Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Here's some advice; read past the first post. Not only have the "Sheik haters" totally destroyed the arguments in the first post, but it's been proven that the spell name changes, along with Zelda's supposed down B, have been proven fake. They remain the same as the previous game.
It so doesn't, there's absolutely no need to hide Sheik for more than 6 months, obviously something's changed or we would've already gotten a Sheik update, I think keeping her down B hidden all this time, hurts her chances a lot.
Neither is correct.
Of course it hurts her chances, Sakurai is never keen on hiding veteran characters, notice how he, himself leaked DK and Peach before they were even updated on the Dojo it would make sense for him to hide Samus's transformation cause it's something new but to hide a veteran like Sheik is absolutely pointless, I'm almost positive that something else will be taking Zelda's down B and hopefully it won't be a transformation.
i hope to quote you on this, and make you say it online, on Feb. 10, even if it means i might have to buy you a copy of smash
The thing I hate most is...
DK was shown in the 15 second movie from E3 2007 before he was shown on the Dojo, and Peach was seen in one of the Subspace Emissary movies on the Dojo before she had a character page added.
Zelda could have a new transformation.
wich means brawl zelda has nothing of OoT Zelda, meaning that brawl has some kind of continuity
Character select screens establish a rule, you know: the rule being “you're going to play as this character for the game.”
Incorrect. What was in previous Smash games was a set-up. NOT a narrative. Not even an "incredibly light narrative." There were blank, empty cut-scenes that functioned as fancy loading screens to introduce the next fight in a flashy way. There was no threaded story being told. There was no character development. There were just fancy transitions between fights.
Brawl's cut-scenes are going to be just as empty as the previous games. They're still going to be loading screens disguised as "transitions." The opening cinema to the game is still just a fancy way of starting the game. Nothing more. There is still going to be no narrative. Simple, light, or otherwise.
Why are you hiding behind this meandering pedantic “philosophical” rationalization? Because if you want to get really “heady” here, you have a point to prove just as much as I do. Why? Because for this discussion, Brawl is neither “consistent” nor “inconsistent” until one of us can supply suitable evidence either way. If there is no discussion engaged in by both sides, the subject is blank, because no consensus has been reached. After all, the ultimate goal of this discussion is to decide whether Brawl is internally consistent or inconsistent. Therefore, at the beginning of the discussion, neither can truly claim it to be either. Therefore, you have absolutely no logical grounds on which to stand to state Brawl is consistent until proven otherwise. So if you want to continue to pull this “Well I don’t have anything to prove here but you do” schlock, there’s no doubt in my mind that you are just playing philosopher here rather than being a philosopher. Because any self-respecting philosophy student would be more than willing to engage in such a debate where they are also actively trying to prove a point. So my question to you is…would you care to try again?
Remember, though. Those other two items were still from Ocarina of Time, my little green friend. Therefore, Smash Bros was still externally consistent with its template game. You have yet to satisfactorily prove anything.
When the "source character" didn't use X item in the source game, that item was still modeled after an item in the source game (silver arrows, fire arrows, boomerang, hookshot, etc). Therefore, Smash Bros was still consistent with the template game. Furthermore, you have yet to satisfactorily prove anything.
Then if you’re letting bias seep into this discussion to where you’re incorrectly attributing items to particular games in a franchise, I question how fair you can be to the rest of this discussion. Accuse me of ad hominem if you must, but we all know that accusing someone of using ad hominem is just yet another meandering, pedantic “philosophical” safety net. Regarding “they weren’t in OoT” remember that even though silver arrows debuted in the original Legend of Zelda, they were still given an Ocarina of Time re-vision. Therefore, Ocarina of Time was still the template game for Link in Smash Bros Melee.
This is a fighting game. In fighting games, it’s not at all a “common technique” to give the player the choice of FOUR or more characters to “do something.” In fighting games, you select your solitary fighter at the character select screen and play with that character throughout the single-player mode. You can select a new character only after a game-over. Smash Bros is a fighting game, first and foremost. Therefore, throwing four different team combinations at you at random intervals in the game, after you’ve chosen a character at the beginning of the game, is illogical and inconsistent with Smash Bros’ fighting game foundation.
How was it consistent with itself?
Internal consistency, how? How was it internally consistent? Only because Smash Bros ignored external narratives? That’s a flimsy argument. You said, “Brawl [made an internally consistent cross-over] by establishing from the beginning that the narratives that the characters came from are not related to brawl.” Anyone would read that and see you making the connection between “ignoring external narratives” and “establishing internal narratives,” as if “ignoring external narratives” was the cause, and “establishing internal narratives” was the effect. Keep in mind that the only way to create internal consistency in this case is through establishing an internal narrative. And the only way to establish an internal narrative in a cross-over fighting game like Smash Bros is to ignore external narratives. This is no Straw-Man Fallacy I’m using. I’m pointing out how you’re trying to dance around gaps in your own “logic.”
Define “unrelated book.” It’s a vague term and you as a philosophy student should know better than to use such a lousy phrase. Regarding your views on Smash’s “internal narrative”…there is no “internal narrative” in Smash Bros.
First, the very idea of “suspension of disbelief” relates to an active decision. In fact, “suspension of disbelief” does not even exist. It is half-a-phrase used by people who genuinely do not understand the dynamics of the principle. Because your disbelief cannot suspend itself. Suspending anything requires an agent to perform the action of suspension. But in “suspension of disbelief” there is nothing, whether explicit or implicit, to perform the act of suspending the disbelief. And for that matter, whose disbelief? Why would the disbelief be suspended? Who is performing the suspending? None of those questions are answered when you use “suspension of disbelief.” “Suspension of disbelief” is an empty phrase. It means nothing. At all. So stop using it.
If I had to venture a guess...it would be that the OP's argument was based on the idea that Smash Bros/SSE was logical and consistent. So if we talk about logic and consistency (or the lack thereof) in Smash Bros, the discussion is perfectly legitimate and on-topic. If Sheik is in Brawl because the single-player campaign operates on some sort of consistent logic, all the more reason to really get in there and wrestle the idea around a bit.
I like how you explain it. I dont think Sakurai even looks so deeply into a character's relation as far as why sheik shouldn't be in. The only problem i see is if sakurai has a new desiegn for sheik and if not is she still a PC in brawl. Besides why would Sakurai ask for something he's not going to use.
Really, what Melee videos?? There was barely any... in Adventure mode I only recall zooming on the stage, Luigi jumping over Mario, eh, the Metal Bros. appeaing and the Giga Bowser transformation. You don't even KNOW how you go from place to place. IMO taking that into account the videos from Brawl are twofold better than Melee's.
Anything that describes events, real or fictional, is a narrative.
You seem to be redefining narrative to have some basis in quality...
You seem to be missing the point...
The fact that they were from ocarina of time doesn't make them externally consistent.
It's inconsistent with the CHARACTER, not the item, the character.
*Possible Spoilers*
Genre classifications do not make something internally inconsistent.
By lacking contradictions, it's that simple.
Again, you are being far too strict in your definition of narrative.
Again, narrative is just detailing of events, real or fictional.
Again, confusing good narrative with narrative. There is a detailing of events, obviously with very little background information, but that means it's a bad narrative, not that it's inconsistent.
In other words, not a fanfiction of that work or anything else which directly utilizes the source material. It wasn't lousy, it was intended so it could refer to a wide variety of different things.
"suspending" means to stop temporarily, inattention can cause one to stop doing something just as easily as an active effort. If one suspends pulling on a rope because they saw something shiny and wanted to pick it up, they did not intend to stop pulling on the rope, they intended to do something else, hence a suspension not directly willed. It still has an agent, but that doesn't mean it must be willing.
When the observer reads a story that is very well-written and doesn't have to do it actively, it is still suspension of disbelief. That same person is still suspending disbelief, actions made through inattention (or in this case, a lack of an action) are still actions.
I'll bet you there are all of 26 people who believe the premise of Harry Potter, yet when reading the book, they do not question, they suspend their disbelief by inattention to the fact that this cannot happen in the real world.
When reading the book you have to deal with time-traveling, that if where one suspends one's belief.
Again, not the point... You are continuing to confuse the quality of the work with it's existence.
Except I never said that fanfiction was no different from any other work of the medium, I said that it is poorer in quality in general, and pretty much stated that you pointed out why this is true.
I'm not trying to be a **** or anything. But is it really, truly, that much better of a cut-scene because there are a few extra seconds of CG footage? Even with seeing Fox's ship downed in the jungle...that video is still no different than Giga Bowser's transformation in Melee. It's still a blank transition.
Meh. It's a fighting game. Fundamentally, nothing's changed since the original Street Fighter and MK1. These aren't stories. They're just brief little snippets that happen before the game starts, and then have no bearing whatsoever on 99% of the actual gameplay.
Eh... Because I changed my mind and I can be in any thread I please.It's a very pointless question.
