Extremely large post ahead rearding Bayonetta.
I guess after some hours arguing on reddit I should post some more candid thoughts here about Bayonetta & the scene's view on her. My article on the subject should be up Tuesday after OR is done since I'll be putting in my arguments & research on the character this week, but...
I don't like doing what I see as a necessity - to defend a character I generally don't like to watch, play, or fight against (I was rooting for Mistake at G5 but that's pretty exceptional) - in the face of what I see. What I see is a community that is earnest in their anger towards a character, an anger that I sympathize with due to her absurd mechanics. Yet, I don't agree with the reasons that the community as a unit seemed to have landed on.
The pro-ban surge is very sudden. This character had a good bit of discussion at numerous points in her history from 2016 to now, but this is very easily the most pro-ban the community has collectively ever been. I believe she will be banned within 4-6 months. I do not see her lasting if this reaction was caused by a player not even winning an event, and I don't begrudge the scene entirely for it because I agree fundamentally that the game would probably be better without her.
The pro-ban side seems to largely accept at this point that Bayonetta is currently not ban-worthy based on available data. This is very hard for me to contend with, because the argument has shifted like this -
Standard response: Bayonetta does not have the national results to warrant a ban
Reaction: Bayonetta is strangling the game at the lower level because she is too difficult for mid level players to fight
Response: PR and tournament data strongly contests this narrative with #1 PR'd Bayonettas being relatively rare across documented city, state, province, & country PRs, even if she is a prominent (albeit totally beatable) character.
Reaction: The level is lower than that, existing below relevant PRs, largely affecting playerbases that don't care as much about being ranked.
There is little response at this stage. People are reasonably (for the most part) targeting their dislike towards the character & not the players - who really have done nothing wrong, they're just picking the character that suits their playstyle. I'm glad that most pro-ban people seem to recognize this. I'm upset that they can't see the punishment they'd be inflicting on the players that worked very hard to get to where they are at the top level.
See, once you start to argue at a level below quantifiable data - obscure local events, gatherings, true low level play where data collection is an absent thing outside of in-group PRs largely not published to the public or only shared with state organizers for statewide PRs - I can't really counter or come up with anything beyond my opinion, because we reach the core issue surround the pro-ban side: Fear.
It's not an irrational fear. Meta Knight facilitated a lot of what killed Brawl. The dwindling stage list resulting in Ice Climbers, an unbridled cancer that remain the single worst thing in Smash history, to become relevant while Meta Knight's ridiculous toolkit forced rules that were designed to curb his very hard to stop camping game. It would have been ideal to ban him after WHOBO 1 and leave it at that. The community decided to keep with the competitive philosophy and keep the character, and Brawl did live with a long life and metagame, but it no doubt suffered from the character's prominence in multiple ways.
Now, people are increasingly worrying that Bayonetta will reach this. Why now? I have no idea. I feel like the community is gripped by a combination of hysteria and boiled over feelings about the character they've had for about a year since she rose back to prominence.
Is there evidence for this? Not in large form. Bayonetta has remained stagnant since July, but it's true that her saturation by year has increased and her national prominence in the last year has gone up. Significantly? No. Noticeably? Yes, she won her first major event this year through Salem who currently holds all wins with the character.
Mistake coming as close as he did will validate concerns for many that the character could feasibly win events through multiple character mains. I expect Mistake or Lima in particular will win an event, there will be clippable jank, and the end result will be a ban.
So there are small tells that the character could become more prominent. Does she harm the game? Definitely, but I think a lot of things harm this game, and accept them all the same. However, top players are extremely vocal in their distaste of her, some actively do not play the game as much because of her, and while viewership numbers are a very fickle things, it's a large unknown that adds to that element of fear.
Was GENESIS 5's 41k peak vs. GENESIS 4's 70k peak because of Bayo, or is Smash 4's drop caused by a waning interest of Smash itself, explaining in turn why Melee experienced its own drop in spite of having arguably the best top 8 in the 17 years the game has been out? Is it because both scenes have intrinsic issues that drive viewers away separately, like Hungrybox being an increasingly disliked figure in Melee as both a person and through his character & playstyle, and like Bayonetta and the prevalence of her junky, silly combos that feel unearned compared to the work an opponent - sometimes fan favorites - put in? Or is it a shared lack of interest between a casual demographic?
This adds to that aforementioned fear. People are afraid the scene that has been built up for three years is going to die, and these are concerns that have left me exhausted in my responses. It's very sudden seeming after the pro-ban side had very little traction for so long and it's only a week after the character performed poorly at PAX.
I only have the idea of what I see as competitive integrity in mind. I have no love or attachment to Bayonetta as a character in Smash Brothers and concede I would like the game just a tad bit more if she never existed. However, that's personal dislike. That's me going "Boy, do I sure hate this." You can actually literally hear and see me going "OHHH OHH NOOOO AAAAA!" in the background during & when Mistake gets an incredibly stupid ladder of ZeRo to win the set at LTC5. I genuinely don't like most of those scenarios, and I will like them less as time goes on, with the Sinji clip being something that left a
bitter taste in my mouth.
I feel like my and everyone else's personal distaste for the character is not a legitimate reason for a ban, however. I think, fundamentally, that a character needs to carry a series of 6-4 or 7-3 matchups on pretty much every cast member in a way similar to Akuma for me to feel a character is truly, utterly broken, or to have a character like Meta Knight who's not quite as bad but is still exceedingly dominant.
Bayonetta does not reach those heights, nor does she approach them, but I think the fear surrounding this character is probably more existential for the scene than Meta Knight ever could've been for Brawl's since we have hindsight and a more volatile, precious, and built up scene to go along with it.
So I get it, but I can't agree, because I come from a thought process that says people need to adapt and accept or just let the game go, and that it'd be silly for a character who is not especially prominent - by comparison to other top tiers of other Smash games - to cause people to quit. I evidently am in a minority in this viewpoint, because people are openly anxious across the board.
I have been posting and researching in regards to this character for around 8 hours as I also wrote up OrionRank posts. I am mentally exhausted for real-life reasons as well as the effort and consideration I've put into this subject for a game I care very much about. My only conclusion, beyond my opposition to banning this character and resisting what I feel is a fear edging on hysteria, is that everything would absolutely be better if this character were banned. If I wake up tomorrow and see an agreement from the panel that says "Bayo is now banned", I won't feel bad, but I will lose respect for the scene a bit and carry on enjoying what I enjoy about the game.
In the long run, I'm worried that Cloud will fall very shortly after in singles. I believe he should be banned in doubles since data very clearly supports this (doubles suck anyway lol so w/e I don't care that much about that debate) because I think banning Bayonetta based largely on community dislike will lead to a domino effect or a panic effect. I'd be really scared for Sonic if Wrath enjoyed any extended success, for example, because that is absolutely toxic for viewership and nobody likes watching/playing against it.
See, when Bayonetta is banned, I think people will have a relativity crisis in the coming years over the jank in this game that could possibly albeit not likely lead to other characters getting disparaged. It's common to refute the ZSS = Bayo argument now, but what about in a year when everybody is complacent? What if Mistake wins a big set or tournament off of a rage ladder from ZSS and people collectively, negatively lose their **** because relatively that's now the worst thing in the game? People will start getting mad at lesser things like they did in 2015 without the stark reality of Bayonetta sitting in front of them, leading to reactionary moments or movements that further erode competitive integrity by banning characters people don't like.
I don't believe the game will become significantly more diverse, either. That 10% from Bayo? Some of that might go to Peach, but a lot of it is going to ZSS, Cloud, Diddy, Fox, Rosa, etc. because people are going to gravitate towards the best. I don't want people to be under the false impression that their favorite low tier will become more viable.
Generally speaking, the top/high tiers oppress the lower cast in less obvious but ultimately almost as brutal ways as Bayonetta does. Go watch Sharpy vs. Dabuz. It's infuriating as a spectator, as much as I respect Dabuz's incredible fortitude, because Sharpy really can't do anything once Dabuz gets the download. Some of that is player/player, but it's Rosalina versus a poor man's grappler. It was destined to be a tragedy.
I think people will shift their complaints elsewhere but the threat or fear won't be as existential. I'd be worried for future titles where reactionary bans might take place. You get the idea, I think, and I combed back through a lot of infamous, much hated sets and the comments on youtube & reddit that exist to validate my concerns about what happens when a community decides they are going to become pro-ban for a character that lacks the data to support it.
I sympathize with the anger, I relate to the anxiety this character causes, and while I have not been on stage and lost a set due to a single mistake after outplaying a character for 5 minutes, I can only imagine most would want to quit if that ever happened to them. By that metric, yes, ban the character, but I personally can't approach a competitive fighter like that because then I think people would be too quick to the trigger and it would reduce the integrity of our scene.
Beyond my inability to do anything, I will not resist if this character goes, because I think the stress afflicting this community would alleviate in a way that would likely help the scene greatly. It's almost reached a point, despite entrant growth in some scenes, that it may just be better to let people's concerns take hold and let this character go.
I hated this comment at first, but after hours on this subject, including the hour it took to write this, I fully sympathize with it now and almost agree with it for the sake of the scene itself so people can move on and get back to enjoying things:
https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/7rt60q/super_smash_brothers_for_wii_u/dszew8m/
Those are my thoughts.
