Automatic L-Cancelling Discussion

[Narpas_sword]

Possibly, just pointing out an observation

No, you weren't
You were claiming evidence.

An observation is: "This animal has 4 legs"
You were saying: "This animal has 4 legs. Cats have 4 legs, so this animal must be a cat.

 

[platologic]

Based on the last few L-canceling threads, the best arguments against auto L-canceling (ALC) as a concept seem to be:
1. It removes options/decisions, making player interaction less deep.
2. It removes an execution barrier, devaluing technical prowess as a whole.
3. It removes an introductory tech skill, reducing new players' incentive to start learning tech.
4. It unbalances characters who can use SHFFL to apply shield pressure effectively.
5. It negatively affects the experience of Melee players who are accustomed to manual L-canceling.

The correlating arguments in favor of ALC/removing L-canceling include:
1. It removes uninteresting options/decisions, streamlining player interaction overall.
2. It removes only one execution barrier, making the game more accessible to new players.
3. It removes a mandatory tech skill, improving new players' incentive to stay in the competitive scene.
4. It exposes characters who are already unbalanced and need to be looked at more carefully.
5. It positively affects the experience of all players by reducing physical strain.

(If I'm misattributing any arguments, please let me know.)

Good design is a tricky balance of tradeoffs. Every argument above, on both sides, is valid to some degree. But while the anti-ALC arguments are more immediate concerns, the pro-ALC arguments favor the long-term benefits. With the ALC option in the standard build (thanks, PMDT!), everyone has a fair chance to try it out for themselves. If you haven't, I encourage you to do so.

Removing L-canceling would be like ripping off a band-aid. Yes, there will be some confusion. People will makes memes about how easy PM is. You'd see even more "Is PM dead?" questions than usual. Players will claim to abandon PM en masse because their main got nerfed again. But once everyone had a chance to get used to it, I doubt there would be many who could truly say they missed it.

 

[Rawkobo]

Based on the last few L-canceling threads, the best arguments against auto L-canceling (ALC) as a concept seem to be:
1. It removes options/decisions, making player interaction less deep.
2. It removes an execution barrier, devaluing technical prowess as a whole.
3. It removes an introductory tech skill, reducing new players' incentive to start learning tech.
4. It unbalances characters who can use SHFFL to apply shield pressure effectively.
5. It negatively affects the experience of Melee players who are accustomed to manual L-canceling.

The correlating arguments in favor of ALC/removing L-canceling include:
1. It removes uninteresting options/decisions, streamlining player interaction overall.
2. It removes only one execution barrier, making the game more accessible to new players.
3. It removes a mandatory tech skill, improving new players' incentive to stay in the competitive scene.
4. It exposes characters who are already unbalanced and need to be looked at more carefully.
5. It positively affects the experience of all players by reducing physical strain.

(If I'm misattributing any arguments, please let me know.)

Good design is a tricky balance of tradeoffs. Every argument above, on both sides, is valid to some degree. But while the anti-ALC arguments are more immediate concerns, the pro-ALC arguments favor the long-term benefits. With the ALC option in the standard build (thanks, PMDT!), everyone has a fair chance to try it out for themselves. If you haven't, I encourage you to do so.

Removing L-canceling would be like ripping off a band-aid. Yes, there will be some confusion. People will makes memes about how easy PM is. You'd see even more "Is PM dead?" questions than usual. Players will claim to abandon PM en masse because their main got nerfed again. But once everyone had a chance to get used to it, I doubt there would be many who could truly say they missed it.

actually, in theory, if what happens is your bottom paragraph, then nothing has changed (this sort of thing has happened nearly every patch except for 3.02 to my knowledge)

so going from where we are to where we are seems pretty minuscule to me

good post though! you were one of the ones last thread to convince me i was wrong, ty for that

 

[Arcalyth]

Based on the last few L-canceling threads, the best arguments against auto L-canceling (ALC) as a concept seem to be:
1. It removes options/decisions, making player interaction less deep.

In general I think we've established that L-Cancelling isn't really a decision. I don't think about L-canceling, I just do it. There's no reason not to. In fact, you're punished for not L-Cancelling, so in order to compete, you HAVE to do it. Which leads you to...

2. It removes an execution barrier, devaluing technical prowess as a whole.

A valid argument, completely true. My argument for keeping L-Cancelling is actually your statement of how not having it would devalue tech skill, one of the primary reasons/fun factors for the game (personally, though I know plenty of others likely share the same sentiment, and I still believe that Melee owes a lot of its success to how the game FEELS in your hands).

3. It removes an introductory tech skill, reducing new players' incentive to start learning tech.

I'm not quite sure how removing L-cancelling would reduce incentive to start learning how to wavedash or b-reverse, as examples. To build on #2, It lowers the skill floor but absolutely does not affect the skill ceiling. Having static landing lag (rather than pressing a button to modify my landing lag, as another way to describe what L-cancelling or the lack thereof actually does) just means that the entire game is playing 50% faster ANYWAY. Just because I'm pressing a button to create that effect doesn't change ANYTHING about the game except for how it feels in your hands. Taking away that button but automating the effect is equivalent to having 50% landing lag taken off of every aerial across the entire cast. So then, to say something like:

4. It unbalances characters who can use SHFFL to apply shield pressure effectively.

is actually completely false for the reasons stated in #3. Nothing is changing about the characters or their gameplay, just their button inputs. Fox (as a prominent example) can just press Y>A>down-B instead of Y>A>L>down-B and achieve the exact same effect.

5. It negatively affects the experience of Melee players who are accustomed to manual L-canceling.

This is true, but I think that this argument is mostly flamebait and only serves to incite game holy wars. However, to all of those who got sick of the "becuz melee" argument and took it a step further (like Kurri), I'd like to point out this paragraph that has not changed at all since Project M was originally created (emphasis mine):

Project M hopes to achieve a game similar to Super Smash Bros. Melee in many respects. It does not, however, intend to be a 1:1 Melee clone. The following is a list of the main aspects of Super Smash Bros. Melee that inspired and have carried over into Project M:

• A fast-paced game
• with flowing, natural movement
• • where the player has a great degree of control over their character due to the technical skill that they've achieved.
• The balance of offense and defense changes depending on the exact matchup and playstyle, but overall tends to favor offense slightly.
• Offstage edgeguarding is risky but rewarding, while on-stage edgeguarding is safer but less rewarding.
• Recoveries generally require great skill to use, with the advantage usually being with the edgeguarding player, with some exceptions.
• The combos are challenging and spontaneous, with anything longer than 2-3 hits requiring a knowledge of both characters' options and some degree of prediction and/or a deep understanding of the mental aspect of the game.

In short, Project M aims to capture the essence of what made Melee a truly great game in our eyes.

Seeing as the design goals of Project M haven't (and most likely won't) change, I doubt the PMDT will ever remove L-Cancelling or push it as a tournament standard.

The correlating arguments in favor of ALC/removing L-canceling include:
1. It removes uninteresting options/decisions, streamlining player interaction overall.

As I said in #3 above, nothing about the characters or their options changes from removing L-Cancelling (barring those exceptions like the GnW key as they are exceedingly rare), so this argument is not valid. Nothing changes about player interaction, unless you want to go as far as to say that tourney nerves/pressure that causes technical flubs counts as player interaction. (And actually, I think you SHOULD go that far, because as the tournament standard is today, we value technical abilities and use them as a measure of competitive mastery, so if you crumble under pressure in that regard you deserve to lose)

2. It removes only one execution barrier, making the game more accessible to new players.

Valid. Accessibility isn't necessarily fun, though. I will concede that it certainly does help to bring in new players

3. It removes a mandatory tech skill, improving new players' incentive to stay in the competitive scene.

Seems to be the antithesis to #3 above. This is not a valid argument because removing a technical barrier will not necessarily be an incentive to a new player, or any player really. It could, but I could vouch for myself personally and say that it would actually be less of an incentive to keep playing. See #2 above.

4. It exposes characters who are already unbalanced and need to be looked at more carefully.

See #4 above.

5. It positively affects the experience of all players by reducing physical strain.

Valid, lol. But I could always just play Smash 4 or a different video game or even something a little healthier for my wrists anyway So I think it's not that great of an argument for why L-cancelling should be removed.

Removing L-canceling would be like ripping off a band-aid. Yes, there will be some confusion. People will makes memes about how easy PM is. You'd see even more "Is PM dead?" questions than usual. Players will claim to abandon PM en masse because their main got nerfed again. But once everyone had a chance to get used to it, I doubt there would be many who could truly say they missed it.

EZ-mode PM memes killed us once and the more we are perceived as PM-babies is the less any other smash game will want to interact with us. Let's not kill ourselves from the inside, shall we?
Once those players are gone it's hard to bring them back. So be nice to them while they're still here.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Valid, lol. But I could always just play Smash 4 or a different video game or even something a little healthier for my wrists anyway So I think it's not that great of an argument for why L-cancelling should be removed.
.

I liked it all except this.

Physical pain is a good reason to remove something like L cancelling, ans telling someone to play another game is silly.

And also, I couldn't care less about people that think PM is too easy and use that as an excuse when they lose.

 

[Kurri ★]

This is true, but I think that this argument is mostly flamebait and only serves to incite game holy wars. However, to all of those who got sick of the "becuz melee" argument and took it a step further (like Kurri)

Now listen here bub! You're right...

Valid, lol. But I could always just play Smash 4 or a different video game or even something a little healthier for my wrists anyway So I think it's not that great of an argument for why L-cancelling should be removed.

I don't think it's fair to say, "Well I can just play a different game!" If something turns out to be damaging your health, it probably shouldn't stay.

 

[Arcalyth]

We should ban computers because typing is bad for your health.

Edit: by "play another game" I meant another smash game but I can still see why that's not exactly the best solution. I think the negative health effects are offset by the positive tactile feeling (an element of "fun" for myself and others), and all things can be taken in moderation. If I'm playing enough video games that it damages my health then there are bigger problems here than the presence of L cancelling.

 

[Kurri ★]

We should ban computers because typing is bad for your health.

This is why I tried to be careful with my words...

I suppose my only argument, is that computers are not arbitrary, their alternatives are not nearly as sufficient. If I wanted to send you an email, it'd appear in your inbox right away. Sending something physical takes a few days.

The alternative to MLC is ALC and we've come to the agreement that ALC, for the most part, accomplishes the same thing just as well, if not, better.

Going to admit, speaking out my ass right now, but I hope my point gets across.

 

[platologic]

We should ban computers because typing is bad for your health.

You misunderstand. Don't ban something because it's bad for your health, look into why it's bad for your health and work on making it easier to use.

We know that playing Melee and PM for extended periods can be hazardous to your health, same for any game. We know about repetitive strain injuries. But we also know that we love Smash. If you consider all the things that could be removed from PM to improve player health, you would look for things that 1) cause physical strain, and 2) contribute the least to the overall experience. L-canceling fits both of those criteria, and it's removal would be well worth the sacrifice.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Brings up an interesting scenario:

At a tourney, one guy ask his opponent if it's ok for ALC to be turned on, as he gets RSI.

I can only imagine what happens next. =/

 

[Arcalyth]

Brings up an interesting scenario:

At a tourney, one guy ask his opponent if it's ok for ALC to be turned on, as he gets RSI.

I can only imagine what happens next. =/

I feel like knowing that MLC is the standard beforehand trumps any negative feelings that would arise from rejection of the idea. You are responsible for the risks and consequences of your actions. RSI is unfortunate but if you have/are developing RSI then maintaining your health is more important than playing a video game.

@ platologic re: ergonomic keyboards, perhaps similar results can be had via custom controls? Map shield to a face button so you don't have to press as hard and it's more accessible to your thumb.

 

[mimgrim]

Brings up an interesting scenario:

At a tourney, one guy ask his opponent if it's ok for ALC to be turned on, as he gets RSI.

I can only imagine what happens next. =/

I don't really think that ALC would really help out someone with RSI, or at least not enough to actually make a difference, to be completely honest.

 

[Narpas_sword]

I don't really think that ALC would really help out someone with RSI, or at least not enough to actually make a difference, to be completely honest.

In which case having it on is no problem =p

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The dev team is not 100% in agreement about L-Canceling. but it's definitely in PM because it was in melee not because it was a part of our vision of what the ideal smash game should be.

Some of the threads and things like this,

Despite the fact that Manual L-Canceling has been in this game for over 4 years and I’ve been unsuccessful so far, I am going to continue to argue against Manual L-Canceling and demand Aerial Lag Reduction instead. Am I going to win?
No. Feel free to discuss the merits L-Canceling has as a gameplay mechanic, though, so long as you don't derail threads in the process.

Give the impression that it's agreed to not budge on this.

 

[Bleck]

I feel like knowing that MLC is the standard beforehand trumps any negative feelings that would arise from rejection of the idea. You are responsible for the risks and consequences of your actions. RSI is unfortunate but if you have/are developing RSI then maintaining your health is more important than playing a video game.

^ "people with injuries shouldn't be allowed to compete"

 

[Narpas_sword]

^ "people with injuries shouldn't be allowed to compete"

\

What a ridiculous sentiment

 

[Stryker]

\

What a ridiculous sentiment

Looking at any professional sport, if a player is injured, they get benched. Why would you just want to aggravate an injury by risking the same actions that injured you while trying to recover?

 

[Narpas_sword]

Looking at any professional sport, if a player is injured, they get benched. Why would you just want to aggravate an injury by risking the same actions that injured you while trying to recover?

Sorry, I'm from NZ where Rugby is our national sport.

 

[Bleck]

Looking at any professional sport, if a player is injured, they get benched. Why would you just want to aggravate an injury by risking the same actions that injured you while trying to recover?

the point is that this is not a sport wherein it's reasonable to expect injuries to occur

 

[SilverhandX]

Looking at any professional sport, if a player is injured, they get benched. Why would you just want to aggravate an injury by risking the same actions that injured you while trying to recover?

Most sports also try to minimize the chance for injury of the players. If there's something that's not detrimental to the gameplay that can minimize risk for injury, they do it, no question. ALC lowers risk for injury by quite a bit, so if you're going by the "we should do what sports do" thing, ALC is unquestionably the way to go.

 

[kinje]

Not all good levels have to be competitively viable. Besides, what is Smashville, what is Castle Siege?

Well at least you agree with this

A majority of it is still left intact

Don't play ****ing dumb with me


Okay, explain why, because all I've ever seen from is "Because Maylay is the bestest!!!!" Which in other words means jack.

Hey, don't do everyone else who likes MLC (me) dirty like that, I've given plenty of reasons other than "meiray a best" and almost worked hard to explain them.

Also, my main reason for commenting:

>calling brawl castle siege a good stage
kek

Based on the last few L-canceling threads, the best arguments against auto L-canceling (ALC) as a concept seem to be:
1. It removes options/decisions, making player interaction less deep.
2. It removes an execution barrier, devaluing technical prowess as a whole.
3. It removes an introductory tech skill, reducing new players' incentive to start learning tech.
4. It unbalances characters who can use SHFFL to apply shield pressure effectively.
5. It negatively affects the experience of Melee players who are accustomed to manual L-canceling.

The correlating arguments in favor of ALC/removing L-canceling include:
1. It removes uninteresting options/decisions, streamlining player interaction overall.
2. It removes only one execution barrier, making the game more accessible to new players.
3. It removes a mandatory tech skill, improving new players' incentive to stay in the competitive scene.
4. It exposes characters who are already unbalanced and need to be looked at more carefully.
5. It positively affects the experience of all players by reducing physical strain.

(If I'm misattributing any arguments, please let me know.)

Good design is a tricky balance of tradeoffs. Every argument above, on both sides, is valid to some degree. But while the anti-ALC arguments are more immediate concerns, the pro-ALC arguments favor the long-term benefits. With the ALC option in the standard build (thanks, PMDT!), everyone has a fair chance to try it out for themselves. If you haven't, I encourage you to do so.

Removing L-canceling would be like ripping off a band-aid. Yes, there will be some confusion. People will makes memes about how easy PM is. You'd see even more "Is PM dead?" questions than usual. Players will claim to abandon PM en masse because their main got nerfed again. But once everyone had a chance to get used to it, I doubt there would be many who could truly say they missed it.

^This comment is good. Everyone who joins the thread from now on should read this comment.

 

[Kurri ★]

Hey, don't do everyone else who likes MLC (me) dirty like that, I've given plenty of reasons other than "meiray a best" and almost worked hard to explain them.

Also, my main reason for commenting:

>calling brawl castle siege a good stage
kek

Oh, I forgot to put "from you" >__>
I was referring solely to @MEnKIRBZ who has yet to actually explain they're views on the topic aside from "It was in Melee!" You and some others are gucci.

Also, the first layout of Castle Siege is good. It's a quirky, two platform stage that works pretty well. The other transitions aren't bad either, sure for competitive play they're terribad, but casually they're fun.

 

[Arcalyth]

the point is that this is not a sport wherein it's reasonable to expect injuries to occur

The original point of L cancelling leading to RSI is moot then.

 

[Kurri ★]

I don't think talking about health implications will get us anywhere.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Spacies cause the hand problems.

The solution is simple, we must kill the spacies!

Jk.

Overall I do think saying, it was in Melee therefore good is a really bad mind set.

Wobbling was not a good thing, chain grabs were not a good thing, the terrible character balance was not a good thing, battlefields messed up ledges were not a good thing.

Take good aspects and apply it of each smash game, don't pull a bias where it blinds you to anything outside of that bubble.

 

[platologic]

I don't think talking about health implications will get us anywhere.

Right you are. On its own, the health argument is not strong enough to outweigh the valid arguments against ALC. It was a great little discussion, though.

I'm not quite sure how removing L-cancelling would reduce incentive to start learning how to wavedash or b-reverse, as examples.

The argument usually goes something like this: Learning how (and more importantly, when) to wavedash adds a lot of depth to your game. It's an essential AT and every player should eventually add it to their repertoire. But learning wavedashing is both physically difficult and slightly unintuitive at first. Players learning wavedashing as their first AT may become discouraged and quit trying. In this context, MLC acts as a primer for wavedashing.

The two fundamental skills of MLC are 1) air dodging very close to the ground, and 2) a semi-strict sense of timing. Both of these skills are required in order to wavedash consistently, so practicing them in isolation provides a natural stepping stone to the remaining skills. Essentially, players will have a higher success rate at learning wavedashing if they first learned MLC.

I think there's some merit to this, even though this was neither Sakurai's nor the PMDT's intention. But as I pointed out above, MLC arguments tend to favor the short-term over the long-term and this is no exception. Once a player has become competent at wavedashing, MLC typically becomes an uninteresting chore. If anything, this highlights unnecessary complexity in the execution of wavedashing, but that's a discussion for another time.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Right you are. On its own, the health argument is not strong enough to outweigh the valid arguments against ALC. It was a great little discussion, though.


The argument usually goes something like this: Learning how (and more importantly, when) to wavedash adds a lot of depth to your game. It's an essential AT and every player should eventually add it to their repertoire. But learning wavedashing is both physically difficult and slightly unintuitive at first. Players learning wavedashing as their first AT may become discouraged and quit trying. In this context, MLC acts as a primer for wavedashing.

The two fundamental skills of MLC are 1) air dodging very close to the ground, and 2) a semi-strict sense of timing. Both of these skills are required in order to wavedash consistently, so practicing them in isolation provides a natural stepping stone to the remaining skills. Essentially, players will have a higher success rate at learning wavedashing if they first learned MLC.

I think there's some merit to this, even though this was neither Sakurai's nor the PMDT's intention. But as I pointed out above, MLC arguments tend to favor the short-term over the long-term and this is no exception. Once a player has become competent at wavedashing, MLC typically becomes an uninteresting chore. If anything, this highlights unnecessary complexity in the execution of wavedashing, but that's a discussion for another time.

I always teach teching first.

It's a defensive option with easily visible outcomes. and you can teach the optional rolls that go with it.

 

[Azurie]

Right you are. On its own, the health argument is not strong enough to outweigh the valid arguments against ALC. It was a great little discussion, though.


The argument usually goes something like this: Learning how (and more importantly, when) to wavedash adds a lot of depth to your game. It's an essential AT and every player should eventually add it to their repertoire. But learning wavedashing is both physically difficult and slightly unintuitive at first. Players learning wavedashing as their first AT may become discouraged and quit trying. In this context, MLC acts as a primer for wavedashing.

I know that everyone's experience is different, but in my group there are 6 players that can wavedash consistently, and 4 (myself included) that use it heavily in their playstyle. By comparison, there is only one person in our group (not me, sadly) that can L-Cancel consistently.

That said, I think the argument that L-canceling is a primer for other techniques can't really be used, considering everybody has different ways of learning and different things they excel at.

 

[Quillion]

Spacies cause the hand problems.

The solution is simple, we must kill the spacies!

Jk.

Overall I do think saying, it was in Melee therefore good is a really bad mind set.

Wobbling was not a good thing, chain grabs were not a good thing, the terrible character balance was not a good thing, battlefields messed up ledges were not a good thing.

Take good aspects and apply it of each smash game, don't pull a bias where it blinds you to anything outside of that bubble.

Which is why I've taken up the standing that Melee is one of the few video games that can pass for a physical sport and every other fighter is inferior.

Street Fighter 4 is slower than Brawl while MvC is a broken mess. Project M leans towards the latter while not letting it be broken while giving it enough depth that ideally every playstyle for every character is unique to the player.

 

[Kurri ★]

and every other fighter is inferior.

I'm glad you're back in this thread, but geez, this is some degenerate thinking.

 

[Quillion]

I'm glad you're back in this thread, but geez, this is some degenerate thinking.

Well people keep defending Smash U by comparing it to traditional fighters.

After seeing them for myself, I've come to the conclusion I have now. Yes, Smash U is more akin to traditionals, and sucks for it like traditionals do.

 

[Kurri ★]

Well people keep defending Smash U by comparing it to traditional fighters.

After seeing them for myself, I've come to the conclusion I have now. Yes, Smash U is more akin to traditionals, and sucks for it like traditionals do.

That's... not what I meant, but that's also bad thinking.
No, I was referring to "every other fighter is inferior." That's horrible to say and shows how little you understand other fighting games.

Also, are you implying you've only recently seen other fighters?

 

[Bleck]

quillion can you explain why traditional fighters suck or should I just assume that your brain is just screaming melee over and over again and you're desperately hoping it makes you a coolguy like all these other losers

 

[Ningildo]

Not to derail the thread, but why is Smash superior to other fighters? Or should I ask why Melee is better then other fighters?

Just cause players in those game play neutral "boringly" (you know, safe and smart because losing neutral in those games is worse then in Smash due a lack of counterplay for escaping combos (we have DI, they don't) and those combos often being guaranteed and fatal) and lack flashy stuff all the time doesn't mean it's instantly worse.

Well, that's subjective I guess, but your haven't given reasoning behind this opinion (and a lot of other things as well).

Screw discussing this mechanic, though. Kinda tired of discussing things with people assuming way too much on the other end, only to have a new person enter it and go all "The answer is obviously this! There's no way this has already been addressed earlier in the thread, so I'm not gonna read it!". **** l-cancelling discussion threads is what I'm trying to say. It always devolves into the same turd, no matter how noble or well intended the OP tries to start it.

**** posting at midnight, too. Makes me salty af.

 

[Kurri ★]

Not to derail the thread, but why is Smash superior to other fighters? Or should I ask why Melee is better then other fighters?

Just cause players in those game play neutral "boringly" (you know, safe and smart because losing neutral in those games is worse then in Smash due a lack of counterplay for escaping combos (we have DI, they don't) and those combos often being guaranteed and fatal) and lack flashy stuff all the time doesn't mean it's instantly worse.

I wouldn't say it's outright worse so much that it's different. Street Fighter doesn't necessarily need it because combos are only a few hits long. While a game like Guilty Gear or Persona 4 Ultimax has "Burst" because combos can be pretty long. And then there's Marvel...

 

[Quillion]

Not to derail the thread, but why is Smash superior to other fighters? Or should I ask why Melee is better then other fighters?

Just cause players in those game play neutral "boringly" (you know, safe and smart because losing neutral in those games is worse then in Smash due a lack of counterplay for escaping combos (we have DI, they don't) and those combos often being guaranteed and fatal) and lack flashy stuff all the time doesn't mean it's instantly worse.

 

[Kurri ★]

So you're not going to contribute to the discussion? I mean, at least explain why other fighters are inferior with something more substantial than "Because Melee"

 

[Ningildo]

Not to derail the thread, but why is Smash superior to other fighters? Or should I ask why Melee is better then other fighters?

Just cause players in those game play neutral "boringly" (you know, safe and smart because losing neutral in those games is worse then in Smash due a lack of counterplay for escaping combos (we have DI, they don't) and those combos often being guaranteed and fatal) and lack flashy stuff all the time doesn't mean it's instantly worse.

Well, that's subjective I guess, but your haven't given reasoning behind this opinion (and a lot of other things as well).

And you have yet to do the bolded. Give your reasoning behind your opinion (and not just on this matter) or stay out of the discussion. Opinions with no reasoning behind them are probably the biggest source of thread derailment on the internet.

 

[Quillion]

I thought you people are smart enough to realize that you either identify everything for me or I put forth everything, yet I guess I'm wrong. I guess you can never assume that there's the remotest bit of intelligence on this internet.

So here are the reasons why Smash, and particularly Melee, is superior to other fighters in no particular order.

• No firetrucking commands by twisting the stick and pressing a button. None of that frustration of getting a fireball when you want a dragon punch or vice versa (I'm exaggerating a beginners problem, but still). In Smash, you press a button, hold a direction, and that's it. Every action you take is a single press of button and I like that.
  • The only exception is wavedashing yet I'm still hoping that it becomes a basic action instead of an emergent one.
• It combines the best parts of the best platforming games and fighters. You can change your momentum's direction in midair Mario style and you can jump to reach higher ground on other platforms. How great is that!?
• Now for Melee's exclusive advantages (referring mainly to the Fragile Speedsters):
  • It can double as a physical sport. There's just so much mechanics and inputs to work around that human limitations are hit first instead of the game's own skill cap.
  • No two top-tier players play alike. Ideally, every fragile speedster, and then, every character plays according to the personal style of the player in question.
  • Because of the above, the Fragile Speedsters in Melee are perfectly balanced among one another.

Of course, there is one thing Smash can adopt from traditionals, it's to make hitstun an inherent value to each move; NOT as a multiplier of knockback. It's a completely awful design decision leading to the imbalance between Speedsters and Glaciers and needs to be revamped.

PMDev, are you working on this? If not, you should be.

 

[Kurri ★]

I thought you people are smart enough to realize that you either identify everything for me or I put forth everything, yet I guess.

Stopped right there. "I thought you people were..." If you're going to have the audacity to call people dumb, at least have the courtesy to use proper grammar.