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

[MookieRah]

Advanced Techniques and Unbreakable combo's drain the life of a game, and replace strategy with rote memorization and practice. I'm glad they're both gone.

Please cite some sources, cause pretty much every competitive game that is worth it's weight has advanced techniques (even RTS games have them) and "unbreakable combo's" don't drain the life of any game. Look at... I dunno, every other competitive fighting game community. Seriously, you don't know what you are talking about.

I don't understand this dilemma. Chess, for example, is a rather simple game, and experienced players can still crush new players, and the games can still get competitive.

Chess isn't simple. Yeah, it's easy to learn the rules, but it's amazingly complex. Regardless, smash and other fighters aren't chess.

Why does slower gameplay equal more tactical gameplay? Is this some kind of linear relation? Would playing this game at half speed make it twice as tactical?

Yeah, I was about to address that but you beat me to it. Guys, slowing the game down doesn't make it more "tactical." In fact, it makes it LESS tactical. From a mindgaming standpoint, it's much easier to trick opponents when you have speed backing you up, giving your opponent less time to think about how to react. In the case of Brawl, more time to react = higher chance the person on offense gets screwed. This on top of all the other ******** buffs you have with your defensive options means that the game becomes a campfest if your goal is to win.

 

[Yojimbo]

I don't understand this dilemma. Chess, for example, is a rather simple game, and experienced players can still crush new players, and the games can still get competitive.

Using chess is a bad example, considering there's so many mindgames to chess and so many different strategies and approaches. Chess is nothing like Brawl, and can't be used to compare. Chess is anything but a basic game and if anything, your statement proved that they are nothing alike.

 

[MookieRah]

I don't like the idea that you can do a combo that just completely and utterly beats an opponent. Such as: shinedashing someone right off the stage and using an offstage shine to spike them to their death. No matter how well your DI was, you died.

That isn't true. Even when done to characters like Peach, Falcon, and Link whom are shine bait you can get prevent your death from shinespiking. You can't prevent the shines up till then, but in the grand scheme of things the amount of damage incurred by shining isn't very large. Also, if you don't like the idea of shining a small portion of the cast across the stage (something that takes technical skill and stuff) then you should really hate how Dedede can chain grab pretty much everyone without skill across the stage with ease.

Sure, it takes skill to learn timing to be able to do that, but once it's been done, don't you think that's boring?

So by taking it out and putting in an even easier more broken version is less boring? Also, in melee, you had plenty of ways around that if you tried hard enough to discover them.

People who don't know about melee shouldn't talk as if they do. I'm sorry, you can ignorantly call me elitist for that statement if you want, but you can't effectively debate something that you don't know much about.

 

[shadydentist]

I don't like the idea that you can do a combo that just completely and utterly beats an opponent. Such as: shinedashing someone right off the stage and using an offstage shine to spike them to their death. No matter how well your DI was, you died.

Theres no such thing as a combo that completely and utterly beats an opponent. The thing is, a combo is a REWARD for successfully tricking your opponent into an opening.

And about camping, if you play 3 stock you can camp to your heart's desire. But having 3 stock and a 10 minute time limit means you can't camp forever. So what is the problem with camping?

Nothing is wrong with camping itself, but while combos require you to get close to your opponent, chip damage works equally well from all the way across the stage. This makes camping a very powerful strategy in Brawl, much more powerful than it was in Melee. Melee had an incredible diversity of viable strategies. It looks like Brawl might have far fewer.

edit: beaten by Mookie.

 

[eman]

I have started with defensive portions. Just trying to figure them out, Like R-and down on the joy stick is a great defensive move.

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

Hold on . . . A Fox Combo Video?!?! Is that all this game is About to some people? How fast you can cheaply kill someone with Fox. People would rather get kicked around by Fox than play brawl?! You know how many Foxes I've had to Fight just because he is easiest to master? Melee was unbalanced as hell, okay?!?! Lets talk about Melee's Flaws for once. A ton of people talk about it like there wasn't a thing wrong with it but I don't feel that's true. Melee had flaws, and yeah, of course Brawl does too. It's more like just trading out those flaws. Brawl is a more balanced game that is slower and takes longer to finish fights. Tournaments will conform by lowering stock AND people will learn to fight differently. We've all talked about unavoidable tiers before so I wont go there. Is Brawls combat so dumbed down that it can't be competitive? I really don't think so. So Boo Hoo, you can't watch Fox scoot around wave dashing & shining a billion times. There is not enough wrong with Brawl to completely Sh##-Can people seriously playing it.

You're a ****** for thinking Fox is easy to master. Cry moar about characters that you couldn't beat, scrublet.

 

[Lei]

People who don't know about melee shouldn't talk as if they do. I'm sorry, you can ignorantly call me elitist for that statement if you want, but you can't effectively debate something that you don't know much about.

I know I was never a big melee competitive person. I tried to get into it, but I joined really late, I played for about a year trying to get good before Brawl came out. I went to one whole tournament.

Also, if you don't like the idea of shining a small portion of the cast across the stage (something that takes technical skill and stuff) then you should really hate how Dedede can chain grab pretty much everyone without skill across the stage with ease.

Also, in melee, you had plenty of ways around that if you tried hard enough to discover them.

You basically answered your own thing here. You probably be chaingrabbed 3 times by DDD, but eventually you'll guess the correct way to DI out of it. Also, DDD has to be close to you to start the grab. Looks like i've already found my way around it.

I know I will never be as good as the pros in melee, and I accept that. I started late in the scene, and honestly never really liked fighting games at all before that. However, being new doesn't mean I can't quickly learn all the things that took people years to discover. This is called progression.

I would also like to state for the record, Mookie, that I respect you. Don't worry about me calling you elitist, I don't care about accusing people of what they may or may not be. This is supposed to be an intelligent discussion.

 

[Drunken_Dragon]

2 month old metagame = ****.


options are actually unsafe now?.. all attacks arent + on block? its harder to mix people up because things are "slower" and even some things are visable? punishing people on whiff is harder than block?

this sounds... like a fighting game?

 

[VicSkimmr]

I answered your points in your own post quoted above.

And it isn't so much slower, I'd use the word floatier. It isn't us whining about having to learn a new game. Competitive players wanted a new game to learn. The fact is there's nothing to learn. With a simplified physics engine that doesn't allow for multiple approaches to your opponent and absolutely encourages camping, defense play, and turtling, it isn't the fighting game we wanted it to be.

Most casuals interpret competitive players being pissed because it closes the gap. We're frustrated because we thirsted for a new game with depth to understand. It took Melee and broke it down into something simple that anyone can pick up and play. What is there to learn? Basic techniques are about as good as it gets right now.

Oh ok, I see now. Everyone was expecting the game to be much deeper than Melee and its not, or at least so far its been perceived as not. In the end though, it still seems like someone with a lot of practice could absolutely dominate the field.

In FPS games, nothing new ever gets added (or at least it hasn't since iron sights were introduced), but they're still incredibly competitive and nobody seems to get bored of them?

I'm honestly not trying to troll the boards, I'm really just trying to get an understanding of why everyone feels Brawl is such a letdown when in my eyes its a vast improvement. Its probably my tendency to like tactical based games. I think if we give it a few more months competitive play will probably take on a new meaning and strategies will be adapted to it IMO, but who knows.

Maybe this really just comes down to humanity's resistance to change.

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

Oh ok, I see now. Everyone was expecting the game to be much deeper than Melee and its not, or at least so far its been perceived as not. In the end though, it still seems like someone with a lot of practice could absolutely dominate the field.

In FPS games, nothing new ever gets added (or at least it hasn't since iron sights were introduced), but they're still incredibly competitive and nobody seems to get bored of them?

I'm honestly not trying to troll the boards, I'm really just trying to get an understanding of why everyone feels Brawl is such a letdown when in my eyes its a vast improvement. Its probably my tendency to like tactical based games. I think if we give it a few more months competitive play will probably take on a new meaning and strategies will be adapted to it IMO, but who knows.

Maybe this really just comes down to humanity's resistance to change.

No, no. You don't understand because you suck at the game. If you didn't suck, you'd see it. Basically, anyone who doesn't see it sucks.

 

[distr0ia]

I respect your opinion, Gimpyfish. honestly, though...that's just how it goes

people are gonna be spying the latest combo vids/youtube matchs and simply copying & pasting it into their gameplay to become tourney players. this happened constantly within the Melee tourney scene and it got ridiculous toward the later years. it's only been a couple months: nobody's word is law just yet


P.S. Melee tourney matches were boring as hell to watch, dude. I've been to these tourneys and I've seen every stupid thing that Marth, Fox, Falco & Peach can f*cking DO; all the little glitches and exploits and broken moves that everyone who wanted to win every match just HAD to master to be totally awesome. it ruined the game. nope, not a typo, it ruined_the_game

 

[shadydentist]

Brawl is still a fun game, but you're right, we were hoping for something deeper. Melee was really fun for me because there was always something new to learn. Whether it was waveshining with Fox, chain throwing/desyncing with Ice Climbers, needle cancelling with Shiek, or knee combos with falcon, there was always more to learn, and get better at.

Theres also a lot of new things to try in Brawl, but its a lot more limited in what you can do at any given time.

edit: I have to respond to the post above me.

How did it ruin the game? By forcing you to actually practice to get good? Brawl is no different, you're going to have to master a few exploits to stand a chance against good players.

 

[VicSkimmr]

It is, but will you really get bored with it because there's less to learn? Like I said before, other genre's of games have been virtually unchanged since their creation and people still rabidly play them, and to be honest, there's a much larger competitive community based around them.

 

[Patsie]

don't be ********, what about my past habits of posting would lead you to believe the fact that I'd harshly pass judgment on this game for not being exactly like it's predecessor, or without giving it a chance?

I couldn't wait for a new game, and I didn't want it to be like Melee, I wanted something new.

I've experimented thoroughly with this game, and these are the conclusions I've come to. Replying with things such as "lulz melee 2.0" and "then play melee" aren't conducive to good discussion, nor do they actually defend brawl or argue any points whatsoever.

Let's see some actual intelligence on these boards for once shall we?

I think if you want some intelligence, you should start setting the trend. Your first post CERTAINLY doesn't do that.

Why? Because your definition of "progression" equates to "how many combos can I pull off in a set amount of time." This is an INHERENTLY Melee-based standard, and every criticism that you get about the standard "Brawl =/= Melee 2.0" is completely deserved.

If that's not your definition of progression, then you fail at intelligent posting because you can't clarify your terms. In this instance though, I hope I'm right, because it's the only thing you mentioned that correlates with progression. If it's not, please don't post bull**** unless you know what you're talking about.

You can't define progression in terms of comboing without explaining why that's essential for the betterment of the game. You haven't done that either, yet you still call people unintelligent. You're actually failing on quite a few levels to be as elitist as you're being.

I would go on a huge explanation of why comboing is not necessary or sufficient for the betterment of the game, but so far you really don't deserve it.

I hope you respond; you can write well and are good at Smash, but you certainly can't construct an argument for sh*t, so I don't think I'm going to have a problem tearing apart whatever you say (knowing the low-caliber standard of your normal posts).

 

[Darkjad]

That said, why should Brawl be a "combo" oriented game?

Not all combat is about setting up strings of hits designed to keep your opponent stunned while you hit them again.

Does that make it worse? I would argue not necessarily. Especially once people learn more about Brawl and discover new stuff. But I'm not competitive: I just wanted to throw the idea out that perhaps the game shouldn't be viewed as a combo oriented game. More of a "setup a decisive blow" game.

 

[MookieRah]

You basically answered your own thing here. You probably be chaingrabbed 3 times by DDD, but eventually you'll guess the correct way to DI out of it. Also, DDD has to be close to you to start the grab. Looks like i've already found my way around it.

That isn't true. You can't get out of it if your opponent is doing it correctly, unless you are using one of the few characters that can escape it. The fact is, D3 can even chain grab a few characters while standing. If your opponent is flawless (which trust me, it's not hard to be flawless with this).

options are actually unsafe now?.. all attacks arent + on block? its harder to mix people up because things are "slower" and even some things are visable? punishing people on whiff is harder than block?

Punishing is way too hard and not good enough in Brawl. Seriously, to land a smash to punish a single tech mistake that I predicted I'd actually have to do the smash a considerable amount of time before my opponent even made his move with most characters. The characters with quick smashes that could smash fast enough don't have the range to hit someones roll and you have to pretty much move prior to their roll. It's dumb, and the window of oppertunity is so small that if you mess it up just slightly you get smashed yourself. The defender is so ridiculously at an advantage that it's ********.

In melee you could camp and it was viable. It wasn't broken, but it was good when done right. In melee, you had options to camp, be agressive, passive agressive, etc. They were all viable and different circumstances required a specific style. In brawl, your best option at any given point is to camp. That is the best way to ensure victory. This doesn't allow for "mixing it up" and there isn't much you can do to adapt to it other than out camp the other player.

 

[shadydentist]

That said, why should Brawl be a "combo" oriented game?

Not all combat is about setting up strings of hits designed to keep your opponent stunned while you hit them again.

Does that make it worse? I would argue not necessarily. Especially once people learn more about Brawl and discover new stuff. But I'm not competitive: I just wanted to throw the idea out that perhaps the game shouldn't be viewed as a combo oriented game. More of a "setup a decisive blow" game.

Let me repost why combos are important:

Let me also make the argument that combos are good for gameplay. Why? Because the ability to combo glives the player more options. Contrary to what some of you believe, combos are NOT about memorizing button combinations to rack up free damage. In Melee, combos were mostly about predicting your opponent's reaction. If you predict well, you can severely punish your opponent for being predictable.

Brawl suffers from not having this option. Even if you do correctly predict your opponent's reaction, often there is simply nothing you can do to punish it because he recovers so quickly. This drastically changes the nature of the game. Where in Melee you were looking for an opening, now in Brawl you're simply aiming for chip damage until your opponent is high enough to KO.

This is why camping will continue to be a dominant strategy. Combos require you to get close to your opponent. Chip damage works equally well from all the way across the stage, and theres no real reason to approach your opponent.

Without combos, the reward for sucessfully initiating an attack is too low. This is why defensive playstyles are dominant in Brawl: Even if your opponent gets in on you, he probably only gets one hit in before you can escape.

 

[MookieRah]

If it's not, please don't post bull**** unless you know what you're talking about.

I hope you respond; you can write well and are good at Smash, but you certainly can't construct an argument for sh*t, so I don't think I'm going to have a problem tearing apart whatever you say (knowing the low-caliber standard of your normal posts).

First off, why are you so angry? Seriously, what did Gimpy say that was so bad and infuriating that you just had to go angst mode on? Please, you talk about how you could tear apart his arguments, yet you are already so emotional.

For the most part, Shadydentist explained why combos are a big deal for smash. Read his post if you want to get a gist of that reasoning. Secondly, if you are going verbatim with Gimpy's post, he just said that a game without combos is basically hit and run and isn't as exciting to watch. Therefor there would be less hype for the game over the long haul and it's longevity will be decreased. How is that not a valid point?

A lot of your arguments about what "Gimpy said" are assumptions on your part. Yeah, your assumptions that Gimpy thinks the depth of the game took a dive because of this is true, but the thing is that you base all of your argument against his standpoint purely on this one thread. He's had countless others that go into more detail than "just combos" that you can look up. The lack of combos in Brawl is just one of the many things that make this game not as good in a competitive sense than melee.

Melee tourney matches were boring as hell to watch, dude. I've been to these tourneys and I've seen every stupid thing that Marth, Fox, Falco & Peach can f*cking DO; all the little glitches and exploits and broken moves that everyone who wanted to win every match just HAD to master to be totally awesome. it ruined the game. nope, not a typo, it ruined_the_game

It seems your inherent hatred for "glitches" and your apparent lack of understanding for them and/or the competitive scene doesn't allow for you to enjoy intense matches. Only a handful of people get worked up over stuff like this, and most people tend to think that matches between 2 pros are much much more exciting than two random "non glitching" players who aren't nearly as skilled.

 

[Senshuu]

OP: It's because the game has the potential for everyone to win, right? That's why, as everyone gets better (with their defense, for example), it gets more boring to watch because of how things have been sort of equalized?

I do agree that the title needs a ~for the competitive~ edit. If you watch two on two 3-stock matches all the time then yes, it will get boring to watch because of this. But~ there's more to the game than that.

 

[Darkjad]

<snip>and most people tend to think that matches between 2 pros are much much more exciting than two random "non glitching" players who aren't nearly as skilled.

Depends . . . if people can understand what's going on then they might prefer the pro match. But for the other 97% of the Smash population (realistically), watching a competitive match makes them wonder if they're cheaters or glitchers or something, and they usually get bored by all the people dashing in place. It is cool, but it's confusing as hell.

 

[MookieRah]

Depends . . . if people can understand what's going on then they might prefer the pro match. But for the other 97% of the Smash population (realistically), watching a competitive match makes them wonder if they're cheaters or glitchers or something, and they usually get bored by all the people dashing in place. It is cool, but it's confusing as hell.

They might not know what's going on, but that doesn't make it less exciting, and that doesn't make the non-competitive videos more exciting.

 

[brandutt845]

P.S. Melee tourney matches were boring as hell to watch, dude. I've been to these tourneys and I've seen every stupid thing that Marth, Fox, Falco & Peach can f*cking DO

QFT

What? Backwards? That doesnt make any kind of sense. People are eventually going to find new things. ONCE AGAIN...GIVE IT MORE TIME.....

 

[Fletch]

P.S. Melee tourney matches were boring as hell to watch, dude. I've been to these tourneys and I've seen every stupid thing that Marth, Fox, Falco & Peach can f*cking DO; all the little glitches and exploits and broken moves that everyone who wanted to win every match just HAD to master to be totally awesome. it ruined the game. nope, not a typo, it ruined_the_game

If you thought Melee tourney matches were boring to watch, I can't wait until you start watching Brawl's. YouTube some of Overswarm's Brawl videos from last weekend and tell me if you can sit through one minute of it.

 

[Fletch]

Depends . . . if people can understand what's going on then they might prefer the pro match. But for the other 97% of the Smash population (realistically), watching a competitive match makes them wonder if they're cheaters or glitchers or something, and they usually get bored by all the people dashing in place. It is cool, but it's confusing as hell.

Back when I had no idea how to play Smash, watching these videos where I didn't actually understand what was going on made me WANT to play Melee and get better. Watching anything else now is completely painful. This isn't going to happen in Brawl for anyone given how easy the game is, and any good players just camp now and makes matches unwatchable.

QFT

What? Backwards? That doesnt make any kind of sense. People are eventually going to find new things. ONCE AGAIN...GIVE IT MORE TIME.....

This is an opinion and blind hope; there is no reason to believe more time will lead to new techniques. You really think Sakurai buried some crazy techniques when he's explicitly stated he does not want anything complicated in this game or anything that would give a skilled player an advantage? Be serious...

 

[Jack Kieser]

They might not know what's going on, but that doesn't make it less exciting, and that doesn't make the non-competitive videos more exciting.

Ok, now we're getting into the realm of non-objective opinions. Whether something is enjoyable or not to watch is an opinion, so we should stay away from arguing about it.

(EDIT: For the record, I can't enjoy something if I don't understand it, so it took a lot of learning/effort for me to enjoy watching even the least technical M2K video. Everyone has different standards.)

 

[controlfreak7]

Ok, i'm gonna address some quotes here before I do my comparison of brawl and melee (a pretty interesting conclusion.)

Yeah... that was a home run. My post was on such a higher level than you, that I don't even think you knew you were playing baseball.

The point in that post was to show that characters in melee looked like they were DOING something compared to current Brawl videos. It seems though, that you were so hell bent on going on a melee tantrum, which, by the way, was not pretty, that you missed the entire intention of everything. You know what was wrong with melee? You say it was unbalanced. Well ****, who was the best player in the world. You are a noob, so I bet you know only a handful of pros anyway, especially ken. Who did he play as? ****ING MARTH!!! OMG Fox is sooo broken! And what is this bull about him being the easiest to play with? He most certainly is not. The right is reserved to Shiek. Any new player can grab shiek, move in the direction of the enemy and hit the C-stick towards them to win. Wow, that fox with his timing, spacing, and such is just to easy to grasp.

But yeah, they totally got rid of THAT cheapness. Now we have chaingrabs off the stage with many characters, instant gimps with certain characters, and tons of wall infinites or near infinites. Yeah, this game is way better. Someone who plays Yoshi, DK, Sonic, amd other low characters completely stand a chance against all that bull.

So, Boo-hoo, attention *****.

First of all 2 address your 2nd paragraph, I played fox in melee, yah i found it pretty hard to do some stuff with him. Despite this, fox players still seemed to get a lot of bad rep for choosing him. And to people like me who just chose him because he was my favorite character (and still is), it didn't feel that great. I mean im just like gimpy who chose bowser because it is his favorite character, but he doesn't get bashed because bowser is one of the worst characters in the game. That's frustrating and thats why i like brawl fox more.

And your 2nd (last) paragraph seems to unintentionally debunk what gimpy said about no gimp kills... Maybe the gimping part may be avoidable, but the chain grabs no way...

The game, from experience, really doesn't seem to be that bad with the people i've played with (non-campers). I haven't played against someone who camps sufficiently yet so i don't know how effective is so i really can't say.

EDIT: Another thing I forgot to address, the ridiculous chain grabs and things like them that are found in the game are actually a sign of hope. I mean really what kind of beta testers or whoever was testing this game out would not attempt to try such things out especially with Sakurai's mindset in mind? If these ridiculous chain grabs are found in the game and some other glitches that have been revealed, then I think there is plenty of more stuff we can find in the game because I don't think was tested very well if even at all..

Now this may sound weird and ridiculous (i think it is myself actually), but why can't we make a rule that doesn't allow camping because it is so effective, easy, cheap, etc.? Stalling was banned in melee, and if you don't approach a camper aren't they in a way stalling? This actually sounds ridiculous to me especially because it is hard to put a definition on what is camping and what isn't.

Oh ok, I see now. Everyone was expecting the game to be much deeper than Melee and its not, or at least so far its been perceived as not. In the end though, it still seems like someone with a lot of practice could absolutely dominate the field.

In FPS games, nothing new ever gets added (or at least it hasn't since iron sights were introduced), but they're still incredibly competitive and nobody seems to get bored of them?

I'm honestly not trying to troll the boards, I'm really just trying to get an understanding of why everyone feels Brawl is such a letdown when in my eyes its a vast improvement. Its probably my tendency to like tactical based games. I think if we give it a few more months competitive play will probably take on a new meaning and strategies will be adapted to it IMO, but who knows.

Maybe this really just comes down to humanity's resistance to change.

This isn't a FPS game it is a fighting game. But if camping really is as efficient and as much of a problem as people are saying then I'd probably say there's no reason not to relate it to one.

Ok so now on to my comparison of brawl and melee.
There is one big reason why brawl is a disappointment and I don't know if anyone has addressed it yet. The reason brawl is a disappointment (to melee competitive level players) is because it is actually the complete opposite of melee.

Don't even look at some of the common points made like the fact that there is no comboing potential, no hit stun, everything is slower, it is a more defensive game, the removal of almost every advanced tech, etc. Think about the things such as gimp kills and stuff like that instead of people dying at below 70% due to gimps and whatever else, we have characters living until they grow old lol. Look at how in melee anything is punishable and it can punish them to death where as in brawl nothing is punishable and if it is, it typically won't be anything near death.

That right there is the reason why brawl is a disappointment. People say they didn't want/weren't expecting a melee 2.0, but no one wanted the complete opposite either. For all we know everything that was changed or removed or even added in brawl was intentionally done to make the game less competitive.

I found that this is the reason why i like both brawl and melee basically equally. It is because melee is everything brawl isn't and brawl is everything melee isn't it. That actually sounds like i was just trying to find another way to say they are 2 different games, but that is basically because i found that they are opposites.

There is one thing that I found that brings the two games a little closer together and it has been discussed before. Setting the gravity to heavy. The only character's recovery that it brutally ****s up is sonic's (but that may be just because I don't know how his neutral b works) and no one pitied yoshi and ness's crappy recovery in melee, so i don't think its necessary to pity sonic. It increases comboing potential by I'd say a lot, it still isn't melee not even close, but it isn't brawl either. It makes a lot of the aerials that were too high (even when u short hop) to hit an opponent on the ground a lot more usuable on ground opponents. Also I think it makes edge hogging easier The floatiness of brawl is the biggest thing that supports no hit stun to disallow combos.


If brawl does end up being proven horrible and unplayable (as in it is playable in a bad way) competitively then there is 2 things we can blame. One is sakurai who now i refuse to believe is a human being lol.. And 2 the Wii... Yah the Wii because some of the things that were simplified or removed from the game (even sakurai admitted) were due to the game's ability to have like 4 different controllers. If this was released on the gamecube (which only has the gc controller) it would have been way more likely for the game to be made more complicated.

 

[Gamerjoe]

Well, I asked Gimpy earlier in this thread about his thoughts on any redeeming values Brawl may have, but I would like if anyone with a professional’s perspective could comment too. I cannot argue that the elements that changed are for better or for worse, as I have not had the level of experience of a tournament player. Is there however, any positive elements in Brawl, in terms of competition? Would a pro Melee to Brawl player be able to find any way to cultivate competitive game play in Brawl?

Also, do you Gimpy or Mookie feel that Brawl’s lifespan will be short as a tournament game, or that Melee will eventually take over again, or that they will coexist (Melee and Brawl tournaments simultaneously)? I know you can’t read the future, but just curious about your opinion.

 

[brandutt845]

This is an opinion and blind hope; there is no reason to believe more time will lead to new techniques. You really think Sakurai buried some crazy techniques when he's explicitly stated he does not want anything complicated in this game or anything that would give a skilled player an advantage? Be serious...

Oh please. We all know that that's impossible. Sakurai can't do a THING about that. Look at the techs people are 'trying' to bury out now. I just don't understand this backwards progression. How is that even possible?

 

[Jack Kieser]

All I'm curious about is why its so hard to create a new standard to judge Brawl by? I'm probably not going to explain this right because this is a msg board (my forte is spoken word), but I'll try my best.

When Melee came out, people were trying to judge it by SSB64's standards of gameplay; in retrospect, we see that as a mistake. Eventually, a new standard for 'what Smash is' was created, and we began to judge Melee by that standard; this is the standard that said technical skill (combos, knowledge of techs, speedy play, etc.) was of utmost importance. Everything that developed from Melee, every tech, skill, strategy, combo, everything new, was judged by how quick, technical, and 'combo-able' it was. That is why everything used in Melee tournament play now works so well: because it either lives or dies by whether it fits the Melee standard of play.

But now we have Brawl, a game with a much different mode of play. Things are slower, combos have lost some of their power (Lucario still loves them, though), and technical skill has taken a backseat to mental prowess. However, with every new development in Brawl (limited in number they may be), we take out Melee's measuring rod in order to determine viability.

This is wrong. It was wrong during the SSB64>Melee transition, and its wrong in the Melee>Brawl transition.

OF COURSE Brawl is a bad game when we're using Melee's measuring rod; the games are opposites. That's the expected logical outcome. But, why is it so difficult to create a new measuring rod with Brawl in mind, and not Melee? Emphasize low % hits, aerial game, godly (comparatively) prediction skills... just as long as it works for Brawl. We really DO need to stop comparing the two games as though we're going to get a logical and realistic outcome, because they are logical opposites of each other!

This is to everyone, not just people like Mookie and Gimpyfish. Stop treating Brawl like it should be anything like Melee. I'm not saying excuse its shortcomings entirely, but ****it, at least try to look at it as if our standards have changed; in all technicality, they should have by now.

 

[Lei]

I agree with ControlFreak and Jack Kieser's most recent posts in this thread.

 

[Fletch]

Oh please. We all know that that's impossible. Sakurai can't do a THING about that. Look at the techs people are 'trying' to bury out now. I just don't understand this backwards progression. How is that even possible?

Backwards progression is possible when you remove everything from the previous installment of a series that made the game competitive, challenging, and fun. Sakurai had much more time with this game, and everyone knows he did his best to ensure that nothing that requires skill gets into this game. I mean, look at just the transition from the demo to the final product. The demo had some interesting little bits to it (i.e. another form of l-canceling, peach had float cancel, lots of others) that were simply removed because they were discovered then and probably removed because they were deemed as requiring skill. People are also tearing this game right now by the thousands, and thus far, nothing promising has been discovered in the way of new techniques. We can hope, but do not claim that there are going to be new techniques simply because you have blind faith in Brawl.

 

[User33]

Threads like this are the reason why every other board in existance laughs at this one.

 

[MookieRah]

Threads like this are the reason why every other board in existance laughs at this one.

I'm sure it is. Meanwhile, all of the best competitive players are on these boards too. So maybe they should realize that we *might* know what we are talking about?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Backwards progression is possible when you remove everything from the previous installment of a series that made the game competitive, challenging, and fun. Sakurai had much more time with this game, and everyone knows he did his best to ensure that nothing that requires skill gets into this game. I mean, look at just the transition from the demo to the final product. The demo had some interesting little bits to it (i.e. another form of l-canceling, peach had float cancel, lots of others) that were simply removed because they were discovered then and probably removed because they were deemed as requiring skill. People are also tearing this game right now by the thousands, and thus far, nothing promising has been discovered in the way of new techniques. We can hope, but do not claim that there are going to be new techniques simply because you have blind faith in Brawl.

You know why posts like these disgust me? Because the poster, in order to truly believe what he's saying, has to really believe that Sakurai and Co. had some kind of vindictive hatred for the competitive community. I'd put 10$, right now, on the bet that anything found in the E4All demo was taken out not because it 'required skill'... but because it was unintentional.

That's it.

There's no reason to think that Sak and Co. sat there and thought, 'You know, I bet those a**holes at smashboards would love this. Let's take it out!' That's you being bitter. The fact of the matter is that we had NO REASON to assume that Brawl would be anything like Melee. We made assumptions that Brawl had to emphasize combos, technical skill, and speed, assumptions that were unfounded. We assumed that the E4All demo would be exactly like the final product, assumptions that were, frankly, stupid. (It's a demo; why would we think that?) We brought this disappointment upon ourselves, and now we need to fix the problem we made for ourselves by disregarding all of our previous notions about what is 'competitive Smash' when we discuss Brawl.

Melee has its competitive standard. It's time we make a new one for Brawl and only Brawl.

 

[Nightmare KoRn Kid]

As a really ****ing campy and gay player, I know that the competitive level will PROBABLY progress from crazy hard core combos to bhro0ken (the best way to spell it, by the way) combos, and intercepting.

I don't think you'll see people getting gimped as often, but I think you'll see a lot of people using long range characters like Ike, and Marth, and using porjectile spammers like Olimar, and toon link...

It's not going to ELIMINATE combos, it's going to make it so combos are improvised.

It's going to be like... You've got to Bruce Lee the ****.

I don't think it'll ruin competitive play, or eliminate combos, but there will be a lot of camping and playing gay, making competive players stress approach a lot more, to get past the camping.

Like Azen's strategy of ****ing hitting you in the face with a sword that's like ten feet long... and two-three stocking you.

 

[MuBa]

I guess people just don't like cheap, n00bish camping/defensive style to be the dominant form of gameplay at a competitive point of view. Some might just find it boring and uninspirational to even try to get better at the game.

But as for my 2 cents about this topic; let's just wait for a little more while, we just might find some interesting exploitations that'll make the game more desirable in the competitive point of view.

 

[MookieRah]

Because the poster, in order to truly believe what he's saying, has to really believe that Sakurai and Co. had some kind of vindictive hatred for the competitive community. I'd put 10$, right now, on the bet that anything found in the E4All demo was taken out not because it 'required skill'... but because it was unintentional.

We have quotes from Sakurai that he intentionally made the game so that the results were randomized as much as possible. This was done so that lesser players could still win. This is not conductive to competitive play, in fact it is the exact opposite. I don't think Sakurai "hates" competitive play, but regardless, his goal with Brawl (and Melee) was to make a party game with no real competitive backing.

 

[Tofu Beast]

i'm glad that there are a lot of intelligent posts on this thread.......

 

[Drunken_Dragon]

that would all fine and good if offense and defense were some switch that you enabled in your brain dictating what you were presently trying to accomplish. it dosent work like that. there is no "non-active" turtleing, there are safe options and there arent. dispite common misconceptions, youre not only limited by your opponent but by your own tools as well. its about using those as effectivly as possible within those confines to win.

even if i agreed with you saying defensive options are so much more easy than offensive options, that dosent make the game boring or broken, there are lots of games as such.


it can be boring in your opinion.. but the number 1 complaint i hear about competative play is it being boring.

its apples to oranges, there is no right or wrong, just opinion.


edit: sakurai's intentions do NOT matter.

double edit: excuse typos , just got off work.

 

[Jack Kieser]

We have quotes from Sakurai that he intentionally made the game so that the results were randomized as much as possible. This was done so that lesser players could still win. This is not conductive to competitive play, in fact it is the exact opposite. I don't think Sakurai "hates" competitive play, but regardless, his goal with Brawl (and Melee) was to make a party game with no real competitive backing.

Though that may be the case, there are plenty of skillful things that a total n00b couldn't do without having to practice, things that have nothing to do with 'luck'. Tell me how a perfect shield drop has elements of luck. How about a reversed Falcon Punch? I still can't get the timing for that right.

The fact of the matter is that people really think that Sakurai consciously (key word) took things out of Brawl just to spite us (no other reason). People really think that! Mookie... you can't possibly believe that those devs did anything in Brawl just to piss you off.