• 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!

Advanced techniques changed

D.Q

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
113
Location
New York
^^No you can't. You think that without advance techs you are somehow on equal level with the people who have been honing their strategic skills for years. The only thing taking out advance techs has done is make additudes like that. If both of you spend an equal amount of time practicing the game, theoretically you should never catch up. So if you want to get better than a competative player you have to devote more time and work harder than a competative player, and thus become a competative player yourself.

Fun, huh.
advanced techs=new button combinations, combos, etc.
strategic skills=mindgames
mindgames>all.
Therefore, even someone who is not competitive can win. Oops, did I say competitive? More like those who don't learn advanced techniques.
Once again, I think a reminder should be issued to all people who complain about lack of advanced techniques: advanced techniques =/= competitiveness. I mean, Aniki doesn't wavedash. He's still considered one of the best in Japan.
 

RedrappeR

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
294
That's fine and dandy for the characters who have very little aerial lag but what about the slower characters. Are they to be left in the dust?
Charizard is pretty laggy from what I've heard and seen. And he KO's mario pretty nicely.
 

Soyl

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
44
I already see a hint depth in this game from just the videos Ive seen.

I'm ok with people whining, because to me that makes me see who's not smart enough to see the great level of depth in Brawl. If you don't want to play the game then fine, less competition.

I dont like to face stupid people. Less interesting

.
 

Circle_Breaker

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
292
Location
sububububububurbs
I just saw a great Meta Knight vs. C Falcon video on Youtube. It was really good and got me excited for Brawl again.

Meta Knight looks pretty cool, but I need to try him out or hear some reliable news about him - people say he doesn't have any finishers but I've seen what look like some pretty good ones, not sure though. Also need to see how light he really is and try out Dimension Cape/ Shuttle Loop and gliding.
 

Soyl

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
44
Everyone seems to have a less attacks as finishers in this game.
 

Soyl

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
44
certain slower attacks dont actually have that much lag after landing
 

PwnyRide

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
638
Location
Australia
I really should extend on what i said earlier. I was meant to write Super Armor :ohwell:

Super Armor helps to even out the competition between the faster and slower characters. In melee, if you put a Fox in a match against a Bowser, Fox would come out unscathed, because with every attack Bowser would flinch, and his attacks being slow, he would nearly never get a hit in.

Well the Super Armor in Brawl are sure to help at least. Ill use the same matchup.
Fox can hit Bowser, but with these frames, Bowser's attack wont be simply interrupted, it's gonna follow through. So in time that Fox took to rack up a some damage on Bowser, he can deliver an equal amount of force in a single blow. And when i say can, i mean CAN as in it will follow through. It's why there is super armor in the first place.
 

PwnyRide

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
638
Location
Australia
Super armor won't help against grabs though =/
That's true of course, no argument can be made for that.

Not sure if its the right moment to bring this up, but i will anyway.

All (?) heavyweights have access to Super Armor Frames, lightwieghts dont.
Both lightweights and heavyweights have access to throws. I dont even know what im getting at there but i thought i should put it out there at least :psycho:

EDIT: According to some people, grabs seem less effective overall. Exception being DDD :p
 

ACtribes

Smash Rookie
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
1
Can someone explain to me that the lack of exploits to the game's system totally ruins the competitive scene? Does the game really need to play so blisteringly fast and look unnatural to be fun?

Seriously, if anything, the removal of "Advanced Techniques" only shows that Sakurai was trying to bring MORE people into the competitive scene, because now you don't have to spend hours upon hours of learning stupid glitches and exploits to play with the best.

The developers gave us plenty of things to use in order to have deep, competitive play.

It baffles me to see people complain that the game doesn't have glitches to exploit! Usually people would whine and moan about being able to change the entire game through using "Advanced Techniques" that were not intended by the developers, yet here you some of guys are QQing about the opposite.

I don't care about the tournament style of play. Don't want to play with items? Cool. Only want to play on fair stages? That's fine too. Those are options the game gave you.

But for that little vocal minority of the tourney-goers that wants to constantly seek out to exploit the system and find glitches in the game so that you can make the meta-game frivolously complex, filled with meaningless jargon and completely destroy the intent of the developers; I can't stand you. Why are you trying to make the game something it isn't?
 

Frames

DI
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
2,248
Location
UCF (Orlando, FL)
Can someone explain to me that the lack of exploits to the game's system totally ruins the competitive scene? Does the game really need to play so blisteringly fast and look unnatural to be fun?
First of all, they're not exploits, an exploit sounds like something that wasn't intentionally meant to be in the game, yet nearly all of melee's advanced techniques were intentionally put in. Also, the lack of advanced techniques affects the competitive scene because being able to use these techniques effectively helped to shape effective tournament play, and the evolution of individual characters as a response to these techniques helped extend melee's life and contribute to it's overwhelming success.

Seriously, if anything, the removal of "Advanced Techniques" only shows that Sakurai was trying to bring MORE people into the competitive scene, because now you don't have to spend hours upon hours of learning stupid glitches and exploits to play with the best.
Once again, they're not glitches or exploits, and guess what, there may still end up being techniques that will seperate competitive players from casual ones. Players will still find a way to have an effective tournament scene, regardless of which techniques are in or out, because there will always be new styles of playing and new techniques to discover and develop.

The developers gave us plenty of things to use in order to have deep, competitive play.
I'm sure they did. I'll bet Sakurai was well aware of the tournament scene, and while it may not seem like it now, i'm sure there are things players will be able to use in order to play competitively.

It baffles me to see people complain that the game doesn't have glitches to exploit! Usually people would whine and moan about being able to change the entire game through using "Advanced Techniques" that were not intended by the developers, yet here you some of guys are QQing about the opposite.
People are going to be upset because competitive players enjoy competitive smash and the way it is, and the alteration or removal of techniques means for some people competitive smash won't be the same as it is now. Many players are worried that brawl will not be as competitive as melee. Also, let me remind you that many of these "non-intended techniques" were intended:

L-canceling: Came from Z-canceling, which was in smash 64
Teching: Many, many other fighters have some form of teching.
Dash dancing: Dude, you can dash dance in like every game, next time you play Super Mario World, or Sonic the Hedgehog try it.
Wavedashing: The only real "exploit" to say the least, and being able to wavedash does NOT mean you are a competitive player.
Really the only real glitches in Smash happen to have the word "glitch" in them, i.e. Yo-Yo glitch, or Freeze Glitch, or Black Hole Glitch, and all of them are banned in tournament play anyways.

But for that little vocal minority of the tourney-goers that wants to constantly seek out to exploit the system and find glitches in the game so that you can make the meta-game frivolously complex, filled with meaningless jargon and completely destroy the intent of the developers; I can't stand you. Why are you trying to make the game something it isn't?
Excuse me, i didn't realize you were a developer for melee! When developing any game, developers see how other developers have handled games in the same genre, and while smash is in a place of its own, the developers did take into account how many other fighters have competitive aspects and communities. Whether or not the developers intended melee to have a competitive aspect it did nevertheless, and having that competitive side only helped strengthen melee's overall lifespan and popularity. How many games can you name that are still popular six years after they are released? And how many of those have as big a community as Smash? This is the biggest problem I see with people who are against the competitive aspect, instead of criticizing players for wanting to "destroy the intent of the developers" as you so put it, why not understand that they are simply trying to fully appreciate the game that they love. By making the meta games "frivolously complex", they have realized the full potential of every character, and shown that competitive play can be done with anyone, and that every character could be played well, something I think the developers definetely intended.

Good first post btw. Welcome to Smashboards.
 

WastingPenguins

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
827
Location
Ohio
Can someone explain to me that the lack of exploits to the game's system totally ruins the competitive scene? Does the game really need to play so blisteringly fast and look unnatural to be fun?

Seriously, if anything, the removal of "Advanced Techniques" only shows that Sakurai was trying to bring MORE people into the competitive scene, because now you don't have to spend hours upon hours of learning stupid glitches and exploits to play with the best.

The developers gave us plenty of things to use in order to have deep, competitive play.

It baffles me to see people complain that the game doesn't have glitches to exploit! Usually people would whine and moan about being able to change the entire game through using "Advanced Techniques" that were not intended by the developers, yet here you some of guys are QQing about the opposite.

I don't care about the tournament style of play. Don't want to play with items? Cool. Only want to play on fair stages? That's fine too. Those are options the game gave you.

But for that little vocal minority of the tourney-goers that wants to constantly seek out to exploit the system and find glitches in the game so that you can make the meta-game frivolously complex, filled with meaningless jargon and completely destroy the intent of the developers; I can't stand you. Why are you trying to make the game something it isn't?
Smashboards is here to discuss competitive Smash Bros. Don't like it? Then go back to Gamefaqs and quit whining. For christ sake.
 

NESJake

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
158
When will you people understand that this isn't Melee 2.0

Things aren't out or in. Everything is new.
 

Demon-oni

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
472
NNID
Thanatos-Demon
3DS FC
0147-1152-7184
Competitive game: Out
Wouldn't say that at all. If melee tricks aren't effective, then make new ones. I've already seen a few new techs and have ideas of my own. True, with the speed of the gameplay slowed, it seems less competitive, but the air dodge system makes for a whole new variety of mind games we could never use in melee. A quote from one of the great pros of melee, "The hype and competitiveness will only rise as much as the players want it to." Right now it seems like 67% of the population doesn't like brawl too much. Take my word for it or not, it doesn't matter much too me. While you sit there complaining the whole time, I'll be having fun.
 

veil222

Smash Journeyman
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
269
Stage Builder>ATs
Well said. I've even posted around a video of a Ganon fighting a Falco showing how L-canceling isn't really needed much anymore because of the new sheild physics. People are giving up so easy and defaulting to the "competitive game got removed" band wagon. If people would just look a bit harder and, I don't know... wait until they actually play the game, they're almost sure to find things that have created depth where they think it was removed.
 

SilintNinjya

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
157
Location
NC, USA
its in.

i just want to understand how and why tripping works. right now, it feels random. but at the same time, someone else i was playing with today tripped a LOT and i only tripped a few times the whole night (he would trip 2 or 3 times a match).

if we can figure out the exact mechanics behind that, ill be much happier.

also, i like it more than melee. it does feel VERY freakin different. but its really fun once you get used to it. it will already be hard for me to go back to melee at all.
 

True Fool

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
524
Location
Vegas
God, you people can be so stupid. Just because this game is missing/changing some of Melee's advanced techniques doesn't mean anything yet. Have you seen the forward backward jump(doesn't have a better name yet)? That's already one new advanced technique that helps in using back ariels, and maybe even jumping over someone and using a forward ariel.

Are you honestly going to tell me that you picked up SSB64 and/or Melee for the intent of competitive play? I highly doubt it. You can't pick apart the details of a game like this so early. Either shut up and give the game time, or get a copy for yourself to look for advanced techniques.
 

IM_A_HUSTLA

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
289
Location
Lancaster, Ca
has anyone thought that if l canceling is out all we gotta do is move fast enough to combo,

i think ppl like m2k could be deadly again because its down to being able to time frames now not canceling them
 

Blackshadow

Smash Ace
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
900
Location
Adelaide, Australia. Along with my Mad Duck.
ACtribes said:
Can someone explain to me that the lack of exploits to the game's system totally ruins the competitive scene? Does the game really need to play so blisteringly fast and look unnatural to be fun?

Seriously, if anything, the removal of "Advanced Techniques" only shows that Sakurai was trying to bring MORE people into the competitive scene, because now you don't have to spend hours upon hours of learning stupid glitches and exploits to play with the best.

The developers gave us plenty of things to use in order to have deep, competitive play.

It baffles me to see people complain that the game doesn't have glitches to exploit! Usually people would whine and moan about being able to change the entire game through using "Advanced Techniques" that were not intended by the developers, yet here you some of guys are QQing about the opposite.

I don't care about the tournament style of play. Don't want to play with items? Cool. Only want to play on fair stages? That's fine too. Those are options the game gave you.

But for that little vocal minority of the tourney-goers that wants to constantly seek out to exploit the system and find glitches in the game so that you can make the meta-game frivolously complex, filled with meaningless jargon and completely destroy the intent of the developers; I can't stand you. Why are you trying to make the game something it isn't?
Back to 4chan with you.
 

Yuna

BRoomer
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
10,358
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Well, mind games will be more pronounced since you wont be able to confuse your opponent easily with wavedashing or dash dancing.

But seriously, has any one tried "Turn around neutral B" in the air?? I'd really like to know if it's still in.

.
Also known as mind games using techs.
 

Hitzel

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
551
Location
New Jersey.
WARNING! Wall of text approaching.:dizzy:

wait, so none of that exists anymore?

also, thank god for the button combos being gone.

and what about the spawn timers? you know you can change all that stuff? i think youre just making stuff up now =\
I put up 21 points. You listed 9. Again, most of the stuff I listed doesn't exist anymore.

And the nine things you pointed out have either been taken out of the player's control and randomized, or been derived of their formal depth. Let's take a look:

What happened to teamspawning?

The spawn system in Halo 1. By standing on specific points on every map, a player could force his teammate to spawn at a specific spawn point somewhere else. You could make your teammate spawn at a power weapon as it respawns, somewhere to give you an advantage against the enemy, behind an enemy, etc. Of course, this was balanced because your opponents know where the spawns points are, and you have to die in order to use the system. Halo 1 took a ton of teamwork and strategy because of teamspawning. Combined with force spawning and randomspawning, the Halo 1 respawn system in itself has more depth than the entire game of Halo 3. You had to constantly out-think your opponents and trick them into letting you use the spawn system to your advantage.


What happened to force spawning?
There are two types of force spawning; one type in Halo 1 and another type in Halo 2. In Halo 1, force spawning is a method one team can use to force the other team to spawn in a specific place, usually the same place the player just spawned. Force spawning isn't commonly utilized in Halo 1, and is more of a system that deters players from camping. Although force spawns are rare and work differently on each map, you generally have to stand in the same spot and not move to make someone force spawn. This makes it easy for your opponent's teammate to kill you if you try to abuse the system.

In Halo 2, force spawning results from Halo 2's spawn system; you generally spawn away from your enemies. If one team has a player positioned in each general area of the map except for one, the other team will be forced to spawn at that left over area until they get rid of one of the forcing players. On some maps, like Ascension, it destroyed the map's balance. On other maps, like Lockout, it made the map a more stable and strategic place to play on, although it slowed the pace of the game down on every map it could work on, which isn't a good thing.


What happened to randomspawning?
There are two types of randomspawn systems, both in Halo 1. The first type works just like the teamspawn system; standing on certain points causes your teammate to spawn on a random spawn point, anywhere on the map. It's used to get your team out of a bad situation by relocating where the spawn system is currently respawning your team.

The second type of randomspawn is when a teammate teamspawns you to a spawn point which another player is currently standing on. If that happens, and there are no other spawn points available in that particular teamspawn chain, the player gets a randomspawn.


How do said spawns work?

Well I've already gone over that, but what they do for depth is huge. Put it this way, in Halo 1, if someone spawned behind you, you thought "Oh wow, that guy just totally outsmarted me." In Halo 3, if someone spawns behind you, you think "Wth. Can this guy get any luckier?" Halo 1's system is controlled by the players and adds a huge mental game. Halo 3's system is random and players can't participate in it. It creates an element of luck and frustration instead.

Because of the way Halo 2's spawn system worked, you rarely ever spawned near an enemy, let alone right behind them. In Halo 3, it happens all the time, and a big factor is that fact that the spawn system "calculates" the best place to spawn a player the instant they die, not the instant they respawn.


What happened to weapon spawn timers?
I am aware that you can tweak weapon spawn timers, but they are dumbed down since Halo 1. Let me explain.

In Halo 1, weapons spawned on FIXED timers. That means that if a Sniper is on a 60 second respawn, a new Sniper spawns on the map every minute interval, period. The Sniper will never spawn at 3:34 or even 5:01, it will spawn at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00, etc. Picking the Sniper up won't effect the timer.

In Halo 3, picking a weapon up, being too close to a weapon as it spawns, or even not picking a weapon up soon enough changes the timer. Random variables can be added, and instead of a Sniper on a 60 second timer spawning every 60 seconds, picking it up at the wrong time completely throws the system out of wack. It could spawn at 4:23, 5:59, whatever.

Why does this matter? With fixed spawn timers, both teams have to be ready to pick up the power weapons and powerups when they spawn. You have to develope different strategies for each interval, because sometimes there are other weapons spawning at the same time or nearly the same time. It adds alot to the game. But with Halo 3's spawn system, everything is left up to chance, so coming up with strats to pick up weapons is pretty much pointless. Halo 2 is even worse, because new weapons won't spawn as long as the old one is still being held by a player, so one team can pretty much grab a power weapon and camp with it without having to worry about the other team picking one up for themselves.


What happened to animation cancels?
Animation cancels were in Halo 1 and 2. They did many different things from meleeing faster, reloading faster, doing two otherwise impossible actions at the same time, etc. Luckily, these glitches were for the most part balanced (aside from superbouncing in Halo 2 and infinite ammo in Halo 1). They opened up more options for players, which inherently added depth. While in Halo 2, most of the glitches simply made things faster, in Halo 1, most of the animation cancels traded one thing for another, like trading a grenade for a double melee, using your secondary weapon while your primary reloads in your backpack, etc. Definitely added depth.


What happened to crouch tapping?
Teabagging quickly in Halo 1 allowed you to bob your head up and down fast enough to dodge headshots, but your movement speed was cut in half while doing so. Shooting at the body countered this, so tapping crouch was generally a rock-paper-scissors kind of thing that players could use to stall a fight temporarily.


What happened to weapon swapping?
It takes a ridiculously long time to swap weapons in Halo 3, and it prevents other actions from being taken, especially animation cancels. Not only is it annoying, but it slows the pace of the game down. A player is more likely to hide to reload and switch weapons than he is to play offensively against more than one opponent.

What happened to melee damage levels?
In Halo 1 and 2, running and moving in the air caused you to do more damage with melees, respectively. If you could set up a situation where you could jump in the air and have you opponent run into your melee, you'd do more damage. In Halo 3, all melees do the same amount of damage. Just another options that players don't have in H3.

What happened to melee hit detection?
In Halo 3, if you're not lunging when you melee, the hitbox is tiny. That means that if you can predict someone coming around a corner and want to meet them with a fist, your melee is most likely not going to register and you'll be a sitting duck waiting for the animation to finish.

What happened to quick camo?
In Halo 1, and even in Halo 2, active camo works differently depending on which gun you're using. For example, if you shoot and have a Sniper out, you'll stay visible for a few seconds before you become invis again. Do the same thing with an Assault Rifle, and you'll go back to invis almost instantly. That's why players with camo rockets use an AR as their secondary instead of a Pistol; the Pistol doesn't give a player quick camo, but the AR does. It's all about decision making. In Halo 3, camo is overpowered when you're not shooting, and keeps you visible for a long time when you shoot with any gun. There's less to think about.


What happened to leading shots?
in Halo 1, bullets were actual objects flying through the air that moved at specific speeds. The Pistol, for example, had relatively slow moving bullets, so you had to predict where your opponent was going to move and shoot ahead to meet him. Hit detection in Halo 2 and 3 works differently, so there's no leading shots outside of bad lag (which is inconsistent anyway).


What happened to the BR?
The BR in Halo 3 is inaccurate and inconsistent. You can't rely on it to make decisions, and it takes the skill away from the game. In a 3-round burst, the bullets can blatently miss the head, or give you a headshot when you weren't aiming at the head. Takes away consistency and depth. The H1 Pistol was accurate at first, but became inaccurate if you fired at full auto for too long, meaning you had to moderate your fire. Players can't control the H3 BR's inaccuracy.


What happened to the PR?
The H1 PR took away shields fast, slowed an opponent down, and froze up an opponent's aim. It was a great teamwork tool that countered the Overshield and offered something a good player could use against a power weapon. In Halo 2 and 3, it's nerfed. There's no point to the PR in those games, and it doesn't add to teamwork at all.


What happened to the Shotgun?
Shotty hit detection is retarted now. If your aimer is red at all, the shot counts as a direct shot the the center of the body, same for the Mauler. Aim doesn't effect damage, just distance. It's obvious how it became a noob weapon because of it.


What happened to the Sniper?
It's nerfed. Horrible hit detection and a horrid rate of fire. It's not a power weapon anymore, at least not the way it used to be. It's not reliable, it's not strong, and it takes stability from the game because of it. The Sniper in Halo 1 and even Halo 2 was balanced as a power weapon and was important to gameplay. In Halo 3 it's been nerfed as to not affect the game significantly, to make it so a good sniper can't dominate over careless opponents.


What happened to flag tossing?
In Halo 1 and 2, you could toss the flag to teammates by dropping it, and the flag would inherit your momentum. You could set up strategies and a good player could throw the flag out of a bad situation if he was thinking on his toes. In Halo 3, the flag drops straight down when you drop it. No tossing.


What happened to flag touch returning?
There is no flag touch return in Halo 3. The system is intended to work on a "time return" system. If you are within 3 yards or so of the flag, you start to make the timer go down. If it reaches zero, the flag returns. The timer at zero makes the flag return if someone is within nine feet from the flag, not touch return. This creates technical flaws with the flag return system and limits the stealth or offensive roles a flag carrier can go about


What happened to bomb arming?
The bomb arming mechanics have also been changed. Instead of having to stay in the opponent's base in order to plant a bomb, you can just set it and leave it. If you try to create a gametype with an arm time but a short detonation time, the enemy team can score in their own base due to them being the last team to touch the bomb if they are nearby.


What happened to play ball?
Play ball is now delayed, and there is no option to make it instant. Throwing the ball of the edge doesn't create the need for quick planning anymore, not to mention that it slows the game down considerably.


What happened to map design in general?
Maps in Halo 3 are generally designed in ways that give players little movement options, plenty of places to hide, and little incentive to move. Take a look at Guardian and compare it to Lockout. Guardian has many more enclosed hallways and very little shot lines, as opposed to Lockout which allows teams to combine fire from many possible angles. Maps like The Pit and Isolation are cut off into two parts, resulting in a campy game. Maps like Snowbound and Epitaf have shield doors that promote camping and slow gameplay. Maps like Narows and Isolation have horrible spawn points, and no cover to create alternate spawn points. Etc, etc, etc. Foundry offers some solutions, but there are serious forge limits on Foundry that limit how much you can make on the map, not to mention the uneven walls that make it extremely difficult to place objects properly.

------

Look, you can like Halo 3. I have nothing against that. But don't say it has considerable depth, because that simply isn't true. There's nothing Halo 3 has over a decent shooter in terms of depth, and in most cases deliberate design choices such as slow, forced animations and constricted map design make the game have less depth than almost any shooter. While you can argue some points, you can simply not say that Halo 3 or 2 have more depth than Halo 1. When H1 vets like me and speak about Halo 1 like it's the gospel, we're not talking out of our a**es or out of nostalgia. Halo 1 really was an in-depth mental gave, and it really did take much, much more skill than the second or third games.

Halo was once a great competitive shooter, one of the greatest in videogame history. Now it's a dumbed down run of the mill shooter designed to make money off of unskilled gamers. It took Halo 2 years to drop down from first place on the XBL activity list, it took Halo 3 a few months. Halo 1 vets still find ways to get together and play Halo, Halo 3 "vets" hate Bungie and are playing Call of Duty 4. If Sakurai does decide to turn Brawl into a marketing scheme, you can bet your *** that Brawl is NOT going to have the longevity that Melee and 64 did. From the looks of it, that just may be the reality of the situation. And if so, a year or so down the road there will be plenty of angry people like me making lists like this about Brawl explaining why the game is too frustrating and boring to play anymore.

Why would this happen? Dumbed down games make money, but they don't last long term. If Brawl is a sell-out like so many people are afraid of, everyone's game experience will be suffering from it after a year. This isn't something new to the videogame industry, and it wasn't something new when it happened to Halo. It's a reality and the people who have blind hope for Brawl may end up finding that out the hard way over time. And Nintendo will have their money.

Sorry for this long rant... I hate it when this happens to games, especially when the game finally gets an online sequel and is butchered. I just get heated. Despite that, what I'm saying here has some real support behind it, so you may want to re-think things before you put blind hope into Brawl, if you are.
 

Dark Sonic

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
6,021
Location
Orlando Florida
^^Bravo. That was actually a very well written speach. I actually haven't ever played Halo as anything more than a casual, and I'm just astounded that the original was so deep. A lot of my friends are dissapointed with Halo 3, and now I see why. And it sold so well too. Maybe we can petition Nintendo to make a demo patch (put the stuff from the demo back in) or something. I really hope we find some more techniques down the road, but I'm suprised so much stuff was taken out.
 

Andydark

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
277
Location
Bourbonnais IL||I consider myself competent. AIM:
Weren't there some people who managed to play at a competitive level without the advanced techniques back in Melee?

I'm not going to say I dislike the advanced techniques, it's just that I didn't need them against my friends and Peach and Zelda don't benefit much from wavedashing. I SHFFL'd the few times I needed to...

How competitive was Melee prior to the tricks? Brawl will go through an infancy phase, and it could take months or it could take years for it to find its own tricks with the physics system.

Though I find it odd that L Canceling had been around since the original and it was taken out...
 

Dark Sonic

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
6,021
Location
Orlando Florida
^^Not anyone noteable. Prior to advance techs (they are not tricks or glitches, they are simply game mechanics) melee was pretty dull. It's just that brawl has taken out the fundemental advance techs. The most fundemental advance techs of any fighting game are Lag canceling techs and character movement techs. Any other techs play second seat. That's why a lot of people are worried about brawl.

And don't bring up the whole "mindgames will be more important" thing. Because advance techs in no way hindered mindgames at all. They actually openned up a lot more mindgame opportunities, because you had better control of your character's movement and more flexibility with lag times. Taking out advance techs hurts that side of competative play too.
 

Pendragonslayer

Smash Cadet
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
31
OK, first of all, I have absolutely nothing against people who use "exploitive" techniques like wavedash, because the game stays balanced and everything is good.

But it's like you guys are asking that the devs make sure the physics system is shoddy enough such that you can abuse things that cancel your lag and stuff. The developers aren't gonna hide ways to abuse the system on purpose. Is it really too much to ask that the game is based on the techniques the devs programmed rather than cheating the system out of lags and momentum that are built into the moves? (not speaking about Lcanceling here, i dunno why that's gone, but isn't lag supposed to be reduced by a lot anyways?)

If new techniques are discovered and the game remains balanced, wonderful. Something added to the game. But a competitive scene in which you get good JUST BY PLAYING PEOPLE and learning the ins and outs of the game rather than playing people + going online to see how people abuse the physics system + hours of practice for button combos that you wouldn't normally ever think of is NOT too much to ask, NOR DOES IT KILL THE COMPLEXITY.

I think some of you are so worried about casuals knowing their place that you feel the need to have something they don't know about... just a hunch :)

It's like playing a point-and-click adventure game. You can make one with brilliant puzzles that make you think outside the box without "combine the pencil and the cat" moments. Is it too much to ask that the brilliance of the game is something that actually makes sense with the game's system? This is not a plug for casuals, btw, it's just that you guys are practically ASKING that the game have secret dare-i-say-glitch-like? lag-cancels and such, when the devs just tried to make a game that was good on its own terms.
 

Hitzel

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
551
Location
New Jersey.
^^Bravo. That was actually a very well written speach. I actually haven't ever played Halo as anything more than a casual, and I'm just astounded that the original was so deep. A lot of my friends are dissapointed with Halo 3, and now I see why. And it sold so well too. Maybe we can petition Nintendo to make a demo patch (put the stuff from the demo back in) or something. I really hope we find some more techniques down the road, but I'm suprised so much stuff was taken out.
Thank you. I guess I've just gone over this enough times to make a rant sound well written. ;)

I'm a big Halo fan. I've played the stuffing out of Halo 1 and, even though I didn't like it as much, Halo 2. But Halo 3 just crosses the line for me. I just can't enjoy it.

Really though, all a dev needs to do is give players the option to play either casually or competitively to give it longevity. With Anyone play in Brawl can be aimed at casuals as long as dumbed down elements of gameplay aren't forced on players in With Friends games. That will keep people playing after they've passed the learning curve and the core gameplay is what stands out to them.
 

SolidSonic

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
652
I was a big fan of Halo 1 and 2.

After playing Halo 2 online with friends for year and years, I finally stopped and picked up a PS3. Resistance Fall of Man quickly eclipsed the Halo series for me, I highly recommend it. (check out the new Resistance game info)

When I got my hands on Halo 3, I was very underwhelmed/disappointed. It had like zero game play depth, compared to Resistance. Yeah it has some awesome features like vid recording and a level editor, but that doesn't change the fact that the gunplay is stale compared to other shooters like CoD4 and Resistance. I don't know how to describe it exactly, but the core game play for Halo 3 was dumbed down to an annoying level.


I'm skeptical Brawl will follow the path of Halo 3 though, its not really the same situation at all. X_x
 

Hitzel

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
551
Location
New Jersey.
I didn't enjoy Resistance because I don't like the PS3's controller.

I personally have been playing alot of Cube 2 and Shadowrun recently. Both of those games are pretty interesting, especially Shadowrun. (but then again, I'm a little biased there because I was a tester for it).
 
Top Bottom