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

[JV5Chris]

It's just pointless to discuss a build that doesn't represent the final game.

What's so wrong with people talking about what they like and dislike about this build as it relates to their hopes for the final product?

 

[Renji64]

Ugh this argument again. If you dont like Smash 4 dont play it. Go have fun playing a 13 year old game instead then.

lol hey if u don't like it go play a better game. Everyone wants to enjoy smash 4 which is why people are talking about how they feel about the game.

 

[ToothiestAura]

What's so wrong with people talking about what they like and dislike about this build as it relates to their hopes for the final product?

Nothing. I just don't see the point, I suppose. But, then, most of what we do here is pointless. I retract my statements.

This just seems like the sort of topic that would easily dissolve into war.

 

[JV5Chris]

This just seems like the sort of topic that would easily dissolve into war.

No reason it should. These are just early concerns. Remember, we've all had either little or no experience with the E3 build. Even for the die-hard Smash 4 supporters that already seem to exist, it's hard to know exactly what they're defending here.

 

[warionumbah2]

Enjoyed reading, unlike most i won't get my hopes up my expectations are moderate unlike my expectation for Brawl. It will have a chance to sniff the air of competitive events but the life span will not be anywhere close as Melee nor will it die as quick as Brawl(assuming).

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

lol hey if u don't like it go play a better game. Everyone wants to enjoy smash 4 which is why people are talking about how they feel about the game.

Very well said.

 

[Cassio]

Not that peeps arent free to voice their thoughts, but to be honest many concerns I see are not legit.

Anywho, I remember an interview awhile ago when smash 4 had just been announced with Sakurai regarding a letter he received. In the letter a Brawl wifi player was complaining about how in his online "with anyone" experience, players would frequently run away and camp, projectile spam, or otherwise attempt to avoid engagement. Sakurai said hed received several complaints about this from players online and was disheartened to hear this happening. As a result he wanted to focus on "fixing" (aka weakening) strategies that could lead to run away gameplay. That was the gist of the article. Anyways, even though I find it funny thats how the decision was made, theres definitely been an active effort in the mechanics to move away from run away tactics.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Not that peeps arent free to voice their thoughts, but to be honest many concerns I see are not legit.

Anywho, I remember an interview awhile ago when smash 4 had just been announced with Sakurai regarding a letter he received. In the letter a Brawl wifi player was complaining about how in his online "with anyone" experience, players would frequently run away and camp, projectile spam, or otherwise attempt to avoid engagement. Sakurai said hed received several complaints about this from players online and was disheartened to hear this happening. As a result he wanted to focus on "fixing" (aka weakening) strategies that could lead to run away gameplay. That was the gist of the article. Anyways, even though I find it funny thats how the decision was made, theres definitely been an active effort in the mechanics to move away from run away tactics.

Yes, and these efforts are clearly visible. The one thing that does bother me is the harsh criticism players receive when their ambitions aren't based on blindly believing the game will be everything everyone has ever wanted, then bashing people for believing otherwise.

The game does look great, and the balancing effort is working out very well, and a lot of the things in the game are very well thought of, but getting targeted on the off chance that you enjoy a specific game in the franchise (or at least people assume that) is asinine and incredibly aggravating. **** that!

 

[Cassio]

I think overall the game will be different, so its natural that some people will like one game or another more even if they can enjoy all of them. I dont really think thats a bad thing at all.

As far as the bickering that goes on, I explained this to Samurai Panda earlier as well but I think a lot of it tends to be crossfire that happens. Unfortunately the most vocal critics aren't people who are concerned about smash 4 being good at all, but will criticize the game regardless of what it may be. There are also those that legitimately do want something close to a clone of melee. Just yesterday I saw someone say the game is slower than brawl and looks like everything's moving inside molasses. Then as a result, you end up with people who support the game becoming more defensive and tend to overcompensate by being critical of those who are trying to be reasonable. In the mix of all of this reasonable discussion becomes difficult and valid questions and criticisms get mixed up with people who are only intent on being critical. Its unfortunate, but it requires a lot of finesse to have real discussions because of this.

 

[Reila]

lol hey if u don't like it go play a better game. Everyone wants to enjoy smash 4 which is why people are talking about how they feel about the game.

Better game? Melee? lol

Anyways, reading this thread makes me glad I am not an extremely competitive player and that I enjoyed the hell outta Brawl and I will most likely enjoy the hell out of Smash 4. Also, if some people here really wanted to enjoy Smash 4, they would stop comparing the game with other games in the franchise and accept it for what it is. Smash 4 will be Smash 4, not 64. 2, not Melee 2, not Brawl 2. It will be Smash 4 and I am glad for that.

 

[TTTTTsd]

All I'm going to say on the matter is that regardless of a game being defensive or not, there's a threshold between too defensive and positively defensive. When you look at USF4, you'll notice it is defensive but in a way that is entertaining to watch because you see the meta unfold between your eyes, and when someone gets a hit, it's usually a guaranteed conversion. In Brawl, this would apply if not for the addition of mechanics that I feel diluted the competitive potential, those being tripping and hitstun dodging.

Easier to break shields is also a plus, but as a whole, if this game rewards good defensive decision-making as well as good offensive decisions, regardless of if it's slower or not, I feel like it will only benefit from this by being engaging in its own right. And from watching those two Bowsers go at it in the finals, it looks to be doing just that. Just my two cents, though.

 

[pizzapie7]

I think overall the game will be different, so its natural that some people will like one game or another more even if they can enjoy all of them. I dont really think thats a bad thing at all.

As far as the bickering that goes on, I explained this to Samurai Panda earlier as well but I think a lot of it tends to be crossfire that happens. Unfortunately the most vocal critics aren't people who are concerned about smash 4 being good at all, but will criticize the game regardless of what it may be. There are also those that legitimately do want something close to a clone of melee. Just yesterday I saw someone say the game is slower than brawl and looks like everything's moving inside molasses. Then as a result, you end up with people who support the game becoming more defensive and tend to overcompensate by being critical of those who are trying to be reasonable. In the mix of all of this reasonable discussion becomes difficult and valid questions and criticisms get mixed up with people who are only intent on being critical. Its unfortunate, but it requires a lot of finesse to have real discussions because of this.

This post is absolutely fantastic.

What doesn't help matters is that there are people who see any valid criticism about their game and in struggling in trying to find a defense, they end up taking it personally. People need to realize that nobody or nothing is perfect, not any video game, not any video game creator, and certainly not any poster here. I feel as though this has been getting better recently here, where people are able to have discussions like this thread. But there are still posters who see any attack on Smash 4 as some sort of shaming of casual players. Like that thread where someone said they didn't like the menu layout, people somehow misconstrued that into "Smash 4 sucks, Sakurai is a hack, all hail Melee!". This works both ways, of course. People like Brawl more than Melee, they have every right to do so. Melee isn't a perfect game, and not everyone who claims otherwise is some sort of casual elitist who hates competitive play and wish it wouldn't exist because winning isn't fun. If someone makes a claim that Smash 4 is slower than Brawl, call them out on it and tell them why they are wrong, don't just whine and say "See, all of them hate this game because reasons."

I feel as though if you make claims that you can't support, if you get flustered when someone challenges what you've said, if you take the criticism of a video game personally, or if you're not willing to admit that nearly everything we talk about is subjective in the first place, you're a detriment to threads like this.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

I really like the easier breaking shields. Hopefully we see shield breaks a lot more often. And not just as a result of crazy hard to hit moves but shield pressure. That reminds me when Sakurai said he added the explosion to Diddy's PopGun. He said to use it when people's shields break. Its not like I want to see a shield break every set.

But like once every year would be more than it is with current smash games. lol.

 

[Ulevo]

It's just pointless to discuss a build that doesn't represent the final game. If this topic is listing concerns and sending them to Nintendo, I misunderstood. I thought people were just complaining and not actually doing anything.

No, it isn't pointless. Nintendo has eyes and ears on these forums. This is the internet hotspot for Smash talk and competitive discussion. How do you think Nintendo became aware of us, and started adhering to at least some of our preferences, however minor? Sure, the fundraiser and recent majors garnered attention, but it was by coming here that they became privy to that information. They've explicitly stated they have accounts on these boards.

Complaining on these forums about Smash's problems is probably the best thing you could possibly do outside of setting up a round table discussion with Sakurai himself and competitive players, which would never actually happen.

 

[Senario]

I really like the easier breaking shields. Hopefully we see shield breaks a lot more often. And not just as a result of crazy hard to hit moves but shield pressure. That reminds me when Sakurai said he added the explosion to Diddy's PopGun. He said to use it when people's shields break. Its not like I want to see a shield break every set.

But like once every year would be more than it is with current smash games. lol.

Shield pressure being better would be great. It gives a good reason to be offensive and makes the shield have downsides instead of just being a tool to block a hit then shield grab for more defensive play. Usually it doesn't seem like most single moves can break a shield.

 

[HammerHappy]

Heavy emphasize on defense over offense doesn't make it noncompetitive. It makes it different.

It makes it boring. Anything that can effectively null a huge portion of the roster shouldn't be an element of a competitive game.

OP doesn't want a repeat of chain grab/projectile spamming monotony. Brawl failed competitively for many reasons, and what OP is talking about was pretty large brick in the wall.

Also, anyone saying "Subject to change, wait for the game" doesn't need to understand that what they're saying adds nothing to anything, and they may as well have not posted at all.

It doesn't make you appear wise with patience, it makes you look stupid because the primary catalyst for change is community feedback. Devs care about what their players think, and so far Smash is showing an effort to be competitively viable and encourage E-sports.

Instead of waiting for the game to be released and dealing with another rapidly dieing community, we can potentially influence it by making these threads and talking about it now.

Like the person I quoted, actually post an opinion to discuss.

 

[Kuragari]

I was not meaning to be that rough in my previous statement. Just makes more sense to me to give the game a chance first before being critical. Smash 4 has shown it can be competitive. We've had two Nintendo-sponsored events already. Is it Melee? No, but that doesnt mean it needs to be frowned upon for its differences. Differences are a good thing actually. It makes us learn and adapt.

 

[Second Power]

OP doesn't want a repeat of chain grab/projectile spamming monotony. Brawl failed competitively for many reasons, and what OP is talking about was pretty large brick in the wall.

Most of the sources I've seen say that most grabs are nearly impossible to follow up on (much less get a CG), as well as that projectiles are pretty much universally nerfed. And I don't see what either has to do with how shields work. Are you just trying to make it Melee vs. Brawl, because this isn't the thread for it. Despite the title, this thread is specifically for discussing how shield changes will affect the metagame. At least, that's what the OP is based around.

 

[pizzapie7]

I was not meaning to be that rough in my previous statement. Just makes more sense to me to give the game a chance first before being critical. Smash 4 has shown it can be competitive. We've had two Nintendo-sponsored events already. Is it Melee? No, but that doesnt mean it needs to be frowned upon for its differences. Differences are a good thing actually. It makes us learn and adapt.

Differences purely for the sake of being different isn't good. Improvements are good. Fixing what is broken is good. Brawl was different, but it wasn't an improvement. Adapting to a worse game isn't going to make it better, why should I do that if I could just play the better one?

 

[greenluigiman2]

The low shield stun isn't an issue for me because the faster game speed and the weaker shields counter it, which was on display in the tournament, especially during the winner's finals and grand finals matches. Smart players were using their shields sparingly and strategically, while people who used their shields too much and too carelessly were punished. Larry was working that shield. I've never seen such strategic shield use in a smash game before. I hope Sakurai doesn't change it.

I don't see how anybody could come from watching that tournament thinking the game will be overly defensive and non-competitive. Players that played overly defensive and campy were constantly getting punished and it was hilariously satisfying. The two players that made it to the Grand Finals played both safe and aggressive, and it was a good sign for Smash 4's competitive future. Such a beautiful balance.

 

[Acadian Flycatcher]

You people are the worst.

We got a brand new article showing off Wii Fit Trainer's customizable moves. She has a ****ing health recovery Sun Salutation.

But no let's complain about the competitive aspect of the 3DS version of an old build of a game that's not even out yet.

If it weren't for people who are actually hyped about this game I would never come to this hell hole.

 

[HammerHappy]

Most of the sources I've seen say that most grabs are nearly impossible to follow up on (much less get a CG), as well as that projectiles are pretty much universally nerfed. And I don't see what either has to do with how shields work. Are you just trying to make it Melee vs. Brawl, because this isn't the thread for it. Despite the title, this thread is specifically for discussing how shield changes will affect the metagame. At least, that's what the OP is based around.

You should read the OP because he directly talks about good grab game/good projectiles/lag less combos as being a result of super effective shield spam, which it is as we've already seen.
Nerfs don't exactly compensate if they're the meta regardless.

I think you're trying to turn it into Melee vs Brawl, because I didn't even mention Melee in my post. If you're in denial about Brawl failing competitively, then I don't know what to tell you because it's observable fact. This shouldn't even bother anyone, because non-comp doesn't mean it's bad (though obviously trips were pretty anti-fun casual or comp) . Besides, Smash Bros as a series has always been something of a black sheep in competitive gaming, even before Brawl.

 

[Senario]

I was not meaning to be that rough in my previous statement. Just makes more sense to me to give the game a chance first before being critical. Smash 4 has shown it can be competitive. We've had two Nintendo-sponsored events already. Is it Melee? No, but that doesnt mean it needs to be frowned upon for its differences. Differences are a good thing actually. It makes us learn and adapt.

This equates to us not providing input on what essentially is like a rough draft. It doesn't benefit us or Nintendo in making a better product for everybody.

Again, the demo is like a rough draft. If you do not provide input you are not helping the game get better/essay get better then it should be no surprise of the new game is not working competitively and is dropped by big multi-game events like EVO.

I wouldn't expect to hand a rough draft to whoever is grading it, not get input (thus not change anything) then wonder why I failed on the paper. Demos this early and rough drafts are there for criticism and impressions.

 

[Pyra]

You people are the worst.

We got a brand new article showing off Wii Fit Trainer's customizable moves. She has a ****ing health recovery Sun Salutation.

But no let's complain about the competitive aspect of the 3DS version of an old build of a game that's not even out yet.

If it weren't for people who are actually hyped about this game I would never come to this hell hole.

Woah, calm down.
Just cause people can be blisteringly annoying about certain topics doesn't make them bad people, nor does it make this place a hell hole.

Though you know what they say about not being able to take the heat

 

[SmashChu]

The Smash 4 tournament was a lot of fun to watch thats for sure. But a couple matches by the Bowser player Damien made me realize that Smash 4 may not be a very good competitive game because the defensive options are so incredibly strong. Shield dropping is the fastest its ever been and shield stun is the lowest we've ever seen in any Smash to date. Even the commentators were shocked at how quick shield dropping is now . Again, Sakurai has made defensive play even stronger in this iteration of Smash which has been the trend in each Smash game.

In Smash 64, the shield was a horrible option. Shield stun was so long and shield dropping took so much time that by blocking attacks you were actually vulnerable to follow ups! Clearly this didn't make for a very good balance between offense and defense.

Melee's shield (the goldilocks of them all) was just slow enough that you had a few options of punishing out of shield but (with a few exceptions) those were mostly limited to punishing an attacker who poorly spaced their attacks on you. Shielding couldn't be punished and attacking a shield wasn't punishing unless you used the wrong attack/spacing. It was the best shield timing of all the Smash games because it made defense viable but not ideal. It forced players to get better and understand their characters better in order to not get punished on block.

Brawl's shield was so fast that many moves, even when spaced perfectly, were incredibly unsafe on block. Shield grabbing and dropping in Brawl was so strong that defensive play became ideal very early in the game's life. The scales of offense vs defense tipped severely into defense and the gameplay suffered greatly. In fact, over any other single change made from Melee to Brawl, the change of the shield timing had the most impact on making Brawl a defensive game. Why attack someone when they can shield it and punish you even if you space it right? The best characters in the game were able to beat this through various options like range, speed, a solid grab game or projectiles. It limited the viable cast from the huge roster we started with to a select few.

Now we come to Smash 4. This has the absolute fastest shield drop and lowest shield stun we have ever seen. Running up and shielding is extremely effective. A Bowser player completely shut down a Shiek and a Toon Link because nearly everything they did on his shield could be punished by dropping it and using one of his (compared to the rest of the cast) slow attacks. Bowser was punishing Shiek for too much lag. Let that sink in for a second. Now throw in increased landing lag on aerials... Okay, now add on spotdodging being even better and rolls being faster than ever.

Every single defensive tactic in Smash 4 has been buffed from Brawl. The scales of offense vs defense will very easily shift to defense unless characters have ways of beating shields. With shield breaking being slightly more viable (damaging shields seems easier now with certain attacks), that could add an additional way of dealing with shields. But if a character doesn't have range, a good grab game, speed, decent projectiles, or options of breaking the shield... then they may not be very viable. Even though I think he was a lot of fun when I played him, Villager is a good example of a character like that.

Unless Sakurai makes some changes (fingers are crossed here) from the E3 build that was being played at the San Diego Comic Con... then Smash 4 may end up being another title that the community forces to be competitive but won't actually be a very good game. No matter what happens, Smash 4 will have an even better run than Brawl did competitively. Lets just hope our concerns and constructive criticism are heard by the right people so this new game can become a worthy successor to the Smash title.

EDIT:

In response to many people saying "wait until release", I feel like I should put my answer on the first post to make it more visible

Oh boy, here we go.

Before I begin, I want to point out the there is no such thing as a game being "More competitive." Competitive is just two people (or more) trying to beat each other. Brawl, Melee, and 64 are all equally competitive because they all let you beat someone else. Competitive is no measurable. The only quantifiable factors in a competitive game are views and tournament attendance. It should be noted that Brawl had better turns out than Melee for a while.

I think you are wrong saying Melee is a "perfect balance" because Melee is a terrible game for defense. So, in Smash Bros, we have 4 defensive techniques. The shield, the sidestep dodge, the rolls and the air dodging. They all avoid attacks except the former which just blocks them. Now, to be effective, they need to actually prevent you from getting hit. So defense usually is trying to avoid attacks in order to counter attack or find an opening so you can get attacks in. In Melee, the defenses don't do this and it's because of wavedashing and, more so, L-canceling. See, L-canceling makes moves safer. You cut all landing lag by half. Sure, maybe it's only 6 frames. But 3 frames can make a big difference, especially in a long match. First, this makes it players can attack without running the risk of a counter attack. This already makes defending a bad option because you don't get any where. But the other thing is you have longer shield stun, so you are actually more vulnerable. Watch most Melee matches, and the shield doesn't come out that often and is a lot of the time just punished with a grab or shine. This is true throughout the entire game. Take the airdodge that everyone wants back. The only reason everyone wants it is so they can wavedash, but overall, it's a crappy defensive move. You can change momentum, but you are vulnerable afterwards. Not only can you not attack, jump or do another dodge, but now your speed changes too. This means your a sitting duck. If you're close to the ground, it can work OK, but if you get too high in the air, you can use it. So already, you have no real solid defense. Now, wavedashing essentially replaces rolls. Rolls avoid attacks but you are committed to the roll. So it's better to just wavedash and move rather than use one of the 4 defensive options. So the game becomes one of betting the other guy's offense.

If Melee was Marvel, than Brawl would be Street Fighter 4. This game didn't strengthen defense, it made it viable. So now you can actually use the airdodge because you aren't more vulnerable afterwards. Shields became moire important because moves actually had recovery frames. And rolling has a purpose in a world where you can do a silly technique and move across the map super fast. Now the defenses had a purpose. What this made Brawl was a balanced game. You could be aggressive, but the opponent could defend. No longer did they have to trump your offense with more offense. Now they could dodge or block attacks and counter-attack (you know, like you're suppose to be able to do). What happens is the game becomes even more about spacing and reading your opponent. The problem really comes in with the western players because the can't change their frame of reference (this is why you think Melee is balanced despite the fact that most defensive mores are useless or very ineffective). The Japanese, to no surprise, play the game like Street Fighter. They zone and space and that's how they win. So that is a balance between offense and defense. And this has been the same for fighting games since the late 90s.

So how does this play into Smash 4. Well, for starters, it means that Smash 4 will work he same way. The game is one of zoning and spacing. I'm sure everyone saw the Bowser/Sheik match in the finals. The typical gif is Sheik doing a forward smash into Bowser's shield and him grabbing her. And there is nothing wrong with this. If you block and the foe has an opening, they you take it. That is part of why you're blocking. This is how Street Fighter matches play. You poke at them and hope to get in. This game is the same way. In all, what this means is you can't do attacks for free. You have to be anticipating the opponents move. You need to have a strategy. In Melee, the best characters are generally the fastest. Bralw is a little more varied as characters like Snake, Olimar and IC are top characters but they aren't necessarily fast. This is because pure offense doesn't matter as much. This doesn't mean Smash 4 will be a terrible game. Player will need to adapt to it. It's a different game with different strategies.

Why does everyone assume that the release of the game will fix all inherent problems with it? Yes it is not the final build. We are discussing this point because if it DOES make the final build then it may be a large detriment to the future of the game.

"Wait until release" is a cop out thats playing to extreme optimism. I choose to believe the game will not be drastically different from the build we're seeing here. If you think Sakurai will recant and spend the rest of the remaining dev time making the game more competitively viable then thats fine. We have no evidence the game will be MORE competitive in later builds

The issue is that you are talking about an incomplete game. Heck, the build they were playing was old and there were still a lot of glitches in it. Hell, we don't even know all the characters and we only got to play with 24 of them. We wont truly know how the game is until it actually releases.

 

[Cassio]

Post I wont quote fully because its long

Yes, although I would say theres one distinction to be made. As mentioned there's some people who are legitimately seeking discussion, and then those who only want to be critical for its own sake. Productive discussion is definitely possible with the former even with disagreement. In the latter case there's nothing that can be said that'll lead to productive discussion, and the only reasonable responses seem to ignore it (like I did with the molasses guy comment) or if its persistent or very visible draw simple attention to ignorance. Granted in this topic of debate its frequently hard to tell whether someone is going to be reasonable or stubborn as I mentioned earlier. But if I occasionally seem harsh to some people or posts thats why, lol.

It makes it boring. Anything that can effectively null a huge portion of the roster shouldn't be an element of a competitive game.

OP doesn't want a repeat of chain grab/projectile spamming monotony. Brawl failed competitively for many reasons, and what OP is talking about was pretty large brick in the wall.

If you're in denial about Brawl failing competitively, then I don't know what to tell you because it's observable fact.

Nope, youre wrong.

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

You know what I honestly find ironically hilarious about this whole debacle?

It's that since absolutely none of us will know what the final product will be like until it's out and we try it for ourselves, regardless of whether or not the majority likes it or now or if it's truly competitively viable or not, even if people do just run back to Melee or PM or whatever else, regardless of what anyone in here claims...

...You are ALL going to end up getting this game, Nintendo WILL be getting your money and Sakurai , as ALWAYS, will have all of the last "*laughs*". ¦D

But seriously though, folks. Just wait and give it a try when it comes out. Even if you don't enjoy it competitively, you still have Melee and PM and they won't be dying off anytime soon, so just try enjoying Smash 4 as just plain fun games instead.

I think it'll save everyone's heads and fingertips as opposed to these constant E-debates. XD

 

[Senario]

You know what I honestly find ironically hilarious about this whole debacle?

It's that since absolutely none of us will know what the final product will be like until it's out and we try it for ourselves, regardless of whether or not the majority likes it or now or if it's truly competitively viable or not, even if people do just run back to Melee or PM or whatever else, regardless of what anyone in here claims...

...You are ALL going to end up getting this game, Nintendo WILL be getting your money and Sakurai , as ALWAYS, will have all of the last "*laughs*". ¦D

But seriously though, folks. Just wait and give it a try when it comes out. Even if you don't enjoy it competitively, you still have Melee and PM and they won't be dying off anytime soon, so just try enjoying Smash 4 as just plain fun games instead.

I think it'll save everyone's heads and fingertips as opposed to these constant E-debates. XD

Unless you get it used a few months down the line! :D. There are plenty of used brawl copies everywhere, and I mean everywhere.

Oh and a lot of people are providing input competitively, no harm in doing that then trying it down the line. Most competitive players have friends who don't play competitively and will get the new game. Going to a friend's house and trying it is a thing ;P. Informed decisions GO!

 

[pizzapie7]

snip

Brawl is in no way a balanced game. People exaggerate it's defensiveness, but it's not USF4. It's a lot more defensive and defensively rewarding than Ultra. Melee's not balanced either, but it's closer to the middle than Brawl is. People want direction air dodging back not (only) because of wavedashing, but because Brawl's air dodge was a lot safer. You are vulnerable afterwards so you have to use it to recover wisely. It's still a good recovery game mix up without being a get out of jail free card. It's incredibly punishable like you've said, and that's a good thing. The game did strengthen defense to an incredible degree, that much is clear. More defense isn't a bad thing, Melee was really offensive. But it tipped the scales so much in the favor of defense that it turned into a worse game to play competitively because of how favored defense was. You could totally play aggressively, but the opponent could defend so incredibly well that in most cases it's not worth it.

Maybe we have different ideas about what offense and defense really are? Because there are way more ways to be defensive than roll/shield/air dodge/sidestep. Spamming projectiles across the stage is defensive. Wavedashing away is defensive. Spacing with shffl aerials in Melee's case or just plain short hopped aerials in Brawl's case is all defensive. Dashdancing is defensive and offensive at the same time. Defense isn't useless in Melee, the traditional defensive moves are. Maybe that's a fair sign that Melee was pushing the brink of being too offensive for it's own good, but defense is certainly viable.

@ Cassio even if your harsh at least you're always a good read.

@ Kaye Cruiser thanks for the irrelevant post declaring that you don't care about what's going on in this thread, hooray for +1s?

 

[Second Power]

You should read the OP because he directly talks about good grab game/good projectiles/lag less combos as being a result of super effective shield spam, which it is as we've already seen.
Nerfs don't exactly compensate if they're the meta regardless.

Could you show me specifically he says this? I actually gave the OP a second read and don't see any of that.

Edit: Third read, saw one line which says that as an aside. The OP missed one option, not rushing and getting punished for something you knew would be punished.

I think you're trying to turn it into Melee vs Brawl, because I didn't even mention Melee in my post. If you're in denial about Brawl failing competitively, then I don't know what to tell you because it's observable fact. This shouldn't even bother anyone, because non-comp doesn't mean it's bad (though obviously trips were pretty anti-fun casual or comp) . Besides, Smash Bros as a series has always been something of a black sheep in competitive gaming, even before Brawl.

After I read the first sentence, I was going to apologize, then I read the rest. Brawl isn't failing, its dying. Because the next incarnation is coming out soon. It was played competitively since its release in 2008 until recently. That happens to every series, its normal. "Brawl isn't competitive" is totally asinine. Every game where the outcome isn't determined by pure luck is competitive (note 'pure', even games where luck play a heavy part can be competitive, such as poker).

 

[JV5Chris]

But seriously though, folks. Just wait and give it a try when it comes out. Even if you don't enjoy it competitively, you still have Melee and PM and they won't be dying off anytime soon, so just try enjoying Smash 4 as just plain fun games instead.

There will be fun to be had in Smash 4 irregardless, but I do hope everyone realizes Nintendo did just put on a tournament. I can't think of a more relevant time to discuss the demo from this angle.

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

@ Kaye Cruiser thanks for the irrelevant post declaring that you don't care about what's going on in this thread, hooray for +1s?

You really shouldn't put words in people's mouths. :3

Nothing I said there indicates that I don't care what happens in here. There a lot of points I agree with on both sides.

But in the end, no one knows anything until it comes out. I'm just saying that for some people that when the game does come out, instead of being mad that it's not competitive the way they want it to be, they should try looking past that and enjoying it just as a game instead.

And I only say this because thankfully for them, Smash 4 is far from their only option.

If it's the way they want t to be, great! Everyone wins! If it isn't, oh well. Maybe next time. There's always Melee and to a higher extent, PM, since that'll actually keep getting additional updates and changes.

 

[Cassio]

I wouldnt say Brawl is significantly more defensive than USF4, but the game is definitely a lot longer. Like, smash games are already longer than traditional fighting games, so even if USF4 is comparable in gameplay Brawl as a smash game is going to take even more time.

Also Brawls airdodge based on the mechanics itself isnt too difficult to punish (though the changes for smash 4 are still nice). What really caused people problems was that you could essentially cancel your hitstun right away with an airdodge. This wasnt necessarily bad in and of itself, but it caused smash games to run a lot longer since Brawls punish game turned into a game of poker instead of something more guaranteed.

 

[SweatshirtSwordsman.]

The main problem with this tournament, is that the Bowser player, was a much better player than the others. None of the players in the tournament were exactly what you'd call the "cream of the crop" players. With the Shiek constantly using Fsmash, it could have been punished by more than a shield drop/shield grab. The Bowser player seemed loads better than the others. (Not mentioning his buffs, that players have no clue how to deal with.)
I myself feel this game has LOADS of potential, but it is going to be ages different than Melee. Aside from that, look at how much our (Melee) community has grown in the past 2-3 years. Info is going to be streaming (No Twitch reference intended.) from the community. Soon enough after the games release, we'll be finding special AT's for this game.
From this improvement over Brawl, the anti-competitive (I don't want to use "casuals" here because I don't like generalizing, and because most of the non-competitive players don't know/care about our community or notice the major changes.) people are beginning to really hate on our community (I hate using the word community so much. It's irritating me but I have no other words to describe us. As a com... Ugh.). They don't bug me, but others are getting their jimmies rustled.

Tl;dr Demo is an older build - Give it time, Bowser player played better, Game has potential, and stop getting your jimmies rustled by anti-competitive/uneducated players. And stop calling beginners "casuals". We all started there, don't lie.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Differences purely for the sake of being different isn't good. Improvements are good. Fixing what is broken is good. Brawl was different, but it wasn't an improvement. Adapting to a worse game isn't going to make it better, why should I do that if I could just play the better one?

Good question, to which most would just tell you to play whichever you think is better, seeing as how "better" is generally pretty subjective when the differences between games can be considered somewhat minute compared to other generation jump modifications many franchises go through.

If you have an argument or a suggestion for helping Smash 4 stand out as a brand new iteration of the franchise, with it's own potential to be held in its own right away from the predecessors, do please complain (constructively). Alas, that is not what you do, and don't try to act like it is. Instead it's nothing but cries and whimpers that this and this mechanic is not identical to Melee, why can't this be like Melee, why don't they have a Melee Mode (wtf), I mean for chemists sake, it's exhausting and downright pretentious.

Have you considered that many of us want exactly the opposite? That while we enjoyed Melee, that we seek something fresh and innovative because we are tired and bored of the same top players skirmish each other year after year, the same top % character match ups, the same exact techniques and old-gen style of Melee?

We appear to take offense to this nonsense for a pretty damn good reason, because we feel like you're being toxic to the general and necessary evolution of the Smash formula. A lot of us want something new and different, not more of the very old and same, no matter how well Melee's mechanics lended itself to its competitive following.

If you like Melee, play Melee, but please, try to keep quiet about a game you really have no bone in whether it succeeds or not simply because you've already decided Melee is still the best.

 

[HeavyLobster]

One thing Smash 4 seems to be doing well is reducing the possibilities for and rewards from simply running away and avoiding interaction with the other player, regardless of whether it's the nerfs to projectiles, air dodges, or planking. Even if you can't overwhelm shields or combo people across the stage the way you could in Melee doesn't mean the game will be super campy. Most characters appear to have good recoveries, though it seems that MK and Pit tier recoveries from Brawl are out, so there will probably be fewer matchups where one character is able to air camp offstage or under the stage for extended periods of time while the opponent can't really do anything about it, which were enough of a problem in Brawl that Ledgegrab limits were implemented, and were even a problem in Melee at times with Peach and Jigglypuff. (I am still concerned that this will be a problem for Little Mac) This game is also getting rid of the Brawl chaingrabs that disproportionately punished unsuccessful approaches, so at least some of the major complaints with Brawl are being addressed.

 

[SweatshirtSwordsman.]

Good question, to which most would just tell you to play whichever you think is better, seeing as how "better" is generally pretty subjective when the differences between games can be considered somewhat minute compared to other generation jump modifications many franchises go through.

If you have an argument or a suggestion for helping Smash 4 stand out as a brand new iteration of the franchise, with it's own potential to be held in its own right away from the predecessors, do please complain (constructively). Alas, that is not what you do, and don't try to act like it is. Instead it's nothing but cries and whimpers that this and this mechanic is not identical to Melee, why can't this be like Melee, why don't they have a Melee Mode (wtf), I mean for chemists sake, it's exhausting and downright pretentious.

Have you considered that many of us want exactly the opposite? That while we enjoyed Melee, that we seek something fresh and innovative because we are tired and bored of the same top players skirmish each other year after year, the same top % character match ups, the same exact techniques and old-gen style of Melee?

We appear to take offense to this nonsense for a pretty damn good reason, because we feel like you're being toxic to the general and necessary evolution of the Smash formula. A lot of us want something new and different, not more of the very old and same, no matter how well Melee's mechanics lended itself to its competitive following.

If you like Melee, play Melee, but please, try to keep quiet about a game you really have no bone in whether it succeeds or not simply because you've already decided Melee is still the best.

Yeah, this is exactly why a lot of other gaming communities hate us. Because they think we hate change and want everything to stay the same, and we think melee is the greatest game ever. I remember hearing M2K say somewhere that he wants the new game as much as we do because playing a game for 12 years gets kind of boring. (That's just the general gist of what he said.) Anyway, you took the words out of my mouth.

 

[ToothiestAura]

No, it isn't pointless. Nintendo has eyes and ears on these forums. This is the internet hotspot for Smash talk and competitive discussion. How do you think Nintendo became aware of us, and started adhering to at least some of our preferences, however minor? Sure, the fundraiser and recent majors garnered attention, but it was by coming here that they became privy to that information. They've explicitly stated they have accounts on these boards.

Complaining on these forums about Smash's problems is probably the best thing you could possibly do outside of setting up a round table discussion with Sakurai himself and competitive players, which would never actually happen.

I actually had no idea that Nintendo watched the forums (or, that they had officially said so).

 

[TeaTwoTime]

As a casual Smash player, Brawl's defensiveness was a little frustrating at times, but in general I loved playing the game and still find it fun to watch at a high level (about as much as Melee). The biggest offenders in my opinion were shields and successive airdodges having very little cooldown. It was disheartening to position well and attempt to follow-up on a combo only to come away with doing negligible damage to their shield and being punished; at times I felt like there was nothing I could do to break through their defense. Part of this is due to me not being good enough at the game, but part is also due to the strength of shields and airdodges.

Smash 4 seems to have really taken steps to fix both of these. Shields recovering more slowly and being easier to break are two things that I had always argued would make Brawl's gameplay better and both of them are observable in Smash 4. If every character has a viable way to break shields and if shields recover at a slow pace (say, 5 seconds from smallest possible to max), that alone pretty much solves the majority of the issues that I had with Brawl.
Multiple quick airdodges being back isn't ideal, but they are still punishable in the air if you time your attacks well and the heavy landing lag is also really nice to see. Funnily enough, aerial ending/landing lag being increased doesn't bother me at all and I wouldn't care at all if it wasn't changed before release.

Ultimately, I'm perfectly happy with a game where defense is a good option - so long as those defensive options aren't really frustrating to play against, don't nullify offensive options and don't limit the choices and options of the player. Excessively defensive play needs to be punishable just as excessively offensive play needs to be punishable. An ideal playstyle should maintain a healthy balance of both offensive strategies and defensive strategies. As far as I can see, Smash 4 has taken steps to ensure that this is the case and I'm very optimistic about the game as a result.

 

[jwj442]

People want direction air dodging back not (only) because of wavedashing, but because Brawl's air dodge was a lot safer. You are vulnerable afterwards so you have to use it to recover wisely. It's still a good recovery game mix up without being a get out of jail free card. It's incredibly punishable like you've said, and that's a good thing.

Brawl's air dodge was too strong; Melee's was too weak. If you take out wavedashing, Melee's air dodge is only consistently used as an alternate recovery option. For actually avoiding attacks it's only occasionally useful - the helpless state makes it very dangerous and generally a bad option. It's TOO punishable.

The problems with Brawl's version are that it can cancel hitstun and that the quick speed makes it very low-risk. Both of these are fixable without abandoning Brawl's basic airdodge mechanics, and it looks like Smash 4 has fixed both of them.