Brawl will have backwards progression (which is a bad thing)

[shadydentist]

Its really a matter of personal preference, but the trend does seem that people who had an extensive knowledge of Melee prefer it to Brawl. I don't take issue to anyone who prefers brawl over melee (or the other way around, I guess), but when people start reacting defensively to the notion that Brawl could be anything less than perfect...

You get what I'm saying. There are reasons why people like Melee better, and there are reasons why people like brawl better. The demographics of these two groups is somewhat telling.

 

[Gluttony]

Its really a matter of personal preference, but the trend does seem that people who had an extensive knowledge of Melee prefer it to Brawl. I don't take issue to anyone who prefers brawl over melee (or the other way around, I guess), but when people start reacting defensively to the notion that Brawl could be anything less than perfect...

You get what I'm saying. There are reasons why people like Melee better, and there are reasons why people like brawl better. The demographics of these two groups is somewhat telling.

Amen. This is why there's also people that like both games the same as well.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Well said, PK-ow! Well said, indeed.

 

[Nobie]

It should be noted, that while this is all very true, whoever attempted to equate Donkey Kong to Smash is a ******. Donkey Kong is played to get a score, not to beat an opponent. This post should be posted EVERYWHERE as people don't seem to realize that you cant compare two completely unrelated things. You have to be able to think in context of the game.

I was giving an extreme example to show that there is more to depth of a game, any game, than simply the concept of "options" being thrown around.

You want a comparable example? Let's throw around one that I'm sure has been mentioned numerous times at this point, but I guess it bears repeating: Street Fighter 2, or more specifically, its most popular incarnations of Turbo and Super Turbo.

Street Fighter 2 lacks many options and there are simply many things which are not safe. "Camping" as it were is arguably more of an issue in SF2 than it is in Brawl because you
cannot avoid projectiles by any means other than jumping over them (except for Sagat's high tiger shots which you can crouch under) and there's less freedom of movement. There's no air blocks, no dashes, no double jumps, in the case of Super Turbo you only have one Super. Compare this with Marvel vs Capcom 2, 3rd Strike, the Alpha series and so on, and you can see how few options are in the game, and yet if you went to a fighting game community and told them that SF2 wasn't deep they'd laugh you straight out. But this doesn't determine whether or not is sequels have been or will be deep. SF2 and SF3 are both considered deep, competitive games which are continually growing among their communities.

Combos don't make a game competitively deep. "Advanced techniques" don't make a game competitively deep. "More options" don' t make a game deep. Camping doesn't make a game shallow. A game's depth can only be determined by figuring out not only what you can do, but what you CAN'T do. In fact, with all this talk about Melee being better and deeper cause it has more options, I can easily argue that Melee is considered deep because of its constraints in relation to its options. The air dodge mechanics are more unforgiving in that you get one shot at it. The lack of automatic sweet spot means that you basically have reduced options and opportunities for how you expect to recover.

In the end, whenever I strip this argument down to its basics, the only real answer I can see for people's issues with Brawl is that they find it less FUN. It's not about the game being deeper or not, it's about FUN and the sooner people realize this, the sooner arguments will make sense because people won't be throwing their opinions around as gospel. Oh sure, you say, you say playing competitively is what you consider fun and that's what qualifies you to say that Brawl is less deep and therefore not competitive and therefore not fun. What I think is happening, however, is that the detractors simply aren't agreeing with the game play of Brawl. They don't think camping is fun or interesting, or rather, that it overwhelms other aspects of the game that they think should hold more weight, and thus lose the motivation to be competitive.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I was giving an extreme example to show that there is more to depth of a game, any game, than simply the concept of "options" being thrown around.

You want a comparable example? Let's throw around one that I'm sure has been mentioned numerous times at this point, but I guess it bears repeating: Street Fighter 2, or more specifically, its most popular incarnations of Turbo and Super Turbo.

Street Fighter 2 lacks many options and there are simply many things which are not safe. "Camping" as it were is arguably more of an issue in SF2 than it is in Brawl because you
cannot avoid projectiles by any means other than jumping over them (except for Sagat's high tiger shots which you can crouch under) and there's less freedom of movement. There's no air blocks, no dashes, no double jumps, in the case of Super Turbo you only have one Super. Compare this with Marvel vs Capcom 2, 3rd Strike, the Alpha series and so on, and you can see how few options are in the game, and yet if you went to a fighting game community and told them that SF2 wasn't deep they'd laugh you straight out. But this doesn't determine whether or not is sequels have been or will be deep. SF2 and SF3 are both considered deep, competitive games which are continually growing among their communities.

Combos don't make a game competitively deep. "Advanced techniques" don't make a game competitively deep. "More options" don' t make a game deep. Camping doesn't make a game shallow. A game's depth can only be determined by figuring out not only what you can do, but what you CAN'T do. In fact, with all this talk about Melee being better and deeper cause it has more options, I can easily argue that Melee is considered deep because of its constraints in relation to its options. The air dodge mechanics are more unforgiving in that you get one shot at it. The lack of automatic sweet spot means that you basically have reduced options and opportunities for how you expect to recover.

In the end, whenever I strip this argument down to its basics, the only real answer I can see for people's issues with Brawl is that they find it less FUN. It's not about the game being deeper or not, it's about FUN and the sooner people realize this, the sooner arguments will make sense because people won't be throwing their opinions around as gospel. Oh sure, you say, you say playing competitively is what you consider fun and that's what qualifies you to say that Brawl is less deep and therefore not competitive and therefore not fun. What I think is happening, however, is that the detractors simply aren't agreeing with the game play of Brawl. They don't think camping is fun or interesting, or rather, that it overwhelms other aspects of the game that they think should hold more weight, and thus lose the motivation to be competitive.

Well, it could be said that while there are less options in SF2, the options that DO exist are far more balanced. Brawl isn't competitively bad because of a complete lack of options, its bad because of the lack of OFFENSIVE options. True, there are less options in SF2, but there are less options for both the Defensive player AND the Offensive player. In Brawl, there are only less options for the Offensive player, where as the Defensive player has multiple more advantages. Even things that are supposed to be equal to both players tend to be more useful to the Deffensive player. The new air dodge system is only semi useful when approaching, but incredibly useful when retreating. The new Power shielding is good for blocking spam, but you can only bring up your shield so much. A defensive player on the other hand will only have to use his shield once he's been approached, and power shielding will allow him to block an attack and retreat quickly. Even character specifics like Lucas' Wavebouncing PK Fire or Snakes.......what the hell is that dash attack canceled Usmash called? Anyways, those are more useful for hit and run than anything else, another type of defensive play. So once again, its not the lack of options, its the lack of balance in those options. So no, this is not entirely about fun >_>

Also, on the note of fun, I played Melee the other day with a group of friends who were just sort of over at my house. We are all competitive players, tourney goers and such, but we rarely play seriously when we're in a group so it was like, random stages, 4 for alls, no items but thats less of a competitive thing and more a "we just generally never liked items" thing. So nothing serious. The thing is, it really was just more fun than Brawl. AND I DON'T KNOW WHY. It was just easier to have fun playing Melee than it was with Brawl. The same thing is happening right now. Im playing the new Crystal Chronicles on the DS and its amazingly fun and I have NO IDEA WHY o.O I think with Brawl, I lose the ability to have fun with it as I sort of play it and think about all of the things that COULD have been. I don't need my wavedashing back(although it really is fun to do. Go ahead, if you can do it, just go play melee for a few minutes, don't even try and be serious, just wavedash around, its fun for no reason XD) but I'd at least like my ground speed to transfer to air speed so when I run around like an idiot I can also jump around like an idiot. I want that freedom of movement back, I HATE when games put restrictions on me

 

[Adjudicator]

It's an utter mistake to believe that a game is deeper because it has more options.

A game's depth, be it competitive or otherwise, does not come solely from its options but also its constraints.

You want to know what's one of the most famous video games for competition?

Donkey Kong. And you want to know what your "plethora" of options are in Donkey Kong?

Walk, Jump, Climb Up Ladder. Sometimes you can "Use Hammer."

Um dude, I hate to break it to you but Donkey Kong is not particularly competitive (you can "compete" in any single player game by trying for a higher score, especially if its infinite. Nothing special about DK here at all. Hell you "compete" with each other to build the best Lego structure too, thats not what we mean by competitive) nor is it deep.

A deep game by definition is one with lots of available options, one that is hard to truly understand, with hidden knowledge and involving outwitting your opponent by thinking on multiple layers. There isn't even an opponent to outwit in DK, and hardly any esoteric knowledge/wide variety of options/etc.

Why for example is tic tac toe considered a very shallow game? Because theres very few options, its very predictable and easy to grasp and so theres no development you can really put into it.

"Advanced techniques" don't make a game competitively deep. "More options" don' t make a game deep.

I really don't think you have any understanding of what "deep" means in relation to games. It means that the game will reward time spent exploring it with new knowledge and mastery, also that the game cannot be easily "solved" and will reward creativity, strategizing, etc. ATs definitely reward players who spend time exploring the game, so they by definition add depth. They might not be required to add depth, which is another issue.

If the Brawl metagame devolves to camping by DEFINITION it will be shallower. Because there will be less of the metagame to use and explore and the game strategy has been solved to a much greater degree, reduction in viable options is BY DEFINITION reduction in depth.

 

[LouisLeGros]

I have to really agree with Pink on that last point(and pretty much his entire post). It feels stupid when you jump with sonic and you just instantly slow down and get floaty. Does inertia not exist in Brawl? I thought the havok physics engine was supposed to be awesome.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I have to really agree with Pink on that last point(and pretty much his entire post). It feels stupid when you jump with sonic and you just instantly slow down and get floaty. Does inertia not exist in Brawl? I thought the havok physics engine was supposed to be awesome.

My guess is that it was an intentional limitation to stop short hopped aerials and insane flying Falcon Punches from across FD. Honestly, of all the things, eliminating inertia was one of the worst decisions ever. That's simply just another reason why SH aerials aren't that viable anymore. Sakurai sure does love feeding the campers. >_>

 

[Red Alert]

Sakurai likes making the game fun, so everyone can win! No one likes losing! Everyone must be winning, all the time! Go Brawl!

 

[Corigames]

But everyone can't win. There can only be one person or team at the end of a match who is called the winner.

It must be a glitch!

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

But everyone can't win. There can only be one person or team at the end of a match who is called the winner.

It must be a glitch!

Winning is banned from tournaments!!!

 

[Corigames]

Winning is banned from tournaments!!!

Facepalm(10);

function facepalm(int){

if (statement == dumb)
post = open_file("/MyPictures/Facepalm.gif");
else
post = false;

reply = post * int;

output == reply;

}

 

[Nobie]

If the Brawl metagame devolves to camping by DEFINITION it will be shallower. Because there will be less of the metagame to use and explore and the game strategy has been solved to a much greater degree, reduction in viable options is BY DEFINITION reduction in depth.

So let's just assume that the Brawl metagame DOES, in fact, turn out to absolutely be a game that favors camping.

Why is it automatically assumed that there's no depth in camping?

Do we know for sure what the most effective methods of camping even ARE?

For that matter, do we know how different characters' styles of playing defensively interact with each other?

Give me a good reason why a more defensive metagame means that a game is more shallow.

 

[Iwan]

If you're going to say that, I can say this:

"I've noticed that the people who rag on Brawl have higher post counts. Now I know there are exceptions, but the majority of people who have deep issues with it are veterans of the forums. I'm not saying you're irrationally stubborn, nor am I saying that you're "old," simply, I'm inferring that you've taken the series seriously for a long time and have become attached to parts of previous incarnations of the game, likely as a result of having gotten into competitive Melee or 64."

Now, I don't like where this kind of reasoning goes. It seems to lead to what a mentor of mine called "a shouting match," something that consists only in statements whose import is understood differently by both sides. This does not add content to a debate, although it deviously always seems to, to both sides. I propose we mutually agree this line of attack is illogical and discontinue it posthaste.



Now this would be a powerful statement. But, and it's a sad thing, arguments that call for empirical work to be done, but have to be qualified with 'but you may not be able to succeed', usually don't end up working.
Moreover, calling for me, say, to just put Melee grinding in my schedule, and get back to you in four or five years, to answer the question of whether Brawl is boring... has an element of absurdity, in the practicals of it. I'd have to play not-Brawl to become bored with Brawl? Nah, see I'd rather play Brawl now, and happily for the next 4-5 years.

Seriously...can we all agree that the amount of posts you have doesn't mean ****? Please?

I've followed smash competitively since the competitive scene existed. Look at my join date...it means nothing. Seriously.

Lame observation.

 

[Jack Kieser]

So let's just assume that the Brawl metagame DOES, in fact, turn out to absolutely be a game that favors camping.

Why is it automatically assumed that there's no depth in camping?

Do we know for sure what the most effective methods of camping even ARE?

For that matter, do we know how different characters' styles of playing defensively interact with each other?

Give me a good reason why a more defensive metagame means that a game is more shallow.

Because for the least 7 years, we haven't been playing a defensively-based game, and as such we, naturally, don't know how to deal with that. The natural human response to what we don't know is to shun, so we're shunning Brawl because we don't really understand it and don't really want to take the time to.

EDIT: This totally relates to what Pink was saying about just having fun. HE can easily have fun in Melee because he understands the game and has no reason to not have fun. When it comes to Brawl, though, I'm willing to bet that most people have already made up their minds on whether they will like it long term or not (I find this ridiculous, but that's just me; I'm also the guy that likes Phoenix Wright for giving everyone he meets the benefit of the doubt), and as such it would be expected that their mind's wouldn't allow them to have fun at all with it. People's preconceived notions dictate that for reasons A, B, and C, Brawl is a bad game, or at least not fun. As such, they can't allow (subconsciously) themselves to enjoy the game, or it would invalidate the logic they've used to break down Brawl in the first place.

And there's my psychoanalytical input for the day.

 

[Skalor]

I definatly see where your coming from. However I have a feeling some more advanced and maybe unblockable combos will be created. Predicting the future is hard.

 

[KernelColonel]

Seriously what about the characters that actually cannot camp, like Metaknight, or Marth, or Charizard, or Donkey Kong, or Bowser, or Zamus, or Squirtle, or Wario, or Kirby, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf, Ike, Sonic....

The only camping they can do is hit and run, which is ineffective (unless you've got WOP like Wario or Squirtle).

I've counted 13 out of 39 that cannot projectile camp in any way. That's exactly 1/3 of the characters. If you really think the game will devolve to projectile camping, will those 33% get the axe to the lower tier? I'm sorry, but even though Marth is not as good this time around, he's still very apt in his reach, speed, and approach.

Metaknight is also bonkers if you consider his F-air approach and his ******** Up-B. How can someone that has the best gimp kill potential be considered low tier?

He won't, simply, because camping is not efficient enough to stop these characters.

My friend Nathaniel has the most annoying Toon Link I've ever seen. He is your definition of a camper. Him and I are on the same level of Brawl skill (mostly because we play so god****ed much). So tell me, how is it possible that such a noob strategy can get 2 stocked?

That's what camping is, a noob strategy. Aggresive players will almost always dominate. You can fire your missiles and your bombs and arrows and lasers all **** day but what happens when someone gets close range and starts throwing sword attacks in your face or stuns you into an F-smash? You won't have time to pull out bombs or razor leaves.

Camping loses.

 

[Iwan]

Seriously what about the characters that actually cannot camp, like Metaknight, or Marth, or Charizard, or Donkey Kong, or Bowser, or Zamus, or Squirtle, or Wario, or Kirby, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf, Ike, Sonic....

The only camping they can do is hit and run, which is ineffective (unless you've got WOP like Wario or Squirtle).

I've counted 13 out of 39 that cannot projectile camp in any way. That's exactly 1/3 of the characters. If you really think the game will devolve to projectile camping, will those 33% get the axe to the lower tier? I'm sorry, but even though Marth is not as good this time around, he's still very apt in his reach, speed, and approach.

Metaknight is also bonkers if you consider his F-air approach and his ******** Up-B. How can someone that has the best gimp kill potential be considered low tier?

He won't, simply, because camping is not efficient enough to stop these characters.

My friend Nathaniel has the most annoying Toon Link I've ever seen. He is your definition of a camper. Him and I are on the same level of Brawl skill (mostly because we play so god****ed much). So tell me, how is it possible that such a noob strategy can get 2 stocked?

That's what camping is, a noob strategy. Aggresive players will almost always dominate. You can fire your missiles and your bombs and arrows and lasers all **** day but what happens when someone gets close range and starts throwing sword attacks in your face or stuns you into an F-smash? You won't have time to pull out bombs or razor leaves.

Camping loses.

QFT

This game isn't going to have backward progress. Gimpy, your logic is sound and you make a legit argument, but the truth is none of us can tell the future.

The game's been out for a ****in month.

We don't know anything about this game right now.

 

[Winston]

So let's just assume that the Brawl metagame DOES, in fact, turn out to absolutely be a game that favors camping.

Why is it automatically assumed that there's no depth in camping?

Do we know for sure what the most effective methods of camping even ARE?

For that matter, do we know how different characters' styles of playing defensively interact with each other?

Give me a good reason why a more defensive metagame means that a game is more shallow.

Well, having one dominant strategy usually means that there's less depth in a game.

It also limits the area of exploration of the game to defensive/camping play. This would cut the number of interactions in half or so from a game that was more balanced offensively/defensively.

I'm interested in your idea of what depth in a game is if it's not directly related to the number of viable options and interactions, and therefore the levels of thinking/prediction as well as execution, a game has.

 

[FishkeeperTimmay!]

I don't think this game will progress backwards. I think that people are just camping right now because its the easier. It was in Melee too! It was a hell of a lot easier to pick up Fox, run around the map blasting his lazers, and abusing that same speed to land the vital Up-Smash/Uair to get a kill. Same goes with Peach, or Falco, or Sheik, or most of the top/high tier.

But, the game progressed. People who naturally play aggressively found ways to punish those players. Characters specific metagames developed to allow characters that couldn't use projectiles to excel.

Combos may be smaller in this game, but they aren't non-existent. 20% isn't much in some peoples eyes, which makes sense because 50 was a good average in Melee. But 100 was a good average in 64, if people remember that. The games are different, so comparing combo damage isn't really relevant.

 

[Lixivium]

SMy friend Nathaniel has the most annoying Toon Link I've ever seen. He is your definition of a camper. Him and I are on the same level of Brawl skill (mostly because we play so god****ed much). So tell me, how is it possible that such a noob strategy can get 2 stocked?

That's what camping is, a noob strategy. Aggresive players will almost always dominate. You can fire your missiles and your bombs and arrows and lasers all **** day but what happens when someone gets close range and starts throwing sword attacks in your face or stuns you into an F-smash? You won't have time to pull out bombs or razor leaves.

Camping loses.

Noob camping is what your friend is doing - standing or running away spamming projectiles.

Effective camping includes punishing you when you do inevitably approach him, and in Brawl that's not too hard to do.

 

[furyberserk]

The best things in life are replaced with worse things because you aren't use to them no being there or you really want the old. This applies for every game. Halo 3 seemed less or the same for Halo 2 because I wanted too much and didn't get half. Brawl is the same as Melee from the start, didn't meet complete expectations, but life still goes on. I personally have issues with the new tv shows coming out that are sh*t and the old ones that seems like legends. The old are gone and the new is here. Brawl won't be as competitive, obviously, but try to have fun for the moment you can. I played Melee for two weeks from Block Buster, loved it and wanted to buy it. I forgot about it for about 7 years until I saw a match online. I was interested in it again and was just as good and/or better. I bought the game though Brawl was coming out in 4 months just to have fun for the moment. I quickly went up to pro level, couldn't enter tourneys for location issues and I never regreted it. That must have been a great mistake, but the same thing would be done for brawl.

Love the moment. Brawl will take even more skill now because there are no L-canceling or wavedashing. No meneuvers to help you win the game but the mind skill you have. That itself stops the competitiveness of the game, but still should bring more afterwards. Hope you understand what I mean.

 

[Repryx]

I don't think this game will progress backwards. I think that people are just camping right now because its the easier. It was in Melee too! It was a hell of a lot easier to pick up Fox, run around the map blasting his lazers, and abusing that same speed to land the vital Up-Smash/Uair to get a kill. Same goes with Peach, or Falco, or Sheik, or most of the top/high tier.

Yeah sure it was easy but the lag on defensive moves made camping A playstyle not THE playstyle.
Now with no hitstun on anything including the sheild, playing defensivly is too easy. PLay Melee and punish a roll spam. Now play Brawl and see how many rolls you punish.

But, the game progressed. People who naturally play aggressively found ways to punish those players. Characters specific metagames developed to allow characters that couldn't use projectiles to excel.

Sakurai has dwarfed the offensive metagame in order to make it more "party-ish" if you will. In Melee we could combo because of hitstun...now hitstun is so low that you often airdodge the ground before you tech meaning you always land on your feet meaning defense is easily the better strategy.

Melee had several strategys, Camping and playing aggressive were split into several parts, Such as projectile spamming or counter attacking to pressuring and mindgames. Hitstun, Defense lag, and manual lag canceling allowed this to be possible.

Pretty soon you are going to see in brawl that the lack of hitsun on sheilds and characters mixed with certain characters l-canceling more moves than others make an unbalanced game.

Most matches you will see sheild grabbing rolling and sidestepping as there is little punishment for it. In Melee you could be cheap with....fox but you actually had to learn how to become cheap. Melee Rolls were precise not spammed because "we got a slew of invincibility frames" Brawl is too easy to break for competition.

Combos may be smaller in this game, but they aren't non-existent. 20% isn't much in some peoples eyes, which makes sense because 50 was a good average in Melee. But 100 was a good average in 64, if people remember that. The games are different, so comparing combo damage isn't really relevant.

Not Combo damage but combos. Period. In Melee I could nair to uair you with falcon. now If I try that you can safely airdodge your way to the ground.

Repryx will also say this now

to the people who say ZOMG no more WD l-cancel Shhfling! = More skill. No. Its one thing to be able to thnk of strategies and another to pull them off. Melee inserted the difficulty of combining the two while playing at high speed. Brawl is almost like a pokemon game except Moves like "Me First" and "Foresight" Win the fights more than anything else.

I will compare brawl and melee to war. War you can build strategies, hope they work and learn from experiences. Melee you actually had to be able to multi-task, be your own tactician while trying to control the feild or even making it look like you are yeilding the feild in order to get a better position. On top of that of you wanted to use High tier effectivly, you had to put in work to learn the character(weapons). Brawl is like the introduction of the gun. wait till the target is in range aim and fire. Camp out until your opponent wants to rush you then sheild-grab, or fsmash out of the sheild because of no lag. so yeah....Ive argued enough for the night.


BTW most people want to see a karate action packed fight(Melee) over two people hiding behind walls trying to shoot each other(Brawl)

 

[CoolDude330]

I feel like the next Smash should have a Competitive mode where the settings are changed to be more like what the hardcore players want. Then you'd still have the stuff that would make the casual players able to play...just a thought.

 

[Shai Hulud]

I feel like the next Smash should have a Competitive mode where the settings are changed to be more like what the hardcore players want. Then you'd still have the stuff that would make the casual players able to play...just a thought.

This wouldn't be hard to do in practice. Presumably there are some universal parameters in the game engine that control things like fall speed, hit stun, knockback, attack decay, run speed, tripping probability, etc. It wouldn't be hard to tweak some of these parameters and create a different mode. In fact this is what they do for things like lightning mode, heavy mode, etc., except that for these the parameters are tweaked for novelty instead of competitive viability.

But while programmers could do this they wouldn't for a couple reasons.

1) It violates the integrity of the game. If they have more than one mode which is seen as good enough for a standard and not for the occasional laugh, then the community is split between the different modes.

2) Competitive gamers are an insignificant market sector for the Smash series. We aren't numerous enough to appeal to Nintendo's greed. They're drawing in more soccer moms and ******** three year olds through their new marketing strategies than they're losing by alienating traditional gamers. Yay, capitalism.

 

[Demon-oni]

oh my god, people are still going on about this. MELEE STARTED OUT THE SAME PEOPLE. IF you don't believe me, check out a vid or two on youtube from year one of melee. There was no endless combos and gimp kills, all i saw was spamming and correctly timed dodges, even at nationals. How about you give the game at least a year or two before you start saying that this game isn't going to be good competitively We've already found some advance techs and more are bound to develop, thus increasing meta-game.

 

[Repryx]

^^understand that Sakurai knows every aspect of this game. He doesnt want it to hate the displeasure of losing so he put in a few adv techs that like pivot grabbing and such that really dont help against camping. BTW Melee had precise rolls, Brawl you can roll spam.

 

[Demon-oni]

yeah, but the rolls are complete crap in this game excluding robs. almost all of them are easily timed and can be caught right out of like in melee. Plus, there are more techs than those in brawl, and i'm pretty sure glide tossing wasn't meant to be in there. Sure, we don't exactly have concrete uses for them all yet, but the game is still young.

 

[Repryx]

^^Show me vids of punished rolls and I will tell you that the person just forgot to fsmash out of it

 

[Fletch]

My friend Nathaniel has the most annoying Toon Link I've ever seen. He is your definition of a camper. Him and I are on the same level of Brawl skill (mostly because we play so god****ed much). So tell me, how is it possible that such a noob strategy can get 2 stocked?

That's what camping is, a noob strategy. Aggresive players will almost always dominate. You can fire your missiles and your bombs and arrows and lasers all **** day but what happens when someone gets close range and starts throwing sword attacks in your face or stuns you into an F-smash? You won't have time to pull out bombs or razor leaves.

Camping loses.

Great, you can beat your friend who doesn't know how to properly camp. Read some of the arguments next time before you post something like this. Camping is dominant because even if you can get around it (and it is VERY hard against a good player), you can get a max of 1-2 hits in before the process is repeated, and the camping player will have inflicted much more damage on you rather than the one to two hits you got off.

Plus how could offense be at an advantage when every different aspect of this game was changed pretty much to favor defense?

 

[LouisLeGros]

Please at least know what camping is before you try to comment on it and it significance to the metagame.

Also, please go over the logic of your statement. This is not really directed at anyone in particular.

 

[Repryx]

There are a few types of camping. Projectile spamming being the most prominent in brawl. others include roll spamming and sidestep spamming, and sheild grabing. Camping is not running and at the same time not approaching, hence the name. the point is to wait for your opponent to move or (with projectiles) pressure your opponent to move and act accordingly. usually leading to a smash attack or something or other.

 

[Demon-oni]

are you kidding me??? In capitol brawl, i easily saw anyone that roll spammed got swiftly punished from a dsmash. Not to say roll spamming isn't used to your point, but it's so easily counter-able for most characters it's rarely an issue.

 

[derpinsmash]

oh my god, people are still going on about this. MELEE STARTED OUT THE SAME PEOPLE. IF you don't believe me, check out a vid or two on youtube from year one of melee. There was no endless combos and gimp kills, all i saw was spamming and correctly timed dodges, even at nationals. How about you give the game at least a year or two before you start saying that this game isn't going to be good competitively We've already found some advance techs and more are bound to develop, thus increasing meta-game.

for one thing we got waaaay more people working their ***** off to try to find anything that'd stop brawl from being a total camp fest. and also i really doubt we can just focus on brawl for 2 years and then go "lol **** sux, everyone switch to melee now!" although i agree that brawl needs some more time, i don't think there will be any less chance of that game changing technique being found if brawl isn't the focus of every single smash tournament. people will still play brawl regardless.

Still... i believe that no matter how many advanced techniques are found, brawl will still be a far less competitive game then melee. I mean its very obvious that the game was intentionally dumbed down for the casual players.

 

[derpinsmash]

^^understand that Sakurai knows every aspect of this game. He doesnt want it to hate the displeasure of losing so he put in a few adv techs that like pivot grabbing and such that really dont help against camping. BTW Melee had precise rolls, Brawl you can roll spam.

I doubt Sakurai really thought about pivot grabbing or intentionally put it in the game. it just happened. To Sakurai, adv techs include the footstool jump and tether recovery. also Ike's >B being cancelable, the 180 falcon punch, DI, and floating with the golden hammer.

 

[Repryx]

^^ It was on the Dojo...FAIL



thanks
-Ciao

 

[Demon-oni]

yeah, it was on the dojo...DOUBLE FAIL

 

[Rhubarbo]

Lol, continue arguing that Brawl is competitve, but from what I read in today's Nintendo Power, Sakurai himself says he was trying not to make it deep and competitve. And of debate. Again my theory is true, someone with a low post count is defending Brawl (by this I'm assuming you're new to the community and you never mastered Melee to appreciate it's true greatness).

 

[KernelColonel]

Great, you can beat your friend who doesn't know how to properly camp.

Great, you can't beat your friends because you don't know how to properly play aggresively. See what I did there?

Read some of the arguments next time before you post something like this. Camping is dominant because even if you can get around it (and it is VERY hard against a good player), you can get a max of 1-2 hits in before the process is repeated, and the camping player will have inflicted much more damage on you rather than the one to two hits you got off.

Every interesting thread on smashboards has 50+ pages, I only read the latest two. Sorry. Camping is not dominant. At least, it won't be. You see, in every game, upon its release, people revert to defensive styles because they simply aren't apt in every aspect they want to be. Call it uneasiness. After all, nobody wants to lose. I can understand that. Yet, name for me three video games (preferably competetive) in which camping is THE best and clearly dominant way to win.

After a while better people start emerging. They use superior tactics instead of infantile ones. While it is tough and annoying to play against a... "good camper", someone who runs and throws things and spams dodge moves will get swamped by attacks. If you wish for me to prove this, I'm willing to do a Wifi match with anyone who wants proof. I am willing to go that far to convince you that camping will not dominate as a whole. Or, you could just look at some videos of Melee pros playing Brawl.

Plus how could offense be at an advantage when every different aspect of this game was changed pretty much to favor defense?

Light shielding is gone. That favored defense pretty **** well and it's gone. The following is based off opinion: The game was not so much changed to favor defense, moreso it was changed to make it easier for n00bs to pick up and play. It wasn't changed to be defensive it was changed to be easier.

Don't confuse being easier with being shallow, though...more on that later.


EDIT: By the way, Sakurai can try to make it shallow and noob-friendly, but seriously, did he expect Melee to emerge the way it did? I can't say Brawl will measure up to Melee's competetive success, but do you really think that just because he tried to make it shallower that it actually makes it shallower?

 

[SmashBro99]

The only reason this game might fail in the long run is because "pros" can't dominate anymore and don't want this game to do well, and sadly most people just go with what they say.

You guys can flame back all you want, it's the truth.

Sorry I'm not a kissa$$ like more than half the board.