• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Brawl - More balanced than Melee? Lie or truth?

Status
Not open for further replies.

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
I think Fawriel's post on balance does a good job of summarizing the more intelligent posts in this thread about balance and adds some observations of his own.

I liked the Snake vs Fox comparission. He's absolutely right that damage means much differnet things in both games. Melee damage is accumulated along with positional stage advantage to set your opponent up for an edgeguard. Brawl damage is accumulated more extensively simply to knock them offstage. No real edgeguard (for most chars). And yes, a bottom tier character who loses to a Snake will have more oppurtunitites to get in damage than a bottom tier char against a (Melee) Fox. However, its worth mentioning that bottom tier versing a Snake while having more chances will have a definite decrease in the quality of those chances (the ability to actually execute on those chances). A mistake from a Melee Fox can really be capitalized on in Melee if he ****s up. Snake doesn't die over 2, 3, even 8 mistakes per stock many times.
 

Fawriel

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
4,245
Location
oblivion~
I don't agree with that snip completely.

And the reason I can't elaborate is becasue I'm going out for wings very soon. Maybe later though ^______^
Go ahead. I might have missed a few things and could have explained some things better - I was a bit absentminded while writing it, so I might try to improve it at some point. For instance, I didn't work enough on the aspect of how a casual anti-Melee player probably views that game's balance. Most of their views are probably largely influenced by cultural osmosis and stuff like combo videos (Shined Blind, what hast thou done!), and they fail to look at the big picture - all these amazing combos are only possible at an amazingly high level of skill. Casual players don't have to worry about this level of skill in the first place, because why should they challenge someone at that level? And as soon as someone is playing lesser-tiered characters at the same level as the amazing Fox, they should also be well capable of DIing and teching out of the combos, so they still shouldn't be instant kills.
Casual players seem to look at combo videos and think "I can't even imagine how you should win against that, it's impossible!" Kind of like everyone thought at some point that level 9 CPUs are invincible.


... also, I'm glad you guys appreciated it. Yay!


EDIT:
EDIT: Fawriel has a point, although I am not sure if we can have an interesting discussion in which we both recognize the other's immovability as a factor in the debate, reguardless of whether or not we truely think that we can change someone's mind on a subject.
Oh, I think you misunderstood me. I didn't claim that you can't change anyone's opinion... but you can't change anyone's opinion if you only have an opinion of your own to counter it with.
The point is, if you really want to participate in a big discussion like this, you'll have to be willing to admit that you still have a lot to learn.
 

Vyse

Faith, Hope, Love, Luck
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
9,561
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I think Fawriel's post on balance does a good job of summarizing the more intelligent posts in this thread about balance and adds some observations of his own.

I liked the Snake vs Fox comparission. He's absolutely right that damage means much differnet things in both games. Melee damage is accumulated along with positional stage advantage to set your opponent up for an edgeguard. Brawl damage is accumulated more extensively simply to knock them offstage. No real edgeguard (for most chars). And yes, a bottom tier character who loses to a Snake will have more oppurtunitites to get in damage than a bottom tier char against a (Melee) Fox. However, its worth mentioning that bottom tier versing a Snake while having more chances will have a definite decrease in the quality of those chances (the ability to actually execute on those chances). A mistake from a Melee Fox can really be capitalized on in Melee if he ****s up. Snake doesn't die over 2, 3, even 8 mistakes per stock many times.
And I liked your breakdown of Fawriel's comparison : 3
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
Why thank you. I wasn't feeling up to a Fawriel epic post so a miny epic post was all I could muster.

I can't believe people talk about closing this thread as much of the most intelligent talk on Smashboards about Brawl happens here and in the SBR.

Oh yeah and I just got 17 emails from Smashboards all at once since its F N up again.
 

Toadsanime

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
290
Location
UK, England (We got Brawl late. Get over it.)
I know my own posts haven't exactly contributed to the opposite cause, but we seem to be discussing about what balance is itself rather than Brawl's balance.
I suppose considering the amount of pages this topic has already been through, however, that's understandable.

As for this topic being closed, I should hope it doesn't happen. This topic is full of some really convincing points regarding several different things to do with Brawl/Melee; it's causing no harm within the community. There's nothing wrong with a good debate.
 

#HBC | Red Ryu

Red Fox Warrior
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
27,486
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
NNID
RedRyu_Smash
3DS FC
0344-9312-3352
I think Fawriel's post on balance does a good job of summarizing the more intelligent posts in this thread about balance and adds some observations of his own.

I liked the Snake vs Fox comparission. He's absolutely right that damage means much differnet things in both games. Melee damage is accumulated along with positional stage advantage to set your opponent up for an edgeguard. Brawl damage is accumulated more extensively simply to knock them offstage. No real edgeguard (for most chars). And yes, a bottom tier character who loses to a Snake will have more oppurtunitites to get in damage than a bottom tier char against a (Melee) Fox. However, its worth mentioning that bottom tier versing a Snake while having more chances will have a definite decrease in the quality of those chances (the ability to actually execute on those chances). A mistake from a Melee Fox can really be capitalized on in Melee if he ****s up. Snake doesn't die over 2, 3, even 8 mistakes per stock many times.
I think it has to do with character weight. Snake is quite fatheavy, Fox is a medium to light character. Snake can take more mistakes due to his fatnessweight and recovery. However that makes him a combo/chain grab magnet...if combing was easy in Brawl. :/

Oh, I think you misunderstood me. I didn't claim that you can't change anyone's opinion... but you can't change anyone's opinion if you only have an opinion of your own to counter it with.
The point is, if you really want to participate in a big discussion like this, you'll have to be willing to admit that you still have a lot to learn.
Fawriel, can I give you a cookie for such a great post?
 

Smartidiot

Smash Rookie
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Messages
20
Location
Minnesota
I think it has to do with character weight. Snake is quite fatheavy, Fox is a medium to light character. Snake can take more mistakes due to his fatnessweight and recovery. However that makes him a combo/chain grab magnet...if combing was easy in Brawl. :/



Fawriel, can I give you a cookie for such a great post?
No just a cookie, but a box.

Though I am young and i have yet to learn, I think there are still new things to be learned in brawl, who knows, if we get a offical tier list it can change very quickly. The game hasn't been out that long to figure out everything. I'd like to be proven wrong though, if someone decoded the game. o.O
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
No just a cookie, but a box.

Though I am young and i have yet to learn, I think there are still new things to be learned in brawl, who knows, if we get a offical tier list it can change very quickly. The game hasn't been out that long to figure out everything. I'd like to be proven wrong though, if someone decoded the game. o.O
A bit of advice - while I personally think that all the current tier lists and character matchup charts are useless, there is a reason everyone complains about Metaknight and Snake. I can tell you right now that Metaknight, Snake, and Mr. Game and Watch are great characters, and Dedede, Lucario, Wario, Olimar, Falco, Marth, and R.O.B. are good characters (along with a few others I may have missed). I'm not sure you will really need a tier list once you get a basic understanding of the character's relative usage, so while a tier list is useful for highlighting good, lesser-known characters (Toon Link, Pikachu, and DK), it is not really necesary if your objective is simply to pick a good main.

EDIT: As much as I personally like them, what is the purpose of a tier list anyway?
 

gallax

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
5,641
Location
Orlando(UCF), Fl
you know, when brawl first cam out i was thoroughly convinced after playing it for like a month straight that it was more balanced than melee. but now i am sure that melee was so much more balanced than brawl. the simple fact that you could do combos and AT's made that game more balanced. what unbalances it is the skill level of players. in brawl, skill matters less than character ability.
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
I think it has to do with character weight. Snake is quite fatheavy, Fox is a medium to light character. Snake can take more mistakes due to his fatnessweight and recovery. However that makes him a combo/chain grab magnet...if combing was easy in Brawl. :/
Its not so much to do with weight as the engine. Snake can make more mistakes because you pretty much have to Wall or Cieling KO him to take a stock. Also, even another Snake who capitalizes on a Mistake-Making-Snake only gets say his 16% in before the positions are reset and both Snakes are trying to get the best of each other again. No combos, no edgeguards.

Now that I think of it, if you listen to good commentary from MLG (Melee) vids they'll talk about one player having the momentum in a match and the other player needs to regain control. The postions aren't reset every 12% or so (which happens often in Brawl) and its not that they're neccesarily being comboed right then but they're in a bad spot positionally. You can pressure people alot more thanks to L-canceling, Dashdancing, Wavedashing, etc. Forcing someone to shield is often a great way to trap them since they've limited their options. Sorry this last paragraphs a little off topic though. To Un-Digress, you can't really pressure Snake in or out of his shield and you can't really capitalize and KO him for more than 8 mistakes or so even if you're another Snake.
 

Yuna

BRoomer
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
10,358
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Maybe you should provide some evidence to back up this claim instead of just spouting off your opinion.
How about logic?

More variety does not automatically equal more balance. Only an idiot would think more variety = more balance by default. Saying "X game has more variety" means jack squat if said variety contributes to imbalancing the game!

In short - we can't change anyone else's opinion (and opinion is technically all either side has), but the attempt makes the discussion interesting.
I can barrage people with plenty of arguments to prove to them that what they base their opinions on are false/lies/misinterpretations/faulty, etc.

I know my own posts haven't exactly contributed to the opposite cause...
This sentence makes little sense. And if my interpretation of it is correct, well, *snicker snicker*.

But we seem to be discussing about what balance is itself rather than Brawl's balance.
Because there are so many... less intelligent/knowledgeable people jumping into the thread with absolutely no grasp on what balance istalking out of their behinds.

Also, not really. It crops up occasionally but it's not like it's currently the main thread of discussion.

The game hasn't been out that long to figure out everything. I'd like to be proven wrong though, if someone decoded the game. o.O
I hate this sentiment with a fervor. Has anyone in this thread played any game other than a Smash game Competitively? Or know of someone who does? Or just knows the scene (somehow)?

"It's too early to say anything definite/for certain", "Anything we say now will most probably change soon", "Any tier list we dish out will most probably be riddled with mistakes".

O RLY? Then how come the other Competitive fighting game communities of the world with membership tallies dwarfed by that of the Smash community managed to do tons of things within a few months of the games' release?

"Guilty Gear XX Accent Core" had barely been released in Japanese arcades when a tentative tier list and individual matchup chart cropped up. And guess what, it's still largely correct.

Saying "It's too early!" has absolutely merit. It's not too early. Competitive fighting game players have accurately pinpointed things like this within months before. The only reason why we wouldn't be able to do that on SWF would be if we just sucked in comparison to all other scenes.

So in other words, if you believe we're incapable of creating an even nominally correct Tier List or an pretty accurate gauge of which game is more balanced (Melee or Brawl), then you're looking down on the SBR and non-SBR-but-knowledgeable-SWF-members. You're saying "Well, others can do it for other games, but you guys can't possibly do it for Smash".

No, we do not suck that much. No, it's not that hard.
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
Yuna: Totally off-topic now. I'm curious about Guilty Gear as a fighter and how it stacks up against Melee. I watched a few tournament vids last night (horrible quality) just to get an idea about the game but I'm guessing what I gleaned was minimal since watching Melee vids would mean as much or less to me if I didn't already know how to play it. That, and the game has a lot of special animation attacks that seem more elaborate than the Smash series so I'm lost on what they're doing. Is there an website equivalent for Guilty Gear games of what we have SWF or could you, in brief, give me some idea of what makes the games technically deep and competitive.
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
Thanks to all who answered. I'll look at the site more in depth later I've got work soon. Still, I'm rather fond of having edges which makes for a whole nother dynamic being able to edgeguard and so forth. I'm also interested in what mindgames, particularly those involving movement are possible. As I said I'll look into it more later I only got to read Terms and Definitions thus far.
 

Izzhov

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 9, 2008
Messages
50
I believe it is more balanced because the alleged "best" characters (Snake and Meta Knight) have counters who are not considered as good (DK counters both, R.O.B. and Olimar counter Snake, etc.), meaning that you aren't limited to using 3-5 characters in order to do well in tournaments. In fact, I don't think there is any one character in Brawl who doesn't have at least one counter.
 

Dark Sonic

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
6,021
Location
Orlando Florida
. I'm also interested in what mindgames, particularly those involving movement are possible. As I said I'll look into it more later I only got to read Terms and Definitions thus far.
Look no further than Chipp Zanuff (well, keep looking anyway, but Chipp is pretty fun)

A character whose game relies completely on mixups. He's got a lot of tools to work with though. He can tripple jump (as opposed to everyone else's double jump), he can teleport in 5 different directions, he can turn invisible, and he's got a lot of ways to reset his wake up traps (throws, air dust, sweep, ect.)

Basically, watch this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfYTdxtVBAk
Real Match applications.
I find the first match to be the most amazing, but they're all pretty rediculous.

I'm sure the other characters have some amazing mixups too, but so far I only know how to play Chipp so...someone else would have to tell you about the other characters.
 

Toadsanime

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
290
Location
UK, England (We got Brawl late. Get over it.)
I got banned from the forums, so I guess that means I was banned from the community, but not from the PnT tourneys.

And about Tudor and HugS, I knew I was missing an important detail from that. My bad, seriously. Ignore that part of my last post.

But see Yuna? You aren't always right. Vegas has really good Smashers, and you shouldn't call people "no names" just because YOU don't know them.
1) Yuna doesn't know the Smashers and hasn't played them. Therfore, to him, they're 'no name players.'

2) You said that 'everyone in that community is a good player' in your last post. Do you realize that that's almost impossible for you to know, depending on the size of the community? It means that for you to judge that, you'd have to of played every single member of the community. Which, for a popular forum community, should be over the 1000 mark.
 

Yuna

BRoomer
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
10,358
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
www.DustLoop.com is a good place to start, as has already been pointed out to you. GG is one of the big heavyweights when it comes to depth. GG is also largely based on Yomi (which is also depth), but it's just too much Yomi for my tastes. But that's just personal preference.

As a thumb of rule, 2D fighters are generally more based around Yomi while most things can be blocked/dodged/whatevered on reaction in 3D. GG, however, is "special" because there's so many moves which can be linked into other moves (on block, not on whiff) to create chains for long strings of shield pressure and Yomi (as opposed to, say, 3S where your Yomi strings end after approximately 3-5 hits and you're forced to either do a very unsafe move or block... of course, this happens in GG as well, it's just that the strings are just much longer in GG).

1) Yuna doesn't know the Smashers and hasn't played them. Therfore, to him, they're 'no name players.'
Don't answer for other people, especially since you're not even knowledgeable enough to qualify for pariticipating in this thread. What makes you think you know enough to speak on my behalf?

2) You said that 'everyone in that community is a good player' in your last post. Do you realize that that's almost impossible for you to know, depending on the size of the community? It means that for you to judge that, you'd have to of played every single member of the community. Which, for a popular forum community, should be over the 1000 mark.[/quote]

But see Yuna? You aren't always right. Vegas has really good Smashers, and you shouldn't call people "no names" just because YOU don't know them.
I said Vegas has no good Smashers when? Quotes or it didn't happen?

I never called any specific players "no names". I didn't even use the term "no names" (or similar ones) when referring to the people Tudor plays!

Your logic is flawed if you think I'm not playing good players. Vegas is really good at brawl, to prove this we have won and placed very high at every out of state tourney we've gone to. The most recent being OMG where the two people who went from Vegas took first and second in singles and won teams.
I specifically said "If Tudor is owning people as Samus...". If you're destroying the Vegas scene, owning tons of Vegas players, then those players just aren't very good. Because they have to be bad if you're owning them. If you're just winning by a small margin or placing "pretty high" as Samus, then the player who originally mentioned you has no leg to stand on.

Samus is still low in potential and has few strengths. She stilll has to work multiple times as hard as other characters to win. The fact that you're doing well with her just means that you're that good. The fact that very few others can even come close to doing as well as you means Samus is still a bad character.

Nothing has been discovered to magically make her High Tier material.

HugS didn't stop playing Samus because I am good, he told everyone why he stopped playing her weeks ago. And I quote;

<snip>
In other words, further proof of that the guy/guys who originally posted about you and your Samus has no idea of what they're talking about, distorting facts/misremembering things.

I never said you were bad. I specifically said that if you were owning people, the others are just bad players. Or quite possibly, you're just that much better than everyone else in Vegas (but you're still not #1), as you can place well with Samus. But as I've been saying for months, a few exceptional players does not a rule make.
 

Tudor

Smash Journeyman
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
435
Location
Las Vegas
You make some good points and true point Yuna. Some good players do get ownd though, so it wouldn't be fair to call them bad because of that. And yes, the truth of the matter is that it takes a lot of work to make samus good, but she can be good.
 

Yuna

BRoomer
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
10,358
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
You make some good points and true point Yuna. Some good players do get ownd though, so it wouldn't be fair to call them bad because of that. And yes, the truth of the matter is that it takes a lot of work to make samus good, but she can be good.
Then they're just bad against Samus (which is also a part of being a bad player, a good player must be able to handle all matchups. If you're not knowledgeable in certain matchups, then you're not very good, now are? All I have to do, after all, is to be at least nominally good as a character you have no experience against and I'll win). Armada is one of Sweden's and Europe's very best players and he consistently places in the top, beating me by a lot. Yet he does far worse against Jigglypuff than I do. And we both play Peach.

Guess what, he has very little Jigglypuff training and I have lots.

As for the point of that Samus can be good, I'll use the argument I use when people say "Peach can be good":
Well, Pea-, I mean Samus can be good. It's just that while she's busy being good, Meta-Knight's busy being amazing.
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
Then they're just bad against Samus (which is also a part of being a bad player, a good player must be able to handle all matchups. If you're not knowledgeable in certain matchups, then you're not very good, now are? All I have to do, after all, is to be at least nominally good as a character you have no experience against and I'll win). Armada is one of Sweden's and Europe's very best players and he consistently places in the top, beating me by a lot. Yet he does far worse against Jigglypuff than I do. And we both play Peach.

Guess what, he has very little Jigglypuff training and I have lots.

As for the point of that Samus can be good, I'll use the argument I use when people say "Peach can be good":
Well, Pea-, I mean Samus can be good. It's just that while she's busy being good, Meta-Knight's busy being amazing.
Interesting...

The advantage of a low-tier character with a totally unique playstyle is the fact that few people have proper experience against said character and said playstyle. Few players are truely knowledgable about all the matchups, unfortunately, because in a game of 39 seperate characters, only a few are completely worthless. You still need knowledge of 30 characters, as only a few never appear in tournaments. Example - If I ignore Samus, a character who has not been placing well, I will not be able to beat Tudor, in fact, I might be owned by him.

MK is amazing, but it seems like his metagame is completely developed. As in, we know his ATs, the range of his attacks, how the attacks go together, etc. Now, some other characters will show off, and we will see more amazing things (Azen, Tudor, fill in the gaps if you will).
 

JigglyZelda003

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
6,792
Location
Cleveland, OH
but even though we know all those things about MK why is he still winning despite the fact most players, both users and non users, know alot about him? its not like his advantages are gone just by knowing them. Yes we know how far he reachs, power, speed, etc. then theres still his high priority, ungimpable recovery, infinite Dimentional cape......... characters like Samus have the element of surprise by not being regularly picked but that can only go so far. Even with surprise and the unknown, Tudor himself, as well as any lower tier mainer will say they still have to work really really hard. >_>
 

MorpheusVGX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
498
Location
Buenos Aires, Capital Federal
I come here once in a while, and I can't still believe this is a matter of discussion. I see that people like Yuna wants to state that Brawl is not balanced, etc. And yes.. its balance is not perfect. But it is much much better than Melee. Don't you already see it? There are much more characters being able to hold their own on tournaments. Go to the "Best Vids of Each Character" thread so you see how far can every character go. There are few if not any worthless characters. And as I continue to say over and over .. don't you see how many moves were fixed so they could be usable on combat? Brawl has a supreme work on this.. Every B and A move is .if not spammable, at least useful. In Melee there were many moves that were too easy to block an punish. They were too slow, or too laggy, or too weak. See how Ness was fixed. How DK was fixed. How Peach was fixed. Zelda. Kirby. Can you deny it? If you could make a list of Brawl useless moves... it would be much more smaller than those from Melee. Then, as all characters have usable moves. All characters have good potential. There may be a few better gifted characters, but the majority is usable and power-capable. It is just irrational to say Melee is a more balanced game.
 

Zankoku

Never Knows Best
Administrator
BRoomer
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
22,906
Location
Milpitas, CA
NNID
SSBM_PLAYER
You're irrational in only comparing Melee characters to their Brawl counterparts and not looking at the newcomers at all. Apparently "rebalancing" characters makes them "balanced" even after adding 9 more completely new characters to the cast?

Also, "all characters have usable moves?" Doesn't that apply to all three games?
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
I come here once in a while, and I can't still believe this is a matter of discussion. I see that people like Yuna wants to state that Brawl is not balanced, etc. And yes.. its balance is not perfect. But it is much much better than Melee. Don't you already see it? There are much more characters being able to hold their own on tournaments. Go to the "Best Vids of Each Character" thread so you see how far can every character go. There are few if not any worthless characters. And as I continue to say over and over .. don't you see how many moves were fixed so they could be usable on combat? Brawl has a supreme work on this.. Every B and A move is .if not spammable, at least useful. In Melee there were many moves that were too easy to block an punish. They were too slow, or too laggy, or too weak. See how Ness was fixed. How DK was fixed. How Peach was fixed. Zelda. Kirby. Can you deny it? If you could make a list of Brawl useless moves... it would be much more smaller than those from Melee. Then, as all characters have usable moves. All characters have good potential. There may be a few better gifted characters, but the majority is usable and power-capable. It is just irrational to say Melee is a more balanced game.
Reguardless of whether or not you said is true, could you go into a little more depth? I don't think this post proves anything, and gets no more specific than "look at these characters."

but even though we know all those things about MK why is he still winning despite the fact most players, both users and non users, know alot about him? its not like his advantages are gone just by knowing them. Yes we know how far he reachs, power, speed, etc. then theres still his high priority, ungimpable recovery, infinite Dimentional cape......... characters like Samus have the element of surprise by not being regularly picked but that can only go so far. Even with surprise and the unknown, Tudor himself, as well as any lower tier mainer will say they still have to work really really hard. >_>
I have always been confused by the term "work really hard." Is the character bad or good? Does the character have much potential or not? "Work really hard" can either mean that the character has a lot of potential to be good, or it can mean that the character isn't very good at all, and that is a gentle way of saying "this character is bad."

In short, I don't care slightly if you have to work really hard to be good at a character. I simply want to know if the character has the potential to be awesome.

And yes, we know that we know everything about MK. Now the question is do we know everything about facing MK with our main. Is Samus' metagame fully developed? What about Pokemon Trainer? Mario? Toon Link and Pikachu? Can we use their attacks better than the simplistic swordsmanship of Metaknight?
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
If those underplayed characters had metagames really worth developing to win tournaments people would have recognized it earlier. Something I've been saying for a while now is the community (or at least those who've been around since Melee or 64) has been great about recognizing character potential early on.

As to characters being "Fixed" MorpheusVGX, if you're reffering how the good Melee characters and all the games depth were spayed and nuetered then I'm with you.

Also, GG doesn't look like its the game for me. Trapping people in the corner while they sit and block your attacks that chip away at their health bar isn't my idea of a cool combo vid.
 

JigglyZelda003

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
6,792
Location
Cleveland, OH
I have always been confused by the term "work really hard." Is the character bad or good? Does the character have much potential or not? "Work really hard" can either mean that the character has a lot of potential to be good, or it can mean that the character isn't very good at all, and that is a gentle way of saying "this character is bad."

In chort, I don't care slightly if you have to work really hard to be good at a character. I simply want to know if the character has the potential to be awesome.

And yes, we know that we know everything about MK. Now the question is do we know everything about facing MK with our main. Is Samus' metagame fully developed? What about Pokemon Trainer? Mario? Toon Link and Pikachu? Can we use their attacks better than the simplistic swordsmanship of Metaknight?
hmm........ yes it can be interpereted as a nice way of saying (insert character name) is bad. i think what i was trying to say is its a brain wracker depening on what character your using vs who your fighting. things like spacing, shielding, not getting grabbed, infinites, combos, recovery, offense, damage, how many mistakes you have till your screwed......

The lesser characters may have potential to hold up but it takes alot more than the better characters. Peach has potential to hold up against a majority of the cast, but its not as simple as someone like MK. she doesn't **** the entire cast, you have to actually sit down and go through with Peach to be decent. while MK doesn't take nearly as long to begin to be good. Hand one noob MK and another one Peach, whats the outcome?

like IrArby said most low tier character metagame isn't really worth developing, not to mention not really going anywhere nearly as fast as higher ones. you can go look at the boards yourself and see some like JP's metagame isn't really going anywhere. while MK seems to always have something new or just useful to some MK mainers metagame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom