Brawl - More balanced than Melee? Lie or truth?

[SamuraiPanda]

too early :/

This post just won the thread.

 

[Corigames]

May I point out the hilarity in the fact that:
A) new people argue that melee ATs break the game.
B) Brawl only has character specific ATs.

Doesn't that mean they are broken, since not everyone can use them?

C) Every time someone "discovers" something' they all flock there to congratulate and speculate.

How are these ATs any more legit than melee ones?

D) Brawl sucks

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

The only things people don't like it for are things that only competative players like us care about.

I mean, really... How many casual players care that hitstun is so low? Or that L-cancelling is gone? All they care about is beating the crap out of each other with Nintendo famous video game characters, and Brawl does that better than Melee since there's more characters to do it with on more stages with more lovely music.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Brawl will have a competative scene despite lacking competative aspects. Sure, Melee is more technical, but as long as a game is popular, it will have a competative scene.

Well, try to see beyond the dimensions of what you desire for a moment.

Think about it, casual players will be happy with the game regardless. Now look at the effort made towards the game so that it wouldn't be competitive? Wouldn't you be angry if you were in our shoes? And to make something clear, the majority of SWF opts for the competitive side of smash, which puts you at an opposition.

You should understand that it isn't the fact that we don't like the game, it's the longevity of the game that we are worried about in the long run. Everything from fun factor, balance, appeal all effect how big of an impact a game will make from the present to the future. And honestly, with all things considered, this game will have an extremely shallow lifespan.

A tournament based casual community will only exist for a short period of time due to them wanting to go for the next big thing. Many of the members who were new to SWF are now busy with Mario Kart. Nintendo has your money, so they won't care whether or not the game is a success.

You all go on and on about how Melee is more balanced than Brawl, or visa versa. You need "reliable" or "competitive" gamers to back up their evidence, because that's a credible source. It's all dumb. Do you realize that wave dashing, and L-canceling, and pretty much any other move/combo related to those two "techniques" are actually GLITCHES in Melee? MELEE WAS A BROKEN GAME. If you didn't know what an L-Cancel was, or a Wavedash was. You were not pro. End of story. You couldn't beat anyone. That just goes to say that any "Pro" Melee player was actually someone who abused a glitch in the game. So, if you're going to say that "omgz sum1 uzed infinite grabz n00bz h4x!!!!1!!!" You're pretty **** ********. You say Brawl isn't balanced, because 10 characters are better, or whatever argument you say. I say Melee isn't balanced, because if you didn't 1. figure out how to L-Cancel or Wavedash on your own, or 2. Learn how to L-Cancel or Wavedash from someone else. YOU COULD NOT WIN A TOURNAMENT. That's the fact. In Brawl, you can play at home against a level 9 computer, and if you really got good enough just by doing that, you can actually do decently in a tournament. That's my point. Melee was a broken game. The winners were abusing a glitch, and Brawl's winners seem to be doing the exact same thing. Only this time, it's only 10 characters with a glitch instead of all of them. That might mean that Brawl is more unbalanced, but as for me. I like Brawl better. It's newer, and there is much more variety. Say what you will. Just about everyone on here is under 17, and likes to flame at people for sucking. That's why I try not to post on here often (I'm not that good), but at least I realize that Melee was a broken game. I'm not saying Melee would be better if there wasn't L-Canceling, or Wavedashing. I'm just saying, that those "techniques" were never intentional by the developers. You should all know that when deciding which game is more balanced.

lol

First of all, you're dumb.

Secondly, you want some glitches?

-Wolf's/Marth's ledge drop glitch
-Bowser Infinite jump
-Marth's infinite Grab on Ness
-Sonic Sky Roll
- Momentum reversal
-Peach's free Turnip pull
-Glide Toss
-"Hyphen Smash" (?)
-Laser Lock

I guess that makes Brawl broken too, M I RITE?

 

[Fawriel]

You know, I've been thinking.
Gimpy and others played the Brawl demo at E4All, and it was good. It had hitstun, all characters except for Ike seemed to be quite usable, and everything was nice.

I wonder, what happened between now and then? They must've had those physics for the longest time, with the "existent" hitstun, a type of l-canceling, and whatever else was changed.
And now we have a game that tried to eliminate combos, yet left in a ton of inescapable infinites, a game where two characters have water-attacks that scream "edgeguarding!" but which cannot be used for anything ever whether by n00bs or pros, Toon Link is better than old Link in every respect, and so on.

Maybe they were forced to change some aspects of the game because the higher-ups were scared that people could still be put off by the possibility of competitiveness, so they had to just quickly fool around with some numbers to decrease hitstun and make everything floaty, with no time to betatest these new physics properly? Maybe they even tried to balance some characters to work with the new physics and couldn't get done in time...

...

Yeah, I'm being terribly optimistic here.


So. Nobody replied to my earlier question. What does balance look like in Doubles?

 

[Benjamin Linus]

since no one from the brawl side has given a decent reason why brawl may be more balanced i will attempt to play devils advocate.

according to a top player in new york, jman, in brawl the smartest player always wins. im not exactly sure thats the case but assuming this is true you could say that it is indeed possible to win with a low tier. Bum consistantly plays with characters like Ness and Ganon or Falcon in an attempt to prove to NYC that they are still good characters. In melee you had to become very smart and very technical to make a low tier decent enough for tourney play. In brawl you only need to focus on one thing. Playing smart. If bum can win with Falcon and ganon it proves to say that brawl may be more balanced if we take more time to learn the low tiers and play them smartly.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

You know, I've been thinking.
Gimpy and others played the Brawl demo at E4All, and it was good. It had hitstun, all characters except for Ike seemed to be quite usable, and everything was nice.

I wonder, what happened between now and then? They must've had those physics for the longest time, with the "existent" hitstun, a type of l-canceling, and whatever else was changed.
And now we have a game that tried to eliminate combos, yet left in a ton of inescapable infinites, a game where two characters have water-attacks that scream "edgeguarding!" but which cannot be used for anything ever whether by n00bs or pros, Toon Link is better than old Link in every respect, and so on.

Maybe they were forced to change some aspects of the game because the higher-ups were scared that people could still be put off by the possibility of competitiveness, so they had to just quickly fool around with some numbers to decrease hitstun and make everything floaty, with no time to betatest these new physics properly? Maybe they even tried to balance some characters to work with the new physics and couldn't get done in time...

...

Yeah, I'm being terribly optimistic here.


So. Nobody replied to my earlier question. What does balance look like in Doubles?

The slightest mention of the E For All demo is enough to make me burst into tears.

I played it so much. the future of smashed was looking smooth, then the final release gave it a catastrophic down fall.

*sigh*

 

[Samochan]

E for All peach makes me cry. ;_;

My dear float canceling and all the awesome stuff... gone...

*cries*

 

[Dexter Morgan]

Yes, perfect balance is impossible. Great Balance is oftem mistaken as perfect balanced. No game in the history of fighting games has been "Perfectly balanced", espiacially to the point where Tiers wouldn't exist. Anyone who thinks Brawl is balanced to this point, hell if they think Brawl is anymore balanced than Melee or 64 at this point, they are simply wrong. And yes, at this point in time Snake does look seem to like a god, but he's not exactly the easiest person to use and is far from unbeatable. To make a 'balanced' fighting game you first have to define what 'balance' is.

Is it fair that a fast character like Fox can absolutely **** Ganondorf, while maybe having trouble with a character like Marth? Should both have EQUAL opporutunity? You can't have that without making every character abolutely equal. The 'Tier' lists are really nothing more than the top character having the most advantages over others. I belive it is truely, 100% IMPOSSIBLE to create a perfectly balanced fighting game. (Unless of course you do something like FOX ONLY, FINAL DESTINATION.) There will always be advantages and disadvantages, and ways to exploit them.

In a sense, That is balance.

 

[Yuna]

You know, I've been thinking.
Gimpy and others played the Brawl demo at E4All, and it was good. It had hitstun, all characters except for Ike seemed to be quite usable, and everything was nice.

I wonder, what happened between now and then? They must've had those physics for the longest time, with the "existent" hitstun, a type of l-canceling, and whatever else was changed.
And now we have a game that tried to eliminate combos, yet left in a ton of inescapable infinites, a game where two characters have water-attacks that scream "edgeguarding!" but which cannot be used for anything ever whether by n00bs or pros, Toon Link is better than old Link in every respect, and so on.

Maybe they were forced to change some aspects of the game because the higher-ups were scared that people could still be put off by the possibility of competitiveness, so they had to just quickly fool around with some numbers to decrease hitstun and make everything floaty, with no time to betatest these new physics properly? Maybe they even tried to balance some characters to work with the new physics and couldn't get done in time...

I can imagine the twits at Nintendo headquarters sitting around a table:
Sakurai: We toned everything down, made everything intuitive and easy to do! We made it so that n00bs would stand an equal chance against pros!
Random ****ty employee #1: But have you seen the pros playing the E4All demo? They managed to become good! They managed to crush their opposition!
Random ****ty employee #2: No! Horrible! Unthinkable! So many idiots will suffer because they'll run into people they can't beat! They'll stop playing the game because they're too stupid to realize there's always someone better!

I can actually almost see that happening. But I personally think it's a case of Bait and Switch. They made the E4All demo to make us think Brawl would be good and have Competitive potential. Then, they gave us a completely different game, but it was too late by then for all of those who had already bought the game or pre-ordered it.

It's either that or the Conspiracy Theory ("Think of the n00bs! Please won't anyone think of the n00bs?!").

So. Nobody replied to my earlier question. What does balance look like in Doubles?

Not very good. It has less viable characters since chaingrabbing is much more limited in teams so the chaingrabbers get screwed over. Camping also isn't half as good, so the campers get screwed as well.

 

[PitMasta]

Sakurai: We toned everything down, made everything intuitive and easy to do! We made it so that n00bs would stand an equal chance against pros!

haha, i think thats what happened!

 

[AlexX]

Well, try to see beyond the dimensions of what you desire for a moment.

Think about it, casual players will be happy with the game regardless. Now look at the effort made towards the game so that it wouldn't be competitive? Wouldn't you be angry if you were in our shoes? And to make something clear, the majority of SWF opts for the competitive side of smash, which puts you at an opposition.

You should understand that it isn't the fact that we don't like the game, it's the longevity of the game that we are worried about in the long run. Everything from fun factor, balance, appeal all effect how big of an impact a game will make from the present to the future. And honestly, with all things considered, this game will have an extremely shallow lifespan.

A tournament based casual community will only exist for a short period of time due to them wanting to go for the next big thing. Many of the members who were new to SWF are now busy with Mario Kart. Nintendo has your money, so they won't care whether or not the game is a success.

Erm... where are you getting the idea that I only play casually? I play competative Brawl just like a lot of others here. It's not like competative Melee, but it can still be competative since there's still a number of people here who want to play it and work to improve its metagame.

My point was that as long as people enjoy the game, Brawl will have a competative scene. And considering how many people here (which is overall a small percentage of the total amount of Brawl players) would rather not go back to Melee and stick to Brawl, I'd say it's a little early to be totally sure that it's going to die.

 

[Rhubarbo]

You know, I've been thinking.
Gimpy and others played the Brawl demo at E4All, and it was good. It had hitstun, all characters except for Ike seemed to be quite usable, and everything was nice.

I wonder, what happened between now and then? They must've had those physics for the longest time, with the "existent" hitstun, a type of l-canceling, and whatever else was changed.
And now we have a game that tried to eliminate combos, yet left in a ton of inescapable infinites, a game where two characters have water-attacks that scream "edgeguarding!" but which cannot be used for anything ever whether by n00bs or pros, Toon Link is better than old Link in every respect, and so on.

Maybe they were forced to change some aspects of the game because the higher-ups were scared that people could still be put off by the possibility of competitiveness, so they had to just quickly fool around with some numbers to decrease hitstun and make everything floaty, with no time to betatest these new physics properly? Maybe they even tried to balance some characters to work with the new physics and couldn't get done in time...

...

Yeah, I'm being terribly optimistic here.


So. Nobody replied to my earlier question. What does balance look like in Doubles?

The E4ALL demo was actually probably really similar, just people didn't know how to abuse spamming yet.

 

[2.72]

No, something would have been mentioned if there was this little hitstun at E4A. Keep in mind that Gimpy noted the lack of hitstun on throws, and hence the lack of combos off of throws, right away. I'm pretty sure that, were most combos dead, he would have said so.

With better combos camping would be much less dominant.

 

[Finesse]

In all seriousness, we first need a rigorous definition of the term "balance" that can be accepted by most. Much of the disagreements I see in this thread stem from the fact that opposing parties' notion of such an order relation "balance" differs in many but subtle aspects.

 

[BOFO]

In all seriousness, we first need a rigorous definition of the term "balance" that can be accepted by most. Much of the disagreements I see in this thread stem from the fact that opposing parties' notion of such an order relation "balance" differs in many but subtle aspects.

When I say it, I mean how fair of a chance anyone stands against anyone else, pushing of course skill levels aside. All characters this time around are much more balanced than Melee, hell, even the first one was more balanced than Melee. Melee was rushed out quickly, and the creators even admitted to this that they just wanted it to get out on the release date. Brawl had time put in, and it shows. Seems like a lot of people here don't seem to realize this though, which makes sense, as Melee was the game everyone here was accustomed to. Unlike Melee, Brawl doesn't matter what tier your character was voted into, it doesn't matter if people use simple little tactics repeatedly, it's just about how good you are now, as everyone was finally broken down to be on equal levels.

 

[Sliq]

When I say it, I mean how fair of a chance anyone stands against anyone else, pushing of course skill levels aside. All characters this time around are much more balanced than Melee, hell, even the first one was more balanced than Melee. Melee was rushed out quickly, and the creators even admitted to this that they just wanted it to get out on the release date. Brawl had time put in, and it shows. Seems like a lot of people here don't seem to realize this though, which makes sense, as Melee was the game everyone here was accustomed to. Unlike Melee, Brawl doesn't matter what tier your character was voted into, it doesn't matter if people use simple little tactics repeatedly, it's just about how good you are now, as everyone was finally broken down to be on equal levels.

You have no evidence to back up your claim that Brawl is more balanced.

I, on the other hand, can point to the last big Melee tournament (Pound 3), where a Jigglypuff won, and a Pikachu and Link made top 32.

Latest Brawl tournament, about 80% of the top 10 used Snake, the other 20% used Metaknight.

If we are going to prematurely argue balance, then you are going to lose.

 

[BOFO]

You have no evidence to back up your claim that Brawl is more balanced.

I, on the other hand, can point to the last big Melee tournament (Pound 3), where a Jigglypuff won, and a Pikachu and Link made top 32.

Latest Brawl tournament, about 80% of the top 10 used Snake, the other 20% used Metaknight.

If we are going to prematurely argue balance, then you are going to lose.

That's not evidence, that's a ****ing tournament results. You're not playing, you're just a bystander. Also, did you realize Brawl has only been out for so long? It's no surprise people aren't using many people, as nobody really has this game quite down yet, which explains the tiers being posted here looping around so much. If you're gonna argue, why can't you have actual experience rather than statistics from a tournament? That's like arguing that whites are the superior race as they make up most the country!

 

[Zankoku]

Tournament results can't be used as evidence? That's news to me. How would you find evidence, then? Playing friendlies with random people?

Tournaments are one of the most effective means of judging both skill and viability. I think that if the majority of tournaments resulted in Snake or Meta Knight winning/placing high, that would indicate Snake and Meta Knight being significantly better than the rest of the cast.

Why would people not use many characters in the beginning of the game? That's an argument completely opposite the usual "omg in Melee everyone only used 4 characters!" and it's still wrong - people will tend to use all the characters at least once to figure out which one they like most. As you said, there are no definitive tiers yet, so why would people all swarm to one or two characters? Possibly because they're better than the other characters?

It's absolutely certain that there are some characters clearly a step above the rest, and other characters that lag behind by a lot. Snake, Meta Knight, Dedede, and ROB are strictly better than Captain Falcon, Ganondorf, Link, and Yoshi. Arguing "well, Yoshi has these sick combos and tricks!" is not valid. Meta Knight can do them better. Dedede can chaingrab a good half of the cast off the stage and into an edgeguard. Ganondorf can get his *** kicked around until he's off the stage, then edgeguarded because his recovery distance blows.

So tell me, what evidence are you toting to show that Brawl is so much more balanced than Melee?

 

[ZeldaSmasher]

Brawl is actually more balanced than Melee IMO.


You see, Melee was such a broken game. Then you have Brawl, all the characters are evened out, there are no broken characters, every character has an advantage and disadvantage.

 

[BOFO]

Tournament results can't be used as evidence? That's news to me. How would you find evidence, then? Playing friendlies with random people?

Tournaments are one of the most effective means of judging both skill and viability. I think that if the majority of tournaments resulted in Snake or Meta Knight winning/placing high, that would indicate Snake and Meta Knight being significantly better than the rest of the cast.

Why would people not use many characters in the beginning of the game? That's an argument completely opposite the usual "omg in Melee everyone only used 4 characters!" and it's still wrong - people will tend to use all the characters at least once to figure out which one they like most. As you said, there are no definitive tiers yet, so why would people all swarm to one or two characters? Possibly because they're better than the other characters?

It's absolutely certain that there are some characters clearly a step above the rest, and other characters that lag behind by a lot. Snake, Meta Knight, Dedede, and ROB are strictly better than Captain Falcon, Ganondorf, Link, and Yoshi. Arguing "well, Yoshi has these sick combos and tricks!" is not valid. Meta Knight can do them better. Dedede can chaingrab a good half of the cast off the stage and into an edgeguard. Ganondorf can get his *** kicked around until he's off the stage, then edgeguarded because his recovery distance blows.

So tell me, what evidence are you toting to show that Brawl is so much more balanced than Melee?

I dunno, use your god **** eyesight, Jesus Christ. If you HONESTLY can't tell, that's really pathetic. Did you notice how in Melee some characters could just go up to 220% until they FINALLY could be knocked so far off screen that they died, while others just could barely make it to 100%? Did you notice how everyone can actually land attacks now, unlike in Melee where the heavy characters just got tossed around for being so slow? While some characters appear to be better, that doesn't mean that others have no potential, or should be assumed to have none, as I've actually LEARNED that this isn't true. Tournament results shouldn't be your standards, because it's not like every smash player in the world are attending these things, just the die hard people like at this forum, who usually will just go for the popular choice, instead of experimenting. Also, it's not just taking tournament results, it's how you're all doing it. "OH THIS ONE GUY IN THIS TOURNAMENT USED MARIO AND LOST FIRST FIGHT, HE REALLY SUCKS NOW!" That's no way to take a statistic. I'm sorry if anyone here is hurt over the fact that poor old Melee is too different than Brawl, the game everyone has stuck to for so long, but it's clear to anyone new to this as to which is better, or really even veterans who have been here from the start. When I came here I expected to find good players who had some knowledge, but it seems like the people my friend met when he stopped to play Brawl which was hosted at a Melee tournament the day it first came out, who cried and threw fits because their old glitches were gone, or that their amazing speed was now gone. It's like Halo 2 and Halo 3, Halo 2 was obviously broken, it shined so clearly, but some people prefer to still play it and will whine and drop all logic and throw stupid evidence in acting like it's the best thing to do.

 

[WoodyWiggins]

Brawl fails.


Kidding. However there are some aspects of the game I do not like. Such as the knockback when attacking an opponent with aerials, tripping and the odd momentum glitches that occur every so often. I don't know if Brawl is more balanced than Melee. But when the weapons are off, Brawl reminds of Street Fighter 2 in terms of gameplay. It's straight foward and boring.

 

[Met]

BOFO once agian you baffle me. You don't even know what you are talking about because if you say any character lasted to 220% in melee then you oviously suck. because people hardly ever make it to that percent in brawl. don't get on this site and spout some bull **** that you think is right because you haven't ever experienced the competative side of this game. Just by the way talk i would bet a hundred ****ing dollars that i could beat you. In all of the smash games at that.

 

[SwastikaPyle]

I'm going to have to rescind me previous opinion of Brawl being more balanced then Melee. I can admit when I'm wrong, and I honestly think that Brawl is actually more unbalanced then Melee at this point.

Jesus christ Snake and Metaknight.

 

[BOFO]

BOFO once agian you baffle me. You don't even know what you are talking about because if you say any character lasted to 220% in melee then you oviously suck. because people hardly ever make it to that percent in brawl. don't get on this site and spout some bull **** that you think is right because you haven't ever experienced the competative side of this game. Just by the way talk i would bet a hundred ****ing dollars that i could beat you. In all of the smash games at that.

I didn't say any, but feel free to trash talk and ignore actual context within posts. Feel free to add me though, I'd love to take you down in Brawl sometime~

 

[Emperor Time]

I suppose Brawl is more balanced because it was intended to be.

 

[BOFO]

I suppose Brawl is more balanced because it was intended to be.

That was the whole point really, I mean they put a lot of time forward, and we didn't get too many new additions, and the balance is what made up for it.

 

[Met]

I didn't say any, but feel free to trash talk and ignore actual context within posts. Feel free to add me though, I'd love to take you down in Brawl sometime~

hahah alright dude.

 

[Amarkov]

Tournament results can't be used as evidence? That's news to me. How would you find evidence, then? Playing friendlies with random people?

Tournaments are one of the most effective means of judging both skill and viability. I think that if the majority of tournaments resulted in Snake or Meta Knight winning/placing high, that would indicate Snake and Meta Knight being significantly better than the rest of the cast.

Why would people not use many characters in the beginning of the game? That's an argument completely opposite the usual "omg in Melee everyone only used 4 characters!" and it's still wrong - people will tend to use all the characters at least once to figure out which one they like most. As you said, there are no definitive tiers yet, so why would people all swarm to one or two characters? Possibly because they're better than the other characters?

It's absolutely certain that there are some characters clearly a step above the rest, and other characters that lag behind by a lot. Snake, Meta Knight, Dedede, and ROB are strictly better than Captain Falcon, Ganondorf, Link, and Yoshi. Arguing "well, Yoshi has these sick combos and tricks!" is not valid. Meta Knight can do them better. Dedede can chaingrab a good half of the cast off the stage and into an edgeguard. Ganondorf can get his *** kicked around until he's off the stage, then edgeguarded because his recovery distance blows.

So tell me, what evidence are you toting to show that Brawl is so much more balanced than Melee?

1) Melee did diversify eventually, yes. But for a considerable time, Sheik, Fox, Falco, and Marth were practically the only characters who placed in tournaments. The "trying out many different characters" phase lasts only as long as it takes people to find ZOMG TEH UBER TIER and start playing those characters.

2) Yes, there are tiers, and the characters lower in these tiers are worse than the others. The characters at the absolute bottom die to everything. This is hardly an uncommon feature in fighting games, as the only way to avoid it is to have no distinct characters.

3) Having said that, I don't think Brawl is more balanced. But it's certainly not significantly less balanced than Melee.

 

[Zankoku]

I dunno, use your god **** eyesight, Jesus Christ. If you HONESTLY can't tell, that's really pathetic.

I actually have no idea what you're talking about here.

Did you notice how in Melee some characters could just go up to 220% until they FINALLY could be knocked so far off screen that they died, while others just could barely make it to 100%?

No, actually. I noticed that sometimes I could gimp ANY character at as low of a % as 70, if they make a huge mistake and I edgeguard properly. I notice that edgeguarding in Brawl sends them more up than away and doesn't actually prevent them from recovering. I noticed physics are a lot floatier and DI a lot more significant, leading to characters living until around 160%, at the very least.

Did you notice how everyone can actually land attacks now, unlike in Melee where the heavy characters just got tossed around for being so slow?

I noticed that Peach is high tier, and Ganondorf is middle tier. I noticed that Pichu is worse than Bowser, and Link is better than Young Link. What did you notice?

While some characters appear to be better, that doesn't mean that others have no potential, or should be assumed to have none, as I've actually LEARNED that this isn't true. Tournament results shouldn't be your standards, because it's not like every smash player in the world are attending these things, just the die hard people like at this forum, who usually will just go for the popular choice, instead of experimenting.

Quite right, people will typically experiment in friendlies, where there's nothing to lose if you fail, rather than experimenting when there's money on the line. I think tournaments are where people put their experimental results to the test.

Also, it's not just taking tournament results, it's how you're all doing it. "OH THIS ONE GUY IN THIS TOURNAMENT USED MARIO AND LOST FIRST FIGHT, HE REALLY SUCKS NOW!" That's no way to take a statistic.

It's more like "Holy ****, five Snakes in the top 6 and a Meta Knight in 4th place. That says something about how good they are."

I'm sorry if anyone here is hurt over the fact that poor old Melee is too different than Brawl, the game everyone has stuck to for so long, but it's clear to anyone new to this as to which is better, or really even veterans who have been here from the start.

Not really. Even the veterans are debating over which game is "better." But they give way better arguments than you.

When I came here I expected to find good players who had some knowledge, but it seems like the people my friend met when he stopped to play Brawl which was hosted at a Melee tournament the day it first came out, who cried and threw fits because their old glitches were gone, or that their amazing speed was now gone. It's like Halo 2 and Halo 3, Halo 2 was obviously broken, it shined so clearly, but some people prefer to still play it and will whine and drop all logic and throw stupid evidence in acting like it's the best thing to do.

Really? I keep hearing that Halo was the broken one, and Halo 2 was good. But I don't play Halo. Yes, wavedashing is gone. Yes, the game is slower. No, there is not a lack of glitches and exploits in Brawl. Also, don't base your "knowledge" on online play. It's a terrible idea.

 

[BOFO]

Another long post I'm ignoring because you're a big baby anyways. Also, don't think my thesis comes from just online play, as that's another false assumption! You people like to just cram words down people's throats.

 

[Zankoku]

Another long post I'm ignoring because you're a big baby anyways.

Who's the one not mature enough to lead a level-headed debate? : P

Here's the tl;dr version: Brawl is not more balanced than Melee. I can see legitimate arguments for it being approximately as balanced, though.

 

[Corigames]

I didn't say any, but feel free to trash talk and ignore actual context within posts. Feel free to add me though, I'd love to take you down in Brawl sometime~

I'll play against you in Melee as Roy. You can play Fox, Falco, Marth, or Sheik. I bet I'll still win because I'm the better player.

Then, I can play you in Brawl. I'll play Pit, and you can play anyone. If you choose Snake or Metaknight, I lose. If you choose anyone else, I win.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

The reason Metaknight and Snake are so popular in high tournaments is than metaknight has the most obvious combos and Snake has obvious, huge tactical ability. They also look kinda cool. However, numerous characters are being discovered to hav tremendous potential. Pikachu was recently found to have a Quick Attack Cancel, which brings new meaning to the word "speed character." Olimar's main downfall which will be overcome sooner or later is that to reach his maximum potential, it is necesary to be totally aware of the Pikmin order and manipulate it with attacks such as the pikmin throw (ex. throw the 3 non-purples to use the one purple twice in a row). The Pokemon Trainer can adapt to any situation, but makes Snake look easy to learn simply because of its 3-in-1 status and the need to radically change tactics mid-match.

My current impression is that Brawl has been made so that virtually all the characters have some secret trick up their sleeve.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

Another long post I'm ignoring because you're a big baby anyways. Also, don't think my thesis comes from just online play, as that's another false assumption! You people like to just cram words down people's throats.

God forbid cite evidence and actual statistics for there claims instead of just narrow minded personal opinion. If your going to disagree try to at least have a minimal amount of respect in doing so. You would be surprised how far even tempered discussion gets you compared to whining.

 

[BOFO]

I'll play against you in Melee as Roy. You can play Fox, Falco, Marth, or Sheik. I bet I'll still win because I'm the better player.

Then, I can play you in Brawl. I'll play Pit, and you can play anyone. If you choose Snake or Metaknight, I lose. If you choose anyone else, I win.

Feel free to wager on that, you'll see otherwise.

 

[Dragonboy2k4]

Brawl fails.


Brawl reminds of Street Fighter 2 in terms of gameplay. It's straight foward and boring.

That can be a very good thing in some ways if you think about it.For instance,due to the nature of this game and the way its supposed to be played control scheme wise,it is way easier to get someone into Brawl than other complex figthing games such as Tekken,VF,ect.As those games require great reflexes and exact movement to preform 2-3 moves in order to survive in "high level" play.Learn two air non escaping juggles and used them on your inexperienced pals,then compare their intrest levels of Smash to other fighting games as such.

And in even in such a case if a rookie runs into a seasoned player,the rookie can at least "feel"he can hang with the big boys even tho the outcome will favor the vet still.Thats why the skill cap is a bit closer than Melee's.

 

[Corigames]

Feel free to wager on that, you'll see otherwise.

I have yet to be shown anything otherwise.

I can beat 90% of my school as Roy (I main Samus), because I practice, play a lot, and know how to use him. I'm better, therefore I win.

In Brawl, I spend all my time as Pit. I can beat anyone in a FFA by camping, and, in a 1 v 1... the same thing. I spend the whole time running away and shooting. It sucks to win in Brawl, because it feels like I did nothing. If I lose in Brawl, it's because I was doing too much! The only way to beat me when I'm camping correctly, is to play Snake or Metaknight (possibly Falco... but that's a big if).

To win in Brawl, you have to play the character select screen game and have an IQ larger than your controller port. That's all.

How much do YOU want to wager?

 

[WaffleJesse]

Wow, look at you with your smug confidence.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

I can beat 90% of my school as Roy (I main Samus), because I practice, play a lot, and know how to use him. I'm better, therefore I win.

Aww come on school match's don't count I could beat most of my school with my feet. If my friends were not playing>.> We had one teacher that was pretty awesome with samus.

 

[Radical Dreamer]

Brawl is actually more balanced than Melee IMO.


You see, Melee was such a broken game. Then you have Brawl, all the characters are evened out, there are no broken characters, every character has an advantage and disadvantage.

I dunno, use your god **** eyesight, Jesus Christ. If you HONESTLY can't tell, that's really pathetic. Did you notice how in Melee some characters could just go up to 220% until they FINALLY could be knocked so far off screen that they died, while others just could barely make it to 100%? Did you notice how everyone can actually land attacks now, unlike in Melee where the heavy characters just got tossed around for being so slow? While some characters appear to be better, that doesn't mean that others have no potential, or should be assumed to have none, as I've actually LEARNED that this isn't true. Tournament results shouldn't be your standards, because it's not like every smash player in the world are attending these things, just the die hard people like at this forum, who usually will just go for the popular choice, instead of experimenting. Also, it's not just taking tournament results, it's how you're all doing it. "OH THIS ONE GUY IN THIS TOURNAMENT USED MARIO AND LOST FIRST FIGHT, HE REALLY SUCKS NOW!" That's no way to take a statistic. I'm sorry if anyone here is hurt over the fact that poor old Melee is too different than Brawl, the game everyone has stuck to for so long, but it's clear to anyone new to this as to which is better, or really even veterans who have been here from the start. When I came here I expected to find good players who had some knowledge, but it seems like the people my friend met when he stopped to play Brawl which was hosted at a Melee tournament the day it first came out, who cried and threw fits because their old glitches were gone, or that their amazing speed was now gone. It's like Halo 2 and Halo 3, Halo 2 was obviously broken, it shined so clearly, but some people prefer to still play it and will whine and drop all logic and throw stupid evidence in acting like it's the best thing to do.

I suppose Brawl is more balanced because it was intended to be.

God, the ****ing ******* just keep flooding in.

Please, go and try to explain the difference between Snake and Captain Falcon, or Ice Climbers and Ganondorf, just so I can laugh at something that will obviously scream "I've been playing since March 9th!" These are matchups that are easily as hard as Bowser vs. Sheik in Melee, and much, much harder than space animals vs. Mewtwo.