Changes in gameplay: A new look at the tradeoffs of gamplay from Melee to Brawl

[MookieRah]

Seeing how a lot of game mechanic discussion has died down recently I'm opting to start a new discussion up. I was talking to a friend of mine and realized a few things I hadn't thought before in terms of brawl competitive play. I would appreciate well thought out replies to this, as I do not want it devolving into one word statements of praise or flaming early on (I say early on cause I know that later in the thread this will happen).

It has been pretty well documented that shield grabbing in Brawl will be more prevalent than it was in Melee (at least in the early metagame). Shield stun seems to be reduced and because of this it allows for the defender to take advantage of aerial assaults quite often. This would prevent a lot of common strategies of faster characters. All too often in Melee you will see people adopting an incredibly aggressive suppression game that is the culmination of quick aerials l-canceled followed by quick ground moves. This won't happen as much in Brawl, because one can't simply toss out moves quickly to overcome one's defenses. In other words, people would have to make their approaches more cautiously and with more thought behind it.

After thinking about it for a while I can see this being a good thing in the long run. While the displays of incredible tech skill of the speedy overwhelming air to ground games are impressive, the strategy itself was not very thought intensive. Sure, there were a lot of defensive options available and the aggressor couldn't just mindlessly go about it, but due to this being the predominant strategy of all fast characters it didn't lend much to thinking in terms of how to handle opponents. This also got me thinking about the speed vs power issue.

When fast characters battle it out in Melee things go back and forth; however, when a fast character plays against a slower character it is quite a struggle for the slower character to handle. Because the slower character has less quick aggressive options, he is forced to play a defensive game most of the time. This makes things an uphill battle. If the speedy character is doing his job right, speed will determine who is in control of the match; however, in Brawl, the person on defense can nip the suppressive game in the bud by being able to shield grab their shffl approaches immediately, then suppression would be a thing of the past.

With suppression out then the balance of speed and power does not simply default to speed. Fast characters still have the advantage when it comes to setting up opportunities and getting in hits, but they will have to get considerably more hits than the powerful characters. This to me is a great thing in regards to balance.

The only problem with all this is if the defensive options are more powerful than the offensive options overall. If this is the case then the game will merely end up being overly campy and overall bad. I would say that having better offensive options than defensive is better than this scenario, because it creates an atmosphere that is set on fighting, but if turtling is the dominant strategy than the meta game could potentially get very boring indeed.

It's way to early to be worried about this happening though, so there is no point in ranting and raving about how much it would suck if this is the case. [Edit] That said, I'd like to hear people discuss potential problems with defense vs offense based off the information we know, because I know a lot of competitive players do worry about this. [/Edit]

 

[psyniac_123]

Definately agree. Brawl seems a lot more thought than Melee balance-wise (and so it should be).

Tier list? WHAT tier list?

 

[Rhubarbo]

Nice evaluation! I think tiers will exist in Brawl, but on a much less radical basis (except for Dk, he shall forever suck!)

 

[MookieRah]

Definately agree. Brawl seems a lot more thought than Melee balance-wise (and so it should be).

Well yes and no. There are some things set in place that seem to point towards them working on it, but others that seem to be not balanced much at all. Final smashes, for instance, seem to be incredibly unbalanced.

There is inherent imbalance with characters as well, judging from the impressions of the competitive players who partook in the demo; however, it really is too soon to debate that. Learning curves differ from character to character, and things that start out as really good early on can be countered as well. Ever since my Peach argument was debunked plus with my new way of thinking on things it does appear the game is overall more balanced than melee was.

 

[Y34HDUD3!!!]

Yup Final Smashes like Bowser's completely destroy poor DK's (unless we figure it out and use it right. I think). Them special world destructor attacks may not be very balanced, I say.

Intelligent discussion (I hope), here we go!

 

[gigasteve]

Hopefully there will be an end to "tier lists", so I can play Pikachu and IC's without being so weak. I have always wanted a balanced Smash: maybe Brawl will solve this.

 

[Y34HDUD3!!!]

Hopefully there will be an end to "tier lists", so I can play Pikachu and IC's without being so weak. I have always wanted a balanced Smash: maybe Brawl will solve this.

Sorry, sir. "tiers" won't go away. To balance out a game like this to a point in which "tiers" don't really exist is impossible. Or near impossible.

 

[Hydde]

As far as there is a better balance between power and speed,, ill be ok with it. What mookie rah said about speed vs power and the slower characters is what kinda depressed me in Melee. My main was not a low tier but it sucks to see players with so much potential like kirby and mewtwo.... getting ***** by the speedy nightmares of the game. I have seen some upgrade in characters, (talking about moevs and other things that were upgraded) so i think this will be solved.

For exmaple... one thing that points top this was the overall nerf fox got. While some of his better moves were nerfed.. i didt saw him being sucky. Yeah his game will change... but i really thin he will maintain the old feeling he had in melee.... but a bit different this time. And while he will be able to kill... some other character who had an uphill batlle in melee against him, now can go toe to toe with fox.

The real issue that really concerns me, is the reduced shield stun and the new L cancel.
If shield stun is redfuced that much,, and the L cancel will be harder to do.. then it will inevitable lead to a camp fest. Everyone will wait for the attacker tocome because it will be a grab for sure if the attacker hit the shield.

We can only hope that this will not be the case... and that we will even find some ways to beat the shield grab this time.

 

[WoapGang]

Sorry, sir. "tiers" won't go away. To balance out a game like this to a point in which "tiers" don't really exist is impossible. Or near impossible.

The thing is, there's nothing stopping people from finding some absurdly complicated way to make at least ONE character broken in terms of competitive play. But if this does not happen, although unlikely, tiers will STILL exist due to the fact that they are decided by the amount of people that play and win tournaments using Specific Characters. And, as long as there is at least one tier, there will be a bottom, by definition. So unfortunately there's no way around it.

 

[MookieRah]

Something I forgot in the original post:
A lot of people, myself included, were upset to discover lessened hit stun in the Brawl demo in melee. Upon hearing this I thought to myself how bad this was, because I imagined Brawl being a game that was devoid of combos and merely about trading hits. This isn't the case though, because a large portion of the combos in melee are impromptu and are done while the opponent is able to retaliate in some way. I believe the intention of reducing hit stun is to prevent set combos and chain grabs.

I'm assuming they did this in order to prevent the possibility of a character/s to abuse certain combos that would make them considerably better than the rest of the cast. While this does make it a lot harder to abuse things, I am also worried that it could potentially limit things unnecessarily. It is much easier to put such systems in place than to have to focus so hard to balance each character on a one on one basis, but managing so much of these things on the grand scale could also take a away from the depth of the game.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that I don't agree with all of these changes (more so I agree on them individually, but all of them together I'm not sure about), but I can see where the dev team is coming from with it. I just hope that they didn't simplify balance issues so much that it hurts competitive play.

 

[gigasteve]

Sorry, sir. "tiers" won't go away. To balance out a game like this to a point in which "tiers" don't really exist is impossible. Or near impossible.

I guess you're right, but when I heard Kirby was better, I hoped some characters would be modified some, so everyone has at least a little chance. Even though Samus is/will be my main, i'd like to use everyone, even knowing some are better than others.

 

[Crispy4001]

There are plenty of ways to counter the speedy characters and overly aggressive players in Melee.

The problem is none of that matters if they do break through. From the sounds of it Brawl should be a bit more forgiving.

 

[Xanderous]

I'm not going to pretend I know anything about Brawl's mechanics. = (

Would love to join in on this one, but I'll have to wait.

 

[MookieRah]

There are plenty of ways to counter the speedy characters and overly aggressive players in Melee.

For one thing, that depends on the character that is going against the speedy character quite a bit. Also, having options to defend against it doesn't make it equal out for the person on the defending end of an all out aggressive assault. The sheer fact that speedy characters have consistently outperformed all of the slower characters in tournaments points towards the slower characters not having a proper balance of speed and power.

I'm not going to pretend I know anything about Brawl's mechanics. = (

My intention was to provide an outlet for intelligent speculation based on what we know about Brawl. I don't suspect this to matter for crap once the game comes out, but honestly there weren't any threads around in this section that I could have much fun in so I made this one XD.

 

[Bajef8]

Well yes and no. There are some things set in place that seem to point towards them working on it, but others that seem to be not balanced much at all. Final smashes, for instance, seem to be incredibly unbalanced.

There is inherent imbalance with characters as well, judging from the impressions of the competitive players who partook in the demo; however, it really is too soon to debate that. Learning curves differ from character to character, and things that start out as really good early on can be countered as well. Ever since my Peach argument was debunked plus with my new way of thinking on things it does appear the game is overall more balanced than melee was.

i also thing the final smashes are way to unbalanced. but i think we still have to consider the fact that the team fixed up the game a little from the demo. i think it would be severely unbalanced if they kept ike the same as he was in the demo or if they keep dk's final smash as crappy range-wise as it is. i think they did that to some of the characters just to see what would happen and i think they will fix them up the way they see fit.

for my opinion on the matter of the big changes to the way the game runs, i think that sakurai and team just didn't like the game to be so competitive. they fixed everything so that the game couldn't be as competitive and so that anyone wouldn't feel extremely bad if they have never played.

 

[Atire]

Thats pretty amazing

 

[Octillus]

As long as someone like me, who isn't of the most dextrous of digits, can use good strategy to counter most techniques, I'll be happy.


As an aside, as a longtime piano player, you'd think my button pressing could move faster. It can't.

 

[MookieRah]

i think that sakurai and team just didn't like the game to be so competitive. they fixed everything so that the game couldn't be as competitive and so that anyone wouldn't feel extremely bad if they have never played.

I don't believe this is the case; however, if it is then Sakurai made a poor decision. There is no reason to try and remove as much skill or depth from a game just to stifle competitive players. Even by doing so it won't amount to much, because competitive players will always beat those that are not. What that really does is hinder the competitive scene, because they would be the ones to take the game to it's limits and if they limited the game then it would grow old and stale.

 

[Kinlap]

Hey MookieRah,

During the earlier years of Melee's metagame, did characters with better shield grabbing fare better in the competitive scene or fast characters remained strong since the start? If the first case is true, Brawl could be similar and just required time for the fast characters' metagame to learn to counter shield grabbing. Then, again Melee did not have high population of competitve players migrating from 64, as that Brawl will have with Melee players.

 

[DraginHikari]

Hey MookieRah,

During the earlier years of Melee's metagame, did characters with better shield grabbing fare better in the competitive scene or fast characters remained strong since the start? If the first case is true, Brawl could be similar and just required time for the fast characters' metagame to learn to counter shield grabbing. Then, again Melee did not have high population of competitve players migrating from 64, as that Brawl will have with Melee players.

That's a point I've given alot of thought towards and I personally feel some of that is what causes some discomforted towards some of the changes in the mechics.... let's look at releases here just using hte US as an example:

Super Smash Brothers: April 29, 1999

Super Smash Brother Melee: December 3, 2001

Super Smash Brothers Brawl: Feburary 10, 2008

Between 64 and Melle there was a little more then a 2 and a half year difference between the two games, which barely had the time to maturity a competitive community by the time Melee came out... but now there has been over six years since the last game came out and what I've seen as in other things, the more time you put between things like this the harder it is to get people get attached to what is comfortable and what they're used to. Which is why there alot of concern over this then what is necessary, but then again there are usually many factors involved.

As far as the mechincs, it's just a little to hard for me to speculate when I haven't played the game, even with the information presented by people from E4-all that is just simply not enough to convince me of something, simply because something doesn't necessary feel as something is written often time.

 

[Eaode]

Just as an Aside....

Everyone talks about Speed vs. Power in terms of balance, but I think it really needs to be changed to Speed vs. Power vs. Range.

Range play a very important part in character balance, I'd say almost as big as speed and power. It you have more range, it becomes easier to actually hit with your moves, as well as continue combos against your opponents. I mean, look at melee. Mario and Doc have a pretty good balnce of Speed vs. Power, but what really hurts them is a lack of range. Ganondorf has enough power to actually make up for his lack of speed, and in addiction has enough range to take advantage of such power, making him really the most viable "strength" chaacter in melee.

With the new physics of Brawl, I believe Range will be more just as important if not more important now. Ike has rediculous power, but is VERY slow. With enough range (and some super armor sprinkled in) he should still be able to compete at a reasonable level in the competitive scene.

Just another aspect of individual character balance I'd like to point out

 

[MookieRah]

Range play a very important part in character balance, I'd say almost as big as speed and power.

This is an important component but I don't think it's close to the speed vs power issue. Mainly because the power characters tend to be the ones with the most range. The only exceptions being Marth and Roy, which were actually only moderately fast.

Ike has rediculous power, but is VERY slow. With enough range (and some super armor sprinkled in) he should still be able to compete at a reasonable level in the competitive scene.

According to JumpFesta he has been sped up quite a bit. Also, make no mistake, the E for All Ike was just tooooooo slow. He wouldn't be able to make an attack and people would simply just grab him any time he initiated an attack. It would be a big joke.

 

[Eaode]

This is an important component but I don't think it's close to the speed vs power issue. Mainly because the power characters tend to be the ones with the most range. The only exceptions being Marth and Roy, which were actually only moderately fast.

Also, every slow character has good range. Mewtwo, Bowser, Zelda, and Ganon have a lot of good range with their melee attacks.

According to JumpFesta he has been sped up quite a bit. Also, make no mistake, the E for All Ike was just tooooooo slow. He wouldn't be able to make an attack and people would simply just grab him any time he initiated an attack. It would be a big joke.

I'm very glad to hear that Ike was sped up from E4All. There's a point where extra power doesn't make up for it anymore, and I'm glad the developers have realized this.
Let's hope they can make it all work out. Bowser sems to be working out, I wonder about Dk/Ganondorf....

 

[Generic Dude]

As far as there is a better balance between power and speed,, ill be ok with it. What mookie rah said about speed vs power and the slower characters is what kinda depressed me in Melee. My main was not a low tier but it sucks to see players with so much potential like kirby and mewtwo.... getting ***** by the speedy nightmares of the game. I have seen some upgrade in characters, (talking about moevs and other things that were upgraded) so i think this will be solved.

For exmaple... one thing that points top this was the overall nerf fox got. While some of his better moves were nerfed.. i didt saw him being sucky. Yeah his game will change... but i really thin he will maintain the old feeling he had in melee.... but a bit different this time. And while he will be able to kill... some other character who had an uphill batlle in melee against him, now can go toe to toe with fox.

The real issue that really concerns me, is the reduced shield stun and the new L cancel.
If shield stun is redfuced that much,, and the L cancel will be harder to do.. then it will inevitable lead to a camp fest. Everyone will wait for the attacker tocome because it will be a grab for sure if the attacker hit the shield.

We can only hope that this will not be the case... and that we will even find some ways to beat the shield grab this time.

One way around that may be using mindgames to cause them to try to grab and miss, or some situation where if they grab, it's a hit, or if they don't grab, it's also a hit. The only problem with this is that the one who decides to attack, may not have a good chance of not getting grabbed, resulting in a camp-fest.

 

[ripman3]

I don't personally think that FS's are as broken as people are making them seem; IMO they each seem to fit the play style of the character overall; OR they seem to complete the character, giving them something that they are lacking in.
Pikachu's final smash has him darting about the stage and, like T0MMY showed, requires the control of a true pikachu player (who is use to darting around the stage) to take advantage of it. Metaknight's FS is an incredibly powerful single slice that gives him what he's lacking in: a good killing move. Etc.

 

[MookieRah]

So I guess giving DK a ****ty FS "completed" him? It doesn't matter if it fits them or not, they just aren't balanced.

 

[CyberBenX4]

So I guess giving DK a ****ty FS "completed" him? It doesn't matter if it fits them or not, they just aren't balanced.

Well, I would think that, in DK's case, it will be more of a thing of figuring just how to make his FS work correctly, before we completely write it off.

And besides, if Ike could get buff'd, who's to say that DK (or at least his FS) couldn't, as well?

 

[Card]

First off, tip of my hat to you for starting an intelligent discussion in a forum which is a sea of spam.

The only problem with all this is if the defensive options are more powerful than the offensive options overall. If this is the case then the game will merely end up being overly campy and overall bad. I would say that having better offensive options than defensive is better than this scenario, because it creates an atmosphere that is set on fighting, but if turtling is the dominant strategy than the meta game could potentially get very boring indeed.
[/Edit]

[Edit:] As well put as your statement is, I have to disagree.[/Edit]

There is one section of this paragraph you wrote in the original post which really piques at my senses. The words I am referring to is when you said very boring in regards to the meta game. Would you not feel that this sentiment is purely opinionated? What I see here is that you feel that a defensive, rather than supressive offense, style of game play would make the tournament scene seem rather dull.

To argue my point, I feel that I have to bring up another heralded fighter... Street Fighter II. The game is decades old, yet it's still played by todays generation. Street Fighter II is also considered to be perfect fighting game, without any adhere flaws, by the pros who play it. Not to mention considering how it is still played to this day is a testament of its worth. I recall an interview somewhere where a professional Ryu player was asked if there was anything he would like to change in his main character, and the player responded "No, leave him how he is, he is perfect". Many can argue that Street Fighter II, along with a variety of other fighters (CvS2 comes to mind), is a game about Turtling and Pokes (That is, poking an attack out in an attempt to hit the opponent, then retreating back quickly into a defensive position). Yet even though the game is composed heavily on a defensive meta-game, it stands to be one of the most recognizable and preferred fighters still around today.

This in fact, is what I hope happens to Smash Brawl. One of my gripes with Smash Melee is, as you stated, its a very offensive style game. Fox's tend to be moving around all over the place at lightning speed, while Bowsers get pummeled from all directions since they simply are not fast enough to handle the pressure put on them. It's physically out of the characters limits.

Now as I said earlier, you state that a Defensive Metagame would end up being Boring in comparison to an Offensive game. I do not think it will be Boring, but I think it will definitely have a Different vibe and feel to an entire professional match. Whereas a high stakes tournament match in Smash Melee has a more dynamic and animated feel to it, packed with its speedy combos, and techniques... a high stakes Street Fighter II match on the other hand, makes the entire room feel so tense and silent, that you could hear a pin drop right until the last moment when there is an uproar of excitement. Just because its a different feeling, does not necessarily mean that it is worse.


Personally, I think Smash Brawl may even hit a chord in both categories. It's too soon to tell, but just an assumption I made from watching videos, it is what I envisioned. We'll have quick and speedy combos and fantastic techniques with speedy characters weaving in and out of defensive turtles, yet at the same time we'll have defensive mind-games and various combo breakers, and a whole slew of different edging opportunities.

It seems to me that instead of fearing or shunning the defensive side of the spectrum, we should embrace it. Because as I just said... I think Brawl will have it's share in both Offensive and Defensive meta games, which can only heighten the overall tournament scene. As opposed to Melee, which as you stated, is composed almost entirely of offensive rush downs.


I can't wait! I get excited just thinking about it!

 

[Phlemingo]

I think changes in gameplay for brawl really depend on whether or not we find techniques that make battles overall faster and easier.

 

[Admiral Hroth]

The only problem with all this is if the defensive options are more powerful than the offensive options overall. If this is the case then the game will merely end up being overly campy and overall bad. I would say that having better offensive options than defensive is better than this scenario, because it creates an atmosphere that is set on fighting, but if turtling is the dominant strategy than the meta game could potentially get very boring indeed.

I agree with this statement. It's very well put.

 

[Zek]

For the people talking about tiers(again...), it's effectively impossible to make a fighting game without tiers, especially with so many characters and without any kind of post-release patches. Some characters are just going to be better than others. In a perfect world, the characters would be close enough that people wouldn't consider tiers worth discussing, but realistically that's not going to happen either. What we should be hoping for is that it's brought under control to an extent so the developers learn how not to make characters totally gimped or vastly overpowered, i.e. chopping off the Top and Bottom tiers. Playing between High/Medium/Low tiers wouldn't be so bad, though the whole thing is an oversimplification anyway.

The real sign of a balanced game is when nobody can agree on the tiers.

 

[SamusMeleeMaster]

Brawl as Indeed changed, in terms of Gameplay. But the game has a few Similar aspects from the previous installment. Melee had a ton of free walk areas, other ways of playing, and a limited way of creating a basic style of playing Smash. Such as WaveDash, L-Cancel, Ledge Movements, etc..etc..(Not a big fan of "Advanced Gameplay" Terms ;p)..But in Brawl all of those Techniques are most likely to be back in the next installment. (not sure) A simple wavedash is just broken down...Short Hop, Air Dodge, (with a Directional "twist")..The point is...These few Glitch's would most likely be back in Brawl. Stating that the Gameplay may have it's similar ways from before.

 

[Zink]

Actually, Card, if we're thinking of the same thing, the pro speaking to Sirlin about balancing Turbo HD Remix... he actually wanted 1 change (fireball fake). Anyway, many would argue that the most well babalnced fighter is GGXX.
Related to the main topic, I can certainly see Brawl being more defensively, at least in the beginning. However, two notes of caution- one, we've only seen like a third or less of the roster, so there could very well be more extreme characters in the speed department (it seems unlikely anyone could out-power Ike). And additionally, the idea of changes at JumpFesta could lead to alterations in stuns as well- likely not enough to shift the balance to an offensive game, but hopefully not a camp fest.
I want to say that although I've seen several competitive metagames go from appearing offensive, to turning out to have a significant defensive side, I've never seen one go the other way. Should be interesting.

 

[Card]

Actually, Card, if we're thinking of the same thing, the pro speaking to Sirlin about balancing Turbo HD Remix... he actually wanted 1 change (fireball fake). Anyway, many would argue that the most well babalnced fighter is GGXX.

Actually... Here is the direct quote I took it from (It is indeed the same pro we are talking about)

http://blog.capcom.com/archives/558

Before implementing this (This being a change in Ryu's moveset), I also talked to Nekohashi, one of the best Ryu players in Japan. I asked him for his list of Ryu changes for a new version of Street Fighter and his response was something close to “No changes needed, Ryu’s design is already perfect.” I said ok, but how about this idea of adding just one thing: a fake fireball? Nekohashi said, “Yes! That is a masterpiece. Give him that move and nothing else.” I think Nekohashi probably had similar reasoning to mine above, because I had already explained to him a few ways that various weaker characters would have to avoid fireballs.

So we're technically we are both right. The pro player at first did not want a change, but once the idea was brought to him, he agree'd to it. I knew this when I made my point, but I just didn't bother to post it since it just adds words to my point for no reason

 

[DragonBlade]

One thing that you might not have considered other defensive moves that are done in response. Shield grabbing is just one of the options characters have. There are many other ways to easily counter, from Marth's reverse Up B to the occasional Jigglypuff rest, not to mention all moves that put your opponent into imminent combos. The effectiveness of these kinds of moves in addition to shield grabbing will probably be what determines viability of defensive play and to what degree. I don't think there will be as big of an issue as it seems, because there is a lot of defensive play in Melee battles too, but it doesn't get the same amount of recognition so its often ignored.

What I find more intriguing, or perhaps a better word may be distressing, is the increased hit lag (supposedly) and more pronounced DI. This increased hit lag gives it a 64 feeling, while the increased DI gives it more of a Melee feeling. How does it feel when you combine to two? Well, the answer is like Brawl, but we don't know what that means yet. From the look of things I would guess it won't be something that encourages competitive play or makes the combat system deeper. Nintendo's primary target are the masses now, because thats where the $money$ is.

It may suck for competitive players, I suppose, but theres not much that can be done, since an overwhelming majority will think Brawl is a success, the criticisms won't be heard and the sequel will never fix the mistakes.

 

[Generic Dude]

Brawl as Indeed changed, in terms of Gameplay. But the game has a few Similar aspects from the previous installment. Melee had a ton of free walk areas, other ways of playing, and a limited way of creating a basic style of playing Smash. Such as WaveDash, L-Cancel, Ledge Movements, etc..etc..(Not a big fan of "Advanced Gameplay" Terms ;p)..But in Brawl all of those Techniques are most likely to be back in the next installment. (not sure) A simple wavedash is just broken down...Short Hop, Air Dodge, (with a Directional "twist")..The point is...These few Glitch's would most likely be back in Brawl. Stating that the Gameplay may have it's similar ways from before.

One-Advanced techniques are not broken at all (except the shine).
Two-There not glitches.

 

[Xanderous]

DragonBlade:

Nice.

 

[CyberBenX4]

What I find more intriguing, or perhaps a better word may be distressing, is the increased hit lag (supposedly) and more pronounced DI. This increased hit lag gives it a 64 feeling, while the increased DI gives it more of a Melee feeling. How does it feel when you combine to two? Well, the answer is like Brawl, but we don't know what that means yet.

Personally, I thought you were fine leaving it there...

From the look of things I would guess it won't be something that encourages competitive play or makes the combat system deeper. Nintendo's primary target are the masses now, because thats where the $money$ is.

It may suck for competitive players, I suppose, but theres not much that can be done, since an overwhelming majority will think Brawl is a success, the criticisms won't be heard and the sequel will never fix the mistakes.

But then you went ahead and posted this...

Yes, we have to be realistic, in the notion that this game is going to be different. We've known this for a while now.

However, I think you're a bit too hasty in trying to write the game off because of these changes, barring the fact that (especially) we don't know nearly enough to pass judgment.

I mean, while you may be largely negative, I think of it as something that could stand to be very positive for the series, or at the least, some thing that will have entirely different feel all its own, which I think is just fine, as well.

After all, any fan of traditional fighting games can tell you that the one thing that can be constant about any fighting game series is change, no matter how relatively minute or grand it may be. For example, Street Fighter Zero/Alpha 3 is DEFINITELY not Super Street Fighter 2 X/Turbo, which is also DEFINITELY not like Street Fighter III: Third Strike, and the upcoming Street Fighter 4 looks to be DEFINITELY quite different from the aforementioned. Even so (at least except in SF4's case, since it ain't out yet), while each game has its own feel, nobody can deny that they're all well made games, in spite of how one or the other may cater more to a certain type's interest.

And that, in the end, is what I think what Brawl will be. It's going to be different. It's going to have its own feel, separate from all that came before it. You're probably going to have plenty who love it, and a number who may (shocking!) hate it. But in any case, I think only the most stubborn will try and deny that there's nothing good going on for the game, or that there can't possibly be a perfectly viable scene for it.

 

[DragonBlade]

But then you went ahead and posted this...

Heh, I actually threw that on at the end for an other reason. You caught the change of tone well. If you've noticed, most of my posts have been negative. This is because I'd rather accept the fact that Brawl with lack all competitive merit, but later find it is actually amazing than hope for an awesome competitive game only to be completely disappointed. This is somewhat of an exaggeration, but its just the position I prefer to take.

 

[MookieRah]

Street Fighter II. The game is decades old, yet it's still played by todays generation. Street Fighter II is also considered to be perfect fighting game, without any adhere flaws, by the pros who play it.

This isn't Street Fighter!!!

I kid, for that is a ****ty argument.

Yes, my statement on the game becoming boring is opionated; howerver, your view is no less opinionated. Another thing is, well, Street Fighter is a fighter that's stages are not dynamic by any sense other than visually. Smash stages offer a variety of situations and positionings that are way way more complex than the basic structer of Street Fighter's stages. They also provide certain levels which can be easily camped and offers a lot of protection. Melee worked out very well having a bonus to the offensive options because the stage often added a lot of defensive support. So by having a great array of offensive options it allows someone to break up the advantage of holding and maintaining a strategic spot.

If the bonus on a basic level goes towards defense, the defensive positions on stages would add another layer of defense into the equation. If that is the case then camping becomes a huge issue. If the game devolves into purely campy strategies, would you find it as exciting to watch or to play as a game that actually encourages attacking your opponent?

What I find more intriguing, or perhaps a better word may be distressing, is the increased hit lag (supposedly) and more pronounced DI. This increased hit lag gives it a 64 feeling, while the increased DI gives it more of a Melee feeling.

There is a big difference between hit stun and hit lag. Hit lag is the amount of time that the move is hitting the opponent, in which the player has time to input DI. This is why it helps with DI, because there are more frames to do so. However, hitstun is the time after the blow in which you cannot do anything. Hit stun has been drastically reduced, and because of this one can perform actions sooner.

It should be noted that the hit lag isn't big enough to make up for the differences in hit stun to make it comparable to melee. But yeah, it's like a wierd mix of both SSB and Melee.