I've had maybe two days worth of Brawl, and it has brought about a few thoughts.
Firstly: as much as I love Final Smashes, and as much as there is an argument about having the skill to control the stage overrule the randomness of the Smash Ball, it simply doesn't work out that way. If there were Smash Balls in Melee, there would have been a much higher chance that they were implemented in tournament play due to how much easier it was to move - until I reach my second point.
As sweet as Great Aether is, I have to side with the fact that the Ball will show up and do one thing: change the goal of the immediate game. Instead of being totally focused on controlling your opponent, you would now have to control him/her and an entire stage, too - and with mechanics as they are, there are so many characters with huge mobility advantages over so many others. It seems to lack the appeal of you beating your opponent, instead changing things to your ubermove beating your opponent.
Maybe, just maybe, Brawl’s lack of competitiveness in the skill department could be fixed by the presence of Smash Balls - you have to fight that much smarter and that much faster in a game where it’s harder to do either - but it’s wrecked when you actually get it. If we argue that control is the majority of what earns you the Smash Ball, why the hell would you need it at all? You already have enough of an advantage over your opponent - the only logical reason to put in the Smash Ball, then, is to help the underdog. And since when did we play tournaments with handicaps? It’s even stranger still when implementing the item for the loser, we practically give the advantage to the winner. There’s no sense in it other than “HAHAHA FIRIN MAH SAMUS LAZOR”. Perhaps if we had clones of ourselves, there would be some rhyme or reason to putting Smash Balls in competitive play.
We all played Melee competitively without items, and as far as I know, not one person refused to play outright because they wanted items. I'd say it will be the same with Brawl, should it become competitive.
And yeah, I don't think it will. I'm also /facepalm'ing when people say "it might be competitive soon!" as if there's some wonderful cure-all still hidden in this game - despite the fact that it's been tested to oblivion and back. If there was something that gamebreaking, something that could fix Brawl up and throw it past Melee, you'd think it would have been more obvious, huh? I kinda expect this miracle fix to be like the equivalent of fifty differently executed wavedashes and l-cancels - it just won't be short and sweet enough to be viable. That's been pretty much assured. If something does make it out of the works, then I'll shut up, but based on all the reliable evidence I've seen up until this point, it really does make me conclude Brawl just won't do it.
Items will always be a debate about skill vs. luck, and counter to that, control vs. lack skill.
Items make FFA's a lot more fun in Brawl. Items make 1v1 Brawl even less challenging. Smash Balls make Brawl FFA more fun than I've ever had with Melee FFA. Smash Balls also make 1v1 horrible. It's not even about the skill to control it - just as soon as somebody has it, the other person will die. It's about as fair as taking the controller off your opponent and jumping them off the stage. The fairness in the ability to get the Ball is far, far beneath the fairness of what happens after, and that's why I say no to Smash Balls.
What I also say as a result of that last paragraph is this: Brawl is a fantastic party game. 1v1 is good, not great, but FFA is probably where this game shines. Focusing on one person with the game as slow as it is isn't as satisfying as concentrating on three - it works quite nicely. Melee was too hectic for it.
I'm a little disappointed, since I was hoping Brawl WOULD be Melee 2.0 - competitive, fast, and with the same element of control that we had in Melee. As much as I also hate the people who EXPECTED Melee 2.0 even after the fact that it was found not to be and still carry on about it, it would have been nice to come into the Smash scene at the same time as everyone else and feel like I was really in the forefront for a change.
As far as our stage rulings go, I don't think it's wise to be different for the sake of being different. It's almost like the items debate - people are trying to think outside the box too hard. The box works fine. The solution for banned stages in the past? They were friendlies. Friendlies are isolated games where people can have what they want individually and still be satisfied with the result - tournaments are meant to be universal, where everyone agrees, so that we can really believe that our rankings mean something. It's kinda like we're trying to change everyone's opinions in here rather than reach a reasonable agreement with each other.
Besides, there are plenty of new things in what I believed to be neutral stages. There are quite a few that are neutral, anyways.
Final verdict from me is that if we're trying to get Brawl to be competitive, it would make sense to base it on what we know worked from Melee - as much as they are different games, they still have the same goal in mind. Stage selections, items, and even stock limits. I've played around with them a bit and they really do seem to feel the best as they were for Melee.
I'm just about over the debate on competitive Brawl, though. I'll enjoy it more than Melee just because it's still new, and that I really felt left behind in Melee, and finally, that it is just a lot of fun with other people around, but it's simply not as competitive.
Brawl is the better of the two games for me - and I’ve pretty much forfeited my competitive playing for that.
/rant
