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

[D-idara]

of course they do, but i'm talkin g about buffer specifically.

Yeah but I meant that those things will always happen, like overshooting the edge with a Fire Emblem character's aerial attack and SDing without being able to do anything because they have crazy ending lag.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Then what was the point of gathering people's opinions and feedback on the game at E3? Just to laugh at their concerns and how they'll never be acknowledged?

Yes.

I still fail to see your point. Just because they joined around the Brawl days doesn't mean they played Brawl first. That just sounds like wild assumptions.

No, it's making a hypothesis given the evidence.

It's not enough to make a conclusion on its own, but it definitely points noticeably towards that conclusion, enough to make an educated guess. His first game could be Melee, so be it. It's just an educated guess.

Let's put things into perspective:

If you have a child, do you automatically assume once he's born he can't read because his brain hasn't fully developed?

Or will you let the child grow and see that he can, indeed, learn how to read?

This is my counter to this.

Do children cost mind-numbingly large amounts of money in order to learn even a small thing? Does a child's worth depend solely on knowing as much as possible by the time of its birth? Can a child learn to read with illiterate parents?

The answer to the first two is a definite "no". The answer to the last one is "maybe, but it has a long way to go given the patterns already in motion".

 

[D-idara]

Yes.

Do you think Nintendo's the devil or something? They're the best gaming company! You seem to love to bash Nintendo all around the forums...

 

[HeavyLobster]

Now, I said I form my opinions based on the mechanics of the game, guided by my knowledge on competitive smash.
Fact: aerials lag.
Prediction: As competitive players optimize their style, shield grabs will be the norm counter as they will be extremely easy to perform. I see the game degenerating to ground approaches, and aerials being used for follow ups instead. I also see character selections degenerating to those who have aerial options, as landing lag is not consistent across the board, and some characters will have heavy advantages.
Proposed solutions: L canceling or lagless aerials. This is a solution not because it's more like Melee, but because it actually solves the problem in my prediction.

This is both the biggest problem with Smash 4 and the one most likely to be fixed, as it was one that was consistently voiced by competitive players and can be addressed in the 2 or so months of time between E3 and the game's completion. It ties in to the concerns the OP raised about quick shield drops. Lower land lag for many characters, as well as adjusting other values such as shield stun and shield damage to compensate for this, is important so that characters won't be super-limited in their approach options, and so shielding won't be an excessively safe option. I think Nintendo will take this feedback into account and make some changes in this direction, though whether they are adequate remains to be seen.

Fact: ground mobility is far more limited than it is in Melee.
Prediction: If it's hard enough for a character in Melee to approach by ground, I imagine a grounded approach in Smash 4 will be far more predictable. As such, an optimized player will begin to take a defensive approach on the ground, rather than to risk losing the neutral game by approaching themselves with limited mixup options. However, as long as there are mixup options, the ground game won't be too bad. It will just be slow and limited, (the brawl problem). I can see specific character traits salvaging this part of the gameplay, but I don't think a character should solve a gameplay problem, as this leads to heavy character centralization (again, another Brawl problem).
Proposed solution: Dash dancing, wavedashing, or other forms of movement options. I love the fact that pivot tilts remain in the game, however, an option to reposition without attacking would also be great. I don't need Melee specific movement options, I just need more options.

I wouldn't necessarily say ground mobility is super limited. It isn't quite as good as Melee, but dash's start up time is noticeably shorter, rolls are quicker, and shielding can even be used as a (slightly slower) alternative to crouch cancelling. Pivot mechanics, as you mentioned, will also be useful. Even without dash dancing I believe existing ground mechanics could allow for a decent number of mixups. The main problem with the ground game is that it suffers from the same limitations in terms of mobility as it has in previous Smash games, and for it to function on its own it'll probably need the addition of some sort of wavedashing equivalent. The other alternative (and the more likely fix) is to improve aerial approaches enough by making the previously mentioned balance adjustments so that both options are viable and can complement one another.
The points you raised are generally valid and hopefully these concerns will be addressed. I feel as though most of the legitimate concerns and criticisms that can be raised against the demo are easily fixable and have a decent chance of being addressed, and it can be frustrating to see people outright dismiss this game as having any competitive potential and make sweeping judgments without providing good justification for their assertions.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Do you think Nintendo's the devil or something? They're the best gaming company! You seem to love to bash Nintendo all around the forums...

Getting your hopes up leads only to disappointment. Expect the worst so you might be relieved instead. That's the code I live by.

 

[D-idara]

Getting your hopes up leads only to disappointment. Expect the worst so you might be relieved instead. That's the code I live by.

That's the saddest outlook on life I've ever heard, not only with videogames and hype...eugh...

 

[Saikyoshi]

That's the saddest outlook on life I've ever heard, not only with videogames and hype...eugh...

Yeah, I know. My life's a total mess because of it, but whenever I try to throw away that outlook, I get burned.

 

[guedes the brawler]

That's the saddest outlook on life I've ever heard, not only with videogames and hype...eugh...

eh, as far as smash goes, it's worth believing in that.

i've started doing it after the last reveal...

 

[D-idara]

eh, as far as smash goes, it's worth believing in that.

i've started doing it after the last reveal...

You mean after the hype reveal that was genetically engineered to please everyone? There's Robin for the people who wanted a FE Magician, there's Lucina for the people who wanted another swordfighter, especially from Awakening, and if you don't care about Fire Emblem (Shame on you! >:I) Then you get glorious Cpt. Falcon!

 

[Deleted member]

You mean after the hype reveal that was genetically engineered to please everyone? There's Robin for the people who wanted a FE Magician, there's Lucina for the people who wanted another swordfighter, especially from Awakening, and if you don't care about Fire Emblem (Shame on you! >:I) Then you get glorious Cpt. Falcon!

Yeah, how dare he have an opinion! You're obviously the only right one here, everyone else is wrong!

 

[guedes the brawler]

You mean after the hype reveal that was genetically engineered to please everyone? There's Robin for the people who wanted a FE Magician, there's Lucina for the people who wanted another swordfighter, especially from Awakening, and if you don't care about Fire Emblem (Shame on you! >:I) Then you get glorious Cpt. Falcon!

as it stands: Chrom was much more of a main character than Lucina was. Even if she was a clone or alt, having her fully playable instead of him is shameful and a bad representation of FEA.

 

[Raider 88]

This thread is so negative...

This game will not be Brawl 2.0, Melee 2.0, or 64 2.0...it's going to be SSB4. It will have it's own techs, it's own quirks, and like it's predecessors will be just fine competitively. We've only gotten our hands on a dated fraction of what Sakurai has in store for us, so I really don't see the point of writing the game off already as a lost cause (as some seem to do so quickly).

 

[DraginHikari]

I still question things a bit in the long run, if Smash 4 does not succeed in a competitive sense, I wonder how many years the Melee scene can keep people's attention for I wonder. While most game communities are moving to their next titles, the Smash scene may eternally remain in the same place which will inevitably lead stagnation of some form. As I'm no tournament player myself I cannot claim to know entirely how it works, but I don't know if I would consider it a good sign.

 

[Chimera]

Why does one of those videos have to be mine in order to agree with the commentary in the video?

That's not what I said.

Plenty of people are capable of determining what I don't have right in front of me

What?

I think the final build will lean greatly towards what we have already seen.

And if that is true, I'm saying that you have seen barely anything at all. You seem to be under the impression that I'm saying that the game will suddenly become Melee 2.0, and I'm not. I'm sure there will be changes, and I'm sure some stuff will remain the same. What I'm saying is coming to a conclusion about the viability of competitive play based video and/or extremely limited playtime of an incomplete game is a terrible idea.

On that note, I would suggest you just leave threads like this alone

Well that has become increasingly difficult as these topics flood the board.

because there are plenty of people who want to complain about what they've seen so far

Correction underlined and bold.

And how can you blame them?

Well I actually just explained that in my previous posts.

Lets just agree to disagree because I can tell we will go in circles on this.

K.

 

[Renji64]

I still question things a bit in the long run, if Smash 4 does not succeed in a competitive sense, I wonder how many years the Melee scene can keep people's attention for I wonder. While most game communities are moving to their next titles, the Smash scene may eternally remain in the same place which will inevitably lead stagnation of some form. As I'm no tournament player myself I cannot claim to know entirely how it works, but I don't know if I would consider it a good sign.

can't move forward when new entries keep going backwards.

 

[Saikyoshi]

can't move forward when new entries keep going backwards.

When disks shatter, Wiis peter out, CRTs die to HD, and the Virtual Console release suffers from frame-skipping/lag, then what will you do?

 

[Renji64]

When disks shatter, Wiis peter out, CRTs die to HD, and the Virtual Console release suffers from frame-skipping/lag, then what will you do?

Play it on usb/hardrives or find a way to keep playing. The only way to move forward is with a good product that is thrilling competieve wise. Sakurai has no plans on doing that if you are looking for a "party game." that is what smash offers mostly and only now.

 

[DraginHikari]

can't move forward when new entries keep going backwards.

Perhaps so. Then it may simply be that the scene is not meant to be in the long run. The matter is the game with the type of function that Melee had is unlikely to happen anytime in the near future whether under Sakurai or anyone else at Nintendo. They probably continuing going for a middle of the road approach at best.

The odd thing about Melee is it seems much of what happened in Melee was a result of the time constraints that Sakurai was under to get the game out for the release of the GCN. I wonder how it would have played out if Sakurai had the development time he with the later games.

 

[JoeInky]

When disks shatter, Wiis peter out, CRTs die to HD, and the Virtual Console release suffers from frame-skipping/lag, then what will you do?

Dolphin.

Though that's not something really suitable for tournaments.


Either that or just quit the franchise because if it's still getting worse by that point then the game clearly isn't going back to the original direction that 64 and melee were going in.

 

[Diabolical]

All games will have to be played on emulators eventually, so I think Dolphin will be the future for competitive smash. That's assuming Melee legacy lasts that long. Many 64 tournaments are actually played on Project 64 already

 

[Cassio]

Snip

I'm glad you've came to air out your specific concerns of the game. I've been around long enough to see from beginning to end the various concerns and tribulations for Brawl as a game and as a scene. I won't lie and say there arent glaring issues, but for the most part people are mistaken on what precisely those issues were.

Even though its a tangent, I feel I should address the concern I have with older Brawl players assessments of Brawl, since this experience is something I see listed in assessing smash 4. I have no intention of judging anyone's ability to make accurate assessments when well informed, but unless they were involved with or paid deep attention to its gameplay at least after Apex 2012, they are not welll-informed. I dont mean to diminish experience or accomplishments that happened before this since itd likely be a strong analysis pre-2012, but in retrospect this is information and experience that only applies to the early metagame.

I use Apex 2012 as a threshold because its a good line and thats when this happened

Spoiler

1st Otori$3,600
2nd Nietono$1,760
3rd Nairo$960
4th ESAM$640
5th Kakera$320
5th Ally$320
7th UltimateRazer$200
7th ADHD$200
9th Gnes
9th Rich Brown
9th OCEAN
9th DEHF
13th Dabuz
13th Mew2King
13th Brood
13th RAIN

Every Japanese player that came hit top 16 (besides one I believe that didnt make it out of pools), and M2K who was considered the US's best player lost to a Japanese Rob. I dont doubt that any player at their peak skill that had played up to this point (except perhaps Nairo and ESAM), would have lost to the Japanese as well.

This as well as other things forced drastic changes to the American scene and the way we viewed the game, which is why most analysis from players before this moment does seem outdated.

Being more specific, heres one example in regards to the punish game which I believe fell under the umbrella of "guessing" you listed. I feel this is an area that is heavily misunderstood by those who never fully explored its depth. "Guessing" is a derogatory way to put what more accurately describes top players using probability maximization. The idea is to maximize probability of one event occurring over another. Once an opponent is hit, you rely on the fact that youll have a greater amount of options compared to their limited amount in order to continue a string. The initiator needs to have a deep awareness of each players options and an awareness of which one the opponent likely to choose based on the habits of a typical person and the player. After their choice the initiator may be right or wrong, the point is that as the initiator youre going to be correct a disproportionately greater amount of the time then your opponent, and as the game plays out this works into your favor. Not only is this a relevant skill in games like poker, its the closest thing to actual real life decision making, where outcomes are not predictable but have sway in their probability.

Pure runaway tactics were more common in the early meta-game and could be viewed as leading to more guessing. But as these started losing to those who improved on their ability to string opponents as just described, it became significantly less popular and when attempted tended to fail to net victories. I won't delve into every concern listed since this isnt a thread about Brawl, but I believe we're not in agreement on how the current meta-game functions. I just wanted to provide one example of what I meant.


I guess the last thing Ill do is go over thing things mentioned in regards to smash 4.

In regards to aerial lag:
In melee unless youre fox and falco, or maybe have something like samus' up-b, Im fairly certain landing into the ground next to an opponent in shield grab range with an aerial leads to punishment against a good opponent regardless of l-canceling, correct? I think people arent accurately assessing how much lag aerials had in Brawl, which was still a fairly aerial intensive game, and how players went around this. In an environment that isnt as heavy as melee short hop aerials typically have the trait (and common use) of being auto-canceled before landing lag, in addition to having a greater ability to weave in and out with more time spent in the air.

In regards to ground mobility:
This is an interesting concern, but I think looking at approach options in isolation leads to issues in how the offense/defense aspects of the game will work, and should be weighed against the games defensive mechanics. As compared to Brawl, Sakurai took a knife to the games more defensive tactics such as planking, and many others which tended to be more character specific (I mentioned some in an earler post, Sakurai mentioned in an interview his displeasure of particular Brawl defensive tactics), and added a few small but nice touches to offense such as being able to shield right out of dash and Pivot Cancelling. None of this can determine how the ground game will play out, but what I can say confidently is that defensive options are weaker than Brawl's and its offensive options are improved.

Lastly in regards to Brawls problems, unfortunately the most significant answer is obvious (but one not yet stated). Metaknight created a massive divide in the community. It led to many other issues that were never able to be resolved and turned the community in on itself. Even after Brawl made an attempt to swing back, metaknight intra-fighting prevented this from happening. Balance is such a big concern for many players, the popularity of PM is evidence of that.

Again thank you for taking the time to cite specific concerns.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

as it stands: Chrom was much more of a main character than Lucina was. Even if she was a clone or alt, having her fully playable instead of him is shameful and a bad representation of FEA.

Eh, Chrom got the shaft for almost every chapter past 11. Lucina was just as important as he was and she was much more popular with the fans. Robin was without a doubt the main character so I think it works wonderfully to have him in the game. Lucina is just icing. Beautiful, wonderful icing.

Poor Chrom.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I'm glad you've came to air out your specific concerns of the game. I've been around long enough to see from beginning to end the various concerns and tribulations for Brawl as a game and as a scene. I won't lie and say there arent glaring issues, but for the most part people are mistaken on what precisely those issues were.

Even though its a tangent, I feel I should address the concern I have with older Brawl players assessments of Brawl, since this experience is something I see listed in assessing smash 4. I have no intention of judging anyone's ability to make accurate assessments when well informed, but unless they were involved with or paid deep attention to its gameplay at least after Apex 2012, they are not welll-informed. I dont mean to diminish experience or accomplishments that happened before this since itd likely be a strong analysis pre-2012, but in retrospect this is information and experience that only applies to the early metagame.

I use Apex 2012 as a threshold because its a good line and thats when this happened

Spoiler

1st Otori$3,600
2nd Nietono$1,760
3rd Nairo$960
4th ESAM$640
5th Kakera$320
5th Ally$320
7th UltimateRazer$200
7th ADHD$200
9th Gnes
9th Rich Brown
9th OCEAN
9th DEHF
13th Dabuz
13th Mew2King
13th Brood
13th RAIN

Every Japanese player that came hit top 16 (besides one I believe that didnt make it out of pools), and M2K who was considered the US's best player lost to a Japanese Rob. I dont doubt that any player at their peak skill that had played up to this point, would have lost to the Japanese as well.

This as well as other things forced drastic changes to the American scene and the way we viewed the game, which is why most analysis from players before this moment does seem outdated.

Being more specific, heres one example in regards to the punish game which I believe fell under the umbrella of "guessing" you listed. I feel this is an area that is heavily misunderstood by those who never fully explored its depth. "Guessing" is a derogatory way to put it, its called probability maximization. The idea is to maximize probability of one event occurring over another. Once an opponent is hit, you rely on the fact that youll have a greater amount of options compared to their limited amount in order to continue a string. The initiator needs to have a deep awareness of each players options and an awareness of which one the opponent likely to choose based on the habits of a typical person and the player. After their choice the initiator may be right or wrong, the point is that as the initiator youre going to be correct a disproportionately greater amount of the time then your opponent, and as the game plays out this works into your favor. Not only is this a relevant skill in games like poker, its the closest thing to actual real life decision making, where outcomes are not predictable but you can still have sway in their probability.

Runaway tactics were more common in the early meta-game and could be viewed as leading to more guessing. But as these started losing to those who improved on their ability to string opponents as just described, it became significantly less popular and when attempted would fail to net victories. I won't delve into every concern listed since this isnt a thread about Brawl, but I believe we're not in agreement on how the current meta-game functions. I just wanted to provide one example of what I meant.


I guess the last thing Ill do is go over thing things mentioned in regards to smash 4.

In regards to aerial lag:
In melee unless youre fox and falco, or maybe have something like samus' up-b, Im fairly certain landing into the ground next to an opponent in shield grab range with an aerial leads to punishment against a good opponent regardless of l-canceling, correct? I think people arent accurately assessing how much lag aerials had in Brawl, which was still a fairly aerial intensive game, and how players went around this. In an environment that isnt as heavy as melee short hop aerials typically have the trait (and common use) of being auto-canceled, in addition to having a greater ability to weave in and out with more time spent in the air.

In regards to group mobility:
This is an interesting concern, but I think looking at approach options in isolation leads to issues in how the offense/defense aspects of the game will work, and should be weighed against the games defensive mechanics. As compared to Brawl, Sakurai took a knife to the games more defensive tactics such as planking, and many others which tended to be more character specific (I mentioned some in an earler post), and added a few small but nice touches to offense such as being able to shield right out of dash and Pivot Cancelling. None of this can determine how the ground game will play out, but what I can say confidently is that defensive options are weaker than Brawl's and its offensive options are improved.


Lastly in regards to Brawls problems, unfortunately the most significant answer is obvious (but one not yet stated). Metaknight created a massive divide in the community. It led to many other issues that were never able to be resolved and turned the community in on itself. Even after Brawl made an attempt to swing back, metaknight inter-fighting prevented this from happening.

I won't call Brawl uncompetitive. I just don't personally prefer it, largely because I despise the business decisions behind its development.

It may be competitive. But it was intentionally designed not to be. It's the intention that I have a serious problem with. You just don't spontaneously decide that 20-40% of your audience should go die in a hole. You just don't.

tl;dr: Most detractors hate it for gameplay reasons. I hate it for ethical reasons.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

I won't call Brawl uncompetitive. I just don't personally prefer it, largely because I despise the business decisions behind its development.

It may be competitive. But it was intentionally designed not to be. It's the intention that I have a serious problem with. You just don't spontaneously decide that 20-40% of your audience should go die in a hole. You just don't.

20-40% seems awfully generous. That's close to 5 million people. If that many people who bought Brawl were competitive you'd think the scene would be bigger and have been handled better.

 

[Sedda]

By the way 64 is another perfect example. The games shield is absolutely terrible, but the game is almost as defensive as Brawl and will certainly be more defensive than smash 4 (if anyone legit follows top level 64). I actually think smash 4 will be fairly even or offensive.

I think this is a really unfair assessment of smash 64. There are defensive matchups for sure, but you have to consider the difference between versions. Because of the lack of smash DI in the japanese version, Japanese players are usually way more conservative in their approaches, while generally west hemisphere players take more risks because you can Smash Di yourself out of combos.

64 is not nearly as defensive at Brawl. Not even close. 64 has viable offensive options. If it didn't, I would be playing Brawl instead.
Extremely defensive matches in 64 are (in the top level, as you say) a result of the extremely destructive punish game and offensive strategies that you can fall into. Defensive games in Brawl are the complete opposite.

 

[Cassio]

I think this is a really unfair assessment of smash 64. There are defensive matchups for sure, but you have to consider the difference between versions. Because of the lack of smash DI in the japanese version, Japanese players are usually way more conservative in their approaches, while generally west hemisphere players take more risks because you can Smash Di yourself out of combos.

64 is not nearly as defensive at Brawl. Not even close. 64 has viable offensive options. If it didn't, I would be playing Brawl instead.
Extremely defensive matches in 64 are (in the top level, as you say) a result of the extremely destructive punish game and offensive strategies that you can fall into. Defensive games in Brawl are the complete opposite.

I didnt meant to imply it was bad. I definitely agree their defense is very different which is why people can like one and not the other. But I do follow and to the extent I can find it play 64, its my personal analysis.

 

[Clavaat]

Well this thread has gone a lot of interesting directions.

-snip-

A lot of strong points are raised here, and I can generally agree with your analysis over the past few years as opposed to the launch of the game alone. An important thing to note here:

Time.

Past and Present

Melee has been around for a fairly long time. It has grown, changed, been expanded upon for years. People discover new things, characters that were once relevant, no longer are, etc. Brawl is the same way. The tierlists for both have changed drastically over the years for various reasons. New techs are found, new characters become more viable, etc. One of the toughest hills for Brawl to actually overcome throughout the years is Meta Knight, which is one of the most polarizing characters on the roster, since launch. Stripping him out of the conversation, what are we left with?

The Future

Now, we are assuming that the way Smash has been played in the past will constitute how it should be played now. Instead, I believe what we should take out of what we've seen so far is that every Smash game is incredibly different than the last. This makes it difficult to pin down what is the definition of a competitive Smash game. Is it one when your motion is unrestricted? Is it speed? Is it stage-related? Is it character balance? Is it viewership? Accessibility?

In my opinion, it's a combination of all these factors. I do not believe there is a singular Smash game that doesn't adhere to these factors in one way or another. 64, Melee, and Brawl have strengths in some areas, but not in others. Smash4 from what I can tell, is trying to achieve some form of balance between these factors.

I'd like to add, just in case someone gets on me about my join date, I made a new account. Old one I had from around end of Melee/Beginning of Brawl era. I just haven't visited this site in a long time because I haven't really played competitively in a long time.

 

[guedes the brawler]

Eh, Chrom got the shaft for almost every chapter past 11.

Yeah, no.

well, the valm arc may lead you to believe in that, but absolutely no one in the entire plot was important during that ordeal, outside of chapter 13 (which wasn't in valm.... must be why it's important)

but whatever. what i quote pretty much implies you either don't get awakening's story or are loves Robin and Lucina too much to accept that they weren't consistently main character.

This isn't the topic for this at any rate.


so, as to not make this too off-topic: People forget there is a chance of we discovering some good mobility ATs or ATs that make combos much more viable.

 

[TheJedi]

honestly, i think the emphasis on defensive play is Sakurai's way of saying "if you dont like it, just play something else" also it adheres to the fact that he has problems with his arm, and still wants to have fun playing. he is also thinking of men/women/children who physically cant do quick actions stacked on top of each other. were going from melee to brawl here.

Now if it weren't for the pressure from the competitive communities the addition of "for glory" wouldnt have been added. HOWEVER sakurai knows that they are a small 10-15% (give or take) of the whole smash community.

and what is nintendo in right now? (financial crisis)
How many casual players are there, as opposed to core players?
Thats one of the reasons they pay melee commentators to also commentate on smash4, in a way to show the competitive community that it needs to conform to a new game. Im sure Toph and Scar cringe everytime they have to commentate it, but hey there getting paid to commentate, i'd do the same thing if i were in there shoes.

Do i think thats right? NO. but sadly its the needs of the many vs the needs of the few here. Melee players are the few, Brawl players are happy either way, P:M players like anything thats new and shiny, and people returning to the smash scene for SMASH4 just think its awsome to have another smash to play.

 

[Mechonis]

I can say the only time I'm competitive is playing against my brothers. Sibling rivalry and all. My younger brother hated Melee, since I played it a lot more than him and got to the point that I beat him easily every time. That made him stop playing it. Eventually it happened with my older brother as well, on most games. Before melee we'd played the N64 Smash together for such a long time.

Brawl brought my younger brother back, although my older brother had lost interest in games by then.

I can honestly say that I've fully enjoyed every Smash game in the series personally. Whether people consider one more competitive or not... I'm happy each installment has been quite different. If it wasn't for Brawl my brother may have never played with me again.

I'm looking forward to the new Smash, and I've enjoyed watching every video of it so far. It looks good to me, personally.

Every time an installment is different, it has the potential to bring in new people and turn others away. This goes both ways.

With melee, it had enough mechanics and so forth that I got good enough that it actually made my family stop playing. Brawl brought one back. I'm happy that we got introduced to the series with the N64 version.

Regardless of how it turns out competitively, there will be people that find things that work. New ways to fight, and a new game to play.

I'm hoping for Smash 4 to be competitive enough that people enjoy it, but doesn't turn others away because of it.Each path does have benefits and consequences and I'm glad they are trying something new again.

 

[Noiblade]

I'd share my thoughts/opinions on Smash 4 being competitively viable, but, it'll probably get torn up by hungry wolves here.

I'll just keep it brief.

Smash 4 is gonna be competitively played, now whether it will be competitively viable is a different story.
From what i've seen, I personally believe it will be competitively viable. I wont go into it but, to sum things up, we're looking at things that aren't there rather than what is there.

I'm not gonna respond to anything else here because i'd rather not get into fights/arguments/debates ect. Plus i'm gonna eat some pancakes. Pancakes are good. You guys should stop debating this and eat some pancakes.

 

[JoeInky]

honestly, i think the emphasis on defensive play is Sakurai's way of saying "if you dont like it, just play something else" also it adheres to the fact that he has problems with his arm, and still wants to have fun playing. he is also thinking of men/women/children who physically cant do quick actions stacked on top of each other. were going from melee to brawl here.

Now if it weren't for the pressure from the competitive communities the addition of "for glory" wouldnt have been added. HOWEVER sakurai knows that they are a small 10-15% (give or take) of the whole smash community.

and what is nintendo in right now? (financial crisis)
How many casual players are there, as opposed to core players?
Thats one of the reasons they pay melee commentators to also commentate on smash4, in a way to show the competitive community that it needs to conform to a new game. Im sure Toph and Scar cringe everytime they have to commentate it, but hey there getting paid to commentate, i'd do the same thing if i were in there shoes.

Do i think thats right? NO. but sadly its the needs of the many vs the needs of the few here. Melee players are the few, Brawl players are happy either way, P:M players like anything thats new and shiny, and people returning to the smash scene for SMASH4 just think its awsome to have another smash to play.

Being offensive doesn't mean it needs to be a twitch shooter that ruins your hands.

Also whilst the actual competitive community is a small portion of the audience, we'll be the ones really driving the game in the coming years (though a bit less so now that Nintendo are getting into the TO business), an exciting tournament game to the average spectator brings a lot of new revenue and marketing opportunities that will be driven by the fanbase without any cost on Nintendo's part unless they choose to sponsor it.

I genuinely think if Brawl had been a more exciting competitive game the series would be selling more than it currently is, smash has the potential to be way more popular than any other fighter out there in the mainstream and in the hardcore audiences.

 

[TTTTTsd]

I think lagless aerials is a bit much, IMO. Reduction of landing lag is a good idea, but I know exactly why L-cancelling wasn't brought aboard. Granted, I don't know if it was a smart decision or not, but perhaps the devs thought it shifted too much focus towards aerial attacks since they were, in most cases, a superior option? I think a truly supplemental solution would be to make certain aerials universally lagless or not laggy(such as Nairs, for instance) to give everyone a favorable approach. Alternatively, they've done this with Bowser already, add some autocancel spots in there. Both Bowser's Fair and Bair autocancel. I'd like to see stuff like that become universal. It would promote usage of the aerials in neutral, but not centralize them.

To add on, if what DEHF said about this game is true and it is a mix of Brawl and Smash 64 in a lot of aspects, if the punish game from 64 returns with the way the mechanics work(AKA you make a mistake on neutral and likely die or at least guarantee something close to a stock loss) would that, in theory, make the neutral game a lot more exciting?

 

[pizzapie7]

honestly, i think the emphasis on defensive play is Sakurai's way of saying "if you dont like it, just play something else" also it adheres to the fact that he has problems with his arm, and still wants to have fun playing. he is also thinking of men/women/children who physically cant do quick actions stacked on top of each other. were going from melee to brawl here.

Now if it weren't for the pressure from the competitive communities the addition of "for glory" wouldnt have been added. HOWEVER sakurai knows that they are a small 10-15% (give or take) of the whole smash community.

and what is nintendo in right now? (financial crisis)
How many casual players are there, as opposed to core players?
Thats one of the reasons they pay melee commentators to also commentate on smash4, in a way to show the competitive community that it needs to conform to a new game. Im sure Toph and Scar cringe everytime they have to commentate it, but hey there getting paid to commentate, i'd do the same thing if i were in there shoes.

Do i think thats right? NO. but sadly its the needs of the many vs the needs of the few here. Melee players are the few, Brawl players are happy either way, P:M players like anything thats new and shiny, and people returning to the smash scene for SMASH4 just think its awsome to have another smash to play.

I like your point about Nintendo in a "financial crisis". I'm not sure how true that is because I don't really keep up with gaming company finances but if it is then there's probably a lot riding on Smash as a system seller. And if you're not already a fan of Nintendo, you know what's going to get you to buy a Wii U? A fun, competitive, low-skill-barrier, easier-to-learn-hard-to-master fighting game. "Core gamers" would potentially eat that **** up. Toss a really good online mode, some rankings, host some tournaments and add pot bonuses to major tournaments that others are hosting. Bam, you're pushing units. Because let's be real here, Smash as Smash only appeals to Nintendo fans or Smash fans. It's not bringing any new blood into the Nintendo scene, which is alienating 3/4s of the gaming market. So, don't market it as Smash. Market it as a game that's revolutionizing the fighting game genre.

The problem with this is that what Nintendo of America wants the game to be isn't what Sakurai wants the game to be.

 

[JoeInky]

I like your point about Nintendo in a "financial crisis". I'm not sure how true that is because I don't really keep up with gaming company finances but if it is then there's probably a lot riding on Smash as a system seller. And if you're not already a fan of Nintendo, you know what's going to get you to buy a Wii U? A fun, competitive, low-skill-barrier, easier-to-learn-hard-to-master fighting game. "Core gamers" would potentially eat that **** up. Toss a really good online mode, some rankings, host some tournaments and add pot bonuses to major tournaments that others are hosting. Bam, you're pushing units. Because let's be real here, Smash as Smash only appeals to Nintendo fans or Smash fans. It's not bringing any new blood into the Nintendo scene, which is alienating 3/4s of the gaming market. So, don't market it as Smash. Market it as a game that's revolutionizing the fighting game genre.

The problem with this is that what Nintendo of America wants the game to be isn't what Sakurai wants the game to be.

I think this is an interesting discussion point actually, if casualising a game to make it appeal to a more general audience actually helped move units, why did Brawl only sell 4 million more copies on a system that sold way more than the gamecube?

Surely it should have been doing Mario Kart numbers if a casual party game is what people wanted out of smash?

 

[TTTTTsd]

I don't usually like to use sales as a scope of being pleasing to long-time series fans. I'd also equate it to the fact that Mario Kart is infinitely more casual than even Brawl could aspire to be. Couple that with the Wii's target market(i.e. parents and, basically anybody) and the Wii Wheel being presented for Mario Kart, tons of people are gonna hop on board that gimmick.

To further push forward my point, Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, a game that in all aspects improved from its predecessor, has failed to catch up to it, and while there are not as much WiiUs sold, I expected more sales out of the game when I played it because damn, was it awesome.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

I like your point about Nintendo in a "financial crisis". I'm not sure how true that is because I don't really keep up with gaming company finances but if it is then there's probably a lot riding on Smash as a system seller. And if you're not already a fan of Nintendo, you know what's going to get you to buy a Wii U? A fun, competitive, low-skill-barrier, easier-to-learn-hard-to-master fighting game. "Core gamers" would potentially eat that **** up. Toss a really good online mode, some rankings, host some tournaments and add pot bonuses to major tournaments that others are hosting. Bam, you're pushing units. Because let's be real here, Smash as Smash only appeals to Nintendo fans or Smash fans. It's not bringing any new blood into the Nintendo scene, which is alienating 3/4s of the gaming market. So, don't market it as Smash. Market it as a game that's revolutionizing the fighting game genre.

The problem with this is that what Nintendo of America wants the game to be isn't what Sakurai wants the game to be.

I'm not sure NoA gets a say in that.

In regards to the financial crisis bit, as I understand it Nintendo was about 400 million in the red after this past year (the numbers keep getting reported differently in different places so if I'm wrong someone please correct me) and a lot of that was from them spending money for R&D purposes in the last quarter. If they feel comfortable throwing themselves into the red like that I'd say they probably are feeling pretty secure. Someone did the numbers once and I think they said that Nintendo can survive off everything it has stored up until... what was it, 2050? Something like that. Point is, Nintendo isn't in a crisis yet. They just haven't been as successful as they hoped (and let's be honest, they set some extremely high standards for themselves)

I actually saw an article this morning saying that Nintendo sold 500,000 Wii U's between April and June so it looks like things are picking up anyways.

Just wanted to attempt to answer the question... I probably didn't do a good job of it but meh.

@ JoeInky Well, no matter what game it is 4 million isn't a horrible number but Brawl overall sold 12 million copies, which is pretty freaking amazing by most industry standards. Though, MKWii sold about 34 million so I see what you're saying.

 

[JoeInky]

I attribute the lack of DKCTF sales to a major lack of an install base and the fact that it was a platformer on a platformer-heavy system.

 

[κomıc]

Nintendo isn't in a "Financial Crisis" at all. That's Sony (selling off buildings and whole divisions such as their VAIO computer division most recently).

Nintendo isn't doing well for sure, but it is no crisis.

 

[TTTTTsd]

As far as DKCTF goes, that's a debatable point as well, I'm not going to argue that. There's a lot of reasons why the game hasn't sold as well as it should have, but if quality alone pushed it, my theory is that it would've sold a lot more.