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

[Cassio]

I dont think anyone is arguing that offensive oriented games arent more exciting than defensive. Moreso that being more defensive doesnt have to be a deathstroke for a competitive game that sometimes people make it out to be.

 

[JV5Chris]

To be fair, people ALSO need to lay off all the melee hate.

I don't think people quite understand the impact it's having either.

The bulk of the Melee community discussing Smash 4 is on Reddit and Facebook now, not Smashboards. As a result you see far less impressions here, a smaller diversity of opinions, and more ganging up on people when they give critiques. It's not the fault of Smashboards so much as it is the reality of what happens before a new Smash game launches.

 

[Ulevo]

I've made no claim other then to deny the statement that "shielding is inherently defensive". This entire thread has been about shielding. If you believe, specifically, brawl's shielding to be defensive, that is your claim that you own and take with it the Burden of Proof. Now the only support you've given has been to repeatedly argue something along the lines of:
"No, the idea that Brawl's shields don't inherently promote defensive play is counter intuitive."
which is entirely circular. This would fail any test of logical soundness.

In spite of this I've still provided you examples which you've chosen to ignore for being "simple". Ok Ulevo, I got it if I dont instinctually agree with you that Brawl's shields are inherently defensive tools that lead to campfests I must be some scrub that doesnt know anything about Brawl.

No, the problem I have is that you initiated a debate with me, self admittedly with a counter intuitive concept, with no self explanation as to why I was wrong, or how you were right. Yet for some reason the burden of proof falls on me to prove the legitimacy of my perspective? Do you realize how silly this is? Then when I bring this in to question, you tell me that my logic is circular, as if to circumvent the fact that you failed to provide any logical burden of proof in the first place.

You've made the effort to make a point while poorly making it. If you wanna prove to me the world is round, not flat, the burden of proof is not me to prove it's flat, even if I am wrong, because the current consensus says otherwise and because you're the one who is trying to alter my perception based on the fact that you made the call to argue. I'm not going to indulge you in a conversation if the very point you're making is without logical explanation.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I have a hard time believing this game will be campier than Brawl with what we have seen.

 

[Turokman5896]

Even with the last two, their merit as an exciting game is limited. I say this because analysis in the most commonly spectated games, while I can't speak for DOTA2 since I don't remember the numbers off-hand, LoL actually has one of the worst ratios of players-to-viewers.

To make sense of this, it has over 20 million active players (or so Riot claims). Anything less than 100k viewers is actually awful, since it suggests a very narrow appeal in proportion to its exposure. It's uncommon for a game to have more viewers than players, but that's a horrible ratio. Comparatively, a game like StarCraft (Brood War or StarCraft II) has had several times its existing player base in actual viewers. Even if its current player base of 300k+ users, if it can break 30k viewers that's fantastic. Even though both are really complex games, the latter has more tangible strategy (IE "It's like real-time Chess") and of course is insanely more aggressive in nature.

So for someone who has been monitoring competitive gaming at large, I must say Smash actually has great turnout for viewership right now with Melee. Even though Melee is a relatively dated product and having to use CRTs creates a tiny bit of a technical anomaly compared to the rest of gaming circuit, the events have still been rather fruitful and worth the investment. Putting nationals and big tourneys aside, GimR is getting insane numbers on his stream considering for how long he has been in the business. No surprise teams with sponsors have been getting into Smash, of all games. Even with a platform that affords meagre opportunity for exposure, it is still enough to provide fruitful return of interest for sponsors.

Highly aggressive play is a lot of fun to watch. Plenty of people who don't even play at a high level can watch Smash, and thus this narrow scope of exposure is reaching more eyes than just the hyper-competitive player base who is able to understand what is going on at an advanced level. Even people who are involved with other products can speak very highly of the Smash community and appreciate the level of intensity in the gameplay. I don't think Smash 4 has to be like Melee, but I certainly hope the game will at least serve to be more exciting than Brawl for the typical viewer so that our scene can only serve to grow.

Good post; but league is actually very intense and fun to watch. Viewership is lower due to very long match times and the fact that so many are playing during matches. That said, melee viewership may be pretty high, but writing off smash 4 so early won't help the competitive scene. I guarantee new viewers would love to see smash 4 tournaments/streams; so players ought to at least wait until they have the game in their hands.

 

[Pyra]

This game looks better than the previous two games to me. It's just different. Love Melee and Brawl, though. They're great games. I think "hating" any of the previous games is ridiculous.

That's my two cents.

 

[Bladeviper]

tbh everyone needs to just lay off everyone, The hate between the two groups is really depressing, especially with all the work some people in the community are putting in to try and bring everyone together.

Now as for the game imo it will be competitive like ive said before, and as far as we know nintendo has taken our feed back from e3 and smash fest so know all we can do is really wait and see if they followed up on any of it

edit: also lol at like the 50+ people here watching us bicker like children over what way to play the game is better

 

[Cassio]

No, the problem I have is that you initiated a debate with me, self admittedly with a counter intuitive concept, with no self explanation as to why I was wrong, or how you were right. Yet for some reason the burden of proof falls on me to prove the legitimacy of my perspective? Do you realize how silly this is? Then when I bring this in to question, you tell me that my logic is circular, as if to circumvent the fact that you failed to provide any logical burden of proof in the first place.

You've made the effort to make a point while poorly making it. If you wanna prove to me the world is round, not flat, the burden of proof is not me to prove it's flat, even if I am wrong, because the current consensus says otherwise and because you're the one who is trying to alter my perception based on the fact that you made the call to argue. I'm not going to indulge you in a conversation if the very point you're making is without logical explanation.

Welp, this went on a tangent. What youre talking about isnt real logic, just the way people tend to argue everyday and on the nets.

Logically and objectively burden of proof is on the person making a claim, not the person who initiated the discussion or has the less popular perspective. You can ask any logician or mathematician. Personally I rarely make claims or add lots of caveats if I do, and tend more towards pushing others to prove statements they make. Anyone is free to ask proof of someone making a claim that isnt self-evident, if you dont want to provide proof than drop the claim. You made a claim about Brawls shields and now provide nothing to back it up.

 

[BelowZer0]

Sorry, I didn't see the previous posts.

Reducing landing lag would do it for me, but otherwise I think that the game is doing well. We know the actual build will feature a better combo game, so there appears to be a WAY better balance. I'm getting sick of hearing people ultimately decide the game is horrible after a year-old demo that's outdated.

Ya honestly, just one of the things I said would probably do it, I'm leaning towards the improved speed as this game appears to be slow but who knows until the game actually comes out. And if that comment about people saying the game is horrible was directed to me (which I don't think it was) then you got the wrong impression. I think this game will be great.

 

[Snagrio]

People are basing opinions of core gameplay on a demo build that was shown to have major glitches and thus blatantly not finished yet. Bravo folks, bravo.

 

[SuperiorYoshi87]

I think judging the game before it's out is just a waste. Further more judging it by the 3DS version? Even more so a waste. I'm pretty sure the 3DS version will actually play differently than the Wii U version. I mean it's launching a whole 2 months (maybe) before the Wii U version which according to many sources is to further balance it and such. I feel the Wii U version will be more pointed towards the major scene of smash balanced to suit casuals and competitive players both. While the 3DS is just going to be kept at a casual gameplay standard.

 

[Hong]

Good post; but league is actually very intense and fun to watch. Viewership is lower due to very long match times and the fact that so many are playing during matches.

That's just my point, though.

Your view of what is "intense and fun to watch" is actually more limited, but mathematically only higher by virtue of the popularity of the product as a game to be played, thus player-to-viewer ratio. LoL is still a GREAT platform for any sponsor since viewers are viewers, but that said we know the vast majority who watch it also play it, and the sponsors and marketing is tailored as such. LoL actually has terrible "surface appeal". To bring up StarCraft again, in the Brood War days you could run ads for cute stuff and junior women's fashion, just because of how diverse the viewership was.

Anyways, not going to run this thread off-topic with my eSports witchcraft. :b

 

[pickle962]

Sakurai may be the mastermind behind Smash bros, BUT Nintendo's still higher than he is on the metaphorical food chain at the end of the day. If Nintendo says "Sakurai, these competitive players from our Smash Invitational have some valid input on what they would like to see changed/added to the final version of Smash 4. I suggest you, your crew, and Namco take a look at some of the top requests we have gotten from the smash bros community regarding overall gameplay especially on a competitive level and implement them into the game pronto!" Do you really think Sak's going to take one look at the suggestions Nintendo's handed him from smash fans all over the country/world and tell the big N "**** off! Don't tell me how to run my game!"

Think LONG and HARD about this before you guys and gals respond

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

tbh everyone needs to just lay off everyone, The hate between the two groups is really depressing, especially with all the work some people in the community are putting in to try and bring everyone together.

Now as for the game imo it will be competitive like ive said before, and as far as we know nintendo has taken our feed back from e3 and smash fest so know all we can do is really wait and see if they followed up on any of it

edit: also lol at like the 50+ people here watching us bicker like children over what way to play the game is better

I feel like people trying to close the divide just separates the groups further. We will all come together if we share a common interest. The only one who holds the power to make that happen is the big Samurai himself, not some random peace-advocates.

Sorry about the OT post. Let's just say your edit made me want to say something instead of lurking.

 

[Senario]

I feel like people trying to close the divide just separates the groups further. We will all come together if we share a common interest. The only one who holds the power to make that happen is the big Samurai himself, not some random peace-advocates.

Sorry about the OT post. Let's just say your edit made me want to say something instead of lurking.

I assume you mean Sakurai , Nah. Nintendo has more say in bringing the two together and they are trying their best while taking input from a lot of the pro players who are at their big smash events, lets hope that the appropriate things are changed. Sakurai I feel is too stubborn or stuck in his ways to consider bringing the community together without input from Nintendo.

 

[Bladeviper]

I feel like people trying to close the divide just separates the groups further. We will all come together if we share a common interest. The only one who holds the power to make that happen is the big Samurai himself, not some random peace-advocates.

Sorry about the OT post. Let's just say your edit made me want to say something instead of lurking.

i dont see how since most of the time they are just saying not to hate on the other game, they are not forcing anything on anyone, it just seems to be people upset that the other game is still being played on both sides

 

[Turokman5896]

That's just my point, though.

Your view of what is "intense and fun to watch" is actually more limited, but mathematically only higher by virtue of the popularity of the product as a game to be played, thus player-to-viewer ratio. LoL is still a GREAT platform for any sponsor since viewers are viewers, but that said we know the vast majority who watch it also play it, and the sponsors and marketing is tailored as such. LoL actually has terrible "surface appeal". To bring up StarCraft again, in the Brood War days you could run ads for cute stuff and junior women's fashion, just because of how diverse the viewership was.

Anyways, not going to run this thread off-topic with my eSports witchcraft. :b

My post had nothing to do with business viability; It just seemed like you were implying league is not fun to watch. They also don't need to run ads or gain new players; they already have millions. Smash can't take that approach, they need to appeal to everyone, and that means attempting to make the new game work. Also, the lcs is popular enough to have fantasy lcs... That's pretty big. Smash isn't there yet.

Edit; I think my post is easily misinterpreted! I mean to say that smash still has a lot of growth still, and working with nintendo, like at comic con; is likely the best way to increase the size of the competitive fanbase

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

i dont see how since most of the time they are just saying not to hate on the other game, they are not forcing anything on anyone, it just seems to be people upset that the other game is still being played on both sides

That's my point. It doesn't end arguments, "guys settle down" comments either go ignored or just fuel the fire of both sides even more. I've seen it happen quite a bit here and I've seen it happen extremely often on Youtube lol.

 

[Bladeviper]

That's my point. It doesn't end arguments, "guys settle down" comments either go ignored or just full the fire of both sides even more. I've seen it happen quite a bit here and I've seen it happen extremely often on Youtube lol.

and those are the same people who wonder why they are not taken seriously and its a major problem

 

[Ulevo]

Welp, this went on a tangent. What youre talking about isnt real logic, just the way people tend to argue everyday and on the nets.

Logically and objectively burden of proof is on the person making a claim, not the person who initiated the discussion or has the less popular perspective. You can ask any logician or mathematician. Personally I rarely make claims or add lots of caveats if I do, and tend more towards pushing others to prove statements they make. Anyone is free to ask proof of someone making a claim that isnt self-evident, if you dont want to provide proof than drop the claim. You made a claim about Brawls shields and now provide nothing to back it up.

You're the one that made the first initial claim, not me. Remember this?

Secondly
While I get what you mean by shielding, I think you didnt pull the analysis all the way to its conclusion nor is it really the greatest contributing factor to Brawls defensive play. Bigger factors IMO include:

1. MUCH MORE DIFFICULT PUNISH GAME
2. Slower movement
3. More commited approaching options
4. Increased emphasis on spacing oriented characters
5. Other stuff Im probably forgetting

All of which seem to be improved in the way of offense for smash 4.

Finally
Going what I said earlier about taking shielding mechanics to its full conclusion, if anything the shield mechanics help promote aggressive play. Remember shields are not inherently defensive, it depends on the way theyre used. Based on how movement works in this game being able to approach with shield is a REALLY good option and more than offsets its defensive capabilities IMO. Its sort of like how at face value dash dancing might sound like a strong offensive option, but it actually provides more utility defensively overall.

This was something I ignored, up until you made an effort to call me out and tell me I was wrong, referencing this post. I took your bait and responded to your post, directly explaining why this was wrong. Rather than addressing why I was incorrect, you told me my retort was mere circle talk, which I've explained repeatedly why it wasn't. Unfortunately repeating myself even more isn't going to suddenly make your lights turn on.

I'm going to drop my claim because it isn't worth arguing with you anymore. I hope you're hilariously good at this game competitively because I can't see another justification for having a discussion like this with someone in the BBR.

 

[Dinoman96]

Sakurai may be the mastermind behind Smash bros, BUT Nintendo's still higher than he is on the metaphorical food chain at the end of the day. If Nintendo says "Sakurai, these competitive players from our Smash Invitational have some valid input on what they would like to see changed/added to the final version of Smash 4. I suggest you, your crew, and Namco take a look at some of the top requests we have gotten from the smash bros community regarding overall gameplay especially on a competitive level and implement them into the game pronto!" Do you really think Sak's going to take one look at the suggestions Nintendo's handed him from smash fans all over the country/world and tell the big N "**** off! Don't tell me how to run my game!"

Think LONG and HARD about this before you guys and gals respond

That's the thing though. Nintendo of Japan might be as indifferent/uncaring to the competitive scene as much as Sakurai seems to be. It's really only Nintendo of America throwing us a bone here.

Iwata could just have too much respect for Sakurai to really question him. Afterall, he feels that Sak is the only one who can properly lead Smash.

 

[Jerm]

I didn't see all the matches, but most of what I saw involved lots of dash attack spam and Toon Links just loving that horrible, horrible dair (didn't see a lot of the 1v1s, don't interpret this as a call-out since ALL the Toon Links did this). That's basically a perfect environment for people who like to shield to win and probably win with a character like Bowser who has such heavy punishes. When the Bowsers were actually spacing stuff and finding the autocancels on their aerials, they seemed to be able to poke at each other safely even with Bowser, and they were using Bowser who is not exactly a speedy rushdown character. I imagine Sheik (who is a speedy rushdown character) and Toon Link (projectile/zoning character) have lots of ways to pressure a shield, probably best realized with some substantial time to practice the game.

I remain very optimistic about this game.

took the words right out of my mouth

 

[Bladeviper]

That's the thing though. Nintendo of Japan might be as indifferent/uncaring to the competitive scene as much as Sakurai seems to be. It's really only Nintendo of America throwing us a bone here.

Iwata could just have too much respect for Sakurai to really question him. Afterall, he feels that Sak is the only one who can properly lead Smash.

who knows, sakurai might be taking comments from namco in terms of balance and things, we cant know for sure whats going on unless we have an insider

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

If this is true (not saying it isn't, just that I haven't personally noticed this) then shield recovery speed would also make a large difference in if this is important to balance.

I'm not certain about shield recovery speed, but I've noticed that shields in Smash 4 also have a lot more staying power when held in place than they do in Brawl. You can simply hold a shield up and the rate at which it shrinks is actually quite slow. At one point in one gameplay clip from the Wii U demo, I saw Rosalina stand in place holding shield and the amount of shrinkage was almost invisible.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

Does it HAVE to be a competitive game to be good? What's wrong with just having a fun new Smash Bros game to play? If you want to play something like Melee, go play Melee.

It doesn't work like that I'm afraid.

tbh everyone needs to just lay off everyone, The hate between the two groups is really depressing, especially with all the work some people in the community are putting in to try and bring everyone together.

Now as for the game imo it will be competitive like ive said before, and as far as we know nintendo has taken our feed back from e3 and smash fest so know all we can do is really wait and see if they followed up on any of it

edit: also lol at like the 50+ people here watching us bicker like children over what way to play the game is better

I don't see any "hate" going on in this thread. It's really just people discussing game mechanics. No one is hating anything.

People are basing opinions of core gameplay on a demo build that was shown to have major glitches and thus blatantly not finished yet. Bravo folks, bravo.

So the game is going to be 100% different from how it is now? With lengthy combos l-canceling and wavedashing? Thats cool.

Glitches and polishing aside. There will probably be only minor differences between the demo and the final build as far as the characters and stages shown. The core gameplay is the most important part of the game. So of course its fair to make judgments. The things that change are things like glitches and bug fixes (alongside extra modes and things). The core gameplay has been established for a long time now... The main difference between now and the final build are tiny balance changes. Thats it. The build now and in the future won't be incredibly different no matter how you spin the "its just a demo" excuse.

I think judging the game before it's out is just a waste. Further more judging it by the 3DS version? Even more so a waste. I'm pretty sure the 3DS version will actually play differently than the Wii U version. I mean it's launching a whole 2 months (maybe) before the Wii U version which according to many sources is to further balance it and such. I feel the Wii U version will be more pointed towards the major scene of smash balanced to suit casuals and competitive players both. While the 3DS is just going to be kept at a casual gameplay standard.

The games have been confirmed to be the same. Several times. Making 2 different smash games in 2 years? I doubt it. The extra month between release is for bug checking. This has been confirmed as well. The only differences being the stages for the most part. and whatever exclusive modes there are. Gameplay remains unchanged between versions.


I don't like how people talking about the game now is being misconstrued as "hate" and people aren't supposed to speculate on the game that they played. Its silly to think that what we have seen and played of the game doesn't matter simply because it isn't finished in terms of bug testing and things like that.

 

[Bladeviper]

I'm not certain about shield recovery speed, but I've noticed that shields in Smash 4 also have a lot more staying power when held in place than they do in Brawl. You can simply hold a shield up and the rate at which it shrinks is actually quite slow. At one point in one gameplay clip from the Wii U demo, I saw Rosalina stand in place holding shield and the amount of shrinkage was almost invisible.

that was probably done just because it only seems to take a few good hits the break the shield so they might as well, its not like it matters in the long run if you are gonna block a few hits

I don't see any "hate" going on in this thread. It's really just people discussing game mechanics. No one is hating anything.

i was not really saying about this thread but in general there is a lot of hate i see going about about all 3 games at this point. it really just needs to stop, people are gonna play what they enjoy and thats kinda ll there is too it.

As for judging a game in its demo state, i am talking more along the lines of we don't know everything in the game yet in terms of movement options and things like that and i can say this because in the past games we didnt know the movement options with only a few hours of play. the core might stay the same but what we can do it will change depending on what we find is possible

 

[Hong]

My post had nothing to do with business viability; It just seemed like you were implying league is not fun to watch. They also don't need to run ads or gain new players; they already have millions. Smash can't take that approach, they need to appeal to everyone, and that means attempting to make the new game work. Also, the lcs is popular enough to have fantasy lcs... That's pretty big. Smash isn't there yet.

Edit; I think my post is easily misinterpreted! I mean to say that smash still has a lot of growth still, and working with nintendo, like at comic con; is likely the best way to increase the size of the competitive fanbase

Since that is not what my post was about, then that is the only thing misinterpreted. Just nevermind.

 

[Turokman5896]

It doesn't work like that I'm afraid.

I don't see any "hate" going on in this thread. It's really just people discussing game mechanics. No one is hating anything.

So the game is going to be 100% different from how it is now? With lengthy combos l-canceling and wavedashing? Thats cool.

Glitches and polishing aside. There will probably be only minor differences between the demo and the final build as far as the characters and stages shown. The core gameplay is the most important part of the game. So of course its fair to make judgments. The things that change are things like glitches and bug fixes (alongside extra modes and things). The core gameplay has been established for a long time now... The main difference between now and the final build are tiny balance changes. Thats it. The build now and in the future won't be incredibly different no matter how you spin the "its just a demo" excuse.

The games have been confirmed to be the same. Several times. Making 2 different smash games in 2 years? I doubt it. The extra month between release is for bug checking. This has been confirmed as well. The only differences being the stages for the most part. and whatever exclusive modes there are. Gameplay remains unchanged between versions.

I don't like how people talking about the game now is being misconstrued as "hate" and people aren't supposed to speculate on the game that they played. Its silly to think that what we have seen and played of the game doesn't matter simply because it isn't finished in terms of bug testing and things like that.

Because people (not here necessarily) are already giving up on it, calling it "brawl 2.0" saying "worse than melee" and "it's garbage." It's easy to see how people here are freaking tired of that crap and want to wait till release when we have our hands on the game before making huge assumptions. Also, although I'm inclined to agree with you on the development of the game, we don't know, we really have no idea.

Edit: @ Hong
LoL is still a GREAT platform for any sponsor since viewers are viewers, but that said we know the vast majority who watch it also play it, and the sponsors and marketing is tailored as such. Sounds like business to me...

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

You're the one that made the first initial claim, not me. Remember this?



This was something I ignored, up until you made an effort to call me out and tell me I was wrong, referencing this post. I took your bait and responded to your post, directly explaining why this was wrong. Rather than addressing why I was incorrect, you told me my retort was mere circle talk, which I've explained repeatedly why it wasn't. Unfortunately repeating myself even more isn't going to suddenly make your lights turn on.

I'm going to drop my claim because it isn't worth arguing with you anymore. I hope you're hilariously good at this game competitively because I can't see another justification for having a discussion like this with someone in the BBR.

Why was i quoted here just curious lol.

 

[Turokman5896]

Why was i quoted here just curious lol.

You're the chosen one!

 

[Cap'nChreest]

Because people (not here necessarily) are already giving up on it, calling it "brawl 2.0" saying "worse than melee" and "it's garbage." It's easy to see how people here are freaking tired of that crap and want to wait till release when we have our hands on the game before making huge assumptions. Also, although I'm inclined to agree with you on the development of the game, we don't know, we really have no idea.

I haven't seen that in this thread at all.

So its kind of unnecessary to spawn hate when no one has bashed the game. If there's an issue I'd suggest taking it to those people and not bringing it here.

I mean if you(meaning everyone) are insulted by the "brawl 2.0" then don't attribute it to the people here who aren't saying that kind of thing. Thats only going to make discussion impossible when people feel insulted and backlash against people who have nothing to do with it.

Misconstruing the purpose of this thread and other users posts here is probably going to kill the thread in the end.

 

[SuperiorYoshi87]

That's the thing though. Nintendo of Japan might be as indifferent/uncaring to the competitive scene as much as Sakurai seems to be. It's really only Nintendo of America throwing us a bone here.

Iwata could just have too much respect for Sakurai to really question him. Afterall, he feels that Sak is the only one who can properly lead Smash.

Nintendo wants to sell Wii Us I'm pretty sure they're listening. I don't think they want to take any risks with this one. I mean regardless of whether it's competitive or not it's gonna sell but I feel like Nintendo is going to try to please all the audiences here. I mean look at the change from Wii to Wii U in terms of gameplay in general Hyrule Warriors, Bayonetta, Wonderful 101, Splatoon are more hardcore type games hell even Aunuma said he was going to lessen the hand holding in the new Zelda. Nintendo is starting to take the hardcore gamers into account again, so especially with a game as big as Smash I feel like they will look more into the competitive scene. I mean they sponsored EVO that's something.

 

[SoaringDive]

The offensive vs defensive debate was pretty much just a Melee vs Brawl debate, and making very broad generalizations based on that.

It'd be way more useful if we looked at why Brawl wasn't that successful as a spectator sport and see what Smash 4 could be doing to change that. Melee doesn't represent everything Smash needs to be to be exciting to watch, it just represents what we have right now.

Off the top of my head, Brawl was boring graphically, too slow, had tripping, dodge out of hitstun, and punished offensive play too much. Still fun to play, not as fun to watch at top level.

Smash 4 looks a lot more interesting visually, even on the 3DS, and its attack effects and the Deadly Red Lightning increase the tension. It's faster - especially on the ground, hitstun can't be dodged out of, and there's no random tripping. The game isn't out yet, so we don't know if it punishes offensive play, but the future is looking very bright.

 

[Turokman5896]

I haven't seen that in this thread at all.

So its kind of unnecessary to spawn hate when no one has bashed the game. If there's an issue I'd suggest taking it to those people and not bringing it here.

I mean if you(meaning everyone) are insulted by the "brawl 2.0" then don't attribute it to the people here who aren't saying that kind of thing. Thats only going to make discussion impossible when people feel insulted and backlash against people who have nothing to do with it.

Misconstruing the purpose of this thread is probably going to kill it in the end.

I made it clear I'm not talking about this thread whatsoever. I'm talking about other places. Thus,after dealing with asinine remarks on other sites, people want to discuss smash, but it turns pointless speculation when almost none of us have laid a finger on the game. It's ok to talk about it or lay down concerns, but to say; "it's not viable" is crazy at this point. Also, yes the game is two months away; but how old is the e3 build? It could be 6 months old for all we know.

 

[Book Jacket]

I'mna throw some stuff out there that I really hope people will think about, but hey, do what you want. If y'all don't want to read the whole post, please at least read the next two paragraphs. Edit: I'm sure most of you know this, but I'mna put it into some relatively specific wording.

First I'd like to say that this kind of thread is warranted. I know a lot of people keep saying that the game isn't out yet, and a lot can change. And they're right. But the important fact to note is that they won't change squat if we don't talk about it. We need these discussions, and we need them in bulk so that someone, anyone from nintendo can find them. And they do look, they've said so. Ergo, we discuss.

Second, I'd like to say that a lot of threads like these show up with legitimate criticisms. I've seen many. Then they get locked. But it's not because the thread is Melee Vs. Brawl, it's because a few people assume it is, and come to the defense of their preferred game and prepare to attack their intellectual opponents. The problem is the assumption that every criticism against the game is the equivalent of saying "I want Melee 2.0," which is almost never the case. Nobody is expecting Melee 2.0, it's just that Melee has a lot of great examples to offer, and they are relevant to the topic. So people bring up what Melee did well. When people do that, they are (usually) not meaning to say that Melee did nothing wrong. In fact, most people will readily admit to things Melee got wrong even if it's their favorite Smash. I see a lot of posts on Wii U topics that disregard entire arguments because they assume that argument to be illogical, and it happens to Pro-Offense posts, Pro-Defense posts, and Pro-WhateverSmash4TurnsOutAsPosts (though least of all to the third one because it's a pretty straight-forward sentiment).

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

Spoiler

Now for my opinion:

I'd like to say that I see a lot of people cite USF4 as a popular defensive fighter. While it is exactly that, it's also integral to the argument that Smash is a different kind of fighting game. In USF4, if you block you still take chip damage. The same cannot be said about Brawl. Smash's shields have always been all-or-none in the sense that you take damage or you don't. This is because it has to accommodate for the lack of traditional directionality; in Smash, you don't always face your opponent, and you can use any attack facing whichever direction. Granted shielding isn't free, but in a game with as strong a shield as Brawl, it is right next to it (being free, that is).

And while Brawl also is defensive in the way of projectiles, many of those projectiles are far more constraining to the player's movement in Smash than in USF4, and that fact takes a bigger toll in a game where almost the ultimate (eh? geddit?) focus is on movement.

Brawl still has some of the same benefits as USF4 when it comes to being defensive, those being (but not limited to) prevalence of mind games, spacing, and reading your opponent. But those take a backseat in the eyes of the audience and the new players, which is why Brawl didn't thrive as a competitive scene. It has a competitive scene, and that scene's players are highly skilled, but it isn't a thriving scene.

Smash, as we know, doesn't have the same format as any "traditional" fighter out there. In a game like Smash (a "Platform Fighter", I call it), offensive options are very reliant on movement and acceptable lag. Defensive options are based on keep-away, shield stun, and OOS options. So, if a shield turns out to be a strong movement option, it might be an offensive utility, but the fact that it is a shield makes that unlikely, and if shield stun is low and OOS strong, then shields will be very strong defensive utilities. We don't want offense to just be viable, we want it to be prevalent. We want offense to be a smart option, at least as smart as the defense (if not more so (I like offense better but that's me)), and on a consistent basis.

Shield is looking a little beefy, and that might end up detracting from the offensive options.

Edit: Is spoiler just brackets, spoiler, and a /spoiler at the end, because I wanna shrink this a bit

 

[Ehn Jolly]

Sakurai may be the mastermind behind Smash bros, BUT Nintendo's still higher than he is on the metaphorical food chain at the end of the day. If Nintendo says "Sakurai, these competitive players from our Smash Invitational have some valid input on what they would like to see changed/added to the final version of Smash 4. I suggest you, your crew, and Namco take a look at some of the top requests we have gotten from the smash bros community regarding overall gameplay especially on a competitive level and implement them into the game pronto!" Do you really think Sak's going to take one look at the suggestions Nintendo's handed him from smash fans all over the country/world and tell the big N "**** off! Don't tell me how to run my game!"

Think LONG and HARD about this before you guys and gals respond

Whenever I see post like this, I'm reminded of the QNA Sakurai held where he was asked "would you want a competitive player to help you design the game" to which he responded "have you ever made a video game?"

While I'm not saying competitive players have no idea how to make a better game, I trust Sakurai and team a lot more than I trust most others to do something like this. I'm sure balance is a consideration, but so are the 100+ other things that go into making a game like this.

 

[Lozjam]

I haven't seen that in this thread at all.

So its kind of unnecessary to spawn hate when no one has bashed the game. If there's an issue I'd suggest taking it to those people and not bringing it here.

I mean if you(meaning everyone) are insulted by the "brawl 2.0" then don't attribute it to the people here who aren't saying that kind of thing. Thats only going to make discussion impossible when people feel insulted and backlash against people who have nothing to do with it.

Misconstruing the purpose of this thread and other users posts here is probably going to kill it in the end.

Look at the title of this thread, it is talking about Smash 4 won't be a good competitive game. That is an insult that has been uttered to brawl. "Brawl is SO uncompetitive, it sucks.". That is why people are so defensive. They say smash 4 won't be competitive, and it isn't worth their time and they are going to start shooting out insults to the game and it's players. That is exactly why people are defensive, and while I believe it needs to be toned down, the upcoming smash 4 community has the perfect right to be defensive.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

The offensive vs defensive debate was pretty much just a Melee vs Brawl debate

Wrong.

And lets not take it there.

No talking about Brawl or Melee or how they compare.

We're talking about Smash 4

(trying to avoid unnecessary flame wars/closing a thread. Melee vs. Brawl debates close threads)

 

[DraginHikari]

I'm mostly like Character Speculation, I'm more or less tired of competitive speculation. I originally was going into a deeper conversation on what I thought but decided how pointless it probably would be in the end as all it was going to lead up to was a wait and see how things play out. So it's probably better if I leave it at that at this point because to be honest I don't like the path I see this going in the long run.

 

[Bladeviper]

[quote="Book Jacket, post: 17159947, member: 253798"

Shield is looking a little beefy, and that might end up detracting from the offensive options.[/quote]
I don't think it looks as good as people are saying, it breaks sooo much faster now so you have to be more careful when putting it up.