After the SDCC tournament yesterday... I'm having doubts Smash 4 will be a good competitive game.

[HeavyLobster]

Maybe there should be more anti-shield attacks.

Falcon Punch needs to be one of those attacks.

 

[SmashBro99]

Why are we comparing a party game like smash to real fighting games? o0

jw

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

Yeah this threads turned into a lot of subjective discussion about what people want the game to have instead of whats necessary for it to be competitive.

Its understandable that theres going to be a decent amount of people that wont prefer the game to others. But so far no one's really presented anything that seems to indicate the game wont be competitive, and it seems like a lot of people are having fun with the game so far.

What's necessary for a game to be competitive is for it to have two opposing parties and the ability for one party to triumph over the other. Everything else is extra.

 

[Morbi]

Why are we comparing a party game like smash to real fighting games? o0

jw

In a competitive environment, Smash is treated as a "real" fighting game as opposed to a party game. So therefore, when the discussion pertains to competitive Smash, it is compared to other fighting games.

What's necessary for a game to be competitive is for it to have two opposing parties and the ability for one party to triumph over the other. Everything else is extra.

I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly.

 

[ItsRainingGravy]

Maybe there should be more anti-shield attacks.

Either that, or more anti-shield options. Of which, there is a new option available in Smash 4 that could potentially serve as such.

Pivot Canceling.

Shields do look a bit strong in this game, especially with the nearly instantaneous shield drop, but one thing that could be used to help offset this is Pivot Canceling. A person shielding you is, usually, expecting a direct frontal attack from your end. This generally leads to the following scenarios:

1) They attempt a shield grab if you try to attack them, especially if you use an aerial.
2) They shield drop to try to attack you, if they anticipate that you are going to grab them.
3) They roll, if they can't properly read what you are going to do next, to try to get into a more advantageous space.
4) They spot dodge an exceptionally predictable attack (Bowser Bomb), and then punish.

With Pivot Canceling being a thing now, this leads to more options in general. Not just for defense, but or aggressive play as well. In particular, characters with high running speed are going to benefit the most out of this, such as Sonic/Shiek/Captain Falcon/Greninja/Fox/Little Mac/etc. Running speed is higher across the board now, which also helps with this new mechanic. This could lead to potential shield punishing options such as:

1) If you anticipate them to shield drop, run behind them and do a Pivot Canceled Tilt.
2) If you anticipate them to try to block your attack, run behind them and do a Pivot Grab. (Could be done in Brawl)
3) If you anticipate them to attack (usually Down Smash), you could shield stop your dash. Though this would lead to a neutral situation, as it puts you in a position where you can't shield grab in retaliation.
4) If you anticipate them to roll, if they try to roll backwards, you have a very good opportunity to grab them. If they roll forwards, it will probably lead to a neutral situation however.
5) If they spot dodge, then gg.

Granted, most of these can be pretty hard reads. But they are still additional options provided by Pivot Canceling. Because it opens up a situation of "Are they going to directly attack me, or try to get me from behind?". Instilling thoughts like this into an opponent gives you more footing in concerns to controlling the pace of the battle to your favor, and could potentially lead to more instances where your opponent could mess up. Granted, it would be nice if there were better options to deal with shields in Smash 4, but at least this is something that players could consider.


Also, random unrelated thought: Mega Man could probably use Crash Bombs (Side B) to place bombs on opponents that are shielding. Not sure if this works or not, but it is some food for thought for people who wish to play the character, such as myself.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Why does everybody assume Pivot Canceling will still be a thing at release, especially now that Sakurai knows about it while he's still in power to do something about it? Why?

 

[κomıc]

Why does everybody assume Pivot Canceling will still be a thing at release, especially now that Sakurai knows about it while he's still in power to do something about it? Why?

Because Smash 3DS is practically gold right now and Pivot Canceling doesn't really seem like a broken tactic or anything compared to Wavedashing. You can pivot grab in Brawl and some can pivot-side special like Ness.

 

[Devil G.]

It seems pretty intentional. If that's the case, I don't understand why the would remove it since as Tortle pointed out, it's not unfair or anything of the sort.

 

[DraginHikari]

Why does everybody assume Pivot Canceling will still be a thing at release, especially now that Sakurai knows about it while he's still in power to do something about it? Why?

I can turn it around as well, is there some reason we should assume it won't be? Both questions are going to have a lot of assumptions in their answer.

 

[Saikyoshi]

It seems pretty intentional. If that's the case, I don't understand why the would remove it since as Tortle pointed out, it's not unfair or anything of the sort.

Sakurai thought the same thing when he found Wavedashing in Melee mid-development.

I have a feeling he'd cut it out the first chance he gets as to not "repeat his mistakes" or so.

 

[World]

Why are we comparing a party game like smash to real fighting games? o0

jw

Ever heard of EVO?

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

Sakurai thought the same thing when he found Wavedashing in Melee mid-development.

I have a feeling he'd cut it out the first chance he gets as to not "repeat his mistakes" or so.

Can you just imagine the ****storm that would arise should Sakurai remove anything like that?

 

[Veggi]

Pivot attacks look really natural and kind of make sense from a realism point of view. People can turn around while running, it's just hard to stop their momentum and push it in another direction. In Brawl it's already possible to dash back back and forth in the same position, which makes less sense than attacking in the opposite direction while moving. If characters slid more while doing pivot attacks I feel like it would make more sense though. Because Sakurai put pivot grabs into Brawl as an intended feature with their own properties, I can't see why he would take this out.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Can you just imagine the ****storm that would arise should Sakurai remove anything like that?

You mean like the one that already happened and he casually ignored with Brawl? The one that still hasn't ended and probably won't any time soon?

 

[Bladeviper]

You mean like the one that already happened and he casually ignored with Brawl?

it was a new engine in brawl that didnt lend it self to the old tech, the new one is in engine already and would take time to remove, time they would probably rather use to polish the game

 

[pickle962]

Personally, I don't have a lot of faith at all in the current game. It just looks really slow, the lag behind a lot of the moves is huge with no apparent way to cancel it. It just looks unenjoyable to play a slower and less technical game, and I think if things don't pick up, it will die out like brawl and melee will remain the esports game.

Its a demo genius! *facepalm*

 

[JV5Chris]

Why does everybody assume Pivot Canceling will still be a thing at release, especially now that Sakurai knows about it while he's still in power to do something about it? Why?

It makes perfect sense to give players the ability to defend their backside when there's limited dashing agility. I wouldn't assume it's unintentional or bad for the game for that matter.

 

[Saikyoshi]

It makes perfect sense to give players the ability to defend their backside when there's limited dashing agility. I wouldn't assume it's unintentional or bad for the game for that matter.

I know it makes perfect sense and has a lot of uses. That's exactly why it's doomed.

 

[pickle962]

That's exactly why it's doomed.

no it's NOT!

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I know it makes perfect sense and has a lot of uses. That's exactly why it's doomed.

I got a really good laugh out of that.

 

[Bread-Butterer]

I would be happy to address an actual argument. Writing a wall of text does not mean youve made an argument.

Is all worth ignoring. They are not arguments. They're emotional nonsense and personal testimony that along with your snark make this look silly. Someone could exchange the words Melee with Brawl and its ledge mechanics and the claim would be just as accurate.

The only thing you actually used as an argument was dash dancing, which cancels movement as Ive stated; and air momentum, which is the only reasonable thing youve used.

You can talk about dashdancing in such a reductive fashion by saying "cancels lol", but clearly, within the context of my post, I was pointing out that pressing right and left repeatedly on the control stick and watching your character reflect this action was good example of the character agency that's been lost. It doesn't matter how you define it. Putting it under your big umbrella of "cancel" techniques doesn't detract from its value. It's natural feedback that feels right. Not many around here consider dash dancing an advanced technique. It's something anyone could execute, it just isn't often used by low level players because they don't concern themselves with spacing and approach feints.

I'm not sure why I'm explaining this... I actually don't know anyone else who has seriously tried to dismiss dash dancing as a bad mechanic that was rightfully dropped from the series. You're not even arguing against its functionality. You're arguing against it because of the simple fact that it's technically a cancel. Huh. Well, you may define it as such, but I see it as a natural, logical translation of the player's intentions onto the screen.

You said that I could argue that Brawl and Melee's ledge mechanics as being equally illogical and silly looking, but you failed to provide a single reason why. In Melee and 64, you had to be right next to the ledge to grab it. You had to be facing it (for the most part), to grab it. Recovery moves would overshoot the ledge, as a result of the force and speed of the actions. This, to me, within the context of the engine and established physics, makes sense. The Brawl auto ledge snap mechanic was designed to make recovering easier for new comers. Every aspect of Brawl's design has pointed to this philosophy. It was not implemented to be intuitive. It was not added to provide depth. It certainly does not improve mobility and increase options. The same philosophy has carried over to the Smash 4 build we've seen. Surely you're not in denial about this as well.

Lets talk about random input buffers as well. A mechanic that was discovered in the Brawl code by modders when making Project M. Explain to me why this is being coded in, other than to reduce player agency and increase random outcomes? Another hidden feature of Brawl that made it feel "off". It's a design statement on par with tripping (which I've excluded from the discussion because it's thankfully been removed).

I'm not even going to get into the atrociously stunted air game that has resulted from this new philosophy, since you've already acknowledged that to be true.

Right, but none of these are arguments, according to you. Just an emotionally charged wall of text. So don't feel inclined to think critically about anything I've written. Shouldn't be too difficult, you've proven to be impressively proficient at it so far.

 

[pickle962]

You can talk about dashdancing in such a reductive fashion by saying "cancels lol", but clearly, within the context of my post, I was pointing out that pressing right and left repeatedly on the control stick and watching your character reflect this action was good example of the character agency that's been lost. It doesn't matter how you define it. Putting it under your big umbrella of "cancel" techniques doesn't detract from its value. It's natural feedback that feels right. Not many around here consider dash dancing an advanced technique. It's something anyone could execute, it just isn't often used by low level players because they don't concern themselves with spacing and approach feints.

I'm not sure why I'm explaining this... I actually don't know anyone else who has seriously tried to dismiss dash dancing as a bad mechanic that was rightfully dropped from the series. You're not even arguing against its functionality. You're arguing against it because of the simple fact that it's technically a cancel. Huh. Well, you may define it as such, but I see it as a natural, logical translation of the player's intentions onto the screen.

You said that I could argue that Brawl and Melee's ledge mechanics as being equally illogical and silly looking, but you failed to provide a single reason why. In Melee and 64, you had to be right next to the ledge to grab it. You had to be facing it (for the most part), to grab it. Recovery moves would overshoot the ledge, as a result of the force and speed of the actions. This, to me, within the context of the engine and established physics, makes sense. The Brawl auto ledge snap mechanic was designed to make recovering easier for new comers. Every aspect of Brawl's design has pointed to this philosophy. It was not implemented to be intuitive. It was not added to provide depth. It certainly does not improve mobility and increase options. The same philosophy has carried over to the Smash 4 build we've seen. Surely you're not in denial about this as well.

Lets talk about random input buffers as well. A mechanic that was discovered in the Brawl code by modders when making Project M. Explain to me why this is being coded in, other than to reduce player agency and increase random outcomes? Another hidden feature of Brawl that made it feel "off". It's a design statement on par with tripping (which I've excluded from the discussion because it's thankfully been removed).

I'm not even going to get into the atrociously stunted air game that has resulted from this new philosophy, since you've already acknowledged that to be true.

Right, but none of these are arguments, according to you. Just an emotionally charged wall of text. So don't feel inclined to think critically about anything I've written. Shouldn't be too difficult, you've proven to be impressively proficient at it so far.

tl;dr! oh and being condescending in your last sentence isn't helping that wall of text you've written any if at all

 

[chrisall76]

I know it makes perfect sense and has a lot of uses. That's exactly why it's doomed.

With the way Sakurai is now, if it's in the game I doubt he'll just straight out remove it.
I don't think he's being as unsupportive of competitive as brawl.

 

[D-idara]

You can talk about dashdancing in such a reductive fashion by saying "cancels lol", but clearly, within the context of my post, I was pointing out that pressing right and left repeatedly on the control stick and watching your character reflect this action was good example of the character agency that's been lost. It doesn't matter how you define it. Putting it under your big umbrella of "cancel" techniques doesn't detract from its value. It's natural feedback that feels right. Not many around here consider dash dancing an advanced technique. It's something anyone could execute, it just isn't often used by low level players because they don't concern themselves with spacing and approach feints.

I'm not sure why I'm explaining this... I actually don't know anyone else who has seriously tried to dismiss dash dancing as a bad mechanic that was rightfully dropped from the series. You're not even arguing against its functionality. You're arguing against it because of the simple fact that it's technically a cancel. Huh. Well, you may define it as such, but I see it as a natural, logical translation of the player's intentions onto the screen.

You said that I could argue that Brawl and Melee's ledge mechanics as being equally illogical and silly looking, but you failed to provide a single reason why. In Melee and 64, you had to be right next to the ledge to grab it. You had to be facing it (for the most part), to grab it. Recovery moves would overshoot the ledge, as a result of the force and speed of the actions. This, to me, within the context of the engine and established physics, makes sense. The Brawl auto ledge snap mechanic was designed to make recovering easier for new comers. Every aspect of Brawl's design has pointed to this philosophy. It was not implemented to be intuitive. It was not added to provide depth. It certainly does not improve mobility and increase options. The same philosophy has carried over to the Smash 4 build we've seen. Surely you're not in denial about this as well.

Lets talk about random input buffers as well. A mechanic that was discovered in the Brawl code by modders when making Project M. Explain to me why this is being coded in, other than to reduce player agency and increase random outcomes? Another hidden feature of Brawl that made it feel "off". It's a design statement on par with tripping (which I've excluded from the discussion because it's thankfully been removed).

I'm not even going to get into the atrociously stunted air game that has resulted from this new philosophy, since you've already acknowledged that to be true.

Right, but none of these are arguments, according to you. Just an emotionally charged wall of text. So don't feel inclined to think critically about anything I've written. Shouldn't be too difficult, you've proven to be impressively proficient at it so far.

You lost me when you said buffering was bad...it's seriously one of the best Brawl mechanics.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I don't consider characters spazzing out while flipping directions repeatedly natural. If I try to do that in real life, I'm going to trip and fast. That sequence of inputs is the optimal way to make yourself trip in Brawl; it's actually amazingly intuitive. While the tripping thing is pretty Brawl exclusive, in general, it really is pretty weird and not intuitive that slamming the stick repeatedly back and forth gives you a dash dance as opposed to your character skidding all over the place trying to resolve the momentum (which is what happens in Mario games when you try to do that). I also don't really find Brawl ledges somehow less intuitive than Melee ledges; for every case where you can find a Brawl ledgegrab from way too far (barely within the Brawl ledgegrab range for maximum graphic awkwardness), I could find a Melee one that looks like it should grab but just doesn't (barely outside the Melee ledgegrab range for maximum graphic awkwardness). Especially on the stages with pass-through floors, I actually found ledges pretty weird in Melee; don't tell me you always found it natural and intuitive to grab the ledges on DK 64 in Melee as Jigglypuff coming at the ledge from directly below. Given that Brawl has such stages as Delfino Plaza and the Halberd as core stages, this sort of situation is far more common in Brawl. I could make similar arguments for literally any mechanical differences, but it would not be a worthwhile exercise.

None of this is even knocking Melee's merits as a game. These design decisions have pros and cons from a gameplay standpoint, and I don't really mind Melee's design decisions within the context of Melee. I do not, however, find Melee naturally more intuitive than Brawl to control, and I think you're just personally really familiar with Melee and are extrapolating your familiarity to intuitiveness. Being actually good at either game requires you to transcend play by intuition and actually think about what you're doing, but if I just turn off my brain for a while and try to do stuff in both games, I really do find what happens in Brawl more natural. Of course, I'm more familiar with Brawl so it's just emblazened into my subconsious. Melee is the same for you, and that's fine. I just don't think your argument here about intuitiveness has merit, and I think Cassio was actually making a pretty good point. From playing smash 4's demo, I can tell you the game controls like a dream and is very responsive; what game actions you find intuitive from your inputs we could argue about, but I found it very easy to "feel" what I was doing in the game even with less than a half an hour of total playtime punctuated by hours of waiting in a line.

 

[Saikyoshi]

You lost me when you said buffering was bad...it's seriously one of the best Brawl mechanics.

He's saying the fact that the amount of buffer is random is bad, not buffering itself.

 

[Cassio]

You can talk about dashdancing in such a reductive fashion by saying "cancels lol", but clearly, within the context of my post, I was pointing out that pressing right and left repeatedly on the control stick and watching your character reflect this action was good example of the character agency that's been lost.

Two different points you made here. The first, thats a big maybe. I dont really see many game designers do this tbh but I wont say its an inherently bad thing.

The second point is just outright false. Assuming you imply that the mechanics in this regard attached to Brawl or smash 4 are unnatural, as AA implied youd have to call a ridiculous amount of critical acclaimed games poorly designed. When you move, youre making a commitment. The faster you move, the stronger your commitment. Theres an easy way to press right and left and have tight response, its called walking.

It doesn't matter how you define it. Putting it under your big umbrella of "cancel" techniques doesn't detract from its value. It's natural feedback that feels right. Not many around here consider dash dancing an advanced technique. It's something anyone could execute, it just isn't often used by low level players because they don't concern themselves with spacing and approach feints.

I'm not sure why I'm explaining this... I actually don't know anyone else who has seriously tried to dismiss dash dancing as a bad mechanic that was rightfully dropped from the series. You're not even arguing against its functionality. You're arguing against it because of the simple fact that it's technically a cancel. Huh. Well, you may define it as such, but I see it as a natural, logical translation of the player's intentions onto the screen.

No real arguments presented here, but Ill add you should reread my initial response to your first post. I didnt say it was a bad thing, I said either way was a design choice. Although I think it could be bad in terms of balance.

You said that I could argue that Brawl and Melee's ledge mechanics as being equally illogical and silly looking, but you failed to provide a single reason why. In Melee and 64, you had to be right next to the ledge to grab it. You had to be facing it (for the most part), to grab it. Recovery moves would overshoot the ledge, as a result of the force and speed of the actions. This, to me, within the context of the engine and established physics, makes sense. The Brawl auto ledge snap mechanic was designed to make recovering easier for new comers. Every aspect of Brawl's design has pointed to this philosophy. It was not implemented to be intuitive. It was not added to provide depth. It certainly does not improve mobility and increase options. The same philosophy has carried over to the Smash 4 build we've seen. Surely you're not in denial about this as well.

The ledge doesn't even have to do with intuitive movement so this was a poor argument from the get go, which is why I ignored it. AA had a good response to this, but Ill add there was also hardly anything systematically natural about the way the ledge interacts with the player due to the diverse amount of recoveries.

Lets talk about random input buffers as well. A mechanic that was discovered in the Brawl code by modders when making Project M. Explain to me why this is being coded in, other than to reduce player agency and increase random outcomes? Another hidden feature of Brawl that made it feel "off". It's a design statement on par with tripping (which I've excluded from the discussion because it's thankfully been removed).

Doubt it was intentional, but it was dumb I agree. Granted no one "felt" until it was discovered and most are still not aware of it.

I'm not even going to get into the atrociously stunted air game that has resulted from this new philosophy, since you've already acknowledged that to be true.

Uhh, I didn't call it stunted, just another design choice. I think its something I prefer, but also something hard to balance around if some characters fly across the screen and others hardly move. You can see this as a problem in melee.

Right, but none of these are arguments, according to you. Just an emotionally charged wall of text. So don't feel inclined to think critically about anything I've written. Shouldn't be too difficult, you've proven to be impressively proficient at it so far.

Well this time you gave four arguments to your original point as opposed to one so kudos.

 

[25%Cotton]

though i think the ledges were far too forgiving in brawl, i specifically remember feeling annoyed by the ledges in melee. they were a little TOO unforgiving.

and anyhow, the off-stage game was one of the better things about brawl. i always loved the feeling of high-risk/high-reward and learning how each recovery worked so i could REALLY push them out of their comfort zone. i'm excited for the new mechanic because i always preferred ledge kills where i physically beat them than the ones where i just caught them with a well-timed ledge grab at the end and watched them fall.

 

[Bread-Butterer]

Hey, it's so much fun slashing out each others paragraphs like giant assholes! I want to play!

Two different points you made here. The first, thats a big maybe. I dont really see many game designers do this tbh but I wont say its an inherently bad thing.

The second point is just outright false. Assuming you imply that the mechanics in this regard attached to Brawl or smash 4 are unnatural, as AA implied youd have to call a ridiculous amount of critical acclaimed games poorly designed. When you move, youre making a commitment. The faster you move, the stronger your commitment. Theres an easy way to press right and left and have tight response, its called walking.

I stated pretty plainly that this player agency is specific to Smash. It's a quality that people fell in love with it for, and that made it such a compelling competitive fighter. Other "critically acclaimed games" aren't relevant at all. Your losing track of my argument entirely, and perhaps your own.

The ledge doesn't even have to do with intuitive movement so this was a poor argument from the get go, which is why I ignored it. AA had a good response to this, but Ill add there was also hardly anything systematically natural about the way the ledge interacts with the player due to the diverse amount of recoveries.

OK now, I'm trying not to be a ****, but have you ever played or watched a game of smashbros? Ledge play has nothing to do with intuitive movement? Sorry.... what? Ledge play is a massively significant and unique part of movement in the series.

Doubt it was intentional, but it was dumb I agree. Granted no one "felt" until it was discovered and most are still not aware of it.

When this was discovered, myself and many others went "Ohhhh, that's what that is." It was the experience of the game feeling "off". That feeling exchanges didn't play out the way they should have, that your input wasn't entirely responsive in certain instances. This is the clunkiness that I described earlier.

Uhh, I didn't call it stunted, just another design choice. I think its something I prefer, but also something hard to balance around if some characters fly across the screen and others hardly move. You can see this as a problem in melee.

I don't see this as a problem in Melee at all, actually. I call it variety. It's a thing. Some characters, like Captain Falcon, would have incredibly limited viability without air momentum. Peach, on the other hand, controls her space just fine without much air momentum at all. Again though, I was discussing more the feel of the game. Jumping and having your momentum carry over from your land speed felt good, and it felt natural. Jumping into molasses does not.

Well this time you gave four arguments to your original point as opposed to one so kudos.

I wasn't making new points (input buffer excluded), I was elaborating on the points that you didn't seem to comprehend.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

Is there actually a random buffer? I was under the impression that the input buffer in Brawl is a static 10 frames, allowing you to input a command before the previous one has finished. That's what a "buffer" means. A waitlist, so to speak. Now, if there were a random input delay, that would be entirely different and really stupid. The 10-frame buffer in Brawl makes cancels easier to pull off when they're there, and makes it easier to attack directly out of a roll or spotdodge.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Is there actually a random buffer? I was under the impression that the input buffer in Brawl is a static 10 frames, allowing you to input a command before the previous one has finished. That's what a "buffer" means. A waitlist, so to speak. Now, if there were a random input delay, that would be entirely different and really stupid. The 10-frame buffer in Brawl makes cancels easier to pull off when they're there, and makes it easier to attack directly out of a roll or spotdodge.

I think it was input delay that was discovered by the PMBR, but I'm not entirely sure. Buffer was already known about.

 

[guedes the brawler]

You lost me when you said buffering was bad...it's seriously one of the best Brawl mechanics.

it has it's moments, where, say... you are trying to use a jab combo (mash A) very close to the edge, you opponent shields and thsi makes you slide off the edge.

if you have a long, laggy nair like, say, Wolf... dead.

 

[Xavier :D]

I don't know how many times this has been repeated, but competitive or not, we all buy the game and it will be a SMASH hit.
See what I did there?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Yeah, I see your point with the throws. But the problem is, shields look to be exactly that strong at the moment.

Maybe there should be more anti-shield attacks. Marth's Shield Breaker does seem to be designed to do exactly that if the PotD is any indication, but the drop speed is too fast for even that to work effectively... Huh...

Are they?

Because I know from Brawl they still had moves safe on shield there and those shields were pretty ridiculous. Heck Lucario's safety on shield changes with how much aura he has. These shields look like they can drop faster but what kind of shieldstun are we dealing with? People might be able to act faster but is it obvious nothing works on shield?

Aerials seem to be either laggy or not as character dependent rather than universal .

 

[Cassio]

I stated pretty plainly that this player agency is specific to Smash. It's a quality that people fell in love with it for, and that made it such a compelling competitive fighter. Other "critically acclaimed games" aren't relevant at all. Your losing track of my argument entirely, and perhaps your own.

This isn't an argument unfortunately, it's a concession. If you can pull any mechanics and arbitrarily decide "its intuitive movement specific to smash", I can do the same thing for every single mechanic in any smash game. Needless to say, this is entirely subjective and terrible logical reasoning.

OK now, I'm trying not to be a ****, but have you ever played or watched a game of smashbros? Ledge play has nothing to do with intuitive movement? Sorry.... what? Ledge play is a massively significant and unique part of movement in the series.

Its not ledge play its ledge mechanics. And the key word is intuitive, which for some reason you included at first then removed. If it worked like a platform then itd be intuitive, but really any of these assessments are going to be subjective to some degree.

When this was discovered, myself and many others went "Ohhhh, that's what that is." It was the experience of the game feeling "off". That feeling exchanges didn't play out the way they should have, that your input wasn't entirely responsive in certain instances. This is the clunkiness that I described earlier.

Cool story, but none of the top level players seem to complain or are very aware of it. Guess youre special.

I don't see this as a problem in Melee at all, actually. I call it variety. It's a thing. Some characters, like Captain Falcon, would have incredibly limited viability without air momentum. Peach, on the other hand, controls her space just fine without much air momentum at all. Again though, I was discussing more the feel of the game. Jumping and having your momentum carry over from your land speed felt good, and it felt natural. Jumping into molasses does not.

Using your reasoning, I can just say its fine due to player agency specific to smash, lol.

In regards to balance, that variety certainly didnt help Kirby, Bowser, GW, Mewtwo, Roy, Zelda, DK, the Links, Ganon; and luckily Mario, Doc, Luigi and ICs have a good wavedash to compensate but they still pretty much suck compared to the good characters anyways (except maybe ICs). Peach is the only real good counter-example here which is why you went directly to her, lol. Sort of jigglypuff, and falco too. Peach because of her float and outstanding punish game and range, falco because of his ridiculous shine, and jigglypuff has to play extremely lame to stay relevant.

I wasn't making new points (input buffer excluded), I was elaborating on the points that you didn't seem to comprehend.

I didnt say points I said arguments. You actually provided none once again, since the first quote was an implicit admission to that your argument is anchored in subjectivity. There wasnt any point responding to the rest but out of courtesy I did anyways.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

You mean like the one that already happened and he casually ignored with Brawl? The one that still hasn't ended and probably won't any time soon?

Worse, mi amigo. Brawl was a "betrayal" to some, and the damage is still lasting. If Nintendo actually came out and patched out a technique, no matter how easy/hard it was to do? The ramifications of such an act would be...immense.

 

[Bread-Butterer]

blah blah subjective subjective blah blah

You toss around the term "subjective" like it's some kind of debate trump card. You sound like every other forum warrior who took a class in critical thinking. It's alright for some issues to be subjective. You might have even noticed that my first post was expressing MY feelings on the direction of the series. So yes... that is subjective. Congratulations. However, you may have also noticed that a lot of people agreed with me. The changes made to the mechanics of the games that have lead to the disappointment of veteran fans like myself are tangible and observable. No amount of misrepresentation on your end can convince us otherwise. Most of the defenders of the new iterations are relatively new players (you joined in 2011, for instance). The fact that there are very few veteran players who support the direction of the series speaks volumes. So you can go on and tell me that it's a matter of preference, and it's all subjective, but mark my words: if the game's demo build is any indication, 5 years from now we'll be watching Melee at EVO, not Smash 4. I find that as disappointing as anyone.

I'm done here. We're boring everyone on this board to tears. Good night and good luck.

 

[Deleted member]

Most of the defenders of the new iterations are relatively new players (you joined in 2011, for instance).

Now that just seems unfair. I didn't register until a bit after Smash 4's announcement, but before that I had been keeping up with the scene and playing Smash for a long time. You can't really attribute someone's registration date to being a new player. Not all veterans to the series dislike the direction Smash 4 is going either, in fact a good deal of them are looking to test out the finished build before passing judgement.

 

[Black Mantis]

Most of the defenders of the new iterations are relatively new players (you joined in 2011, for instance).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageism

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

You toss around the term "subjective" like it's some kind of debate trump card. You sound like every other forum warrior who took a class in critical thinking. It's alright for some issues to be subjective. You might have even noticed that my first post was expressing MY feelings on the direction of the series. So yes... that is subjective. Congratulations. However, you may have also noticed that a lot of people agreed with me. The changes made to the mechanics of the games that have lead to the disappointment of veteran fans like myself are tangible and observable. No amount of misrepresentation on your end can convince us otherwise. Most of the defenders of the new iterations are relatively new players (you joined in 2011, for instance). The fact that there are very few veteran players who support the direction of the series speaks volumes. So you can go on and tell me that it's a matter of preference, and it's all subjective, but mark my words: if the game's demo build is any indication, 5 years from now we'll be watching Melee at EVO, not Smash 4. I find that as disappointing as anyone.

I'm done here. We're boring everyone on this board to tears. Good night and good luck.

What does the registration date of members have anything to do with their experience of Smash?