A point I want to make

[WhoIsMrBlack]

The main argument I see AGAINST brawl being as 'competitive' as Melee is 'people who add more depth to their game don't get rewarded nearly as much in Brawl'. I don't understand this.

Anyone can spend lots of time practising and perfecting their Brawl play but they now do so KNOWING that it won't be as gamebreaking as it was in Melee - it's their own choice to do that so they can't really complain when it doesn't give them such an advantage.
And honestly, how many people spend time learning all these ATs because they want to get better and how many people spend time learning all these ATs because they want to be as good as someone else? (Don't go saying how stupid this sounds, think about the point I'm making)

What about those that spent lots of time on Melee? You can't say they did that without knowing full well the next game would play differently. Anyone that spent hours practising/perfecting Melee did so knowing they would get better at Melee - surely they didn't expect all that to carry over to the next game too. Why should they feel like Brawl has screwed them over when it was obvious what would happen? You had your time, it was good, now choose to keep playing Melee or move on to Brawl. No point complaining.

Someone once posted on here late last year saying they wanted to learn and asked what it would take to play Melee 'competitively'. Someone simply told them 'Don't worry about it, Melee's time is almost over'. Exactly.

 

[Cirno]

The main argument I see AGAINST brawl being as 'competitive' as Melee is 'people who add more depth to their game don't get rewarded nearly as much in Brawl'. I don't understand this.

Well, basically the defensive options in Brawl currently outweigh the offensive options.

So where as adding an AT like jackets to a Ness' arsenal in Melee could result in some well deserved combo setups, spikes, defense, ect.

In Brawl, any new technique used varies from player to player for results after a successful usage because the new defensive options allow for better counters,escapes, and ect. if allowed.

Anyone can spend lots of time practicing and perfecting their Brawl play but they now do so KNOWING that it won't be as game breaking as it was in Melee

No one knows that.
We only play with our characters and strategies hoping it'll give us the edge to win.

And I don't know how you define game breaking, but I like the term game opening or widening if we're talking about ATs.

Wavedashing did nothing but help Melee become a better game.

The same way smash boosting and pivot cancels have with Brawl.

it's their own choice to do that so they can't really complain when it doesn't give them such an advantage.

People are going to be disappointed when things don't go their way.
Can't blame us for that.

And honestly, how many people spend time learning all these ATs because they want to get better and how many people spend time learning all these ATs because they want to be as good as someone else? (Don't go saying how stupid this sounds, think about the point I'm making)

I think I have to ask what the point is.

Seeing as we can't know each individuals motivations for learning something we can only assume.

But why would this be an important question.

If I admired Mango and wanted to be able to play a match with him where I don't get 4 stocked isn't that fine?

And if I want to learn shell shifting just to grow and maintain a level of percentage of wins isn't that fine too?

What about those that spent lots of time on Melee? You can't say they did that without knowing full well the next game would play differently.

Of course not.
But anytime somebody learns something and wants to try it the next time, it has to be different with that intent in mind right?

That alone makes the game different even if they don't use it there, they'll at least be thinking along the lines of where were good places to use it, and where it could be easily punished.

Anyone that spent hours practicing/perfecting Melee did so knowing they would get better at Melee - surely they didn't expect all that to carry over to the next game too. Why should they feel like Brawl has screwed them over when it was obvious what would happen?

Was it really so obvious?
I for one didn't expect L-canceling to be out.

Despite it being a new game it was a game following a series.
Usually when following things like this, producers keep the good, test the new, and remove the bad.

L-canceling had no reason to be removed.
And many people were disappointed.

Of course several things were carried over, such as our use of approaching aerials.
I think a lot of us pre-Melee players did expect more of things to return.

Again, is that so wrong?

You had your time, it was good, now choose to keep playing Melee or move on to Brawl. No point complaining.

People are always going to complain with things they don't agree with. Although I can understand not wanting these Melee v.s Brawl threads to continue, telling people there's no point in them feeling a certain way without knowing their beliefs is a bit ignorant and negates this thread with it's own concept.

By the way, that saying is weird.

Melee players are still here, and are not going anywhere. I bought Melee 4 times (**** thieves and scratches) and I refuse to not play such a great game again.

Also, we're here playing Brawl, and we're very good at it.
Retaining mind games and spacing techniques we've been winning pretty easily against newcomers.

We're in yur Brawlz fuxing yur d00dz.
8D

Someone once posted on here late last year saying they wanted to learn and asked what it would take to play Melee 'competitively'. Someone simply told them 'Don't worry about it, Melee's time is almost over'. Exactly.

Well, that wasn't very nice.
Seeing as people still play Street Fighter and Soul Calibur despite there being newer versions, I don't see any reason why Melee has to die.

Threads still exist here if he happens to read this post, and combo videos galore on youtube.

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

L-canceling had no reason to be removed.
And many people were disappointed.

Why did it have no reason to be removed? I'm fairly sure Nintendo didn't intend there to be such a technique as L-Cancelling, it's just exploiting one of the game mechanics.

I don't really see how L-Cancelling adds to the game at all, other than giving players that can do it a slight advantage.

I DO understand how Wavedashing can add to the game, because it creates new strategies and tactics, but L-Cancelling is different.

Sorry if I was willing to spend more time I'd reply to the rest of your post, but I have other things to do atm. Maybe later.

 

[Cirno]

Why did it have no reason to be removed? I'm fairly sure Nintendo didn't intend there to be such a technique as L-Cancelling, it's just exploiting one of the game mechanics.

I don't really see how L-Cancelling adds to the game at all, other than giving players that can do it a slight advantage.

I DO understand how Wavedashing can add to the game, because it creates new strategies and tactics, but L-Cancelling is different.

Sorry if I was willing to spend more time I'd reply to the rest of your post, but I have other things to do atm. Maybe later.

L-canceling was in 64 and they knew about it. All L-canceling did was telling the game to bring your shield up faster when you landed.

The thing was we chose not to shield.
This created another offensive option from a defensive one.

And slight advantage is an understatement imo.



L-canceling not only added to the increase in speed and overall movement in a match but helped create techniques and combos as well.

Falco shine pillars, and overall aerial approach would be dead if not for L-canceling.

Not to be rude, but you did play Melee, right?

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

Not to be rude, but you did play Melee right?

I'll give you a chance to word that question differently.

And from your original post...

Well, basically the defensive options in Brawl currently outweigh the offensive options.

So where as adding an AT like jackets to a Ness' arsenal in Melee could result in some well deserved combo setups, spikes, defense, ect.

In Brawl, any new technique used varies from player to player for results after a successful usage because the new defensive options allow for better counters,escapes, and ect. if allowed.

Well, when you're going to learn an AT and practise something, it's wise to evaluate how useful it's going to be, the sort of advantage it's going to give you, ways your opponent will try and deal with it, and so on... if you've evaluated it, you shouldn't be surprised about its level of effectiveness.

 

[Vulcan55]

I don't really see how L-Cancelling adds to the game at all, other than giving players that can do it a slight advantage.

wow...

stfu you noob.

you have no Idea what you are talking about and you shouldn't be arguing against Melee if you don't know anything about their side of the debate.

 

[Candide]

How do you play Melee "right?"
You start off with as many AT's as you can at first and see what happens.
Then your friend says, "How on Earth did that work? How come I can't do that?"
Then, instead of laughing at their face, you BE a friend, and beat them in a way they understand, or even let them beat you once.

And no, this is not the real world. In a game, everyone should be your friend.

 

[Kayn]

How do you play Melee "right?"

He was asking if he played melee, not if he played melee right. He left out a comma in his post but I think simply by reading it one can assume the typographical error and still understand the meaning of his last statement.

"Not to be rude, but you did play Melee, right?"

 

[DeliciousCake]

Anyone that spent hours practising/perfecting Melee did so knowing they would get better at Melee - surely they didn't expect all that to carry over to the next game too.

People wanted Melee 2.0 because of this. Thread over. In before lock and Melee vs. Brawl debate insanity.

 

[illboyzeus]

okay, L canceling added safe approaches for many of the characters that without would not had one. People like ganon, bowser, roy, basically lower tiers. It made them viable. Also it was intended, since it was in the first one, and then the second one. They took it out because Sakurai wanted the most basic, casual friendly smashed he could attain. The problem I have with brawl is that there is no tech to really learn or perfect, so the ceiling is much lower. Also it gives players no real incentive to practice regularly. The sad thing is I can just get by playing smart and win quite a few matches in a brawl tourney just from owning at melee. That is a problem, shouldn't I have to practice to even go into a tourney and win a single match?

 

[Grunt]

How do you play Melee "right?"

Wavechet with Fox

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

He was asking if he played melee, not if he played melee right. He left out a comma in his post but I think simply by reading it one can assume the typographical error and still understand the meaning of his last statement.

"Not to be rude, but you did play Melee, right?"

Thankyou Kayn, now it makes more sense.

Yes I did play Melee.

wow...

stfu you noob.

you have no Idea what you are talking about and you shouldn't be arguing against Melee if you don't know anything about their side of the debate.

Wow jumping to conclusions. I never said I wasn't one of the people who can L-Cancel. Please don't make assumptions. If you break up assume, you get ***/u/me - assume makes an *** out of u and me.

That is a problem, shouldn't I have to practice to even go into a tourney and win a single match?

illboyzeus, why SHOULD one have to practice to go to a tournament and win a single match? The idea that anyone can go into a tournament not having contact with other Smashers besides their friends and still do well is pretty good imo.

 

[Cirno]

I agree but last time I mentioned it in a better light and you disagreed with that too.

You misread I'm afraid.
I disagreed with the term.

Apparently not according to your last post (Aerial Approach anyway, and frankly I don't think whether Falco can Shine Pillar or not affects how good the game is)

How so?

I think you misread again, but if you can show me where I can explain to you what I meant.

I only used Falco's Shine Pillar as an AT example since I mentioned techniques in my earlier statement.

I'll give you a chance to word that question differently.

I don't think I need to.
It's a yes or no question. I apologize again if it offends.

Well, when you're going to learn an AT and practice something, it's wise to evaluate how useful it's going to be, the sort of advantage it's going to give you, ways your opponent will try and deal with it, and so on... if you've evaluated it, you shouldn't be surprised about its level of effectiveness.

And where can you do that exactly?
;D

It doesn't matter how long you practice against a cpu, or how perfect you've learned to execute a move, until you get a chance to use it in a real match you never know how people will deal with it or how well it will work.


And Vulcan can you please no insult him?
):

We are still a community.
There's no reason to call each other idiots, and noobs and the likes because we don't agree.

 

[illboyzeus]

It is not competitive if someone can come off the street and fare well in a tourney setting(albeit I'm not someone off the street smash wise). What other competitive game can you say allows this anomaly?

 

[Vulcan55]

It is not competitive if someone can come off the street and fare well in a tourney setting(albeit I'm not someone off the street smash wise). What other competitive game can you say allows this anomaly?

Slapjack. (because anything can be competitive, technically speaking)

Brawl = Slapjack
Melee = High stakes poker

 

[DeliciousCake]

Slapjack. (because anything can be competitive, technically speaking)

Brawl = Slapjack
Melee = High stakes poker

So you're equating Brawl to a game of reflex and Melee to a game of chance? Sounds completely inaccurate.

 

[Vulcan55]

lol not exactly.
I was thinking more of the complexity of each game.
also seeing as, in slapjack, no matter the number of players, the "dealer" has a giant advantage. I was comparing it to how unbalanced Brawl is.
but you are right, it's not a very good analogy.
=/

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

I don't think I need to.
It's a yes or no question. I apologize again if it offends.

I'm sorry, I didn't think I would have to explain that what is 'right' to one person may be very different to what is 'right' in another person's eyes. Why would I be offended? I just have no idea what your view of 'right' is.

@illboyzeus, I never said someone could 'come in off the street' as you put it, and win. Merely come in and have more fun with some chance of winning a round or two rather than losing outright without a chance. The finalists/winners will still always be people who've done their homework anyway.

 

[Best101]

It's obvious you know nothing of Melee's competitive side.
There's no point for you to argue this since you know very little of Smash Bros. in general. You arguing against Melee with no knowledge of Melee is useless, and you shouldn't have made this topic.

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

It's obvious you know nothing of Melee's competitive side.
There's no point for you to argue this since you know very little of Smash Bros. in general. You arguing against Melee with no knowledge of Melee is useless, and you shouldn't have made this topic.

I was hoping I wouldn't have to say this, but I guess I'm going to have to in order to stop all these assumptions.

I played Melee competitively.

Now can we please discuss rather than flame each other? Discussion about Brawl doesn't have to be personal. Seriously.

Thank you Cirno for discussing in a civilised way, I'm enjoying debating with you.

It doesn't matter how long you practice against a cpu, or how perfect you've learned to execute a move, until you get a chance to use it in a real match you never know how people will deal with it or how well it will work.

If you learn a technique knowing that, then why should it not working as well as you'd like affect your opinion of Brawl as a game?

 

[illboyzeus]

I played melee competitively can entail so many things...

at what level did you play, did you frequent tournies. Cuz if not your view on it is not relevant at all. Believe I don't go and say things about ss64, I know nothing of it's scene. I can read all I want about it, if I wasn't legitimately a tourny goer, my opinion on it's competitive virtues does not matter.

And also, if you were in fact competitive in melee, what made you shift your stance to brawl?

 

[dj_pwn1423]

I was hoping I wouldn't have to say this, but I guess I'm going to have to in order to stop all these assumptions.

I played Melee competitively.

lmao

It only takes a glance at your join date to realize that is not true.

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

lmao

It only takes a glance at your join date to realize that is not true.

rofl......

And also, if you were in fact competitive in melee, what made you shift your stance to brawl?

Melee doesn't have ROB.

Nah, mainly because my friends enjoy playing me on Brawl. And I will admit I do enjoy playing Brawl more, don't ask me why I just do.

 

[Best101]

Your previous post appears to contradict that you played Melee at a level above casual. What's getting to me is the simple fact you barely know the usefulness of l-canceling, the most easiest of advance techniques to utilise and understand.

 

[DeliciousCake]

lmao

It Only Takes A Glance At Your Join Date To Realize That Is Not True.

Join date means everything gaiz! Although in this situation it's probably true.

 

[illboyzeus]

well when it says JULY 2008, it's kind of a big giveaway he didn't play melee at a competitive level. nothing wrong with it, just don't lie about it lol.

 

[WhoIsMrBlack]

well when it says JULY 2008, it's kind of a big giveaway he didn't play melee at a competitive level. nothing wrong with it, just don't lie about it lol.

Haha honestly, I don't want to dignify these comments with a response... I fail to see how someone's join date on an online forum reflects their skill level at a console game.

If this thread is going to be a discussion about my skill level at Smash Bros. I'm no longer bothering to post. Thanks Cirno for having an intelligent discussion with me while it lasted.

 

[Vulcan55]

Your previous post appears to contradict that you played Melee at a level above casual. What's getting to me is the simple fact you barely know the usefulness of l-canceling, the most easiest of advance techniques to utilise and understand.

exactly like I have said before:

Brawl sucks.
Those who think otherwise never truly discovered Melee.

--------------------------------

Haha honestly, I don't want to dignify these comments with a response... I fail to see how someone's join date on an online forum reflects their skill level at a console game.

If this thread is going to be a discussion about my skill level at Smash Bros. I'm no longer bothering to post. Thanks Cirno for having an intelligent discussion with me.

lol.
ran out of ways to dodge every intelligent post threw his way and now is taking the easy way out because on the internet, you can.

 

[The H Kid]

Haha honestly, I don't want to dignify these comments with a response... I fail to see how someone's join date on an online forum reflects their skill level at a console game.

I agree. Kind of.

 

[illboyzeus]

hmm, how in the hell do you be competitive in melee, without being on smashboards till July 2008, were the tournaments fed into your brain?

This is why brawl supporters get bashed so hard most of the time, can't back up the claims and **** they say. Besides you needed someone to tell you why l-canceling is useful, you can not be competitive asking **** like that, seriously.

 

[LavisFiend]

Brawl sucks.
Those who think otherwise never truly discovered Melee.

Or, they could like both games, like I do.

Quit saying stupid ****.

 

[PsychopathicEmus]

hear hear, i agree with LavisFiend! play both!

a response to the original post: something about learning ATs to improve and learning ATs for some other reason.

i learned ATs because i was fascinated by the whole idea. SMASH?! ADVANCED TECHNIQUES?! WHOA I GOTTA TRY! caps because i was psyched to learn. and even after i learned wavedashing and all that, i didn't all of a sudden become great at the game. the whole reason why i played melee was that i wanted to improve. human nature tends to want to improve. it just seems like to me, those anti-AT people didn't want to put the time in to learn ATs and improve. those who gave up after learning wavedashing gave up because wavedashing didn't make them twice as good as they already were. i'm making a hell of a lot of assumptions, forgive me =/

i don't know what the deal is with everybody but learning the tech is only half the process. somebody who can wavedash doesn't always beat somebody who doesn't. spacing is part of the game, that doesn't take ATs to develop. why can't non-AT people learn their spacing, outspace their opponent, and win? predicting the opponent also doesn't take ATs. if you can outspace AND predict what your opponent is going to do, no AT or any combination of ATs is going to help him/her: he/she will lose.