What if Smash 4 turned out to be a great competitive game?

[ChikoLad]

The way I see it, there will always be Melee elitists, always, because it's simply the most prominent game for serious Smash play, historically speaking. It's where the scene really got it's identity. For some, Melee is life. Some make a living off the game, even. And if not that, playing in Smash tournaments is a very extensive hobby for them. So while I don't think anyone should really be treating the game like a holy grail or should bash other games because they love Melee too much, the logic behind such a stance is actually not far fetched at all. If something has brought many people great fortune for a long time and has given them a community to feel at home within, then of course, said thing will be idolised. Anything that seems like it's contesting the long accepted traditions (in this case, unfortunately, Smash 4 may be viewed as contesting Melee), is something elitists will oppose, even if the new "contender" has no intention of opposing anything and may simply be an alternative or a co-operative (in this case, Smash 4 really is simultaneously an alternative game that also means to co-operate fans of the Melee scene, since most people riding the Smash 4 hype train really like Melee anyway).

While I won't go any further with the following comparison to save unnecessary and off-topic controversy, I will just say that I feel if one has any knowledge on the history of religious denominations, they will understand the current controversies in the Smash community. Everyone just keeps thinking they have a target painted on top of them, and that everyone else has a target, when there really is no need to think such a way.

At the end of the day, I think most arguments in the Smash community are caused from the fear that one game will be overshadowed. Melee elitists may fear Melee will be overshadowed by Smash 4, Smash 4 enthusiasts (there aren't really any elitists for Smash 4 YET, since the game isn't out) fear the game will be met with little fanfare because of the Melee elitists.

But no matter what happens, the Smash community as a whole will thrive. Assuming Smash 4 is a perfectly valid and deep competitive game with as much potential as Melee, then more people will inevitably aim to play Smash at a professional level, and there will be a new game to support the scene in the long run. Everybody wins. Melee won't go anywhere either, since it has it's loyal fans, some of whom may also play Smash 4.

And if Smash 4 turns out to be the worst competitive game ever, and absolutely cannot be supported in tournaments, people will still be drawn to the Smash community, as regardless of how Smash 4 is in the long run, it's going to get tournaments and such in that first year or so - "the honeymoon period", as people refer to it as. People will be drawn to the community that way, and may pick up Melee once Smash 4 tournament hype dies down. And Smash 4 will die fast in this scenario, since people will have a lot less tolerance for a shaky competitive game after Brawl, and Melee will continue to be the main game of the Smash community at large.

So yeah, getting overly defensive of Melee, while being something I can empathise with, is not warranted, since Melee is the only scene that will inevitably benefit regardless of Smash 4's viability and success in the professional's eye. While in Smash 4's case, it only benefits if it's successful. So either, Smash as a whole benefits, and Melee is going to benefit. Melee fans can really just rest easy, things will be fine for them. The only concern left is if Smash 4 can do well on it's own merits, as it is a very different Smash game, and hopefully, that will work to it's advantage.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

It's really pretty simple.

The truth of the matter is that Melee enthusiasts actually have nothing to lose. If Smash 4 succeeds, it just does. If it doesn't, they can keep on playing Melee.

Then you have a large breadth of folks who want something new and fresh. Smash 4 is the beam of hope for those types of players, like myself. This makes reading hate and unwarranted criticism on the game much more difficult, especially when it comes from players who will be unaffected either way. If Smash 4 fails, the franchise essentially loses its luster to me. I loved 64 when it was current, I loved Melee when it was current, and I even liked Brawl for what it is while it was current...but this iteration, whether it's objectively "bad" or "good" needs to get the respect it deserves in terms of the effort that's going in to its development. If Smash 4 fails to be an enticing game, the series itself would lose its luster to me because I have grown bored and tired of the same old for about a decade long.

This is why things are looking up. Smash 4 looks great. I'm totally hyped to play it, for long-ass hours every day.

That's why arguments spark, Melee enthusiasts are basically ****ting on what many players would see as their next or "last hope" for revitalizing the franchise's feel, and players hopeful for Smash 4 essentially cannot retaliate, because the former has their good pal Melee to fall back on and tout, given its competitive success.

It's really an issue of being cruelly unfair to Smash 4. When the game comes out we shall see how things unfold, and that's simply how we wish Melee enthusiasts to think. Not "Nah it's gonna be terrible and Brawl 2.0", even though a large % of the folks saying this have either not even played it yet, or are going completely off of one 2 minute FFA game. Many statements made by professional players have even been deemed inaccurate and lacking in credibility due to finds later on!

We're all just getting restless, really.

 

[RanserSSF4]

It's really pretty simple.

The truth of the matter is that Melee enthusiasts actually have nothing to lose. If Smash 4 succeeds, it just does. If it doesn't, they can keep on playing Melee.

Then you have a large breadth of folks who want something new and fresh. Smash 4 is the beam of hope for those types of players, like myself. This makes reading hate and unwarranted criticism on the game much more difficult, especially when it comes from players who will be unaffected either way. If Smash 4 fails, the franchise essentially loses its luster to me. I loved 64 when it was current, I loved Melee when it was current, and I even liked Brawl for what it is while it was current...but this iteration, whether it's objectively "bad" or "good" needs to get the respect it deserves in terms of the effort that's going in to its development. If Smash 4 fails to be an enticing game, the series itself would lose its luster to me because I have grown bored and tired of the same old for about a decade long.

This is why things are looking up. Smash 4 looks great. I'm totally hyped to play it, for long-*** hours every day.

That's why arguments spark, Melee enthusiasts are basically ****ting on what many players would see as their next or "last hope" for revitalizing the franchise's feel, and players hopeful for Smash 4 essentially cannot retaliate, because the former has their good pal Melee to fall back on and tout, given its competitive success.

It's really an issue of being cruelly unfair to Smash 4. When the game comes out we shall see how things unfold, and that's simply how we wish Melee enthusiasts to think. Not "Nah it's gonna be terrible and Brawl 2.0", even though a large % of the folks saying this have either not even played it yet, or are going completely off of one 2 minute FFA game. Many statements made by professional players have even been deemed inaccurate and lacking in credibility due to finds later on!

We're all just getting restless, really.

i personally know how you feel. i love the competitive side of melee, but i want Smash 4 to be it's own game and i want it to be fresh and new and a big improvement from brawl.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I want it to be competitively good so people can finally shut their ****ing mouths about games that I love.

Easy, bro...

 

[victinivcreate1]

It's really pretty simple.

The truth of the matter is that Melee enthusiasts actually have nothing to lose. If Smash 4 succeeds, it just does. If it doesn't, they can keep on playing Melee.

Then you have a large breadth of folks who want something new and fresh. Smash 4 is the beam of hope for those types of players, like myself. This makes reading hate and unwarranted criticism on the game much more difficult, especially when it comes from players who will be unaffected either way. If Smash 4 fails, the franchise essentially loses its luster to me. I loved 64 when it was current, I loved Melee when it was current, and I even liked Brawl for what it is while it was current...but this iteration, whether it's objectively "bad" or "good" needs to get the respect it deserves in terms of the effort that's going in to its development. If Smash 4 fails to be an enticing game, the series itself would lose its luster to me because I have grown bored and tired of the same old for about a decade long.

This is why things are looking up. Smash 4 looks great. I'm totally hyped to play it, for long-*** hours every day.

That's why arguments spark, Melee enthusiasts are basically ****ting on what many players would see as their next or "last hope" for revitalizing the franchise's feel, and players hopeful for Smash 4 essentially cannot retaliate, because the former has their good pal Melee to fall back on and tout, given its competitive success.

It's really an issue of being cruelly unfair to Smash 4. When the game comes out we shall see how things unfold, and that's simply how we wish Melee enthusiasts to think. Not "Nah it's gonna be terrible and Brawl 2.0", even though a large % of the folks saying this have either not even played it yet, or are going completely off of one 2 minute FFA game. Many statements made by professional players have even been deemed inaccurate and lacking in credibility due to finds later on!

We're all just getting restless, really.

I've repeatedly said that I've had an hour and a half of experience with this game, and I can safely say its similar to Brawl, significantly moreso than it is to Melee.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

I've repeatedly said that I've had an hour and a half of experience with this game, and I can safely say its similar to Brawl, significantly moreso than it is to Melee.

I've heard reports that the dude who won the SDCC tournament says it feels more similar to Smash 64.

 

[victinivcreate1]

I've heard reports that the dude who won the SDCC tournament says it feels more similar to Smash 64.

I could agree to that too. But 64 without L-Cancelling was slow. And the shields are wayyy better than 64. And hitstun is wayyy less.

 

[Deleted member]

I've heard reports that the dude who won the SDCC tournament says it feels more similar to Smash 64.

I heard a certain person claim Smash 4 feels like PM...a lot of people dismiss it as Brawl 2.0...and now someone else is saying it plays like 64. At this point, I don't know what to believe about the game. If the game turns out to be competitive in a Melee-esque way, that's great, but it probably won't be. Either way, I'm gonna give the game a chance and try to enjoy it like we all should.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

I could agree to that too. But 64 without L-Cancelling was slow. And the shields are wayyy better than 64. And hitstun is wayyy less.

Except you don't need L-cancelling in Smash 4 (much...) because of auto-cancelling aerials. You know that Fox DAir drill combo? Yeah, that's pretty much a thing again, 'cause DAir auto-cancels.

 

[topspin1617]

I've repeatedly said that I've had an hour and a half of experience with this game, and I can safely say its similar to Brawl, significantly moreso than it is to Melee.

I don't... is this a joke?

"Trust me, I played for an hour."

I think it's to be expected that this game have more in common with Brawl than Melee... it only makes sense to build off your latest iteration. However, there's enough different from Brawl to make Smash 4 completely its own game, with its own metagame to develop after release.

Smash 4 may or may not end up as "good" as Melee, but I think saying "it's more similar to Brawl than Melee" and then using that as a reason to dismiss it is not being fair to this game at all.

I'm really, really hoping that Smash 4 isn't pushed aside just because people have bad memories of trying to move from Melee to Brawl.

 

[victinivcreate1]

Except you don't need L-cancelling in Smash 4 (much...) because of auto-cancelling aerials. You know that Fox DAir drill combo? Yeah, that's pretty much a thing again, 'cause DAir auto-cancels.

Yeah but auto cancel aerials on shield just get blocked and X aerial OOS. Most auto cancel aerials are rising. Rising aerials get stuffed. I mained Marth in Brawl, I know that autocancelss are not what they're made out to be.

@ T topspin1617
An hour and a half is more experience than you have. Also I likely am one of the few people who have played this game for more than 3 rounds. Me, Venks, Shokio, and probably a few others.

 

[Mechonis]

Regardless if it's competitive or not....

I just want the game now, lol. XD

Oh well, every bit of extra time for development and such is good.

 

[MontyMonterson]

I hope it plays like Smash 4, just like every Smash game in the series had its own identity. But just the fact that stages will be more varied due to the Final Destination versions already puts it leagues ahead of Melee and Brawl when it comes to competitive Smash as a spectator; but that could easily be ruined by imbalanced characters, which I'm hoping is not the case since Sakurai and his team addressed they're working hard on balancing the characters. As much as I love Melee, I'm just ready for something new and fresh. Can't wait to play it for the first time thursday at Gamescom.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Most casuals don't even understand what tiers are and how they are determined. Hell, when I first started playing Smash years ago I thought tiers were a scapegoat for why no one used characters like Mewtwo or Bowser. I just didn't understand.

Ignorance can be cured with careful explanation.

I thought worse than that during my own casual years. I thought tiers were purposely engineered and rigged to make sure everyone played as the top players' personal favorite character, and I was constantly going on about how nobody dare make a tier list for Super Smash Flash 2, the only Smash game not (yet) "tainted" by "tourneytards".

But then I went back in time and shot my past self because he was being a ****ing idiot who gave me self-inflicted bad memories that I'll regret for the rest of my life.

 

[Aninymouse]

I've repeatedly said that I've had an hour and a half of experience with this game, and I can safely say its similar to Brawl, significantly moreso than it is to Melee.

While I don't discount your experience with the game, I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Competitive Brawl has its problems (too defensive to enjoy as a spectator game for most, game pace is a lot slower than Melee, timeouts are very common, few combos, high tier characters are vastly better than others, etc.), but most of Brawl's problems seem to be addressed in Smash 4. If Smash 4 ended up being a "fixed" version of Brawl with a bunch of new things to try, that doesn't mean it will be a bad competitive game. Heck, that sounds pretty cool to me. And as far as the movement options, hitstun, shield properties and other finer details that concern many people, well, we're just going to have to wait and see, unfortunately. People have been saying that this game is unlikely to change from the demo version a lot lately, and honestly I just don't understand that line of thinking. As you, the reader, may recall, Brawl changed a lot from the demo to the final build. It changed for the WORSE, yes, but it did change quite a bit. Let's hope for some positive and healthy changes. I think they are very likely to happen.

 

[victinivcreate1]

While I don't discount your experience with the game, I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Competitive Brawl has its problems (too defensive to enjoy as a spectator game for most, game pace is a lot slower than Melee, timeouts are very common, few combos, high tier characters are vastly better than others, etc.), but most of Brawl's problems seem to be addressed in Smash 4. If Smash 4 ended up being a "fixed" version of Brawl with a bunch of new things to try, that doesn't mean it will be a bad competitive game. Heck, that sounds pretty cool to me. And as far as the movement options, hitstun, shield properties and other finer details that concern many people, well, we're just going to have to wait and see, unfortunately. People have been saying that this game is unlikely to change from the demo version a lot lately, and honestly I just don't understand that line of thinking. As you, the reader, may recall, Brawl changed a lot from the demo to the final build. It changed for the WORSE, yes, but it did change quite a bit. Let's hope for some positive and healthy changes. I think they are very likely to happen.

A faster Brawl= Brawl's engine with some changes that allow more speed. AKA characters move faster, the game is not faster.
The fact that Sakurai is using brawl's engine is already a screw up. Why not a new engine?

Also, do you REALLY think that the demo will be signifcantly changed? Brawl was a bit of a different story, the demo for brawl was a year before release iirc.

 

[topspin1617]

Yeah but auto cancel aerials on shield just get blocked and X aerial OOS. Most auto cancel aerials are rising. Rising aerials get stuffed. I mained Marth in Brawl, I know that autocancelss are not what they're made out to be.

@ T topspin1617
An hour and a half is more experience than you have. Also I likely am one of the few people who have played this game for more than 3 rounds. Me, Venks, Shokio, and probably a few others.

It may be more hands-on experience than I have. That hardly makes you an expert. I've watched tons of video (as I'm sure you have), and while that's no substitute for hands-on experience, I have to say that there just appear to be objective things about Smash 4 that should already differentiate itself from Brawl enough to where it will be completely its own game, and its competitive scene will (or at least should) progress or not on its own merits, not at all because it's "similar to brawl".

Because yes there are similarities, but everything I've seen points to enough differences that the two should not be lumped together as "if one's bad, so is the other."

A faster Brawl= Brawl's engine with some changes that allow more speed. AKA characters move faster, the game is not faster.
The fact that Sakurai is using brawl's engine is already a screw up. Why not a new engine?

Also, do you REALLY think that the demo will be signifcantly changed? Brawl was a bit of a different story, the demo for brawl was a year before release iirc.

Because Brawl's engine, while clearly not perfect, is closer to what Sakurai envisions as his "perfect Smash" than Melee was, that's why not a new engine. Sakurai never really intended for Melee to be as fast-paced, technical, etc. etc. as it was. And it's totally fine that it turned out that way for the players who love that scene. But the (unfortunate, depending on your point of view) truth is that that made Melee totally contrary to Sakurai's original ideals for the series. So I think, for him, the choice of starting with a "Melee-engine" or a "Brawl-engine" was easy. In his mind, it would be far easier to turn Brawl into the "perfect Smash" than it would be starting with Melee.

 

[Mr. Mumbles]

Why are people saying /thread? Shouldn't it be </thread>. It doesn't even matter which markup language you're using, as it would still be </thread>, though html is the more relevant one since this is a website.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

I've heard reports that the dude who won the SDCC tournament says it feels more similar to Smash 64.

He said it felt like a mix of Brawl and 64, you can read it here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/2bvkh5/im_the_sdcc_champion_larry_lurr_dehf_ama/

It's one of the first responses on the page so you won't have to scroll down far. Look for D1's post.

 

[Aninymouse]

It may be more hands-on experience than I have. That hardly makes you an expert. I've watched tons of video (as I'm sure you have), and while that's no substitute for hands-on experience, I have to say that there just appear to be objective things about Smash 4 that should already differentiate itself from Brawl enough to where it will be completely its own game, and its competitive scene will (or at least should) progress or not on its own merits, not at all because it's "similar to brawl".

Because yes there are similarities, but everything I've seen points to enough differences that the two should not be lumped together as "if one's bad, so is the other."



Because Brawl's engine, while clearly not perfect, is closer to what Sakurai envisions as his "perfect Smash" than Melee was, that's why not a new engine. Sakurai never really intended for Melee to be as fast-paced, technical, etc. etc. as it was. And it's totally fine that it turned out that way for the players who love that scene. But the (unfortunate, depending on your point of view) truth is that that made Melee totally contrary to Sakurai's original ideals for the series. So I think, for him, the choice of starting with a "Melee-engine" or a "Brawl-engine" was easy. In his mind, it would be far easier to turn Brawl into the "perfect Smash" than it would be starting with Melee.

Whether this is good or bad, it seems to be the closest to the truth. At least as far as I can tell, anyway.

 

[ferioku]

A faster Brawl= Brawl's engine with some changes that allow more speed. AKA characters move faster, the game is not faster.
The fact that Sakurai is using brawl's engine is already a screw up. Why not a new engine?

Also, do you REALLY think that the demo will be signifcantly changed? Brawl was a bit of a different story, the demo for brawl was a year before release iirc.

Are you forgetting that the demo we played was very old and the brawl demo was not? Do you really think that the game wouldn't change when it's released several months later? Sakurai even stated himself that it's one of his older builds, so yes it's too early to make judgments.

Dude, you're contradicting the post that you made earlier, one minute you say that the hitstun is better then the next minute you say it sucks. If you truly dislike this game, then why go through that trouble to make a thread listing all of it's pro's and why we should support it, when you will bash the game later on? No one said that this version used Brawl's Engine, so it's impossible to tell if the engines are the same, which I highly doubt because of how long It took for him to release it.

Smash 4 is Smash 4, not Melee 2.0, not Brawl 2.0 and certainly not 64 2.0. It has it's own features and everyone will play it differently than the other 3. Sick and tired of this Brawl 2.0 nonsense. If it was truly Brawl 2.0, Sakurai would create it with the exact same features as brawls but with more characters.

 

[Mensrea]

Then I will enjoy it for a long time. Unfortunately it's looking like Brawl 2.0. Say what you want, but the lack of momentum, seriously overpowered defense, slow movement, floaty falling, and low hitstun all result in a game that looks just like Brawl. No offense to anyone, but Brawl is garbage. Melee is a game that can actually be played and enjoyed by everyone, Brawl is a game that is only fun for the most basic beginners. If sakurai wanted to accommodate everyone, he would make a game that was also deep like melee. Instead, he makes it as shallow as possible to appeal to people who will have fun regardless.

 

[topspin1617]

Then I will enjoy it for a long time. Unfortunately it's looking like Brawl 2.0. Say what you want, but the lack of momentum, seriously overpowered defense, slow movement, floaty falling, and low hitstun all result in a game that looks just like Brawl. No offense to anyone, but Brawl is garbage. Melee is a game that can actually be played and enjoyed by everyone, Brawl is a game that is only fun for the most basic beginners. If sakurai wanted to accommodate everyone, he would make a game that was also deep like melee. Instead, he makes it as shallow as possible to appeal to people who will have fun regardless.

Again, you're missing the point.

Melee wasn't meant to be a deep competitive fighting game. It's awesome that it became one, but that wasn't Sakurai's intent. He's not actively trying to not make a deep game, or trying to alienate competitive players; he's just trying to make Smash as he envisions. But it does seem to me that he's trying to take suggestions and criticisms and implement them where they don't run counter to his own objectives.

Stop saying he's "trying to make it shallow". And as far as your list of complaints, from what I've seen:

-Defense doesn't look overpowered.
-Movement certainly isn't slow. It's not Melee-fast, but it is NOT slow.
-Hitstun, while again not Melee-levels, is definitely there. Combo potential is there.

Just stop trying to judge the game as "it looks like Brawl, Brawl = garbage, therefore Sm4sh = garbage."

 

[Saikyoshi]

If it was truly Brawl 2.0, Sakurai would create it with the exact same features as brawls but with more characters.

To play devil's advocate for a second, that's exactly what the people arguing that it's Brawl 2.0 say is happening.

 

[topspin1617]

To play devil's advocate for a second, that's exactly what the people arguing that it's Brawl 2.0 say is happening.

And I'd argue said people are objectively wrong.

I've said it before, but yes, there are similarities. But the differences that are apparent SHOULD be enough to at least make people say "this could turn out good, let's see what happens." The game is different enough from Melee and Brawl to not be the "2.0" to either of them.

 

[ferioku]

To play devil's advocate for a second, that's exactly what the people arguing that it's Brawl 2.0 say is happening.

Then they are wrong.

You know what is funny, people say that they will go back to melee and yet, they still complain about how "bad" Smash 4 will turn out. It is quite childish if you think about it. If you're truly going to go back to melee, then why moan about every little feature that is in the new games? Why can't anyone just accept this game as its own? It's like calling Zelda Skyward Sword - Twilight Princess 2.0 when it clearly adopts some features from previous Zelda games but has its own features that make it unique. This is indeed a unique game, and if people can't accept it and don't like it, then why post in these forums in the first place? If the game turned out to be a great competitive wise I'm certain that many people will still find reasons to hate on this game, mainly because they don't want change! I want a new smash to play competitively but in a different way because having the same feeling as when I played Brawl and Melee will bore me too quickly and it wouldn't deserve to be called a new game.

 

[Poxnixles]

****-flinging's gonna happen no matter what, even if this miraculously winds up with a majority who consider it above Melee as a competitive game.

Also where are people getting this info on Sakurai considering balance patches?

 

[pickle962]

To play devil's advocate for a second, that's exactly what the people arguing that it's Brawl 2.0 say is happening.

Except they are using an OUTDATED AS ALL HELL demo as "proof" of their groundless claim! *sigh* Sm4sh cannot get here soon enough so all the idiocy and irrational biases I keep seeing crop up in the smash 4 threads will cease to exist (as they currently exist I mean)

Oh and @ victinivcreate1 having an "hour" with said outdated demo doesn't automatically make you some know it all expert. Someone like @Amazing Ampharos on the other hand I would sooner believe as a valid source on all things smash 4 related as he's a very throughout expert in Brawl having dissected the game in and out while also pouring his time and energy into the hacking/modding community earning him a respected spot in debates AND he also had the benefit of playing for hours on end during his time with the best buy demo thus giving him more than enough to work with to draw logical conclusions about how Smash 4 is shaping up to be.

As I have told you before, believe whatever dumbass things you want to believe kiddo, but being ignorant of people who've actually had positive well meaning things to say about smash 4 despite the demo being archaic and being able to actually back up what they say using experiences from past smash games or people who've had a similar smash 4 demo experience while acting like nothing's going to change or trying to act like you know everything about smash 4 when its clear you DON'T judging from your relative lack of playtime compared to the aforementioned people who've been lucky to practically have the demo all to themselves isn't doing you any favors nor does it give you any "street cred" on the internet for hating on a game that's not even out yet, much less having had a demo that was beyond ancient.

@ Poxnixles I believe he said in an interview once that he was considering them. Can't remember exactly WHERE, but I'm certain those words came out of sakurai's mouth

 

[Saikyoshi]

This is making me think more and more that we could've avoided so many headaches if they updated the build before SDCC instead of using the known-incomplete Best Buy build.

 

[victinivcreate1]

Except they are using an OUTDATED AS ALL HELL demo as "proof" of their groundless claim! *sigh* Sm4sh cannot get here soon enough so all the idiocy and irrational biases I keep seeing crop up in the smash 4 threads will cease to exist (as they currently exist I mean)

Oh and @ victinivcreate1 having an "hour" with said outdated demo doesn't automatically make you some know it all expert. Someone like @Amazing Ampharos on the other hand I would sooner believe as a valid source on all things smash 4 related as he's a very throughout expert in Brawl having dissected the game in and out while also pouring his time and energy into the hacking/modding community earning him a respected spot in debates AND he also had the benefit of playing for hours on end during his time with the best buy demo thus giving him more than enough to work with to draw logical conclusions about how Smash 4 is shaping up to be.

As I have told you before, believe whatever ******* things you want to believe kiddo, but being ignorant of people who've actually had positive well meaning things to say about smash 4 despite the demo being archaic and being able to actually back up what they say using experiences from past smash games or people who've had a similar smash 4 demo experience while acting like nothing's going to change or trying to act like you know everything about smash 4 when its clear you DON'T judging from your relative lack of playtime compared to the aforementioned people who've been lucky to practically have the demo all to themselves isn't doing you any favors nor does it give you any "street cred" on the internet for hating on a game that's not even out yet, much less having had a demo that was beyond ancient.

@ Poxnixles I believe he said in an interview once that he was considering them. Can't remember exactly WHERE, but I'm certain those words came out of sakurai's mouth

SO basically I have to be apart of the Brawl Back room, and hack a game to have any credibility here? Ok.
And I never said I kneweverything about Smash 4 (if I did I would know if Mewtwo returned). I just said that I have an hour and a half of experience playing it, more than most people with the exception of a few. My opinion DOES count. I voice whatever I feel. I don't ride on someone just because they have "Back Roomer" below their name. And my opinion counts just as much as these "Back Roomers". Why? Because I have played the game for a decent chunk of time.

Also, I am pretty knowledgeable when it comes to Brawl. But I hardly was on the Brawl boards. Just lurked. Never actually posted.



@ ferioku
It is nearly a 2.0. So far in terms of mechanics, there are VERY FEW new ones. Many of Brawl's old techs and physics carried over to this game. B REVERSALS. DACUS. NO MOMENTUM FROM DASH INTO JUMP. THE FRAME PERFECT MR.R DASH DANCING. I believe Brawl's style of crouch canceling, where stun is cancelled but not KB

 

[Joe73191]

What if? Well then there will be tournaments and good players will be successful at the game.

I've said it before, looking at the unfinished demo from E3 the game still needs a few things:
1. Better dash-dancing and momentum transfer from run to jump.
2. Severe reduction in landing-lag and throw's end-lag.
3. Not being able to cancel hit stun.

I always see a lot of people say it needs improved hit stun or that it needs better than brawl hit stun. What a lot of people don't know is that Brawl and Melee had the same hit stun it is just that you could cancel hit stun in Brawl.

From Smash Wiki [ "Each Smash game has a programmed value that is multiplied by the amount of knockback received to determine the amount of frames a character is locked in hitstun after being hit (for example, Melee has a hitstun multiplier of 0.4 frames per unit of knockback, so a hit that deals 100 units of knockback will leave the target in hitstun for 40 frames)." ] ["Brawl has the same hitstun multiplier Melee has. However, when hit, characters can now air dodge after 13 frames and attack after 25 frames out of hitstun, regardless of the actual amount of hitstun they sustained; this new mechanic drastically reduces the amount of actual hitstun characters have to sustain upon being hit, especially at higher knockback (for example, while a character sustaining 100 units of knockback in Melee will be in hitstun for 40 frames, in Brawl that character will be in actual hitstun for only 13 frames if they air dodge or 25 frames if they attack, and if that knockback value is doubled, while the Melee character would sustain an inescapable 80 frames of hitstun, the Brawl character will still only sustain 13 or 25 frames of hitstun).]

I don't care too much about l-canceling but either way the game needs to reduce landing lag. If there really is no l-canceling the game NEEDS an auto-cancel system where landing aerials all universally have extremely low lag. If people hope to see follow-ups and combos then the cooldown from throws needs a severe reduction too.

In Melee when you are running and you jump your momentum is carried into the jump and you jump further. This was taken out in Brawl. This MUST return. Momentum carrying over from run to jump is essential. In brawl when you run and jump your momentum is canceled and your jump is unchanged from if you had been standing still. For competitive play this is one of the most important things Sm4sh must get right.

Finally wave-dashing while desirable is not necessary. Dash-dancing is necessary. Being able to dash dance correctly (not the useless version brawl gives us) is so important to competitive play that the game will undoubtedly sink like brawl without it.

If these things are given to Sm4sh it will undoubtedly be competitive and it might be even be better than Project M and who knows it may even be the most beloved and competitive smash game to date.

 

[ChaosNeo45]

Wouldn't that just be great? Think of all the new stuff we'd have to talk about. Think about how the dual hardware would bring in all kinds of new tournament ideas, from the home-grown variety all the way up to international events. Think about alllll those new characters that we're going to love seeing.

Wouldn't it be great if it turned out that the only people who would hate to play Smash 4 were the same people who never really wanted to play it to begin with? I bet it's going to be a lot of fun. I've played the demo and I've seen the footage. I think it looks fine.

I hope so

 

[The Slayer]

@ ferioku
It is nearly a 2.0. So far in terms of mechanics, there are VERY FEW new ones. Many of Brawl's old techs and physics carried over to this game. B REVERSALS. DACUS. NO MOMENTUM FROM DASH INTO JUMP. THE FRAME PERFECT MR.R DASH DANCING. I believe Brawl's style of crouch canceling, where stun is cancelled but not KB

Probably the only part for me that I wanted to see in this game but will never happen. Not that it'll make it or break it, but that nerf to physics sure made some characters fall down big time in Brawl. I don't like history repeating itself if that's the case.

 

[victinivcreate1]

Probably the only part for me that I wanted to see in this game but will never happen. Not that it'll make it or break it, but that nerf to physics sure made some characters fall down big time in Brawl. I don't like history repeating itself if that's the case.

I miss Captain Falcon not sucking

 

[Deleted member 245254]

SO basically I have to be apart of the Brawl Back room, and hack a game to have any credibility here? Ok.
And I never said I kneweverything about Smash 4 (if I did I would know if Mewtwo returned). I just said that I have an hour and a half of experience playing it, more than most people with the exception of a few. My opinion DOES count. I voice whatever I feel. I don't ride on someone just because they have "Back Roomer" below their name. And my opinion counts just as much as these "Back Roomers". Why? Because I have played the game for a decent chunk of time.

Also, I am pretty knowledgeable when it comes to Brawl. But I hardly was on the Brawl boards. Just lurked. Never actually posted.



@ ferioku
It is nearly a 2.0. So far in terms of mechanics, there are VERY FEW new ones. Many of Brawl's old techs and physics carried over to this game. B REVERSALS. DACUS. NO MOMENTUM FROM DASH INTO JUMP. THE FRAME PERFECT MR.R DASH DANCING. I believe Brawl's style of crouch canceling, where stun is cancelled but not KB

Nobody has credibility, that's the whole point.

Also...cmiiw, but lower hit stun can technically mean that the game requires more skill as long as characters are quick enough out of their preceding move to follow up, as long as it isn't too much lower (like to the point of not existing). It means there is a tighter window of action.

Guess the Melee ravers didn't think of that though.

 

[victinivcreate1]

Nobody has credibility, that's the whole point.

Also...cmiiw, but lower hit stun can technically mean that the game requires more skill as long as characters are quick enough out of their preceding move to follow up, as long as it isn't too much lower (like to the point of not existing). It means there is a tighter window of action.

Guess the Melee ravers didn't think of that though.

This game is so similar to brawl that it even retains the RCO lag glitch with Marth.

Guess the Smash 4 ravers didn't think of that though.

 

[ferioku]

@ ferioku
It is nearly a 2.0. So far in terms of mechanics, there are VERY FEW new ones. Many of Brawl's old techs and physics carried over to this game. B REVERSALS. DACUS. NO MOMENTUM FROM DASH INTO JUMP. THE FRAME PERFECT MR.R DASH DANCING. I believe Brawl's style of crouch canceling, where stun is cancelled but not KB

Meh, you know what Smash 4 sucks, I bet that's what you want to hear anyway, It is brawl 2.0 and it will not succeed competitively. We might as well bring tripping back and increase landing lag, since that's what ya'll want to see isn't it!

 

[victinivcreate1]

Meh, you know what Smash 4 sucks, I bet that's what you want to hear anyway, It is brawl 2.0 and it will not succeed competitively. We might as well bring tripping back and increase landing lag, since that's what ya'll want to see isn't it!

Lets not make it worse lol.

 

[topspin1617]

This game is so similar to brawl that it even retains the RCO lag glitch with Marth.

Guess the Smash 4 ravers didn't think of that though.

Which is, in your words, a GLITCH.

It should be fixed, yes, Perhaps it will be.

If we're trying to call this Brawl 2.0, lets stick with mechanic comparisons, not glitches that may still exist because they started with that engine.

 

[Saito]

The pessimist inside is a defensive mechanism.

We all want smash 4 to be successful, but by riding it down, we lessen the blow if it ends up not being good.

But if it IS successful, trust me that most of these people are going to be more estatic than a bunch of school girls getting asked out to prom.