Top 3 Advanced Techniques you'd like to see returning in smash 4 and not Returning

[mimgrim]

Return (in no paticular order);
Wave Dashing
Crouch Canceling
Dash Dancing
Prefect/Power Shielding
OoS shiz

Not return;
Infinities (they migh work in MvC3, however imo they don't work in a game like Smash)
L-Cancle (just reduce landing lag by a considerable amount instead X_X)
DACUS

 

[Ulevo]

Might I ask what this other benefit is? I mean, I get the proposed argument for those who want to take it out, but I still feel like it adds depth. It allows for a punish game for going in too deep. I mean sure, you could just halve the landing lag, but if L-cancelling was unknown, then people wouldn't go for the flashy and risky stuff that is part of the metagame. I feel like having the ability to punish your opponent in a game with pressure like Melee adds depth based on the same argument they have for L-cancelling not adding depth. It is all in the presentation of information I guess. Thanks for the viewpoint of others that I missed out on (my noob is showing again x.x).

The thing is though is it isn't L-Cancelling that allows you to punish your opponent. It's the effect that L-Cancelling has on your landing lag. Depth is an element that requires the player to choose between a variety of relevant options. However, since L-Cancelling is always the correct decision, there is no depth since the choice is made for you. From there it comes down to execution.

The proposed argument I make is that it adds an element of satisfaction to the game. There are many examples of pure technical barriers in place in fighting games, as well as other games, that are put there simply to challenge the player through their ability to ascend mechanically. It's a way of rewarding the player for their hard work, time, and dedication. It feels good to do it, and you feel excited knowing you performed it correctly. And given how easy L-Cancelling is to do, it seems reasonable. If you can learn to ride a bicycle, you can certainly L-Cancel in Smash.

Just because something is included that doesn't add perceivable depth doesn't mean it doesn't serve an important purpose. Those are the reasons I personally enjoy L-Cancelling, and I think it is an important consideration. Ultimately though it comes down to design philosophy, and whether or not you want your game to have a certain level of technical challenge, if at all.

 

[Double Helix]

The thing is though is it isn't L-Cancelling that allows you to punish your opponent. It's the effect that L-Cancelling has on your landing lag. Depth is an element that requires the player to choose between a variety of relevant options. However, since L-Cancelling is always the correct decision, there is no depth since the choice is made for you.

The proposed argument I make is that it adds an element of satisfaction to the game.

Just because something is included that doesn't add perceivable depth doesn't mean it doesn't serve an important purpose. Those are the reasons I personally enjoy L-Cancelling, and I think it is an important consideration. Ultimately though it comes down to design philosophy, and whether or not you want your game to have a certain level of technical challenge, if at all.

Makes sense. Though I don't think I am wrong I guess that depth is the wrong word for me to use...I just can't think of it. Maybe it is that it adds a level of interaction that wouldn't be there if L-cancelling were gone? Either way, I guess you are right in that it doesn't add depth, but I feel it adds more than just satisfaction (though that does help).

 

[GreatGonzales]

The thing is though is it isn't L-Cancelling that allows you to punish your opponent. It's the effect that L-Cancelling has on your landing lag. Depth is an element that requires the player to choose between a variety of relevant options. However, since L-Cancelling is always the correct decision, there is no depth since the choice is made for you. From there it comes down to execution.

The proposed argument I make is that it adds an element of satisfaction to the game. There are many examples of pure technical barriers in place in fighting games, as well as other games, that are put there simply to challenge the player through their ability to ascend mechanically. It's a way of rewarding the player for their hard work, time, and dedication. It feels good to do it, and you feel excited knowing you performed it correctly. And given how easy L-Cancelling is to do, it seems reasonable. If you can learn to ride a bicycle, you can certainly L-Cancel in Smash.

Just because something is included that doesn't add perceivable depth doesn't mean it doesn't serve an important purpose. Those are the reasons I personally enjoy L-Cancelling, and I think it is an important consideration. Ultimately though it comes down to design philosophy, and whether or not you want your game to have a certain level of technical challenge, if at all.

This is the most cogent argument I've read yet in favor of eliminating l canceling. Thanks - you may have convinced me.

 

[Ulevo]

This is the most cogent argument I've read yet in favor of eliminating l canceling. Thanks - you may have convinced me.

 

[Double Helix]

I'm no pony fan, but c'mon man. That made him quite sad lol. He wants L-cancelling in the game. XD He just feels that my argument was incorrect. So he went about correcting me. Unfortunately, for the first time again today, I was wrong, but we both support L-cancelling I am pretty sure.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I have a theory on why L-canceling is not received so well among some people.

The thing with L-canceling is that it is executed by pressing L or R before you hit the ground. The L and R buttons are for shielding, so when a newer player is executing it is they think "why would I shield after an attack?". It feels counter intuitive to the player because when you are being offensive, you are in a sense being defensive. Maybe if there was an input for L-canceling that made more sense to the player it would be appreciated more. I personally don't have a problem with doing it as it just becomes muscle memory for a while, but bare in mind a lot of casual players don't use the shield button (in my experience) for the most part, so to them it seems like a waste. So I ask, what kind input or prerequisite should be met to perform a cancel besides using L or R? Any ideas?

 

[Ulevo]

I don't know. I think it's a lot more simple then that honestly.

 

[Ussi]

Return:
Crouch cancel
Jumps keeping momentum from running
Projectile reflect powershield

Not return:
4 frame powershield
Grab armor

 

[Mind Ranger]

No tripping I guess.

Wave dashing is not coming back....

 

[Renji64]

Dash dancing L-caceling would be more than enough for me to settle.

 

[Michael Blaine]

Bring all of them back. And if the playpen known as "Brawl" has any...best just leave those out. Package the game with Gerber applesauce and some Johnson & Johnson baby wipes for anyone that can't handle it.

 

[Dash000]

@Ulevo: L-cancelling alone allows so much depth to the game. Not missing allows for amazing follow-ups and missing causes punishes. There is a lot more too it than that, but it basically adds more to the game than it looks like, because it isn't completely ridiculous like Z-cancelling, but without it the decision-making process is very different. Also you get to use cool moves like Link's dair and Bowser's bair. Seriously, who could hate those moves?

So, then have automatic L-cancelling, still gives the same opportunities but people won't hate on it as much, lol

 

[Double Helix]

So, then have automatic L-cancelling, still gives the same opportunities but people won't hate on it as much, lol

Nooooo. Having auto L-cancels gives too much of an advantage for the offensive player. L-cancelling adds a level of interaction between the offense and defense, like, punishing missed L-cancels, but if they hit the L-cancel, nair out of shield to get out of pressure

 

[wizards64]

I think it would be best if Smash 4 is created in Project M's direction, that game has excellent balance of AT's from all the games.

 

[Double Helix]

As long as Smash 4's physics actually feel like physics should. PM is a great idea and the creators are doing a good job with it, but unless 2.6 changed the physics a lot (haven't gotten a chance to download it), so far the physics and the AT's feel forced and unnatural.

 

[wizards64]

As long as Smash 4's physics actually feel like physics should. PM is a great idea and the creators are doing a good job with it, but unless 2.6 changed the physics a lot (haven't gotten a chance to download it), so far the physics and the AT's feel forced and unnatural.

Agreed, PM does feel really forceful and I really dislike playing fox in it cause he feels the most unnatural to me. 2.6 seems interesting now that it has MK I hope the feel did improve.

 

[Raccoon Chuck]

WaveDashing, MoonWalking, L-Canceling, FastFalling, Air Teching, WallTripDashing, KneeDashDoubleBladeTeamZooming, and Running.

 

[[Corn]]

As long as Smash 4's physics actually feel like physics should. PM is a great idea and the creators are doing a good job with it, but unless 2.6 changed the physics a lot (haven't gotten a chance to download it), so far the physics and the AT's feel forced and unnatural.

Lol at physics feeling like physics.

 

[Raccoon Chuck]

Considering we only saw an early build of the game, I find that these statements of "It's gun b the same as Barwl", to be lacking any cohesive evidence. Given the fact that Brawl used the Melee engine in it's early build, we could see an entirely different engine in the coming months. I'm positive Brawl is NOT the way Sakurai wants the engine to emulate, given he has already stated that Melee is his personal favorite, public awareness of competitive play has grown substantially due to EVO, Brawl is notorious for being built for casuals; with mechanics that chain one's competitive play, he has stated that he wishes to cater to both crowds (something that Melee and 64 already do very well) etc.

 

[Double Helix]

Lol at physics feeling like physics.

Sorry, but I meant they should feel complete, smooth, and unforced. You know, like a finished game (and yes I know, PM is not).

Considering we only saw an early build of the game, I find that these statements of "It's gun b the same as Barwl", to be lacking any cohesive evidence. Given the fact that Brawl used the Melee engine in it's early build, we could see an entirely different engine in the coming months. I'm positive Brawl is NOT the way Sakurai wants the engine to emulate, given he has already stated that Melee is his personal favorite, public awareness of competitive play has grown substantially due to EVO, Brawl is notorious for being built for casuals; with mechanics that chain one's competitive play, he has stated that he wishes to cater to both crowds (something that Melee and 64 already do very well) etc.

It is mostly speculated that it will be in between Brawl and Melee in terms of physics, and tripping will be taken out. I think the statement "It's gun b the same as Barwl" is basically catering to the very small portion of the community that wants Melee 2.0. Most people that want a game more like Melee do not want Melee 2.0, but a game that has the speed and technical ceiling of Melee, or maybe higher.

All of this said, I may be a Melee player, but I do enjoy watching higher level Brawl. It is good to see people play their favorite game despite the game attacking our community as a whole. Also, would anyone want to see Marvel come back to Smash Bros? I feel like Smash64 is basically Super Smash Bros. Marvel, even though it came before Marvel.

 

[Snakeyes]

Returning:

Moonwalking
Ledge-canceling
Reverse Aerial Rush

I also want things like dash-dancing and shield grabbing to return, but they're not really advanced.

Not returning:

L-canceling - Just reduce landing lag across the board.
Wavedashing - Make it an official technique.
Shine-canceling