BRING THE SMASH COMMUNITY TOGETHER

[El Duderino]

Have you considered that perhaps the community doesn't want to move on?

And that's the problem!

Is it really? It certainly hasn't been a problem for the overall Smash community growth and exposure. You get people passionate enough about a game and anything can happen from raising $90k for breast cancer research, topping streaming records at EVO, getting Nintendo to make one of the largest reversals in their history, and becoming the #1 story on all of Reddit. Melee even attracted some star power with Taylor Hicks.

I'm completely dumbfounded to see posters still insistent that the Melee's community is a problem. It's clearly an asset and one that potentially just helped saved future Smash tournament organizers from having to cancel events completely. (if you haven't heard Nintendo wasn't just trying to drop the streams, they wanted to shut down Melee's entire presence at EVO).

Realistically, for a 12 year old game, many of these players shouldn't even still be around. What exactly is it to Nintendo or the future Smash 4 scene if these adults stick to competing in the game they enjoy? Also, what's it to you? A few more forum posters that openly speak their mind isn't going to kill Smash 4 or any potential it has.

 

[nessokman]

Yep, someone from American idol matters....I don't even remember him winning, I still remember the first season if that says anything

 

[El Duderino]

Yep, someone from American idol who NOBODY has heard from since his season of idol matters.

Not really, it's just an example of the wide reach Melee had. Also this was a fighting game tournament, what do you expect. All my Marvel friends there were talking about it, haha.

 

[mimgrim]

I'm completely dumbfounded to see posters still insistent that the Melee's community is a problem. It's clearly an asset and one that potentially just helped saved future Smash tournament organizers from having to cancel events completely. (if you haven't heard Nintendo wasn't just trying to drop the streams, they wanted to shut down Melee's entire presence at EVO).

I just want to point out that with how fast the issue was resolved (if I'm not mistaken it didn't even last a full day? or was it a little bit longer then a full day? I forget lol) that it could have been 1 of 2 things.

A new legal person flubbering up and trying to get status to move up in his/her job.

Or a marketing stunt. You know the saying bad publicity is still publicity or there is no such thing as bad publicity, yea with all the coverage they got from the whole thing they might have potientally got new people getting Smash games and possibly even helped in Melee getting new viewers to. But at the same time by reversing the descision like they did it showed that they listen to the fans and even the competitive base. It kinda reminds me of the whole Xbone fiasco to an extent, that could have all been a marketing scheme of MS to show they listen to their fans.

Of course these are just theories, but plausible ones at least.

As for the whole Melee comunity being a problem or not thing... Nah they aren't, tough there are a select vocal few who keep on try to state as fact the Brawl is bad and doesn't have competitive success and all the jazz with the former being highley subjective and the latter being completly false but they are the minority and probably most of them are trolls at that, as the one people are complaining about seem to be in the minority of the Melee community while the majority seems to be more laid back about it. But I also don't expect the Brawl community to die as easily as some say o.o there are some out there who are into Brawl just as much as some are into Melee and they will probably keep the tournament scene alive for Brawl. Just like it is for Melee now and forever. Heck isn't the 64 competivie scene still around even? o.o

 

[El Duderino]

Nintendo should get some thanks for reversing their decision, but that's about the extent of it. The whole situation was hardly praise worthy. I don't really buy the idea that it came down to a handful of people in the legal department, but even if it did, the entire company is still accountable. Not to mention after the Let's Play incident, a decision like this would certainly need to pass through someone higher up.

A lot of the initial reactions seemed to think this was a sign that Nintendo supports to competitive scene. In reality it was quite the contrary, they just got out of our way. Anyways, I'm glad they corrected it. Lets hope this is the last time they make this mistake and refrain from say going after twitch revenues next.

 

[mimgrim]

Nintendo should get some thanks for reversing their decision, but that's about the extent of it. The whole situation was hardly praise worthy. I don't really buy the idea that it came down to a handful of people in the legal department, but even if it did, the entire company is still accountable. Not to mention after the Let's Play incident, a decision like this would certainly need to pass through someone higher up.

A lot of the initial reactions seemed to think this was a sign that Nintendo supports to competitive scene. In reality it was quite the contrary, they just got out of our way. Anyways, I'm glad they corrected it. Lets hope this is the last time they make this mistake and refrain from say going after twitch revenues next.

Hrmmm true I guess. But I still feel like with how fast it was reversed there was something else behind then just stopping it at EVO just cause they could. I mean from what I have seen these kinds of situations useually take more time to reverse. Personally I don't buy into the first theory I stated either but I have seen it thrown around quite a bit and it does seem to have a bit of plausibility to have happened but not allot. I personaly think it might have been the second theory, I mean honestly if Nintedo really wanted to stick to their guns it would have taken allot longer to reverse which is why I believe it might have just been a publicity stunt. But eh either way they actually helped promote Melee in the end whether it was intentional or not due to the publicity. xD

 

[[Corn]]

I dont understand the need to bash other communities at all when they are basically 2 different games. Hell, I dont even understand how you can call a game worse then another when they arent supposed to be amazingly similar in the first place besides concepts. You like Melee and dont like Brawl? Play Melee. You like Brawl and dont like Melee? Play Brawl. You like Brawl and Melee? Play both. But dont be an idiot and yell at the subjective differences between 2 products if the original project is still available to be played.

Another thing I will never understand is why people use speed as an argument. I dont give a damn about speed when I play games unless im in a hurry to do something. I play for fun and sport.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

You like Melee and dont like Brawl? Play Melee. You like Brawl and dont like Melee? Play Brawl. You like Brawl and Melee? Play both.

Agreed. People are always going to have preferences, but I'm pretty sure 99% of the community is actually pretty happy just to play Smash, whichever it is. These threads have a habit of bringing out the losers to force their loser opinions on amicable Smash lovers (you know who you are, don't try and defend yourselves, just stay in back and try not to embarrass the rest of us).

 

[DRM4R10]

that Melee's air dodge is better (which is ludicrous).

Great so now I'm an idiot for thinking that Melee's air dodge is better than Brawl. I personally think that you cannot think that it's idiotic to believe than Melee's air dodge is better than Brawl's and vice versa. There's something called preference you know.

 

[[Corn]]

Great so now I'm an idiot for thinking that Melee's air dodge is better than Brawl. I personally think that you cannot think that it's idiotic to believe than Melee's air dodge is better than Brawl's and vice versa. There's something called preference you know.

Its not that people think it is, its that people tend to state that it is.

This is the largest reason why the communities hate each other. Its like going into places that serve Coke and telling them that Pepsi is better even though noone cares cause they are obviously drinking the stuff.

 

[El Duderino]

Hrmmm true I guess. But I still feel like with how fast it was reversed there was something else behind then just stopping it at EVO just cause they could. I mean from what I have seen these kinds of situations useually take more time to reverse.

Two words, social media. That's what pushed Nintendo to make the 5 hour turnaround. Once again, it all comes back to the community.

 

[SmashChu]

Is it really?

Ummmmm, YEAH!

The community can't grow if Melee is the only thing they want to play. Melee came out in 2001 so it's about 12 years old. People will leave the community as life kicks in, and there will have to be a younger generation to replace them. The problem is these new people are not going to play a 12 year old game. They will play the new game. And that it where the problem lies. The community doesn't want to let the game go and will not except there could be another game. Its not even that the old guard will just play their game, but they will make sure to drag the new one though the mud as much as possible. So what happens when the new players come in to replace the ones that left? The old guard will tell them "SSB for Wii U is awful." They will make sure people have trouble playing the game competitively and, like Brawl, they will drag the game and it's players though the mud. They will discourage tournaments and try to prop up Melee as the one true game and the greatest thing to happen to Smash. Do you want to keep playing a game the community where people keep saying it's awful and sabotage it's success? No. Why deal with the drama and tomfoolery? See, there are plenty of other games to play and lots of competitive games too. Starcraft, the MOBAs and fighting games are generally more open to new ideas and have bigger tournaments and prize pools. You can play the new Street Fighter with no risk of being scorned and actual enjoy the game without others breathing down your neck about how your game is inferior to a 12 year old game. So it's a win/win for you. The Melee worship is not open to new players. New players wont see why it's so great and they don't care. They want to enjoy the new one. But the community wont let that me. How dare someone else like a game that's not Melee. Even worse, how could they DARE play a game that isn't Melee in a tournament. Don't they know it's not competitive and inferior to the glorious Melee.

A unified community is a healthy one. A unified community will be accepting to new games and players (because who cares how you play). Until the Melee worship dies, the community will not be able to move forward.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

Until the Melee worship dies, the community will not be able to move forward.

How do you define "move forward"? What does forward mean in this context? What is it you would prefer the community to do?

EDIT:

A unified community is a healthy one.

What is the basis for this statement? How do you respond to the statement "a diverse community is a healthy one?"

 

[BSP]

I'll give more extensive thoughts in a bit, but I don't have high hopes for "unity".

The difference with Street Fighter and Marvel is that their sequels are direct and complete improvements on the previous games. They take the best parts about them and add one or two new key features. They never do anything to drastically change the game at its core and alter its competitive value (ex: removal of l-cancelling, wavedashing, inclusion of tripping).

You're right. Sequels don't do that. Brawl is a successor, not a sequel. Same thing with SSBM to SSB.

I can't say what I would've thought if I had seen this earlier. I wasn't around SWF when this was made. Anyway, the only thing I don't like about this OP now is that it does something many other posts explaining the "problems" with brawl do, and that is calling X in Brawl bad/a failure by comparing it to Melee or 64, when Brawl wasn't even meant to be a sequel. It is a successor, not a sequel.

Sequel examples: Super Mario Bros -> SMB Lost Levels -> Super Mario Bros. 3 ; Super Mario Galaxy -> Super Mario Galaxy 2 ; Banjo Kazooie -> Banjo Tooie ; Sonic the Hedgehog -> Sonic the Hedgehog 2 -> Sonic 3 and Knuckles.

Sequels directly build off of the previously offered gameplay and or story. By putting a "2" or "3" in the title, the developer is implying that they're building right off of the previous game.

Successor Examples: Super Mario 64 -> Super Mario Sunshine -> Super Mario Galaxy (in the sense of 3D Mario title) ; SSB -> SSBM -> SSBB ; Mario Kart 64 -> Mario Kart Double Dash -> Mario Kart Wii (omitting handheld versions); Paper Mario -> Paper Mario TTYD -> Super Paper Mario -> Paper Mario Sticker Star

Successors usually keep the same general idea of gameplay, but they're at liberty to change mechanics of it. From SM64 -> Sunshine, you got Fludd. In galaxy, you're in space, no Fludd, and you're armed with your star spins and star bits, and you deal with different mechanics like gravity changes. MK64 = Only Karts. MK:DD = Teamwork. MKW = Bikes plus a new drifting mechanic. Super Paper Mario was much less of an RPG than the previous Paper Mario games.

There is a reason that Marvel goes like: MVC-> MVC2 -> MVC3; or SF-> SF2-> SF3-> etc. or however the SFs go. That "2" or "3" in the title implies exactly what you said in your post.

When that 2 or 3 isn't there though, anything is fair game. For example, look at what happened from Banjo-Tooie to Nuts and Bolts, or look at each Smash game.

 

[mimgrim]

Ummmmm, YEAH!

The community can't grow if Melee is the only thing they want to play. Melee came out in 2001 so it's about 12 years old. People will leave the community as life kicks in, and there will have to be a younger generation to replace them. The problem is these new people are not going to play a 12 year old game. They will play the new game. And that it where the problem lies. The community doesn't want to let the game go and will not except there could be another game. Its not even that the old guard will just play their game, but they will make sure to drag the new one though the mud as much as possible. So what happens when the new players come in to replace the ones that left? The old guard will tell them "SSB for Wii U is awful." They will make sure people have trouble playing the game competitively and, like Brawl, they will drag the game and it's players though the mud. They will discourage tournaments and try to prop up Melee as the one true game and the greatest thing to happen to Smash. Do you want to keep playing a game the community where people keep saying it's awful and sabotage it's success? No. Why deal with the drama and tomfoolery? See, there are plenty of other games to play and lots of competitive games too. Starcraft, the MOBAs and fighting games are generally more open to new ideas and have bigger tournaments and prize pools. You can play the new Street Fighter with no risk of being scorned and actual enjoy the game without others breathing down your neck about how your game is inferior to a 12 year old game. So it's a win/win for you. The Melee worship is not open to new players. New players wont see why it's so great and they don't care. They want to enjoy the new one. But the community wont let that me. How dare someone else like a game that's not Melee. Even worse, how could they DARE play a game that isn't Melee in a tournament. Don't they know it's not competitive and inferior to the glorious Melee.

A unified community is a healthy one. A unified community will be accepting to new games and players (because who cares how you play). Until the Melee worship dies, the community will not be able to move forward.

You want to know something about most of the people you are complaining about? They are the minority of the Melee players, just very very vocal. The majority of Melee players actually don't go ranting like that and are much more laid back and simply don't care if you play Brawl or not. But is it really do bad for a old game to be played competivly to this day? I mean look at 64, that game is still played competitivly to this day still, maybe but not as big as Brawl or Melee but the competitive scene is still there. Yes some people like Melee the best and play it exclusivly competivly. Same goes for the other Smash games though. And I'm pretty damned sure Brawl is going to end up being the same as there are going to be those people who enjoy Brawl competivily so much they will keep the scene alive and going. I mean really Smash is a series where even the older games are still played competivly. What other game communities can say that about their older games? Just because a new game comes out doesn't mean you have to stop playing older games, or even stop playing them competitivly.

Please note that I am not a Meleeplayer, I am a Brawl player but I am looking at this objectivly without letting bias get in. Well trying to at least.

 

[SmashChu]

How do you define "move forward"? What does forward mean in this context? What is it you would prefer the community to do?

A better way to say it might be "move on." Like I said, Melee is 12 years on. It's time to let the game die and move on to the next one. What should have happened was that Brawl became the new staple game, but for some reason Melee fans made sure to trash it at every turn. What we end up having was a split community and the Melee fans being very vocal to trash Brawl at every turn. Games get old and people move on. It would have been different had Marvel fans stick with 2 and bash anyone who players 3 as well as trash the game at every turn.

Like I said above, the community has to move on. New players are going to play SSB for Wii U, not Melee. I the old guards are not controlled, they will keep hurting the success of the new game which is also the community's life blood. Players want to play the new game and events don't want to host a 12 year old game. What will happen if the community doesn't move on is that it will stagnant and then decline. As Melee players roll off, there will not be any new players to replace them because new players will not be playing Melee. To grow, the new game will have to be the standard. Melee can still be played, but it can't be the focus and the new game should not be attacked for not being Melee.

Project M isn't any better.

What is the basis for this statement? How do you respond to the statement "a diverse community is a healthy one?"

Diverse doesn't mean better despite what everyone wants you to beleive. A deversified portfolio isn't better. In fact, some investors say it's worse. Warrent Buffet says "diversification," is "diworsification."

A diversified community means half of the people are playing one game and half are playing the other and both are smaller as a result. You don't see a divide between Stracraft 1 and 2 players do you? You don't see Street Fighter 2, 3 and 4 players. They all play the newest one and older ones are side events. If they were split, they would be a lot smaller and have smaller prize pools. They would also get less attention so people would be less likely to join them (kind of a critical mass thing. People tend to do things if others are doing them). Basically, it's better to be unified because unified means bigger.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

A better way to say it might be "move on.", etc.

Brawl has been enjoying tournament success, despite the general opinion that Melee is competitively superior, which leads me to wonder how many die-hard Melee fans there really are that refuse to play Brawl. There must be some, but what percentage of the community do the comprise?

 

[SmashChu]

Brawl has been enjoying tournament success, despite the general opinion that Melee is competitively superior, which leads me to wonder how many die-hard Melee fans there really are that refuse to play Brawl. There must be some, but what percentage of the community do the comprise?

Be interesting to find out.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

Be interesting to find out.

Yes it would. Until then, all arguments regarding Melee-worship hurting the community are based on speculation. Perhaps we should get some facts.

 

[Vkrm]

There's no reason to move on from melee until something better comes along. In this context, better doesn't have to mean better in strictly a competitive sense. Often in other FGC's, it's commonplace for the scene to completely abandon their game of choice for the newest version. Umvc is the most popular FG right now despite it being inferior to marvel 2. Why? Thats because it still offers a better experience in that there's room for innovation relating to the metagame. The melee exclusive players are not hard to please. We would've found it easy to leave melee if brawl was something fresh, but it was just a crappier version of melee. Did we want Melee 2.0? Maybe, but we damn sure didn't want melee 0.5 like we got with brawl.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

There's no reason to move on from melee until something better comes along. In this context, better doesn't have to mean better in strictly a competitive sense. Often in other FGC's, it's commonplace for the scene to completely abandon their game of choice for the newest version. Umvc is the most popular FG right now despite it being inferior to marvel 2. Why? Thats because it still offers a better experience in that there's room for innovation relating to the metagame. The melee exclusive players are not hard to please. We would've found it easy to leave melee if brawl was something fresh, but it was just a crappier version of melee. Did we want Melee 2.0? Maybe, but we damn sure didn't want melee 0.5 like we got with brawl.

What about Melee 0.9? What about Brawl 2.0? When does a game become good enough enough to draw your attention? What is the criteria?

 

[Vkrm]

What about Melee 0.9? What about Brawl 2.0? When does a game become good enough enough to draw your attention? What is the criteria?

I'd prefer a game as deep as melee is or one that's deeper. I'd settle for game that at least functions in a competitive sense unlike brawl. That's only assuming it comes with a reasonably more active scene and undiscovered techs.

 

[mimgrim]

There's no reason to move on from melee until something better comes along. In this context, better doesn't have to mean better in strictly a competitive sense. Often in other FGC's, it's commonplace for the scene to completely abandon their game of choice for the newest version. Umvc is the most popular FG right now despite it being inferior to marvel 2. Why? Thats because it still offers a better experience in that there's room for innovation relating to the metagame. The melee exclusive players are not hard to please. We would've found it easy to leave melee if brawl was something fresh, but it was just a crappier version of melee. Did we want Melee 2.0? Maybe, but we damn sure didn't want melee 0.5 like we got with brawl.

How is Brawl Melee 0.5 or a watered down version of Melee? Each Smash game has been it's own game and has not been a revamped version or watred down version of past games. Each Smash game has had it's own physics and mechanics. I mean really, calling Brawl any kind of version of Melee and Melee any kind of version of 64 is just wrong as each Smash game is its own game and not a new version of a previous game. And Smash4 is going to be the same way and will have new physics and mechanics and will not be a certain version of a certain game.

I'd prefer a game as deep as melee is or one that's deeper. I'd settle for game that at least functions in a competitive sense unlike brawl. That's only assuming it comes with a reasonably more active scene and undiscovered techs.

What constitutes as deep? It is highly subjective and can be argued Brawl is jsut as deep as Melee or deeper or not as deep, but in the end it is all opinion. But what you say about Brawl not functioning in a competitive sense is false as the game does and still is functioning competitivly. The competitive scene is still going strong and will continue to be exist just like it continues to exist for Melee and to a lesser exten 64.

 

[El Duderino]

Ummmmm, YEAH!

The community can't grow if Melee is the only thing they want to play. Melee came out in 2001 so it's about 12 years old. People will leave the community as life kicks in, and there will have to be a younger generation to replace them. The problem is these new people are not going to play a 12 year old game. They will play the new game. And that it where the problem lies. The community doesn't want to let the game go and will not except there could be another game. Its not even that the old guard will just play their game, but they will make sure to drag the new one though the mud as much as possible. So what happens when the new players come in to replace the ones that left? The old guard will tell them "SSB for Wii U is awful." They will make sure people have trouble playing the game competitively and, like Brawl, they will drag the game and it's players though the mud. They will discourage tournaments and try to prop up Melee as the one true game and the greatest thing to happen to Smash. Do you want to keep playing a game the community where people keep saying it's awful and sabotage it's success? No. Why deal with the drama and tomfoolery? See, there are plenty of other games to play and lots of competitive games too. Starcraft, the MOBAs and fighting games are generally more open to new ideas and have bigger tournaments and prize pools. You can play the new Street Fighter with no risk of being scorned and actual enjoy the game without others breathing down your neck about how your game is inferior to a 12 year old game. So it's a win/win for you. The Melee worship is not open to new players. New players wont see why it's so great and they don't care. They want to enjoy the new one. But the community wont let that me. How dare someone else like a game that's not Melee. Even worse, how could they DARE play a game that isn't Melee in a tournament. Don't they know it's not competitive and inferior to the glorious Melee.

A unified community is a healthy one. A unified community will be accepting to new games and players (because who cares how you play). Until the Melee worship dies, the community will not be able to move forward.

Again, the Melee crowd never prevented Brawl from becoming a successful tournament game. Brawl's attendance records I believe are somewhere in the 400s. With that considered, I don't see how they could possibly do any real damage to Smash 4, not that they even necessarily have the intent to. You seem to be hung up on forum banter and rather than the actual numbers. I also think you're significantly overestimating how invested the Melee community is in Smash 4 as a competitive game. With Brawl, the expectations were a lot higher given Melee's growth at the time. As much as players argue now, it's rather tame compared to what I witnessed lurking back then.

I consider a 700 person attendance record and 1.34k viewers a step forward for the competitive Smash community, so I certainly don't agree with you there. Those are some very healthy numbers, especially when you consider that's just one game in the franchise. As I was saying the Melee community is an asset, they're not the enemy.

 

[BSP]

I'm curious: If most melee players don't want Melee 2.0, but just want a game that "functions" competitively, why isn't Balanced Brawl widely popular? Especially considering that P:M proves that mods can gain a lot of popularity.

 

[El Duderino]

I'm curious: If most melee players don't want Melee 2.0, but just want a game that "functions" competitively, why isn't Balanced Brawl widely popular? Especially considering that P:M proves that mods can gain a lot of popularity.

Because most Melee players don't just want a game that functions competitively, they want a game that excels competitively for them. What that entails exactly does differ from Brawl exclusive players' preferences.

 

[Black Mantis]

Objectively Brawl didn't lack competitive success though. That's where none of these arguments even make sense. There have been tons of Brawl tournaments, and they were very successful. There were consistent winners and losers, there was a vibrant metagame in which no player ever reached the limit of the game's depth, and the participants were satisfied with the games. There were some ruleset controversies, and certain types of play that saw success were unpopular. Neither of these problems was substantial enough to really get in the way of the tournament level play though; it carried on regardless. It's not that this is an impossibly low standard either; plenty of games fall short or fizzle out (remember everything that happened with SFxT?), and Brawl did not. I'm not sure what rubric you're using to judge competitive success, but it seems impossible for any objective standard to call Brawl a failure.

This is where people get upset over the divisions. The Brawl community was just doing their own thing and being successful at it, and then when people come along and loudly insist that Brawl is terrible and that the game is a competitive failure, it's a denial of what those people have been doing. No one can say that you have to like Brawl, but it's, for lack of a better term, just plain rude to deny the efforts and successes of its community. Us dedicated Brawl players who are so loudly insisting we need to avoid doing this again with smash 4 really mean this. You don't have to like any smash game, and if you admit that it's just not your cup of tea in your criticisms and limit said criticisms to the proper time and place, no one will be upset. When you claim things like the game is uncompetitive when a lot of people are in fact successfully competing at it, you're not just trashing the game but also the people playing it, denying what they're doing, and it casts a malaise over the broader smash community to have that kind of internal strife. You can see that the malaise is so bad that you really have to badger us before we even defend Brawl anymore despite being a game we both love and have sunk thousands of competitive hours each into. For my part, I don't even care if you hate Brawl forever and think all kinds of crazy things about what we were doing at these Brawl tournaments for years. I just want smash 4 to be spared the same fate, and the only way I know to explain how that can be avoided is to explain what happened with Brawl. We don't all have to like the same games, but we do all need to support what everyone else is doing.

 

[BSP]

Because most Melee players don't just want a game that functions competitively, they want a game that excels competitively. What that entails exactly does differ from Brawl players.

Ok, so what causes a game to excel? What does it entail?

Why couldn't Balanced Brawl excel?

 

[mimgrim]

Because most Melee players don't just want a game that functions competitively, they want a game that excels competitively for them. What that entails exactly does differ from Brawl exclusive players' preferences.

But isn't what excels compitivly usually subjective? hat excels to one person doesn't nesscarily mean it excels for the other person. Sheesh I hope Sakurai finds the middle ground he is looking for, for smash 4.

 

[BaPr]

This can't be proven, sakurai himself is going for middle ground, and namco is helping. Excuse you, melee fans are NOT i repeat N.....O.....T the originals. Original supporters supported the....original game...big shock I know. And technically 64 was a moderately casual game, so you should have said he returned back toward 64's level, but went waaaay overboard

This is what annoys me. When I read posts like these, I am disappointed that there aren't more people with the logic you have. I always hear people say he betrayed his original fans when they talk about melee, not 64. Hopefully your posts will help people learn.

 

[El Duderino]

Ok, so what causes the game to excel? What does it entail?

Rather than writing a big long paragraph, if you haven't spent the time yet already, I'd recommend watching some of the EVO matches to get a better idea. Here's a good one to start with.

 

[El Duderino]

But isn't what excels compitivly usually subjective?

Yeah it is.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

A better way to say it might be "move on." Like I said, Melee is 12 years on. It's time to let the game die and move on to the next one. What should have happened was that Brawl became the new staple game, but for some reason Melee fans made sure to trash it at every turn. What we end up having was a split community and the Melee fans being very vocal to trash Brawl at every turn. Games get old and people move on. It would have been different had Marvel fans stick with 2 and bash anyone who players 3 as well as trash the game at every turn.

Like I said above, the community has to move on. New players are going to play SSB for Wii U, not Melee. I the old guards are not controlled, they will keep hurting the success of the new game which is also the community's life blood. Players want to play the new game and events don't want to host a 12 year old game. What will happen if the community doesn't move on is that it will stagnant and then decline. As Melee players roll off, there will not be any new players to replace them because new players will not be playing Melee. To grow, the new game will have to be the standard. Melee can still be played, but it can't be the focus and the new game should not be attacked for not being Melee.

Project M isn't any better.



Diverse doesn't mean better despite what everyone wants you to beleive. A deversified portfolio isn't better. In fact, some investors say it's worse. Warrent Buffet says "diversification," is "diworsification."

A diversified community means half of the people are playing one game and half are playing the other and both are smaller as a result. You don't see a divide between Stracraft 1 and 2 players do you? You don't see Street Fighter 2, 3 and 4 players. They all play the newest one and older ones are side events. If they were split, they would be a lot smaller and have smaller prize pools. They would also get less attention so people would be less likely to join them (kind of a critical mass thing. People tend to do things if others are doing them). Basically, it's better to be unified because unified means bigger.

I've also heard Brawl fans trash Melee fans...its the same thing dude...it goes both ways. Why should people move on if they enjoy playing that particular game? Sure its getting old, but if they like it...why try to convert them into something else. You sound like one of those religious preachers going door to door. "That religion is old and outdated, please come with us, read our pamphlets and join our religion." Replace religion with game...and that's exactly what you are doing, except on a website going thread to thread.

To be honest, due to the hype at EVO there have been MANY new players streaming Melee with titles such as (practicing and etc). Many professionals that you saw at EVO are actually anticipating Project M and will be moving to that (so some have moved on). Who cares what people choose to play? Why does this bother you so much?

That's fine that players will play a new game. Nothing is wrong with that. If Melee continues to get the hype that its getting, people who wish to play a more competitive game that has more money involved are going to play Melee rather than a game that won't be seen at a huge tournament. People will play games where the money is at.

 

[SmashChu]

Again, the Melee crowd never prevented Brawl from becoming a successful tournament game. Brawl's attendance records I believe are somewhere in the 400s. With that considered, I don't see how they could possibly do any real damage to Smash 4, not that they even necessarily have the intent to. You seem to be hung up on forum banter and rather than the actual numbers. I also think you're significantly overestimating how invested the Melee community is in Smash 4 as a competitive game. With Brawl, the expectations were a lot higher given Melee's growth at the time. As much as players argue now, it's rather tame compared to what I witnessed lurking back then.

I consider a 700 person attendance record and 1.34 million viewers a step forward for the competitive Smash community, so I certainly don't agree with you there. Those are some very healthy numbers, especially when you consider that's just one game in the franchise. As I was saying the Melee community is an asset, they're not the enemy.

First, your numbers are incorrect. It wasn't 1.34 million. It was 134,000. Stop using wrong figures.

Second, Melee guards did nothing to help and purposely tried to sabotage the game. They bashed the players and the game and blamed every problem with the community on Brawl (as if an inanimate object can do anything). It's quite clear that behavior isn't helpful and it's kind of the point of this thread, The Melee players will not move over and will say that SSBWU is "too much like Brawl." I think you live is a damn dream world. For a game with over 7 million people (talking Melee here), 700 is pretty pathetic (that is one hundredth of a percent, or 0.0001). It's clear that competitive Smash needs to be bigger.

 

[El Duderino]

First, your numbers are incorrect. It wasn't 1.34 million. It was 134,000. Stop using wrong figures.

Second, Melee guards did nothing to help and purposely tried to sabotage the game. They bashed the players and the game and blamed every problem with the community on Brawl (as if an inanimate object can do anything). It's quite clear that behavior isn't helpful and it's kind of the point of this thread, The Melee players will not move over and will say that SSBWU is "too much like Brawl." I think you live is a damn dream world. For a game with over 7 million people (talking Melee here), 700 is pretty pathetic (that is one hundredth of a percent, or 0.0001). It's clear that competitive Smash needs to be bigger.

My bad, I did write the numbers wrong, it is 1.34k. Got a bit head of myself there and had a brain fart.

Second, consider the context. Smash isn't a widely advertised competitive fighting game like the other EVO tittles are. There is certainly more room to grow considering the install base, but that is by no means a good reason to play down the accomplishment EVO was or the asset the Melee community is. 700 players traveling across the country to compete in a 12 year old game is remarkable.

 

[Ulevo]

I'm curious: If most melee players don't want Melee 2.0, but just want a game that "functions" competitively, why isn't Balanced Brawl widely popular? Especially considering that P:M proves that mods can gain a lot of popularity.

The first reason is because it is a mod. Mods will always have a stigma associated with them. Mods also are not always the most convenient, and we all know how people are when it comes to convenience.

The second reason is because even though Balanced Brawl does a lot of things to fix Brawl internally (it fixes a lot of problems Brawl has that make it objectively bad as a game) and did a fair job at it, it didn't fix a lot of other problems. It didn't give back mechanics that were lost from the transition from Melee to Brawl, it didn't make combos possible, et cetera.

Also, for those of you who are stating Brawl is not a watered down version of Melee, I encourage you to reconsider that thought process. There is very little that Brawl has mechanically that made it new or innovative. It was primarily the removal of mechanics that we had in the previous two games and alterations in specific values like character run speed or frame data on moves that made it feel like a different environment, but most of the elements that are present in Brawl that constitute what it is have always been there in every Smash game. Not only that, but many of the new nuances present were not intentional mechanics given to the player to learn from and create depth, but were often discoveries we found that involved bugs or oversights left in from poor playtesting and programming, like with grab releases, chain grabs, infinites, and other specific techniques like Claw Hopping or Scarring.

 

[mimgrim]

The first reason is because it is a mod. Mods will always have a stigma associated with them. Mods also are not always the most convenient, and we all know how people are when it comes to convenience.

The second reason is because even though Balanced Brawl does a lot of things to fix Brawl internally (it fixes a lot of problems Brawl has that make it objectively bad as a game) and did a fair job at it, it didn't fix a lot of other problems. It didn't give back mechanics that were lost from the transition from Melee to Brawl, it didn't make combos possible, et cetera.

Also, for those of you who are stating Brawl is not a watered down version of Melee, I encourage you to reconsider that thought process. There is very little that Brawl has mechanically that made it new or innovative. It was primarily the removal of mechanics that we had in the previous two games and alterations in specific values like character run speed or frame data on moves that made it feel like a different environment, but most of the elements that are present in Brawl that constitute what it is have always been there in every Smash game. Not only that, but many of the new nuances present were not intentional mechanics given to the player to learn from and create depth, but were often discoveries we found that involved bugs or oversights left in from poor playtesting and programming, like with grab releases, chain grabs, infinites, and other specific techniques like Claw Hopping or Scarring.

Aside from L-canceling and Wave Dashing you are telling me all of the mechanics in Melee where there on purpose? Even the CGs in Melee? I would like to know what proff you have of thtat as I know L-cacneling was impletented purposfully and that Sakurai said he left Wave Dashing on purpose. But what makes you think all the other mechanics in Melee also aren't bugs or oversites either?

Going off of the pressumption only L-caneling and Wave Dashing being removed from Brawl. Does that really constitutes it to be called a watered down version? The game has a totally different engine and play style from Melee and removing L-cancleing and Wave Dashing furthered that playstyle that differs Brawl from Melee making them 2 entirely different games and not one being X version of the other. Mechanics (intentional or note) are not the only things to keep games different or simmilir, the engine, physics, and playstyle also matter. Braw is different in pretty much regard making it a different game from Melee and not just a watered down version or better version or equal version of Melee it makes it it's own game.

 

[Evil-Guy]

This is an issue?

 

[BSP]

The second reason is because even though Balanced Brawl does a lot of things to fix Brawl internally (it fixes a lot of problems Brawl has that make it objectively bad as a game) and did a fair job at it, it didn't fix a lot of other problems. It didn't give back mechanics that were lost from the transition from Melee to Brawl, it didn't make combos possible, et cetera.

Rather than writing a big long paragraph, if you haven't spent the time yet already, I'd recommend watching some of the EVO matches to get a better idea. Here's a good one to start with.

@El Dude - I watched all of Saturday and Sunday

@OP

This is where unity will be extremely difficult. These are only two opinions, but I wouldn't be surprised if the general consensus of Melee players felt similarly. If they didn't, BB would be rivaling or outdoing P:M right now, as it removes most (they didn't get the input delay (yet?)) of Brawl's objective problems.

Removing Brawl's objective problems isn't enough: the game has to have Melee mechanics to be successful or good to them. If it doesn't, they won't support the game (which is fine), and they may even bash it (which doesn't help anyone). There's a very low chance of returning to 100% Melee mechanics and then some, so don't get your hopes up on unity.

The best chance we have at unity is just leaving each other alone. It's sad, but I think that's the best case scenario. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

@El Dude - I watched all of Saturday and Sunday

@OP

This is where unity will be extremely difficult. These are only two opinions, but I wouldn't be surprised if the general consensus of Melee players felt similarly. If they didn't, BB would be rivaling or outdoing P:M right now, as it removes most (they didn't get the input delay (yet?)) of Brawl's objective problems.

Removing Brawl's objective problems isn't enough: the game has to have Melee mechanics to be successful or good to them. If it doesn't, they won't support the game (which is fine), and they may even bash it (which doesn't help anyone). There's a very low chance of returning to 100% Melee mechanics and then some, so don't get your hopes up on unity.

The best chance we have at unity is just leaving each other alone. It's sad, but I think that's the best case scenario. I hope I'm wrong.

The creators of Project M admittately said that it is unlikely that the engine will mimic Melee. Which is both a good and bad thing (depends on which side you are on if you are solely a Melee player). The idea of a mod in a game might prevent people playing it, but some of the best games today were created from mods (DayZ is a PRIME example of this).

Everyone has different opinions. Try convincing a fanboy of Microsoft or Playstation and changing them to the opposite side. Its just not going to happen, regardless of their ridiculous excuses for choosing that system. People are going to play the game the way they want to. There will be a segregation between communities. You just can not help that. It isn't a bad thing either. Would you rather have a competitive player playing against you and demolishing you when you just want t play for fun by using silly items...? No. Sticking with the community you are comfortable with is the best solution.