Event - MLG Anaheim 2014 Brawl, More Hyped Than Tekken?

[M@v]

If you dont have to do the ladder, please dont. I got disputed my first match which was a win and mad wifi'd the second for a loss. PLEASE save yourself a headache.

 

[ETWIST51294]

I don't know the frame data in SF4 how can you give me an example with vid or some of these 1 frame BnB's. I also understand that some of the combos are hard to execute however, there are players like Jwong and Diago who are at the point where they will rarely drop combos if they ever do. The only difference is how safe they are with their characters and executing. A lot of that stuff just simply because muscle memory. It may be difficult learning for the first week or so but after a while you'll be doing combo's like the pros. It's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Do you know how I know you don't know **** about SF?(LOL 3 knows) You mention Jwong and Diago, Mago's better than both and all he does is have amazing zoning.

 

[M@v]

Do you know how I know you don't know **** about SF?(LOL 3 knows) You mention Jwong and Diago, Mago's better than both and all he does is have amazing zoning.

Every forum needs their mr.knowitall though.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Do you know how I know you don't know **** about SF?(LOL 3 knows) You mention Jwong and Diago, Mago's better than both and all he does is have amazing zoning.

What's his record against them in tourney? From every major SF tourney I've seen they've been at the top. So what are you basing this off of ?

 

[nevershootme]

tekken - spacing, sidesteps, juggles, 50% combos to wall combos, rage mode with insta death combos if done right, frame specific stuff, 3d game with restricted movement (spaced back, to walls, open fields), koreans are tempting to dominate at the game (case in point, Holeman and Rain). grab breaks are a key to this game

smash - spacing, side dodging, CG's with IC's and DDD, grab release exploits, edge games, item tricks. 2d game with more freedom of movement.

 

[ETWIST51294]

What's his record against them in tourney? From every major SF tourney I've seen they've been at the top. So what are you basing this off of ?

01. Mago (Sagat) 555.033
02. Daigo Umehara (Ryu) 375.365
03. Ojisan Boy (Sagat) 357.451
04. RF (Sagat) 299.149
05. Tokido (Akuma) 214.968
06. Uryo (C. Viper) 199.367
07. Momochi (Akuma) 192.492
08. Shiro (Abel) 192.209
09. Radiowave (Sagat) 192.065
10. Rikuson (Sagat) 173.081

And Americans aren't even that good a SF (sadly) so Jwongs out of the picture. I think Mago and Daigo go relatively even. I'm pretty sure Jwong wouldn't win, Mago has to much exp. against Kindevu. I don't mean to sound like a knowitall, but I know what I'm talking about, which y'all don't, so stfu. >_______>

 

[ph00tbag]

all combos do realistically is provide ways to do more damage in a shorter amount of time and make matches shorter. all brawls "lack" of combos do is increase the number of times you must make a better option over your oppenent to win.

It really is simply a flashy animation diffrence.

It's important to pay attention to this post. It's also important to note that neither way of doing the system is necessarily right. Ultimately, nevershootme points out elements of the system that are more comparable.

tekken - spacing, sidesteps, juggles, 50% combos to wall combos, rage mode with insta death combos if done right, frame specific stuff, 3d game with restricted movement (spaced back, to walls, open fields), koreans are tempting to dominate at the game (case in point, Holeman and Rain). grab breaks are a key to this game

smash - spacing, side dodging, CG's with IC's and DDD, grab release exploits, edge games, item tricks. 2d game with more freedom of movement.

Add potential for low percent gimps and self destructs into smash, and you've got an excellent comparison.

 

[nevershootme]

It's important to pay attention to this post. It's also important to note that neither way of doing the system is necessarily right. Ultimately, nevershootme points out elements of the system that are more comparable.


Add potential for low percent gimps and self destructs into smash, and you've got an excellent comparison.

lol yea, i mean i've played tekken since 3 and couldn't get back into it for 6, but at least i have legit knowledge and hands on play time for most FG's except guilty gear. plus i was mostly watching tekken on MLG instead of reading countless bs chat on smash via facebook or halo.

heck 70ish ppl with $35 entry and $7000 in prizes sound pretty legendary to tekken players (i see that attendence will jump up for Columbus).

 

[ph00tbag]

lol yea, i mean i've played tekken since 3 and couldn't get back into it for 6, but at least i have legit knowledge and hands on play time for most FG's except guilty gear. plus i was mostly watching tekken on MLG instead of reading countless bs chat on smash via facebook or halo.

heck 70ish ppl with $35 entry and $7000 in prizes sound pretty legendary to tekken players (i see that attendence will jump up for Columbus).

It's unfortunate you don't know much about GG. I honestly have to agree with Sirlin that it is the best balanced fighter out there. There are some elements of the system that really do a lot of damage to Roger Ebert's argument about video games as art.

 

[Black Mantis]

It's unfortunate you don't know much about GG. I honestly have to agree with Sirlin that it is the best balanced fighter out there. There are some elements of the system that really do a lot of damage to Roger Ebert's argument about video games as art.

Can we really call video games art?

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

01. Mago (Sagat) 555.033
02. Daigo Umehara (Ryu) 375.365
03. Ojisan Boy (Sagat) 357.451
04. RF (Sagat) 299.149
05. Tokido (Akuma) 214.968
06. Uryo (C. Viper) 199.367
07. Momochi (Akuma) 192.492
08. Shiro (Abel) 192.209
09. Radiowave (Sagat) 192.065
10. Rikuson (Sagat) 173.081

And Americans aren't even that good a SF (sadly) so Jwongs out of the picture. I think Mago and Daigo go relatively even. I'm pretty sure Jwong wouldn't win, Mago has to much exp. against Kindevu. I don't mean to sound like a knowitall, but I know what I'm talking about, which y'all don't, so stfu. >_______>

we'll see at evo 2k10 I guess. Like I said when this dude when a major tourney then I'll acknowledge him however that random *** list that you have of ten players which I'm assuming are from japan means absolutely nothing to me. So tell your boy Mago to go win evo otherwise stop meat riding kthnxbai. ^__^

 

[Big-Cat]

Can we really call video games art?

I would say so. It's a mix of the arts and the sciences: Art being applied with computer science.

 

[Dekar173]

Heavy Rain is such a good movie.

 

[iProdigy101]

Smash definitely had more people in it then Tekken. Still, no matter what games there are, Halo is going to remained the league's flagship game. and most people in it.

 

[nevershootme]

Heavy Rain is such a good movie.

Shenmue was too epic that you'd wait a century to see how it would end

 

[ETWIST51294]

we'll see at evo 2k10 I guess. Like I said when this dude when a major tourney then I'll acknowledge him however that random *** list that you have of ten players which I'm assuming are from japan means absolutely nothing to me. So tell your boy Mago to go win evo otherwise stop meat riding kthnxbai. ^__^

Dude, you're such an ignorant dumb***. SBO>>>>>>>>EVO. I'm not meatriding, I don't even like Mago, but facts are facts. JP is waaaaaaaayyyyy better than us, and this has always been true. I hate JP for that for real. Who do we even have? Jwong, Sanford, Combofiend, Ed ma, and Sabin. Not one of them has beaten Daigo.

Can you please shut you stubborn *** up? You don't know **** about SF.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Dude, you're such an ignorant dumb***. SBO>>>>>>>>EVO. I'm not meatriding, I don't even like Mago, but facts are facts. JP is waaaaaaaayyyyy better than us, and this has always been true. I hate JP for that for real. Who do we even have? Jwong, Sanford, Combofiend, Ed ma, and Sabin. Not one of them has beaten Daigo.

Can you please shut you stubborn *** up? You don't know **** about SF.

I know this stuff man I just don't like your attitude so I wanted to piss you off. Cheers ^_^. Although i've never heard of this mago guy before but still just wanted to piss you off ^_^. Cya,

 

[ETWIST51294]

Why you lieing?

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Thinking that Brawl is a fundementally flawed mess, doesn't make me pro-Melee. I do believe that Melee is clearly a superior, but I have no interest in it anymore.

Seriously though, we're over two years into Brawl. This game's flaws are well documented on this website. Between Melee players and the hacking community, a large portion of the Smash community don't even acknowledge Brawl as a quality game. It's questionable to suggest that Brawl is a superior tournament game than actual legit fighting games, that are actually developed with the intent of being competitive (unlike Brawl). Hell, random tripping alone disqualifies Brawl from being superior to Tekken.

Yet you people fail to realize:

By playing the game for money, hacking it, or even holding discussions about it tells that you support the game of having quality.

 

[Big-Cat]

Yet you people fail to realize:

By playing the game for money, hacking it, or even holding discussions about it tells that you support the game of having quality.

Technically speaking, everything has some sort of quality. Brawl is low quality, IMO of course. At least with the hackers, they molded the game to their liking. If anything, they saw the potential in the game's design.

 

[Black Mantis]

I would say so. It's a mix of the arts and the sciences: Art being applied with computer science.

"A game is a structured or semi-structured activity, usually undertaken for enjoyment and sometimes also used as an educational tool. Games are generally distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas."-Definition of a game from Wikipedia.

 

[Hikki]

I actually think Sakurai is a genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiCcOJ7gfyo

Yes, he is.

 

[CRASHiC]

well, not that i have a stake in this convo, but you see in brawl there's this thing called 'buffer',

That's in every fighter ever. Its standard in fighting games.

Also, LOL at this turning into a video game, are they art discussion? Go play Kiler 7 and tell me that's not art.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Yet you people fail to realize:

By playing the game for money, hacking it, or even holding discussions about it tells that you support the game of having quality.

I never said that Brawl had no reedeming qualities.

 

[Dark Sonic]

post about buffer

That actually has nothing to do with why people powershield by accident.

Powershielding in brawl occurs if the shield is raised within 3 frames of an attack hitting it. Notice I used the phrase "shield is raised," as opposed to "shield button is pressed." This is a very big difference between brawl and melee powershields.

What this means is that if you're holding shield and your shield happens to come up 3 frames before an attack hits you, you will powershield it. It doesn't matter if you were holding the shield button for a full 2 seconds before the attack happened, all that matters is that the shield pops up right before you get hit. That is where accidental powershields come from.

In addition, the entire shield is capable of powershielding (hitting ANYWHERE on the shield can trigger it), while in melee only a small portion of the shield acts as this trigger (it's a little bubble within the shield bubble itself, it doesn't even cover the entire character)

The more you know.

 

[ph00tbag]

Can we really call video games art?

My point is more that the system in GG has a degree of beauty on par with that of any work of art. To the point where I'd say the system itself, at least, is artistic.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The main thing I like about Brawl is the fact it doesn't try to alienate itself into a competitive only crowd kind of fighting game.

Something that a lot of newer fighting games seem to be wanting to move towards.

Uh, no, I disagree. For one, the execution barrier is significantly higher in, say, SF4, where the top players are using brutally difficult 1-frame links as BnB.

Frame data or I'm calling BS.

I may not know SF4 frame data but an error of 1/60th is the strictest time frame in which someone can drop a combo. I don't even think a person's finger can react to catch the correct timing of 1/60th of a second consistently while doing all of the other stuff needed to play SF4.

 

[Turbo Ether]

The main thing I like about Brawl is the fact it doesn't try to alienate itself into a competitive only crowd kind of fighting game.

Something that a lot of newer fighting games seem to be wanting to move towards.



Frame data or I'm calling BS.

I may not know SF4 frame data but an error of 1/60th is the strictest time frame in which someone can drop a combo. I don't even think a person's finger can react to catch the correct timing of 1/60th of a second consistently while doing all of the other stuff needed to play SF4.

Google or search SRK for Plinking/P-linking and Double-tapping.

Btw, good fighting games have always catered to the competitive crowd, why do you think SF2 is still played?

 

[Flayl]

Plinking gives an additional frame for error.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Google or search SRK for Plinking/P-linking and Double-tapping.

That lets you have more room for error when doing a combo. And I was wrong about 1-frame combos.

Btw, good fighting games have always catered to the competitive crowd, why do you think SF2 is still played?

First off SF2 is a classic and it doesn't only cater to the competitive crowd, also Akuma.

Second while those games tend to have good qualities to them, they alienate themselves from everything else causing small crowds that play it and having poor sales because it's hard for people to get into it. If a game is made overly complicated it's gonna be harder to get those casual to become competitive players.

 

[Black Marf]

Btw, good fighting games have always catered to the competitive crowd, why do you think SF2 is still played?

Considering that two qualities that define good competitive games for you are technical difficulty and potential for combos, it isn't surprising that you also assume that good competitive games cater specifically to the top.

 

[Turbo Ether]

That lets you have more room for error when doing a combo. And I was wrong about 1-frame combos.



First off SF2 is a classic and it doesn't only cater to the competitive crowd, also Akuma.

Second while those games tend to have good qualities to them, they alienate themselves from everything else causing small crowds that play it and having poor sales because it's hard for people to get into it. If a game is made overly complicated it's gonna be harder to get those casual to become competitive players.

I didn't touch on this subject. You said that, "companies catering to competitive players is a new trend". I said, "no, they've pretty much always done that. Example: SF2". I also did not use the word "only".

Considering that two qualities that define good competitive games for you are technical difficulty and potential for combos, it isn't surprising that you also assume that good competitive games cater specifically to the top.

Technical difficulty and combo potential are not the only elements that determine the quality of a fighting game. I did not say or imply otherwise.

I also did not say that good fighting games cater to "the top". I said that that they cater to to the competitive crowd. There is obviously a difference between "top" and "competitive". Hey, you can use this community as an example. Lots of Brawl players are serious about the game, compete and even travel out-of-state for tournaments, but don't have the consistency to be frequent money-placers. They would obviously be considered competitive, but far from a top player.

No strawman arguments from anyone, plz. Do not quote me, if you're going to make strawman argument. If you take something out of context, just let me know if my statement was unclear.

Maybe "cater" isn't the correct term, because Capcom, Namco, etc. obviously do care about their casual fanbase, but at the same time it's clear as day that they also care a great-deal about the competitive depth of their games.

 

[Black Marf]

Technical difficulty and combo potential are not the only elements that determine the quality of a fighting game. I did not say or imply otherwise.

Read my post before you respond, or stop straw manning. I'm not sure which is the culprit here. "Considering that two" does not imply or say that those are the only qualities you look at. They say that those are qualities you care about (among others), which seems to be true from your posting. I find that interesting because I do not see a theoretical reason that difficulty to play should ever be a qualifier for a game to be competitive.

I also did not say that good fighting games cater to "the top". I said that that they cater to to the competitive crowd. There is obviously a difference between "top" and "competitive". Hey, you can use this community as an example. Lots of Brawl players are serious about the game, compete and even travel out-of-state for tournaments, but don't have the consistency to be frequent money-placers. They would obviously be considered competitive, but far from a top player.

You're correct in thinking I misused the term "top player", but it isn't for lack of understanding. This was my thought process while typing that post. The term "top" is subjective, just like the term "good" is. These days, any time I play video games I play with a bunch of casuals. Because I have a competitive background, I am frequently considered the "top", despite the fact that I'm subpar at best in the competitive community of Brawl. The "top" in this case is from the perspective of the large group of players that have little interest in playing a game that's difficult for them to understand and learn. The competitive community for a specific game is a small subset of game players, and from the casual perspective, those players are at a peak they do not understand. From the way you presented your idea, the games you are talking about are catering to the group of players that the average player can't match. This makes it difficult to get these casual players into the game. This is a fault, not something to be proud of.

No strawman arguments from anyone, plz. Do not quote me, if you're going to make strawman argument. If you take something out of context, just let me know if my statement was unclear.

This is true in all discussions, but do try to read people's posts, especially if they're very short. The lack of the word "the" can change the meaning of a sentence drastically, as you have shown.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Read my post before you respond, or stop straw manning. I'm not sure which is the culprit here. "Considering that two" does not imply or say that those are the only qualities you look at. They say that those are qualities you care about (among others), which seems to be true from your posting. I find that interesting because I do not see a theoretical reason that difficulty to play should ever be a qualifier for a game to be competitive.

You're correct in thinking I misused the term "top player", but it isn't for lack of understanding. This was my thought process while typing that post. The term "top" is subjective, just like the term "good" is. These days, any time I play video games I play with a bunch of casuals. Because I have a competitive background, I am frequently considered the "top", despite the fact that I'm subpar at best in the competitive community of Brawl. The "top" in this case is from the perspective of the large group of players that have little interest in playing a game that's difficult for them to understand and learn. The competitive community for a specific game is a small subset of game players, and from the casual perspective, those players are at a peak they do not understand. From the way you presented your idea, the games you are talking about are catering to the group of players that the average player can't match. This makes it difficult to get these casual players into the game. This is a fault, not something to be proud of.

This is true in all discussions, but do try to read people's posts, especially if they're very short. The lack of the word "the" can change the meaning of a sentence drastically, as you have shown.

Wait. Are you telling me that difficulty is incompletely irrelevant to the competitive integrity of a game? Am I correct in this assumption?

Also, are you aware that it's not that difficult for a casual player to get into a game like SF, Tekken, etc. and enjoy it at a casual level? If you want to progress past that point, though, it takes work. Hard work. As it should. Higher skill-cap = more potential reward for improvement. I don't see where the "fault" is. Actually, it's a brilliant concept. Players that work much harder at improving, absolutely should destroy the players that aren't putting in the work.

Btw, refer to the last paragraph in my last post in this thread, regarding the term "cater".

And on the subject of strawmanning: I'm aware that you weren't implying that I think that those were the only two qualities that I believe are important in a competitive game. All I said was that they weren't the only qualities.

 

[Xyro77]

Read my post before you respond, or stop straw manning. I'm not sure which is the culprit here. "Considering that two" does not imply or say that those are the only qualities you look at. They say that those are qualities you care about (among others), which seems to be true from your posting. I find that interesting because I do not see a theoretical reason that difficulty to play should ever be a qualifier for a game to be competitive.

You're correct in thinking I misused the term "top player", but it isn't for lack of understanding. This was my thought process while typing that post. The term "top" is subjective, just like the term "good" is. These days, any time I play video games I play with a bunch of casuals. Because I have a competitive background, I am frequently considered the "top", despite the fact that I'm subpar at best in the competitive community of Brawl. The "top" in this case is from the perspective of the large group of players that have little interest in playing a game that's difficult for them to understand and learn. The competitive community for a specific game is a small subset of game players, and from the casual perspective, those players are at a peak they do not understand. From the way you presented your idea, the games you are talking about are catering to the group of players that the average player can't match. This makes it difficult to get these casual players into the game. This is a fault, not something to be proud of.

This is true in all discussions, but do try to read people's posts, especially if they're very short. The lack of the word "the" can change the meaning of a sentence drastically, as you have shown.

Whats a "Black Marf"

 

[Black Marf]

Wait. Are you telling me that difficulty is incompletely irrelevant to the competitive integrity of a game? Am I correct in this assumption?

There isn't a strong reason that difficulty to play should be a quality desired in a competitive game. Difficulty to play, in this case, is being defined as having strict technical requirements. Difficulty in making your character do what you want him/her to do isn't desirable.

It's the same reasoning for why some people hate L-canceling in Melee. It's nothing more than a technical requirement, and having the reduced delay be an inherent quality in all aerials would not diminish the game in any way.

Also, are you aware that it's not that difficult for a casual player to get into a game like SF, Tekken, etc. and enjoy it at a casual level? If you want to progress past that point, though, it takes work. Hard work. As it should. Higher skill-cap = more potential reward for improvement. I don't see where the "fault" is. Actually, it's a brilliant concept. Players that work much harder at improving, absolutely should destroy the players that aren't putting in the work.

This can be true without having technical requirements. Also, I'll be ****ed if there's more people who aren't interested in playing games competitively who are bringing out Tekken than Brawl. Seriously, commands in Brawl are so easy that it's simple to get people involved for casual play.

Btw, refer to the last paragraph in my last post in this thread, regarding the term "cater".

I read it, but most of my middle paragraph was devoted to explaining the reasoning of my using that term.

And on the subject of strawmanning: I'm aware that you weren't implying that I think that those were the only two qualities that I believe are important in a competitive game. All I said was that they weren't the only qualities.

Yes. I, and a few others that I've seen on this and other boards, don't even think they're qualities that a competitive game cares about. Technical difficulty and potential for combos are qualities that a game has, but they're separate from how competitive the game is.

Whats a "Black Marf"

A bored, bright college student. What's a "Xyro"?

 

[Turbo Ether]

There isn't a strong reason that difficulty to play should be a quality desired in a competitive game. Difficulty to play, in this case, is being defined as having strict technical requirements. Difficulty in making your character do what you want him/her to do isn't desirable.

It's the same reasoning for why some people hate L-canceling in Melee. It's nothing more than a technical requirement, and having the reduced delay be an inherent quality in all aerials would not diminish the game in any way.

This can be true without having technical requirements. Also, I'll be ****ed if there's more people who aren't interested in playing games competitively who are bringing out Tekken than Brawl. Seriously, commands in Brawl are so easy that it's simple to get people involved for casual play.

I read it, but most of my middle paragraph was devoted to explaining the reasoning of my using that term.

Yes. I, and a few others that I've seen on this and other boards, don't even think they're qualities that a competitive game cares about. Technical difficulty and potential for combos are qualities that a game has, but they're separate from how competitive the game is.

A bored, bright college student. What's a "Xyro"?

I'm not saying that there should be a great amount of difficulty in performing basic actions. But precision absolutely should be rewarded. This is why there is a 3-point line in Basketball, why the scoring system in Golf works well, why headshots generally do the most damage in a shooter, and why a damaging combo in a fighting game should require good execution and setup.

Mastering Ryu's DP -> FADC -> Ultra1 in SFIV is a great example of a rewarding execution benchmark to overcome. Something that players are proud to achieve. Versus, say, Dedede's chaingrab that results in massive reward for minimal execution and setup, and is a factor in damaging the viability of multiple stages. Or his infinite that grants auto-win matchups, again, with minimal execution or setup involved. In fact, people hate this chaingrab. At the first Brawl tournament in NJ, I was literally nearly punched in the face for performing the chain grab on the member of a certain crew.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I didn't touch on this subject. You said that, "companies catering to competitive players is a new trend". I said, "no, they've pretty much always done that. Example: SF2". I also did not use the word "only".

SF2 wasn't designed specifically for a competitive crowd, it was designed to be a fighting game that people took competitively and Capcom caught onto this.

Technical difficulty and combo potential are not the only elements that determine the quality of a fighting game.

Except when you make a game so overly complicated that little to no one wants to play it.

Simple games can be competitive, so can complicated games. What ultimately matters is what people want to do competitively and the people around them accepting it. More people trying to play and win it means more people are competing in it, so winning is much harder since more people want to play it.

The qualities of the game can either help or hurt if people want to play the game. Some people hate games where most of the cast can infinite each other, MvC2, others like this concept and will jump on top of it to play it and the other qualities, multiple character teams, assists, etc.

What Smash offers is something that people like, it's more competitive at MLG because more people are competing in it to win. If people think the game is of poor quality, well that's there choice, since people have different interests I can't tell people of if they don't like it, but at MLG Orlando, Brawl was more competitive than Tekken 6.

Qualities of the game don't matter for it being competitive, what matters is how many people are willing to play to win in that game.

I'm not saying that there should be a great amount of difficulty in performing basic actions. But precision absolutely should be rewarded. This is why there is a 3-point line in Basketball, why the scoring system in Golf works well, why headshots generally do the most damage in a shooter, and why a damaging combo in a fighting game should require good execution and setup.

Mastering Ryu's DP -> FADC -> Ultra1 in SFIV, is a great example of a rewarding execution benchmark to overcome. Something that players are proud to achieve. Versus, say, Dedede's chaingrab that results in massive reward for minimal execution and setup, and is a factor in damaging the viability of multiple stages. Or his infinite that grants auto-win matchups, again, with minimal execution or setup involved.

Your trying to compare a game that wants to be simple to a game that wants to be more complicated, and a chain grab that was either intentional or a huge oversight by the developers.

Gee I don't know, I think that a game is more complicated is going to be, *gasp* harder!

 

[Turbo Ether]

SF2 wasn't designed specifically for a competitive crowd, it was designed to be a fighting game that people took competitively and Capcom caught onto this.



Except when you make a game so overly complicated that little to no one wants to play it.

Simple games can be competitive, so can complicated games. What ultimately matters is what people want to do competitively and the people around them accepting it. More people trying to play and win it means more people are competing in it, so winning is much harder since more people want to play it.

The qualities of the game can either help or hurt if people want to play the game. Some people hate games where most of the cast can infinite each other, MvC2, others like this concept and will jump on top of it to play it and the other qualities, multiple character teams, assists, etc.

What Smash offers is something that people like, it's more competitive at MLG because more people are competing in it to win. If people think the game is of poor quality, well that's there choice, since people have different interests I can't tell people of if they don't like it, but at MLG Orlando, Brawl was more competitive than Tekken 6.

Qualities of the game don't matter for it being competitive, what matters is how many people are willing to play to win in that game.



Your trying to compare a game that wants to be simple to a game that wants to be more complicated, and a chain grab that was either intentional or a huge oversight by the developers.

Gee I don't know, I think that a game is more complicated is going to be, *gasp* harder!

Um, considering that this thread (that I didn't make) is basically "Tekken (a traditional fighter) vs Brawl", yes, i'm comparing a traditional fighter to Brawl.

I don't even neccessarily disagree with most of your post, however you're jumping into topics that I have not touched on. My original post in this thread was in response to someone saying, "lol, Tekken sucks". To which I replied, "No, Tekken has superior competitive mechanics, alongside multiple other fighting games". Opinion of course, but it's the gist of my standpoint and I never claimed otherwise. I'm talking game mechanics only, which is technically offtopic, since I initially responded to an offtopic post.

So, if that guy can say, "lol Tekken sucks", i'm going to say "lol Brawl sucks", and be done with the thread.

 

[fkacyan]

**** all your ****, GG:XX is more technically difficult AND more fun to watch than any game mentioned so far, so that's what we should play.

Seriously, guys, who the hell cares? Play and watch what you enjoy, and leave it to people like me to shove their opinions down other people's digestive tracts.