standard landing lag was a great idea and made for a consistent and accessible game, while still introducing a bevy of new tech and matchup knowledge to the series. It might have been a controversial entry within the competitive facet (Brawl, that is), but there's no denying that it did a lot of good for the series. Smash 4 not only does the same things, simplifying the game to make it more accessible among them, but it also does the same things that make Project M a success in the tournament scene. It (Sm4sh) sees plenty of balances throughout the roster, takes advantage of the latest hardware to bring us a good-looking experience, and most of all, is relevant. It's the latest entry in the SERIES that we all love and support as a whole (or at least should be tryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyying to), and is going to introduce a wealth of new players to the scene, each bringing fresh perspectives and new discoveries to this game. Sm4sh is competitive, does have the capacity to be competitive, and for once has the support of the publisher to help you people along already. ****ing embrace it.

On top of all of that, Smash 4 has a ton of new techniques to discover, new combos, new setups, new matchups... everything! The least the Smash community could stand to do would be to play the Hell out of this game, take it to its limit and beyond just like the old school players of Melee were able to do, and drive this community forward.

Take part in it, do your job in the Smash community to make this a respectable series that does get actual consideration at tournaments from players like us in the Project M boards. Advance this game, help it along, help yourselves. Who knows, you, you, might end up being the next big player to advance Sm4sh's metagame and bring something new to the table. The Wii U version isn't even out yet, and @Jackson and players like him have been pushing the envelope with what's possible, and he's a Melee veteran for crying out loud. Not stopping him from having the right attitude. Chain-grabs won me my first Sm4sh tournament, and it's thanks to players like Jackson that allow for that sort of thing. Saying **** like "well, this game doesn't have wavedashing, so it's not competitive" is ass-backwards bonkers. It's a close-minded way of approaching this game, and thoughts like that don't even give it a chance to help the community. People who say these sort of things only hurt the community.

What makes a competitive fighter? The roster? The tech? The look of the game? No, none of these things do. The interactions between the players playing the game are what make the game competitive. Using whatever means at their disposal to dominate their opponents and leave them coming right back up to that booth over, and over, and over, with the smarter player up at the top seat at the end of the night. That's competitive. The techniques you employ, the matchups you know, that's all on you to master and use to the fullest extent. They themselves do not make a game competitive, your use of them does. Smash has been only getting closer and closer to being an airtight fighter of its own respect, embracing traditional values of 2D fighters that will make this game more respectable to outside players.

Start embracing and enjoying Sm4sh for the game it is. Of course it's going to be unenjoyable when you go in with your expectations set to "well, I hope it has combos like Maylay", or, "well, I hope it has combos like Project M".

Project M. Melee. Brawl. 64. They are all their own titles, each with unique ways to succeed in, and Smash 4 is no different. It's its own game, and the only other thing I have to say to people ******** about how it's 'not competitive' is to nut up and get gud.

 

[Zoa]

Fortress is 100% correct. The game is new. There's a lot to uncover. If you're into Smash 4, then push the envelope and help develop its metagame. If you don't like it, or are just reserving judgement for it later on as the metagame develops, then just support our fellow Smash 4 players. Every game, or mod, can be competitive and develop a competitive scene. There is nothing that isn't competitive about any Smash game to date.

 

[WinterShorts]

By "better stages", I mean "something other than a Battlefield clone is going to be legal". There are plenty of unique stages that are strong candidates for being tournament legal, unless you're one of those super conservative people that think there are actually only 10 good competitive stages in PM.

I mean either way I see tournaments for Smash 4, just I see PM / Melee having more tournaments. I sware everytime there's a stream seen on Smashboards 70% of the time it's PM or Melee.

 

[WinterShorts]

Fortress is 100% correct. The game is new. There's a lot to uncover. If you're into Smash 4, then push the envelope and help develop its metagame. If you don't like it, or are just reserving judgement for it later on as the metagame develops, then just support our fellow Smash 4 players. Every game, or mod, can be competitive and develop a competitive scene. There is nothing that isn't competitive about any Smash game to date.

I mean not saying I disliked Smash 4. Smash 3DS is much, MUCH better than it's previous iteration Brawl, and I can see it having it's own metagame. Personally and competitvely, I prefer PM but only by a hair, a really tiny hair I might add, but even on the 3DS I see it having greater potential to be a competitive game.

 

[shapular]

I mean either way I see tournaments for Smash 4, just I see PM / Melee having more tournaments. I sware everytime there's a stream seen on Smashboards 70% of the time it's PM or Melee.

Wait, what does that have to do with stages? And yeah, given how hard 3DS is to stream, Melee and PM streams should be more common. Although it seems like most days a 3DS stream is on top.

 

[Zoa]

I mean not saying I disliked Smash 4. Smash 3DS is much, MUCH better than it's previous iteration Brawl, and I can see it having it's own metagame. Personally and competitvely, I prefer PM but only by a hair, a really tiny hair I might add, but even on the 3DS I see it having greater potential to be a competitive game.

I never accused you of anything. Everyone has their preferences. Just be logical about it.

 

[Paquito]

Not bashing this post or this user in particular (okay, maybe this post), but **** like this annoys the Hell out of me. "It's doesn't have X mechanic from Y game, so it's not competitive".

Well, we know Brawl was intentionally designed by Masahiro Sakurai to massively lower the skill ceiling that was discovered in Melee, because he found the competitive scene so distasteful.

We also know that he's stated that sm4sh's gameplay is a "middle ground" between Brawl and Melee.

Maybe "not competitive" isn't the right phrase, but a game that's the middle ground between a competitive game and a game intentionally designed to nerf competitiveness is... going to be less competitive than it could be, otherwise.

 

[Paquito]

Incidentally, does anyone have a link that describes why Sakurai made the gameplay decisions he did with sm4sh?

 

[Fortress]

Well, we know Brawl was intentionally designed by Masahiro Sakurai to massively lower the skill ceiling that was discovered in Melee, because he found the competitive scene so distasteful.

We also know that he's stated that sm4sh's gameplay is a "middle ground" between Brawl and Melee.

Maybe "not competitive" isn't the right phrase, but a game that's the middle ground between a competitive game and a game intentionally designed to nerf competitiveness is... going to be less competitive than it could be, otherwise.

No, it's not a middle ground between any of those things. It's tightening up the experience such that it's more consistent, accessible, and enjoyable by a larger amount of players. That in itself does nothing but help Sm4sh be a more tournament-appropriate title than any of the others in the series. The only thing holding it back is its own community who has gems to say about its own game such as:

but a game that's the middle ground between a competitive game and a game intentionally designed to nerf competitiveness

That kind of **** right there? The players of this game, its own community? They're the ones saying "yeah, our game isn't competitive", and it's no wonder why communities of other titles like Street Fighter can't even begin to start taking Smash seriously. I mean, how can they be expected to when our own community cannot find itself doing the same?

 

[Paquito]

No, it's not a middle ground between any of those things...
That kind of **** right there? The players of this game, its own community? They're the ones saying "yeah, our game isn't competitive"

Ummmm, let me introduce you to the director of Smash Brother's. Masahiro Sakurai!

I would consider the changes that we're making this time around not as fixes, but that we're changing the direction. And so the vision for the overall balance of the game in Smash Bros Melee, it was sort of more focused towards more hardcore players. Then when it came around to making Brawl, this was a game that was targeting a Wii audience where there were a lot of beginner players, so it sort of leaned a little bit more in that direction. So now, for this time around, we're sort of aiming for something that is in between those as far as the speed of the game. Because I don't really think this time we're in a situation where we're trying to accommodate that many new players.

Source

Here's more:

Kotaku: Do you ever talk to the high-level competitive players when you're balancing Smash Bros.?

Sakurai: Mostly I don't incorporate feedback like that. Basically, Smash Bros. is designed to be sort of targeted at the center, intermediate players, and if you think of sort of a skill graph or something where if you're targeting just the peak of that performance level, you're targeting a very small group of people. We wanna avoid a situation where it becomes a game sort of like other competitive fighting games, where it's only apreciated by a very small, passionate group of sort of maniac players. We definitely don't want that sort of situation. It's supposed to be a fun game for a wide variety of people.

Source

That last quote is sooooooooooooo face-palm inducing. He states in one interview that Melee was focused towards "more hardcore players". Did that focus cause Melee to be appreciated by only a "small, passionate group of sort of maniac players?" Not at all. Items, alternate game modes, and even regular 4 player battles were all things that drew more casual players in. The mere existence of a high skill ceiling doesn't prevent casual players from enjoying a game they love.

 

[Fortress]

Cool, you linked me to a bunch of things somebody else said, I totally see that you're right now.

>Kotaku

Go back, read what I actually said, and actually read it. I mentioned that one of the specific strengths of Sm4sh is that it is targeting a wider audience, and with support from the publisher (Nintendo), Sm4sh has even more potential than any game before it to advance the competitive Smash scene as a whole. I never mentioned Smash 4 being some kind of balance between Melee and Brawl, because it's not related to the point I'm presenting.

Which, now that I think about it, I actually do have to spell out for you: Sm4sh is just as competitive as the titles before it, and has the potential to be a stronger competitive game with its stronger accessibility, deep metagame to help develop, new entrants to the series, and direct support from the publisher of the title.

 

[Paquito]

Cool, you linked me to a bunch of things somebody else said

Holy crap dude, take off your fan boy goggles. I'm quoting the director of Melee, Brawl, and Sm4sh. The things he says about the design of these games are... facts.

I never mentioned Smash 4 being some kind of balance between Melee and Brawl

You're right, you didn't mention it, I mentioned it, as a fact explained by the director of the game. You insisted I was wrong, and are currently trying to backtrack.

 

[Rhubarbo]

Which, now that I think about it, I actually do have to spell out for you: Sm4sh is just as competitive as the titles before it, and has the potential to be a stronger competitive game with its stronger accessibility, deep metagame to help develop, new entrants to the series, and direct support from the publisher of the title.

1) Arguing a game's competitiveness these days is indefinitely moot because of how malleable the word "competitive" has become. By simply aspiring to the lowest common denominator (what should emerge a common theme in this discussion), a game is competitive insofar that people play it among one another with a passion to beat their opponent. Thus, we should try to determine Smash 4's merit in a more tangible sense, so I reason that we should instead try to figure out Smash 4's skill ceiling.

2) Accessibility is a double edged sword. Sure, accessibility attracts more players, but that's not necessarily a good thing. You have to factor in who wants to play an easier game. I predict that Smash 4 will attract many cas-core fans. Individually, these players will not attend tournaments at the same frequency as hardcore fans, but they will flock to major Smash 4 tournaments in droves. They'll do this for a year or two and then **kapoot**. My fear is that the Smash community will shift its infrastructure to support these transient cas(h)-cores, and when they eventually dip, they'll reveal a huge void. In the meantime, hardcore community leaders will have lost interest and left the scene, the community will face an identity crisis, and the overall enthusiasm for the franchise will be worse off than it was before 2014.

Why am I being so specific? Because this has happened before, circa 2008. 2013 saw a huge resurgence in our community thanks to the Mother Game, but as Melee grows older by the year, it's less likely to bring back the enlivening hardcores after every casual-flood along the way. (This is why I firmly believe Project M has to buckle up and establish its self as the premier competitive Smash game; Project M has the ability to stay fresh.)

A high skill barrier not only makes the game more interesting in and of itself, but it also attracts a dedicated fan-base. One Mango is worth 1,000 Michaels arguing who's more powerful - Ganon or Ike?

3) Smash 4's metagame is unproven, but maybe that's your point. Well, in that case, we have to asses just how optimistic we can be at the moment. Since Smash 4 is mechanically similar to Brawl, there's a great reason to be pessimistic right from the start. Sure, a bunch of new ATs may be found along the way, sure Smash 4 may prove its self supremely balanced, but that still doesn't shake Smash 4's core problem. Since blocking and evading maneuvers aren't skillfully demanding in Smash Bros., meaningful player interaction is fundamentally dependent on offence. Since defence is exceptionally easy in Smash 4 (see low shield-stun, air dodges, rolling, and so on), offence is neutered by proxy. Moreover, offence is directly nerfed thanks to ludicrous knockback, forgiving ledge mechanics, and several ways to escape hitstun. If the main interactive component of Smash Bros. is subdued in Smash 4, there is a good reason to be pessimistic about its meta going forward.

4) By new entrants, do you mean new players? I've already made it clear why I believe new players aren't necessarily a good thing, so instead I'll talk about new characters.

Is there any Smash 4 newcomer who you can't live without? I like a bunch of the new characters, namely Little Mac, Pac-Man, and Robin, but I can live without any of them. There are only so many viable play styles within the Smash Bros. engine and I firmly believe that Project M can foster greater play-style diversity that Smash 4 since its character designs are practically oriented. Smash 4's newcomers are notorious for their evident gimmicks, but I think Project M does better in that department. Instead of having frivolous junk like Robin's limited tomes or Little Mac's KO punch, Project M has stuff like Lucas's charge-up and Lucario's aura/on-hit-cancels; Smash 4 has quirky dynamics, whereas Project M has gimmicks that encourage meaningful game play.

5) Direct support from the publisher killed Project M at Apex. Nintendo may host a flurry of Smash 4 tournaments, but they'll be cas-core fests like the E3 invitational.