An amateur's opinions on Final Destination vs. Battlefield

[Saikyoshi]

I see For Glory mode being constantly bashed for featuring Final Destination instead of Battlefield.

However, I'm fairly sure that the metagame has been adjusted to make it a lot more suitable for competitive play.

Let's look at the common arguments:

People cite that Little Mac will be overpowered on FD because he can charge through projectiles. However, if you knock him in the air even once, it's all over. On Battlefield, however, there's hardly any air at all; Knock him upwards, and there's more ground for him to counterattack from.

Now, let's get to another point - Palutena. There's no question in my eyes that Battlefield is severely skewed in her favor, with massive area-of-effect attacks making any kind of counterattack except on the main platform a total impossibility.

Finally, the fact that projectile and speed gaming, which has made FD unbalanced before, has been nerfed. Slower characters who were put at an insurmountable disadvantage due to it before now have a form of defense against it in Super Armor. They'll still take damage , making projectiles and hit-and-runs not worthless, but they at least stand a chance now.

Keep in mind that I'm far from a professional. This is just my personal observation and I'm probably wrong about some things.

 

[pizzapie7]

This is all theory on a half finished game. You're right about Little Mac. I can't make an argument that a character that lacks an air game as much as Little Mac will even be a good character, let alone overpowered. But Smash 4 may surprise me in that regard.

The problem with Final Destination isn't the fact that it's balanced or unbalanced or more balanced than Battlefield or Smashville or any other stage. It's the fact that it's the only stage, and no one stage is perfect. That's why a stage list and counterpicking exists. That's why most players play on multiple stages, even casually. Having one stage playable isn't balanced or fun and I have no idea why Sakurai would think that game mode would be a good idea. I've questioned his judgement on a lot of things, but this one probably takes the cake (aside from tripping). Who is this game mode even for?

All I really know is that I wouldn't touch For Glory with a 30 foot pole and I hope Sakurai isn't balancing everything to be balanced around Final Destination. Variety is the spice of life and stage selection is no different than anything else.

 

[Beats]

There are plenty more factors to consider than the ones you have listed. If you knock Little Mac up onto a platform, he'll be put into a tech chase scenario, so attacking at that point won't really be possible. What he'll want is a center stage position so that he can stay below his enemies; I really don't think his attacks are suited for coming back down from above. Also important with platforms is maneuverability, and more aerial based characters can do things like top platform camp. Camping in general, especially with projectiles, is made easier with platforms. Yes, having a wide stage helps, but platforms play a big part too. That's why campier stages in melee include dreamland and pokemon stadium, and not so much FD. I've never seen FD as the most beneficial stage for projectiles camping.

As for Palutena, I don't think we know enough to pass judgement on her best stages. We'll wait and see.

 

[Phaazoid]

Then what about the Final Destination form of Battlefield?

sorry I don't actually have anything to add here

 

[Saikyoshi]

The problem with Final Destination isn't the fact that it's balanced or unbalanced or more balanced than Battlefield or Smashville or any other stage. It's the fact that it's the only stage, and no one stage is perfect. That's why a stage list and counterpicking exists. That's why most players play on multiple stages, even casually. Having one stage playable isn't balanced or fun and I have no idea why Sakurai would think that game mode would be a good idea. I've questioned his judgement on a lot of things, but this one probably takes the cake (aside from tripping). Who is this game mode even for?

All I really know is that I wouldn't touch For Glory with a 30 foot pole and I hope Sakurai isn't balancing everything to be balanced around Final Destination. Variety is the spice of life and stage selection is no different than anything else.

My problem with this is speaking as a Street Fighter player; the only differences between stages are aesthetic, yet it does just fine for itself. I feel For Glory mode will be the same way.

There are plenty more factors to consider than the ones you have listed. If you knock Little Mac up onto a platform, he'll be put into a tech chase scenario, so attacking at that point won't really be possible. What he'll want is a center stage position so that he can stay below his enemies; I really don't think his attacks are suited for coming back down from above. Also important with platforms is maneuverability, and more aerial based characters can do things like top platform camp. Camping in general, especially with projectiles, is made easier with platforms. Yes, having a wide stage helps, but platforms play a big part too. That's why campier stages in melee include dreamland and pokemon stadium, and not so much FD. I've never seen FD as the most beneficial stage for projectiles camping.

As for Palutena, I don't think we know enough to pass judgement on her best stages. We'll wait and see.

I thought camping was generally seen as detrimental to the metagame?

 

[pizzapie7]

My problem with this is speaking as a Street Fighter player; the only differences between stages are aesthetic, yet it does just fine for itself. I feel For Glory mode will be the same way.


I thought camping was generally seen as detrimental to the metagame?

Street Fighter, like traditional fighters, has a primary focus on the 1D plane that the characters are in. Some fighters fight in the air or on the ground, which is where the 2D aspect comes from, but there is really only one x axis that the characters reside on. Smash is an entirely different game with platforming elements. Stage selection is an important part of the game, not just aesthetic changes like in Street Fighter. By only playing on one stage you're removing a chunk of the game.

Camping is as legitimate of a strategy as any other. A game that promotes and helps camping while hindering different otherwise viable tactics will not have a good metagame, but camping in and of itself isn't detrimental like how rushdown isn't detrimental.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

What you have to consider is that a character benefitting from a stage is relative to that character's worth on other stages. Like let's take Palutena's ability to up smash through platforms; that's pretty great. Now, if every stage has some area she can up smash through for an advantage other than Final Destination, is it reasonable to say that every stage but Final Destination gives her an advantage? No, you would say Final Destination offers her a disadvantage. Obviously if Final Destination and Battlefield were really the only two stages this logic wouldn't work well, but that's the point. This is why including a diversity of stage types as legal is important. We want to play the "real game", not a game we made up, and every element within the game is defined in part by how it works relative to the other elements.

Since different characters are strong or weak on different types of stages, we want to include as many as possible so we can best represent the true value of the game's balance in the tournament scene, not the skewed value as shown on simply the most static of stages. I remember in Brawl I got so mad over this; my main Mr. Game & Watch is a very good character, but people kept changing the rules to artifically make him a worse character. They kept saying it was to keep Meta Knight in check, and Meta Knight never did a bit worse no matter how they changed the rules (not that it's legit to try to nerf a character via stage list anyway). I kept saying G&W was getting screwed, and no one cared, and his tournament performance flatlined. Then people said Ice Climbers and Olimar were newly discovered as top tiers when, really, I had been saying all along that the stage rule changes were just really biased in those characters' favors. Our understanidng of the game didn't change so much as the rules changed and changed what the game actually was.

I didn't just post this to be salty over Brawl's very poor ruleset history. The bigger point here is that the idea that you just take the couple of most static stages, determine a most fair among them, and evaluate fairness based on similarity to that is wrong. Diversity is a core aspect to stages, and by its very nature, there can never truly be a most fair stage. Only in how we allow many stages that benefit many different types of characters can we approximate neutrality, and it will always be fundamentally impossible to isolate a single stage as the center of that balance since even the gameplay on that stage itself is really defined in how it differs from every other stage.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I do see your points. They're good points.

However, I will say this in the mode's defense above a stage hazard switch like I keep seeing suggested:

Temple and Hanenbow would be entirely unaffected by a stage hazard switch.

That's why Super Smash Flash 2 still has a ban list, even though it does have a stage hazard switch.

If you ask me, FD versions are a reliable way to stay within all tournament rulesets because Sakurai can't predict what the rules will be.

 

[Canuckduck]

I'm fine with For Glory mode as long as Sakurai agrees to include Battlefield variants as well.

 

[Senario]

I'm fine with For Glory mode as long as Sakurai agrees to include Battlefield variants as well.

Would agree but this is Sakurai we are talking about lol. He doesn't do his homework on the competitive community. Nintendo does though so maybe there is a very small chance.

 

[LancerStaff]

There's two sides to this coin. Before, FD gives projectile campers a major advantage. But now, it might be the only thing making them useful with how nerfed projectiles are. Same case with Mac, he'll be garbage if Battlefield is around.

Since this is the first time the developers have taken balance seriously, and it's based on FD. Don't you think that we'd just be wasting their effort by not trying FD only at all? I can't help but think a single stage metagame will work much better then attempting to sort out good and bad stages.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

I don't believe that the projectile nerf is enough to not skew matchups on FD in favour of camping. They're still projectiles after all. Look at Pit in Project M. His arrows deal less stun and damage the further the arrows fly, to the point where Loop Arrowing is a pathetic tech because you won't deal any more than a whopping 2% (at BEST). Doesn't stop Pit players from arrow camping though.

One thing that Wobbles wrote about on his blog is that whether a player should play offensively or defensively should ultimately be whichever is more likely to make the player win. So if you can just stand on the other side of the stage and wall any kind of advancement your opponent attempts all the while dealing damage to set up for a KO later, why would you want to go on the offensive and take a risk? It's less safe and (depending on your perspective) less rewarding. Platform stages help with manueverablilty and evasiveness. Also most traditionally legal stages (like Battlefield) aren't as wide FD, giving players little reason or room to just sit in place.

EDIT: And don't even get me started on how Dominant Strategy fits in all of this lol.

Since this is the first time the developers have taken balance seriously, and it's based on FD. Don't you think that we'd just be wasting their effort by not trying FD only at all? I can't help but think a single stage metagame will work much better then attempting to sort out good and bad stages.

No, I don't. I'm still not convinced that Sakurai knows one thing about balance. Nevermind the blandness and removal of a core element of Smash (platforms) as described above by @ pizzapie7 . I'd perhaps settle for an FD-only side event but the idea of having it as the predominant meta makes my blood boil.

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

Honestly, I'd rather play For Fun and deal with all the items and stages rather than playing For Glory.

For Glory really seems like a slap in the face.

 

[Saikyoshi]

You do realize that the total rejection of the mode will lead Sakurai to think that the competitive fandom is even smaller than he already thinks it is? Because the competitive mode is all he's going to look at when determining the conpetitive fandom.

When he sees how embarrassingly few people use it, he's going to conclude that we're not worth listening to at all next time.

(Also, I'd like SOMEONE to play against at my skill level, and I'm sure as hell not going to get that in With Friends...)

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

This is only a problem if you take online play seriously and/or you are incapable of making friends online. People played Brawl just fine and we had to deal with dumb ass friend codes and terrible online. This isn't the case anymore. I'm positive that we are more than capable of playing someone online and adding them as a friend easily.

Play For Glory, add the player after the match, play as friends and do whatever you want.

Who knows, maybe Sakurai will make some changes to For Glory, but if not, I have absolutely no problem with it. With such a massive community to play with at any given time I doubt this will be a problem at all.

 

[ImaClubYou]

Well, Palutena's AoE has no stun to it, leaving her vulnerable during the animation. Up Smash hits far off, but to me it just looks like a better Melee Marth up smash and that's not really any better.

No comment on Little Mac.

 

[pizzapie7]

You do realize that the total rejection of the mode will lead Sakurai to think that the competitive fandom is even smaller than he already thinks it is? Because the competitive mode is all he's going to look at when determining the conpetitive fandom.

When he sees how embarrassingly few people use it, he's going to conclude that we're not worth listening to at all next time.

(Also, I'd like SOMEONE to play against at my skill level, and I'm sure as hell not going to get that in With Friends...)

You're really overstating Sakurai's relevance. If Sakurai wanted to pander to the competitive community he should've at least done his research like Nintendo of America did. For Glory is terrible. ****ing terrible. I'm not going to use it simply because this was Sakurai's shoddy attempt at throwing the competitive community a bone. And I'd advise anyone against doing it. **** that noise. This community has lasted over a decade without his help. It supports all three of his games and it made a fourth one and supports that too. We don't need him. We aren't trying to play the game to his standards in the first place. If he sees that few people play this mode and he blames it on the consumer, rather than his ****ty decision making, then that's his fault as a developer.

 

[Saikyoshi]

You're really overstating Sakurai's relevance. If Sakurai wanted to pander to the competitive community he should've at least done his research like Nintendo of America did. For Glory is terrible. ****ing terrible. I'm not going to use it simply because this was Sakurai's shoddy attempt at throwing the competitive community a bone. And I'd advise anyone against doing it. **** that noise. This community has lasted over a decade without his help. It supports all three of his games and it made a fourth one and supports that too. We don't need him. We aren't trying to play the game to his standards in the first place. If he sees that few people play this mode and he blames it on the consumer, rather than his ****ty decision making, then that's his fault as a developer.

Well, don't come crying to me when the next game is an even slower Brawl...

 

[pizzapie7]

Well, don't come crying to me when the next game is an even slower Brawl...

I'd have 64, Melee, PM, and hopefully both versions of Smash 4 to play would that take place.
Smash 4 wasn't "sped up" because of the competitive community alone. Even casual players were disappointed in how sluggish it felt. Sakurai recognized he made a mistake on all levels with Brawl and is currently attempting to fix it. He won't revert back simply because one section of online play he shoehorned in isn't getting much play.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I'd have 64, Melee, PM, and hopefully both versions of Smash 4 to play would that take place.
Smash 4 wasn't "sped up" because of the competitive community alone. Even casual players were disappointed in how sluggish it felt. Sakurai recognized he made a mistake on all levels with Brawl and is currently attempting to fix it. He won't revert back simply because one section of online play he shoehorned in isn't getting much play.

Yes, he recognized his mistakes and is slowly coming to his senses. Which is why, despite its obvious shortcomings, it's going to be seeing a lot of playtime from me, and hopefully he'll improve on it next time.

He's not going to do that if he thinks the effort's in vain.

Is he totally senile? Yes, yes he is. But he's trying.

 

[TurnUp]

Chances are the for glory lobby will not include anything other than Final Destination and variations of it. There's nothing stopping players from playing in 'For Anyone' mode with the rules they want. For glory is going to be timed mode most likely anyway which is not my preferred way of playing.

I feel this game being very ground based to be honest and it seems chaingrabs are basically done for, and the final destinations may be different by a minuscule amount with distance and possibly the blast zones, we don't really know for now.

I have to admit I wish stage hazards were just turned off, but I can see why they would just make different forms instead of removing parts of stage's personalities with a ticker.

 

[LancerStaff]

I don't believe that the projectile nerf is enough to not skew matchups on FD in favour of camping. They're still projectiles after all. Look at Pit in Project M. His arrows deal less stun and damage the further the arrows fly, to the point where Loop Arrowing is a pathetic tech because you won't deal any more than a whopping 2% (at BEST). Doesn't stop Pit players from arrow camping though.

One thing that Wobbles wrote about on his blog is that whether a player should play offensively or defensively should ultimately be whichever is more likely to make the player win. So if you can just stand on the other side of the stage and wall any kind of advancement your opponent attempts all the while dealing damage to set up for a KO later, why would you want to go on the offensive and take a risk? It's less safe and (depending on your perspective) less rewarding. Platform stages help with manueverablilty and evasiveness. Also most traditionally legal stages (like Battlefield) aren't as wide FD, giving players little reason or room to just sit in place.

EDIT: And don't even get me started on how Dominant Strategy fits in all of this lol.


No, I don't. I'm still not convinced that Sakurai knows one thing about balance. Nevermind the blandness and removal of a core element of Smash (platforms) as described above by @ pizzapie7 . I'd perhaps settle for an FD-only side event but the idea of having it as the predominant meta makes my blood boil.

Ye of little faith. Think about it for a moment, did Sakurai really try balancing the previous games? Absolutely not. He fully knew that he was shipping games with clear-cut winners and losers. He just didn't bother because he didn't think it'd matter much. The flaws in Brawl's balancing system and with how far out of whack Brawl is must of made Sakurai turn his stance around on balance. How many times did he mention balancing in Brawl? Like never. Now, he mentions it every time he talks about Smash. Namco's best are playtesting. Even if Sakurai can't balance for peanuts those guys will quickly find and abuse major strengths and weaknesses, and back to the drawing board Sakurai goes.

Remember the demo? There was a whopping one garbage character, Zelda. That's half the roster on a demo slapped together months ago. Remember how Mario was just okay? The Treehouse guys let slip that Mario is much better on the current build then on the demo. That's all pretty significant evidence for knowing what he's doing, don't you think?

Have you tried a single stage tournament?

Honestly, I'd rather play For Fun and deal with all the items and stages rather than playing For Glory.

For Glory really seems like a slap in the face.

...Unless it's far more balanced then platforms are.

You're really overstating Sakurai's relevance. If Sakurai wanted to pander to the competitive community he should've at least done his research like Nintendo of America did. For Glory is terrible. ****ing terrible. I'm not going to use it simply because this was Sakurai's shoddy attempt at throwing the competitive community a bone. And I'd advise anyone against doing it. **** that noise. This community has lasted over a decade without his help. It supports all three of his games and it made a fourth one and supports that too. We don't need him. We aren't trying to play the game to his standards in the first place. If he sees that few people play this mode and he blames it on the consumer, rather than his ****ty decision making, then that's his fault as a developer.

He has two competitive communities to listen to: A hyper conservative one, and one that varies it's stage list greatly. I don't see anybody from the former being happy with the later's ruleset, but the later will most likely use the former's if it's the only option. Just because this was designed with a minority in mind doesn't mean he has to appeal to precisely one part of this minority.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

(Also, I'd like SOMEONE to play against at my skill level, and I'm sure as hell not going to get that in With Friends...)

Given that For Glory could pair you up against anyone and GSP is based on solo modes (thus not being a good representation of a player's PvP skills), I'd say that you very well COULD get that from With Friends. After all, you're on Smashboards! Everyone is going to be looking for suitable opponents here and will probably make Youtube videos (I know I will) so if you can't take people's words for granted, you can at least try to gauge their skill level visually.

I personally I am going to use For Glory, but only as a... Training ground of sorts. I'll be using it for what it presents itself as; a mode where you can quickly jump in for a "serious" match with no reward money or tournament bracket lol.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Given that For Glory could pair you up against anyone and GSP is based on solo modes (thus not being a good representation of a player's PvP skills), I'd say that you very well COULD get that from With Friends. After all, you're on Smashboards! Everyone is going to be looking for suitable opponents here and will probably make Youtube videos (I know I will) so if you can't take people's words for granted, you can at least try to gauge their skill level visually.

I personally I am going to use For Glory, but only as a... Training ground of sorts. I'll be using it for what it presents itself as; a mode where you can quickly jump in for a "serious" match with no reward money or tournament bracket lol.

Yeeeeah, I just... Well...

Let me put this simply. I'm kind of intimidated when it comes to looking for opponents myself, because this is how I see it.

This is me:

And if I choose MANUALLY instead of automatically like For Glory will do, these are my choices of opponents around here with no visible inbetween ground:

I hope that gets the point across visually even if you're not familiar with the series.

Of course people will be making themselves look like the latter, and since I'm on the lower end of the spectrum, that's what they will be in my eyes.

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

Given that For Glory could pair you up against anyone and GSP is based on solo modes (thus not being a good representation of a player's PvP skills), I'd say that you very well COULD get that from With Friends. After all, you're on Smashboards! Everyone is going to be looking for suitable opponents here and will probably make Youtube videos (I know I will) so if you can't take people's words for granted, you can at least try to gauge their skill level visually.

I personally I am going to use For Glory, but only as a... Training ground of sorts. I'll be using it for what it presents itself as; a mode where you can quickly jump in for a "serious" match with no reward money or tournament bracket lol.

Pretty much this. I'll be playing With Friends mainly anyway, just like many others on Smashboards.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Yeeeeah, I just... Well...

Let me put this simply. I'm kind of intimidated when it comes to looking for opponents myself, because this is how I see it.

This is me:

And if I choose MANUALLY instead of automatically like For Glory will do, these are my choices of opponents around here with no visible inbetween ground:

I hope that gets the point across visually even if you're not familiar with the series.

Of course people will be making themselves look like the latter, and since I'm on the lower end of the spectrum, that's what they will be in my eyes.

Liked cuz Dragon Ball Z

 

[pizzapie7]

He has two competitive communities to listen to: A hyper conservative one, and one that varies it's stage list greatly. I don't see anybody from the former being happy with the later's ruleset, but the later will most likely use the former's if it's the only option. Just because this was designed with a minority in mind doesn't mean he has to appeal to precisely one part of this minority.

Exactly which part of the minority was this designed in mind for? I don't know of anyone in the competitive community who would be supportive or happy with a ruleset with only one stage. Even the most hyper conservative players tend to like 5 stages in Melee and Brawl, and Final Destination is pretty far down the list in terms of being a favorite out of those in both games.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

It isn't the same for two critical reasons. For one, Dragonball Z has silly lore and Vegeta, as a saiyan, is just inherently better than Krillin ever could be. The real world isn't like that; you have every bit as much potential to be as strong as the strongest if you can only find the way. The second point is that Vegeta would just kill Krillin, Krillin would be dead, and that would be it. In the context of real life smash gaming, you play someone way better than you, you lose, you learn, you get better. In fact, as long as you can even begin to keep up at all, you'll probably improve faster playing "super saiyan" players as opposed to seeking out Yamcha who you are marginally stronger than and will give you a feel-good win.

"For Glory" is just a quickmatch, a feature designed to be used by somewhat competitively minded players to be in a game and fast. It only exists because these players wouldn't find "For Fun" a very fun mode, and nothing about how it works should be interpreted as significant to the greater competitive scene. I'm not going to say you shouldn't use the feature, but you should just as much if not more be seeking out strong opponents on your own and trying your hand against them. It will pay off in the long run, and you'll have a much richer and more rewarding gameplay experience.

 

[Saikyoshi]

It isn't the same for two critical reasons. For one, Dragonball Z has silly lore and Vegeta, as a saiyan, is just inherently better than Krillin ever could be. The real world isn't like that; you have every bit as much potential to be as strong as the strongest if you can only find the way. The second point is that Vegeta would just kill Krillin, Krillin would be dead, and that would be it. In the context of real life smash gaming, you play someone way better than you, you lose, you learn, you get better. In fact, as long as you can even begin to keep up at all, you'll probably improve faster playing "super saiyan" players as opposed to seeking out Yamcha who you are marginally stronger than and will give you a feel-good win.

"For Glory" is just a quickmatch, a feature designed to be used by somewhat competitively minded players to be in a game and fast. It only exists because these players wouldn't find "For Fun" a very fun mode, and nothing about how it works should be interpreted as significant to the greater competitive scene. I'm not going to say you shouldn't use the feature, but you should just as much if not more be seeking out strong opponents on your own and trying your hand against them. It will pay off in the long run, and you'll have a much richer and more rewarding gameplay experience.

So, basically, I should think more like a saiyan in the "get stronger every time you almost die" sense.

Endless fandom-ing aside, though, that's a pretty good way of putting it. I tend to get disheartened after repeated losses (see: my very, very brief stint as a competitive Pokémon player and my nightmares about Skarmory and Mega Venusaur), so I always forget to learn from my mistakes.

Performance in For Glory should be a pit stop, not the journey, right?

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

So, basically, I should think more like a saiyan in the "get stronger every time you almost die" sense.

Endless fandom-ing aside, though, that's a pretty good way of putting it. I tend to get disheartened after repeated losses (see: my very, very brief stint as a competitive Pokémon player and my nightmares about Skarmory and Mega Venusaur), so I always forget to learn from my mistakes.

Performance in For Glory should be a pit stop, not the journey, right?

Precisely. I had a reply to one of your other posts ready, but you and Amph basically said what I wanted to.

Spoiler

And here it is just in case you care

Yeah I get what you mean... But the two possible outcomes look the same as what you'd get from For Glory to me. Also might I point out that some of us have only one person to play with IRL who's so much better than them that some days they get butthurt and give up? Trust me, I know how it feels to lose a lot. However, I still notice myself getting better. The only reason I'm not winning much is because he is too. We're growing together as players <3

 

[pizzapie7]

Hardly a pit stop at all, if anything. So long as playing with friends is functioning and you still have an account on Smashboards I wouldn't really use it as anything much aside from a warm up. You can only get better by playing people that are of some quality, and the nature of For Glory means that the quality could end up being questionable.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Hardly a pit stop at all, if anything. So long as playing with friends is functioning and you still have an account on Smashboards I wouldn't really use it as anything much aside from a warm up. You can only get better by playing people that are of some quality, and the nature of For Glory means that the quality could end up being questionable.

Or if enough people give it a chance, it'll be a valuable place to get a quick, fair exhibition match.

The people who never improve and don't care will be trapped at the bottom rungs, so I'll stop seeing them entirely in a matter of days with even a grain of competitive knowledge.

 

[Xavier :D]

I actually like FD more than Battlefield, and I think I'm somewhere casual and competitive. I lean more towards casual though.

 

[Book Jacket]

Exactly which part of the minority was this designed in mind for? I don't know of anyone in the competitive community who would be supportive or happy with a ruleset with only one stage. Even the most hyper conservative players tend to like 5 stages in Melee and Brawl, and Final Destination is pretty far down the list in terms of being a favorite out of those in both games.

Japan. Japan has an FD only competitive ruleset, apparently. Which means that in order for online to at least feel serious to the world, FD is the only option. If Sakurai included other stages, he'd be slapping their competitive scene in the face.

 

[Saikyoshi]

Japan. Japan has an FD only competitive ruleset, apparently. Which means that in order for online to at least feel serious to the world, FD is the only option. If Sakurai included other stages, he'd be slapping their competitive scene in the face.

Considering that their 64 ruleset has always been Dream Land only, No exceptions, I can't say I'm surprised.

I am surprised that I forgot, though.

 

[LancerStaff]

Exactly which part of the minority was this designed in mind for? I don't know of anyone in the competitive community who would be supportive or happy with a ruleset with only one stage. Even the most hyper conservative players tend to like 5 stages in Melee and Brawl, and Final Destination is pretty far down the list in terms of being a favorite out of those in both games.

Like Book Jacket said, Japan. Sakurai has two widely different competitive scenes to take imput from. I don't see a way he could of pleased both without creating even more modes, so he picked the one that he couldn't possibly mess up. People here would still be complaining if fG was just two stages, and Japan wouldn't exactly be thrilled either.

 

[Kevandre]

As a person who despises the Smash tournament mentality, I really.. just don't see any issue with For Glory. Who doesn't like a FD/no item match every once in a while? If you don't like it, don't play it. No reason to complain about it.

 

[D-idara]

Street Fighter, like traditional fighters, has a primary focus on the 1D plane that the characters are in. Some fighters fight in the air or on the ground, which is where the 2D aspect comes from, but there is really only one x axis that the characters reside on. Smash is an entirely different game with platforming elements. Stage selection is an important part of the game, not just aesthetic changes like in Street Fighter. By only playing on one stage you're removing a chunk of the game.

Camping is as legitimate of a strategy as any other. A game that promotes and helps camping while hindering different otherwise viable tactics will not have a good metagame, but camping in and of itself isn't detrimental like how rushdown isn't detrimental.

By removing items and gimmicky stages you're removing a chunk of the game, but the community seems to be perfectly OK with that. Also, this 'I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole, I'm a pro so I only play with my own perfect rules' mentality is REALLY irritating and infuriating to watch.

You're really overstating Sakurai's relevance. If Sakurai wanted to pander to the competitive community he should've at least done his research like Nintendo of America did. For Glory is terrible. ****ing terrible. I'm not going to use it simply because this was Sakurai's shoddy attempt at throwing the competitive community a bone. And I'd advise anyone against doing it. **** that noise. This community has lasted over a decade without his help. It supports all three of his games and it made a fourth one and supports that too. We don't need him. We aren't trying to play the game to his standards in the first place. If he sees that few people play this mode and he blames it on the consumer, rather than his ****ty decision making, then that's his fault as a developer.

God, you are a ray of sunshine, aren't you?

 

[josh bones]

t. Also, this 'I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole, I'm a pro so I only play with my own fair and logical rules

FIxed for truth

 

[Networker1]

Exactly which part of the minority was this designed in mind for?

Doesn't Japan have an FD only meta?

...

Just sayin...

Edit: 'd