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

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

Brawl's Not a Competitive Fighter

Waynebruce

Smash Cadet
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
56
Whatever fighting game you're playing, you'll inevitably argue that yours is the best. You just can't bring "facts" to the table, because in the end it all comes down to personal preferences.
I agree and disagree. Of course you personal prefernce IS your personal prference, bu I (and everybody else) see a bigger difference between Smash and SF than between MK and SF.
"Ok Wayne. but what you meant with that?" I mean, smash is different. **** i g2g.

Just take a look on the stages or match-up guides. i have so many things to say and so little time. i could say it later. now i g2g
 

Dsull

Smash Ace
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
536
Location
Nebraska
3DS FC
5301-0115-2290
i think the main reason this game seems more popular and widely used than the other fighter games for competitive use is you dont die by being punched so many times, you die by falling off or being thrown off, meaning theres a little more randomness to each fight and/or skill.

When youre at low damage getting thrown off in 1 hit is the last thing on your mind, but i've seen it happen at 30% because of a fail recovery or insanely good timing with aerial attacks. At the same time, ive seen people (or cpus) last up to **** near 300% because they got **** lucky at not going QUITE far enough. Nothing more irritating than dying to someone that was at 150% or so when you just freshly spawned. Even tho i'd say 7/10 times that happens its because youre trying so hard to land that final smash attack you get sidetracked and fall for a trick, its still a very important factor other games dont have.
 

SmashChu

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Jul 14, 2003
Messages
5,924
Location
Tampa FL
i think the main reason this game seems more popular and widely used than the other fighter games for competitive use is you dont die by being punched so many times, you die by falling off or being thrown off, meaning theres a little more randomness to each fight and/or skill.
No, Smash actually is rather small as a competitive game.
 

RedrappeR

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
294
...or so the nutsacks who deem themselves "fighting game purists/buffs/*homo name*" say. I'm not too sure about everyone here, but, loving Smash and the community as much as I do, it makes me want to throttle some *****es when something like that is so callously claimed. Smash Bros. pioneered into a completely different dimension of game, but retained the fundaments of fighting games. Problem is, that the archetype runs so deep, that people often refuse to acknowledge Brawl as a legitimate, complex fighting game. For a while now I've wanted to take an in-depth look into what makes Smash Bros. so unique amongst other fighters. What makes it the game we've all come to love and value over all the other competition. My goal today is to analyze the facets that make Smash Bros. Smash Bros., and what makes every other fighting game a Street Fighter/Tekken clone by comparison. Hopefully I can articulate well enough that this may be the "go-to" post if you ever want to suckerpunch someone in the shame gland for talking out of their *****.

Let's see what we'll be covering:

A) Archetypes of fighting games
B) What Smash brings to the table
C) Why Smash is, holistically, just as (if not more so) competitive and legit a fighter than any other on the market

ARCHETYPES OF FIGHTING GAMES

As we all know, being the fighting game fans we are (most of us anyway) fighting games come in all shapes and sizes; not a single one is the same in many respects. We have Street Fighter, Guilty Gear, Tekken, Soul Calibur, Mortal Kombat, etc. Each game offers its own unique flavor to the fighting game archetype. But therein lies the problem. Each one simply tweaks and builds on the archetype; they never actually change it or add a new dimension to it. With this in mind, let's look at some of the general facets of these fighting games.

Let's start off with the primary objective in most fighters. Each opponent is given a health bar, and you have to find a way to deplete your opponent's before they deplete yours. Once you hit the opponent enough, they die and you win. Pretty vanilla. Now let's look at variables that can affect this or make it more interesting. There are none. It comes down to simply putting out more force. Due to restrictions such as being grounded, and not moving very fast, this removes a major could-be facet from the fray of most fighting games. It comes down to working in a little box in close quarters. A Judo match would be a good analogy. This brings up a few more points.

Stages. The stages in most fighters change almost none, with the exception of minor stage hazards. In Soul Calibur we have ring-outs, which are the gayest thing God ever put on this earth. In DoA we have the occasional electric fence that you can wall combo someone on to death with Jan Lee. Again, nothing too special; nothing that forces the players to adapt and cope. Lastly, we take a look at unique characters. The one thing that arguably ties fightings games together in the most meaningful way, is how the characters operate. The only thing separating most of these games though, is not how unique the characters are, rather, what system the characters fight with.

A direct-counter system like Soul Calibur. A pressure system like Street Fighter. A combo-heavy system like Mortal Kombat. A juggle system like Tekken. But what is always kept the same, is the similarities that tie each character together. Every character has a basic set of moves that don't deviate from one another: punch and kick variations (such as high/low kick, strong/weak punch, etc.) with a character specific special move set. Ryu and Ken's Hadouken, Cyrax's cyber net and detonators, etc. Most of the time, speed is not applicable, due to a confined setting. These are just a few of many character unique traits that are absent from a lot of fighters.

All that said, let's recapitulate in an abridged version. Fighting games as we know them adhere to a strict pattern. Differences between characters usually go only as far as special moves, and similar moves with slightly different functions. The dimensions of the game remain confined to close-quarters fisticuffs, which automatically alleviates potential dimensions. It does, ultimately, boil down to outputting more force than your opponent.

The general fighting game archetype has been tweaked here and there, but it has almost never changed. You are confined to an unremarkable arena, in which you're forced to strongarm your opponent in close range. There are just, plain and simply, a lot of restrictions, especially in movement and freedom. Trademarks include what I like to call "dial-a-combo", in which a button sequence results in a combo. Oftentimes, a combo's intended implementation is unrealistic to execute, but its pseudo-complexity belies its unrealistic nature. Killer Instinct Gold is a good example. Fulgore had at least 50 auto-doubles, and 100 combos, but none but one were ever used. Why? Because it was the strongest, and covered the most bases. In other words, just because a game like Soul Calibur has 8,000 different combinations, does not mean it is complex, despite it giving that illusion. If you ever watch an SCIV match, you'll see Hilde trying to do her auto-ring-out and a Yoshimitsu trying to spam her to death.

Overall, some fighters have a lot to offer. But the reality is that many of them are one-in-the-same in many regards. Each one operates on a rock-paper-scissors system, and that system alone. Each one only modifying the archetype slightly.

WHAT MAKES SMASH UNIQUE

Now for the interesting part. As we discussed before, almost every fighter out there gives its own flavor of ice cream, but that's the problem: they're all still ice cream. With Smash, it takes the general concept of implementing an arsenal of moves to defeat your opponent, but removes the restrictions of the fighting game archetype. Let's explore a bit what these restrictions are, and how Smash transcends them to add a whole new level of gameplay.

Let's just make a quick list of unique traits that Smash possesses above other fighters. Forgive me if I miss a few.

-Unique stages
-Completely unique characters
-Counterpicks
-Range and priority playing a huge role due to unique character traits
-Survival and recovery
-Free-roam
-Creativity methodologies
-DI
-Tier Lists

Now, time to delve into each facet.

Unique stages: As previously mentioned, most fighters have different stages for the sole purpose of scenery change, with an occasional gimmick. Smash flips this concept upside-down. Smash is the foremost game in its league/genre to allow the stage to play a pivotal role in your victory. Having the mobility and freedom to run, jump and everything in between allows for some creative implementations. Stages that cater to different character's latent abilities. Norfair being great for Ganon because it makes his otherwise inadequate recovery, adequate. Final Destination being the Diddy brothel (because if he picks it, that means you didn't ban it, so the "****" was consensual, so you're not a victim, you're just his ***** now) thanks to there being no way to effectively cirumvent the bananas strewn about the expanse of the stage. This all makes it so each character has to adapt a strategy to that stage, and work use his/her resources to the best of his/her ability.

Unique characters: In most fighters I've ever seen, as mentioned in the previous section, characters differ, but how much? Minor differences do exist, such as a different animation for the same class of move, but they're often too negligible to notice. Smash, again, takes the core concept to the next level by giving the characters differing, well, everything. No single character has a single similar trait aside from clones. Ike is, by all means, the antithesis of Fox. Ike's move implementations are completely alien to what Fox's are. The only similarity is the general direction in which each attack goes. Same goes for every character. These differences include weight class, KO moves, trajectories, framerates, planes, gravitation (falling speed, etc.), size, hitboxes, range, etc. I could go on for hours. The characters are fettered by models only in the sense that they have the same amount of moves and each move corresponds with the direction which is pushed, i.e. forward = fair.

By and large, Smash is Smash primarily due to the vast uniqueness of each and every character. This makes it so a player has to adapt to not only a playstyle, but the character accompanied by it as well. Each one necessitates a new way of thinking and playing. Due to the variables given by the stages and other characters, every match-up is infinitely different and each move interaction has to be known, adding quite a lot of depth to the equation.

Counterpicks: Smash is probably the only fighter in the world that has such a vivid counterpick system. Due to each character transcending uniformity, and every mode of attack being available through any given character, a system consequently arises that feeds one character's strength and the other's weakness in a large way. Sure, there are other fighters with counterpick systems, no doubt, but due to aforementioned reasons, I find it difficult to believe as they're... shall we say "intimate". What I mean by intimate is that each character interacts on the minutest of levels, whereas in many other fighters, counterpicks are based more on countering styles from my experience.

Precision: Hitboxes in Smash come in all shapes and sizes. Their knockback power no different. What these unique hitboxes and priorities create is a rock-paper-scissors system for each move. It adds the dimension of precision and prediction and vivifies them. If your opponent is above you, and his dair ***** your uair, then you find a way around it, or use a less conventional move by being creative.

Survival and Recovery: Yet another big'n. This is probably the second most important dimension of Smash gameplay. What this concept of survival and recovery does, is it makes you and your opponent work for your kills. No longer will simply overpowering your opponent suffice. You will need to think, predict and act quickly to successfully kill your opponent. Beautiful thing is, that thanks to no boxed-in confines, if you're near death, you can implement a strong defensive game. You have to find a way to both survive, and concurrently catch your opponent in a vulnerable state to kill them instead of just spamming hadoukens while the other guy hides in the corner crouch-blocking. It also adds a great deal of longevity to matches.

Free-roam: I've mentioned this many times already, but I don't believe I've given a full explanation as to why it's so terrific. What makes your freedom in Smash Bros. so wonderful is the fact that it opens up for new types of gameplay. Camping, defense, offense, etc. It alleviates strict close-quarters combat, allows for more mindgames such as baiting and punishing and necessitates precision. Not being held captive in a small, boxey arena means more room to make a comeback, more strategical implementations and an endless myriad of other things. In general, it is the gateway for several other facets to be mentioned.

Creative Methodologies: Again, hearkening back to the uniqueness of each character's moves, Smash allows for something most games do not: attacking out of context, if you will. What I mean by this is since you are granted such freedom of movement, an attack that would normally not be used in a certain context can be used to catch an opponent off-guard. A good, yet simple example is Ganon's fair. Most good Ganon users won't attack with it as it's "intended", which is when facing the opponent. Instead, they will jump behind them, shattering the opponent's expectations, which means they drop their shield and eat fair from behind. Most other fighters, you don't need to anticipate anything other than a high/low/grab attack, since most combat is about-face and full-frontal.

The reality is that in a lot of fighters, since you are fully-frontal, you can't really catch someone off guard with much but cross-ups. "Attacking out of context" isn't really an option, since you're always facing forward and have no stage exploits at your disposal.

DI: An entirely new idea added to fighting games. DI, or, directional influence. DI, as most of you know, is a method in which you can manipulate where you are sent after an attack by using the control or c-stick. What this offers is more depth to the prediction system, in which you must predict your opponent's DI and react accordingly.

Tier Lists: Ever wondered why tier lists are such a big deal? It's because along with Smash's unique gameplay, a unique imbalance gets mixed in. Sure, other games have tier lists, but Smash's is different I believe. I've never seen an entire community get hyped up and get into 10,000+ reply debates on why a character shouldn't be where he/she is in relation to another character. What makes Smash so incredibly fun is overcoming obstacles. Finding ways to circumvent hindrances and use everything in your ability to emerge the victor despite unfavorable odds.

Simply put, there is an endless network of intra-character relations whose significance in the difference between winning and losing is paramount. Most other fighters do have tier lists and character discrepancies, but they lack the intimate relationship that Smash characters do with the rest of the cast. As stated earlier Smash's quirky gameplay allows for multifaceted combat, which in turn, allows for deeper character analysis.

SMASH IS ****ING LEGIT

Hopefully by now you've gotten the picture that Smash is a little more complex than people like to give credit. Unfortunately, a lot of what has caused the disrespect for the Smash community and game in general is the ill-perceived notion that it's strictly a party game due to its less "abrasive" presentation, and the ostensible simplicity of button pressings. What Smash trades this memory-oriented scheme for is the need for precision and timing. Smash Bros. has always retained the fundaments of every great fighting game, but ousted old archetypes and presented new, improved concepts that dilutes some aspects, but adds plenty more to even the playing field out.

Sure, Smash has its share of shortcomings. Things that would be considered degenerative to competitive play. Brawl for instance has things like planking. But the fact of the matter is that this doesn't subtract from the overall Smash gameplay, both as a fighter and as a competitive game. While it is also true that Smash brings only a few truly new ideas to the mix, those ideas form most of what comprises Smash, mixed with old models given a new twist.

If you ask me, being a fighting game fan since day one, Smash is probably the most complex, multi-faceted and brilliant fighter of all time. If not by gameplay alone, in its analysis, community and staying power. ****, I don't know of any game in ****ing history that lasted 8+ years with a strong competitive scene like Melee. Notice the word "strong". That means that just because a few people still played SFIII for a decade doesn't mean it had a strong competitive scene.

The intricacies and vectors of Smash I do not think were intentional. I do not think Sakurai was sitting with his hug-box thinking of some incomprehensible system on which his new fighter would work. But **** it all, whatever HAL lab and Nintendo collectively thought of conglomerated to make one of the most prolific and unique fighting games to ever hit shelves. It's just a crying shame how many people take Smash at face value, and fail to recognize the potentialities that lie in it through its unique characteristics. Wanna know how other game's match-ups work?

"So, uh, hey, how Cyrax beat a Human Smoke?"

"Just block his teleport punch and punish him. Don't use detonators 'cause he'll t.punch you and be out of range of them."

How Smash match-ups work:

http://www.smashboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=118

I see a difference, believe it or not.

So, in closing, I hope I was able to enlighten a few people as to why Smash is the amazing game it is. Why it is no less a veteran to the fighting game world than its archetypal counterparts. Why it has such incredible staying power, and why it is, whether you like to admit it or not, one of the most ****ing legit competitive games ever made.
HAHAHAHAHAHA

okay. Let's get something out of the way. People at SRK and other communities who hate Smash-- aren't really payed attention to. Either that, or they aren't that adamant about it. Jwong doesn't like smash at all, but he doesn't go around everywhere proclaiming how it's terrible and that all the players should go f uck themselves. So let's get that out of the way.

Secondly... you're an idiot. the worst possible way for you to qualify your fighter is to trash Street Fighter. 9/10 times you're just going to make things worse. Just a few people play SFIII? yeah, okay. It's not like it was the main attraction next to marvel at almost every major fighting game tournament until SFIV rolled out, and that it's competitive scene is still quite large due to the fact that a LOT-- and I mean a LOT of players still play that game at arcades.

You do understand that a good portion of every coast still has a HUGE SFIII scene. Did you also know that after NCR, CvS2 is making a comeback?

Saying street fighter has not had a "Strong" competitive scene is just ******** in general. Do you understand how many people enter ST tournaments every year? Or even ****ing 3s tournaments? ST is old as hell. It's been around since the 80's and it still gets billing at EVO.

3s is still a part of SBO. Google that if you have no idea what I'm talking about.

Oh and Matchups? You're an idiot.

Ryu is 2nd from the top of the tier lists in SFIV. His matchup against Abel, people give you **** like... "Hey, throw him out of his roll. His wheel kick from up close is punishable by sweep. and you can SRK him out of combos." What DIP**** in their RIGHT MIND is going to WHEEL KICK YOU FROM UP CLOSE WHEN HE KNOWS YOU CAN SWEEP HIM! It's about MIXING IT UP! OutPLAYING your opponent.

Most of the matchup tips for Ryu against dictator consist off "Hey, neutral jump fierce to break his headstomp." THOSE PEOPLE ARE ****ING IDIOTS! BECAUSE ONLY A BRAIN DEAD BISON PLAYER IS GOING TO HEADSTOMP YOU WITHOUT PLAYING GROUND GAME!

The Matchups for EACH character are FAR more complicated than you posted. People give those snips because they are trying to stop you from falling for obvious ****. Crouching Strong beats a good deal of what Rufus has, but a good Rufus isn't going to just fall for it. He's going to mix it up and use **** that BEATS your crouching fierce. So you have to not only time your **** correctly, but READ what your opponent is going to do... KNOW what kind of tricks Rufus likes to pull, and capitalize.

And on top of everything else, you posted...

"
The reality is that in a lot of fighters, since you are fully-frontal, you can't really catch someone off guard with much but cross-ups. "Attacking out of context" isn't really an option, since you're always facing forward and have no stage exploits at your disposal."

Part of me just wants to sit back and let what you just said sink into you, but since you posted it, you obviously don't recognize the innate stupidity of it. So CROSSUPS DON'T really work in fighting games, right? I mean, it's not like RUFUS' CROSSUP SHENANIGANS, and Zangiefs ENTIRE F UCKING GAME really work, amirite? I mean it's not like CROSSUP TATSU is every really viable, right? Oh I'm sorry, we don't have STAGE EXPLOITS. Maybe if we had those, they'd be viable? right?

Then you go onto claim how your counter picking system works. Yes, you have a counter picking system. That's great. Hey, guess what... ALMOST EVERY OTHER ****ING FIGHTING GAME IN THE WORLD HAS THE SAME THING! EXACTLY how you described it. If I pick Ryu, anybody can pick Balrog, Sagat, Akuma or Abel and almost entirely shut down one MAJOR part of my game. In HDR, Zangief, who is BOTTOM *** TIER, a man with a 1-9 Matchup... has a 6-4 matchup against balrog... the HIGHEST TIERED CHARACTER on the list. Hell, the ENTIRE EVO 2009 FINALS WAS BASED ON A COUNTER PICK!


You also say "Oh smash has Unique characters. I mean, some character in other fighting games are too similar." Motherf ucker... do you even know what the differences between Ryu and ken are? They aren't even minor, they're impossibly different. Ken can't even play the fireball game for the most part. Do you even know the differences between Ryu and Akuma? If you're stupid enough to even think they're similar, you're out of your ****ING MIND. They aren't even played REMOTELY the same.

Your entire POST is idiotic.



I played brawl when it came out, and part of the reason I left was stupid *** posts like this. This is what makes this community seem less legit than any other community out there. And it does. You are the equivalent of GameFaqs with better graphics when you post this tripe. I come here every so often to see if the game has evolved, and for every intelligent post I see, I see one stupid post that just signifies why I left in the first place.

Smash is a competitive game, because it takes skill, and a level of outplaying your opponent in order to win. The way you do this differs largely, but the tennants of fighting games are still in tact here. That does NOT MEAN they are UNIQUE to only YOUR GAME and that you can go around talking **** on the grandaddy of the entire ****ing fighting genre and start calling it not as "popular" or as competetive as smash. Not because it's your opinion, because it's not true. When you start getting bigger tournaments than evo, then yes, your game will be bigger, and everyone in the world would be more than happy to agree with you. Hell, I love HDR, but I feel Vanilla Turbo is more balanced and other players disagree. But honestly, don't give me this **** about how our games aren't nearly as good as yours(and notice I never said that about Smash. I think it's just as important of a game as any... just that it's scene isn't nearly as big as SF's.), because thats not only misinformed, it's egotistical and stupid.

These topics are a dime a dozen in this place. Please Grow up.
/endrant
 

RedrappeR

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
294
Did somebody call Street Fighter fast? Go watch a Street fighter 4 tournament, just as if not more defensive and slow as Brawl.
Buddy, you play Viper. How the **** are matches slow for you? RTSD! Have you ever watched Combofiend or Valle play? Or even Daigo? Imo, when I played 3s, It seemed much more defensive. I got a lot more mileage from turtling in that game then I ever did in SF4.
 

BEES

Smash Lord
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
1,051
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
-Unique stages
-Completely unique characters
-Counterpicks
-Range and priority playing a huge role due to unique character traits
-Survival and recovery
-Free-roam
-Creativity methodologies
-DI
-Tier Lists
I crossed out the things that are in other fighting games. I've played Guilty Gear and Soul Calibur enough to say that tier lists matter in other games just as much. The same arguments occur. The same metagame evolutions occur. Counterpicks are just as important. That's not unique to our game.

-Remember, characters in other fighters typically have more specials. The diversity that characters have in Smash Bros is actually not that great.

-Typically there are 2-3 good aerials, 1-2 good tilts, 1-2 good specials, 1 good throw, and smashes are thrown in very conditionally.

-The gravity and recovery differences force you to think very differently between characters in ways you would not in other games. That's it though. Range and speed differences are typical for any fighter.

The creativity in other games comes from a greater variety of useful combo and approach moves, and the energy system, which allows you to play differently throughout the fight. Smash Bros does have an element of improvisation that other fighting games don't quite have as much of.

If I had to rank the depth in Smash Bros up to other games... I'm not sure I could. It's deep in a different way.

I think Melee is actually borderline between a competitive game and a competitive sport. The technical requirements in Melee are greater than any other game I know of. The blending of physical skills, muscle memory, reaction timing, strict precision, with the strategical depth in the game just seems reminiscent of something like table-tennis, foosball, or billiards, where a similar blending of game and sport elements exists. And don't knock those sports. They're quite deep at a competitive level. They don't require much physical strength, but they do demand highly specialized, acquired muscle memory. The techniques in them are eerily reminiscent of the tech skills you would learn in Melee.

Brawl eliminates the technical depth of Melee, which is alright. It's not necessary for a competitive fighting game. It also reduces the depth associated with combo improvisation, recoveries, and approaching, which is problematic if you're going to have a competitive fighter. There is still enough there for a competitive game. I don't consider it particularly enjoyable, but that's a matter of taste. It does improve on character diversity quite a bit, and there's something to be said for that.

64 is a better example of a game with much lower technical requirements, but closer in terms of strategic depth to Melee, since the combo game and the recovery game are similar. Of course character diversity is a joke in that game compared to Brawl.
 

Kitamerby

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
5,729
Location
Las Vegas
Explain, please.
Yanno how we're always happy if a top stream reaches 500 views?

EVO '09 topped 36,000 viewers on the stream, + a few hundred people in the venue. :\

Smash is the most popular fighting game series by far in terms of sold copies, but the competitive scene is actually VERY small in comparison. Remember that 90% of people that own the Smash games are casual players who just play for fun/with friends/on weekends or something, and probably leave the game stuffed next to their copy of Super Mario Galaxy or Mario Party Wii for a majority of the time.
 

XxMurderingQu33nXx

Smash Rookie
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
4
Location
Minnesota, USA
Im just going to put this out there. If you think your going to get a full fighting experience from Brawl then think again, sure its a fighting game but not your TRUE fighting game and no its not a traditional fighting game either. Also I do not think they shouldve have made teir's on the game beacuse it only causes issues and I really dont think many charecters are much stronger than others besides, Snake, and maybe Marth, i think it all depends on if your even good at going against the certain charecter or not instead of making up teirs to back up your lack of skill or should I say experience against the charecter whenever you lose against them..k so im probably going to get flammed for all this but watever. Brawl just doesnt seem like the kind of fighing game to be adding teirs and all to it, sometimes it just frustrates me i guess i could say this is all IMO but Ill ask people just to take it to mind. I play Virtua Fighter 5 one of the most complex fighting games out there and Brawl one of the least complex fighting games out there and trust me guys they dont compare..or should I say Brawl doesnt live up to what a true fighing game is. So ahem lets all stop fighting over the teirs of the charecters, and all the moves people make beacuse if it was Virtua Fighter, Tekken, or ven SF, wed all be screwed if all we had was Brawl experience.
 

Vermanubis

King of Evil
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
3,399
Location
La Grande, Oregon
NNID
Vermanubis
3DS FC
1564-2185-4386
I came back here for the lulz and I must say that I am astounded at the sheer volume of people who did not bother to read the post and instead read the title. Considering I avidly proposed Brawl and Smash in general as an exceptional series competitively, why people are arguing the same point I made against a stance I didn't take.

Seriously, people. Learn to read the thread. I put a good three hours into thinking this up and articulating it. It'd be nice if people didn't just ignore it.

Also, hey, Gangstakirby. Haven't seen you since you last made an idiot of yourself. Glad to see you've improv-- o wait.

As I said to others, I say to you: learn to read. Taking the time to read it will result in far less embarrassment.
 

Vermanubis

King of Evil
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
3,399
Location
La Grande, Oregon
NNID
Vermanubis
3DS FC
1564-2185-4386
I crossed out the things that are in other fighting games. I've played Guilty Gear and Soul Calibur enough to say that tier lists matter in other games just as much. The same arguments occur. The same metagame evolutions occur. Counterpicks are just as important. That's not unique to our game.

-Remember, characters in other fighters typically have more specials. The diversity that characters have in Smash Bros is actually not that great.

-Typically there are 2-3 good aerials, 1-2 good tilts, 1-2 good specials, 1 good throw, and smashes are thrown in very conditionally.

-The gravity and recovery differences force you to think very differently between characters in ways you would not in other games. That's it though. Range and speed differences are typical for any fighter.

The creativity in other games comes from a greater variety of useful combo and approach moves, and the energy system, which allows you to play differently throughout the fight. Smash Bros does have an element of improvisation that other fighting games don't quite have as much of.

If I had to rank the depth in Smash Bros up to other games... I'm not sure I could. It's deep in a different way.

I think Melee is actually borderline between a competitive game and a competitive sport. The technical requirements in Melee are greater than any other game I know of. The blending of physical skills, muscle memory, reaction timing, strict precision, with the strategical depth in the game just seems reminiscent of something like table-tennis, foosball, or billiards, where a similar blending of game and sport elements exists. And don't knock those sports. They're quite deep at a competitive level. They don't require much physical strength, but they do demand highly specialized, acquired muscle memory. The techniques in them are eerily reminiscent of the tech skills you would learn in Melee.

Brawl eliminates the technical depth of Melee, which is alright. It's not necessary for a competitive fighting game. It also reduces the depth associated with combo improvisation, recoveries, and approaching, which is problematic if you're going to have a competitive fighter. There is still enough there for a competitive game. I don't consider it particularly enjoyable, but that's a matter of taste. It does improve on character diversity quite a bit, and there's something to be said for that.

64 is a better example of a game with much lower technical requirements, but closer in terms of strategic depth to Melee, since the combo game and the recovery game are similar. Of course character diversity is a joke in that game compared to Brawl.
You are not the first to assume I meant that each facet was completely unique and specific to Smash. We can argue 'til day's end about which has what, but my point was that Smash's respective facets that are unique magnify the other aspects and builds upon them.
 

Vermanubis

King of Evil
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
3,399
Location
La Grande, Oregon
NNID
Vermanubis
3DS FC
1564-2185-4386
But yeah, I'm going to have this locked. The volume of stupidity that pervades this thread is almost too much to bear. At least ten people now have completely misunderstood my meaning and raged because of it. The folks at All is Brawl didn't seem to have this much trouble and to my knowledge, All is Brawl is a less serious community.

I'll reconsider posting again sometime if I can figure out what not-so-blatant error I made to result in people thinking I was crapping on Street Fighter, saying that Smash is completely original and that the unique facets aren't unique, because every person can think up 1,000 semantic ways to refute any logic on either side.
 

masterbraz

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
155
Location
Medina, Ohio
Its simple really

1.Noncompetitive fighting games<
2.Low tier fighting games (competitive but not amazing) Brawl, ect.<
3.high tier fighting games (games with lots of depth) SF2, Melee, ect.


Both 2 and 3 can be played at high levels of play, but I feel level 3 games will certainly have a longer life span, and more respected by the majority. Games on each level are not necessarily equal, but close.

I think any arguments against the smash series as whole are ridiculous considering Melee and Brawl are 2 different games when it comes to competitive standards. Then there's 64, but i haven't read up on it/ played it enough to understand where it should be placed.
 
Top Bottom