Competitive Smash consumer action: Organisation thread

[Vigilante]

The purpose of this thread is to initiate a consumer-driven sensibilisation movement in order to air our grievances to Nintendo's current approach with the Super Smash Bros. series in a "polite and civil manner". The gist of it is to inform Nintendo that we are not quite content with being marginalized and wish for them to return to making a game that is both fun for us and for party smashers. There is no need for anyone to be unhappy.

Here are some guidelines:

1. This thread has but one purpose: Discuss the organization of the consumer-driven movement and setting it up. This means that we are not here to discuss which Smash game is the best. We are also not here to bash other games, or derail the topic. You may disagree with points presented, but your arguments must be constructive. By constructive, they must be "trying to help". For example, a cosntructive argument can be "I disagree with this point, and it might lead to the letter being misunderstood. Maybe you should mention this instead". A non-constructive argument is "You just want Melee 2".

2. Anyone may propose ways to further the agenda. However, we cannot go off topic as it becomes very difficult to dig through all of the posts. Trolls should be ignored, and hopefully moderated.

3. While I'm taking charge of the topic right now, I'd like for the movement to leave my hands eventually. I think it's best if people don't necessarily follow my lead. I'd like to see people take their own initiative. I want to kickstart it, that's all.



Now, last time, we were writting a letter. I'd like you guys to comment on what you'd like to see changed. You could even make the changes yourself. For the msot part, I will ally with the majority. One thing I'd like you guys to maybe look into is perhaps fhelp me find wording that makes it clear that we like "elements" from Melee, but we are not trying to get an exact replica of it.



Added a very rough draft:

This letter was written as part of a consumer-driven movement in which we would like to peacefully air our grievances with Nintendo and all involved in making Super Smash Bros. on the general direction of the series.



Super Smash Bros. has had the amazing distinction of being playable both as party game and as an engrossing competitive experience. This is an incredible feat as it allowed two completely different audiences to enjoy a game for completely different reasons. We represent a large part of the competitive community, one that enjoys a particular kind of competitive play.



What made Super Smash Bros. Melee the most fun for us is a combination of elements. The first was having a wide range of movement options. Wavedashing, L-cancelling, and dash-dancing to name a few allowed players to move in very novel manners, space attacks, approach and evade quickly as well as combo more effectively. These techniques allow for the game to become much more offensive-oriented, rewarding taking risks over camping and biding one’s time. It becomes more exciting as a spectator sport. Of course, dodging on bad timing would need to be slightly easier to punish for it to take the desired effect. Many competitive smashers will say that Super Smash Bros. is heavily about positioning your character in the right spot. Nevertheless, this emphasis on position and movement is what set Super Smash Bros. apart from other fighters. It is what made it unique as an esport.



The second is physics variety. One thing certain people bemoan of Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Super Smash Bros U/3DS is that they feel that most characters are very slow and floaty. While it is perfectly fine for certain characters to be on this end of the spectrum like Super Smash Bros. Melee’s Jigglypuff, some like the much faster, fast-falling characters. While no one is asking for all characters to be fast and highly technical, there is demand for it. Super Smash Bros. Melee did really well in this respect, having characters on the very both extreme ends of the spectrum and many in-betweens.



The third is sharp controls. Super Smash Bros. Melee did not have forced buffer, which prevented the player from selecting an input in inadvertence. Movements were crisp and immediate, which allowed players to move their character on command.



Recoveries also play a part. Whenever recoveries are too potent, it drags out matches. Many feel that the latest games make coming back on stage much easier, which doesn’t reward risk-taking, especially off stage as much. Being able to dodge multiple times in the air also removes some of that risk-reward incentive.



Finally, and one of the most important aspects is hitstun. One of the reasons why combos don’t seem as effective and reliable is because characters don’t suffer from nearly as much hitlag, and thus can act out of being hit much quicker. This can punish trying to be bold and creative.



Now let us be clear: We are not asking for another Melee, nor as we demanding that this game only appeal to our sensibilities. However, there are some elements from Melee that we would like to see return. We fully recognize that the party aspect of Super Smash Bros. is an important consideration and should exist alongside the competitive side. We believe that these two can co-exist, and they already have. Super Smash Bros. Melee was enjoyed by both communities. Now, more and more people are jumping into For Glory mode in Super Smash Bros. U/3DS. There is a desire for an engrossing competitive experience, and we would like to peacefully give you our feedback. We are fans, the same as the party smashers you have recently catered to. Mr. Sakurai has once stated that the series could not cater only to the competitive scene, but this is not what we are asking for. We are asking to be taken into consideration whilst also taking the needs of the casual smashers into consideration as well.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I will not be contributing to this thread, I will be monitoring it if something goes out of line.

 

[Vigilante]

I appreciate it. Thank you.

 

[HalcyonDays]

Thus far, the tone of the letter seems respectful enough, which is great.

I do have a few questions though.

Who do we plan to send the letter to? Will this letter be enough? Are there additional activities planned to help get our voices heard?

Also, about the 'verb-age' being used here. Will terms like Buffer/Hitstun/Hitlag/Fast-Fall/L-cancelling/Dash Dancing/etc, easily be understood by whomever it is that we're sending the letter to?

 

[Rizner]

I do not think l canceling is a movement option. You just want reduced landing lag on things, not necessarily that mechanic based on your writing.
People dying earlier is something you can point to in brawl, not yet smash 4. The game is 6 months old, people haven't figured out stuff and for all we know people will start to figure out edge guarding more effectively as time goes on.

The dodge factor being brought up as you can do it multiple times also makes it look like you don't understand how the counterplay works for that mechanic. It isn't free to do a second one. The idea is you bait out one and then you can punish, but you can't punish if they dodge through your attack in time.
The argument for movement works better in this regard.

For the buffer, some would say it feels better. I think you could argue for a reduced buffer, but without more behind that claim it doesn't seem like a good argument to make.

Also, you should reconsider the opening of being representative of a large part. I don't think a large part will contribute or express their support. You would need to get buy in from all communities, or change it to a large part of melee scene which then sets the tone of "our community is more important".
I personally do not support this idea, but figure it's better to explain issues with what's presented than ignore it as a whole. Realistically, there won't be a new smash in development anytime soon. Smash 4 won't change core mechanics. There is no benefit to getting this out there, and is kinda rude imo. Pm I've always seen as "we used your thing and made something really cool" and not "your thing sucked so we changed it to be good". This letter seems to present the latter, which I do not like.

edit: ok, I feel like I should expand on that last part.

I think wanting more mechanics makes sense. I think that presenting a letter to say that you want a game a different way doesn't. If you're a game designer and in charge of stuff, you don't want to keep making the same game. You want to add things in here or there, you want to provide a new experience for those playing and those making the game. If you get told "Make this game again, put in the same mechanics, make it a little different" for many games in a row, as the lead designer you would be really bored and angry and unhappy with the experience. I agree that more movement options would be really fun. But at the same time, I think this letter presents it more as a requirement and not as much of a request.

Also, you're suggesting that the competitive scene as a whole will not enjoy a game without these (x) techniques added back in, and trying to force design decisions to them. I think a letter saying more broadly you want more options, you want more control, etc, and after that giving specific examples of when that control existed and when it didn't would be a better approach, but even then you are trying to represent a group larger than what I think you see. Also, if you try to add to the movement options that you want hitlag, you l-cancel, you want fast fallers to be relevant, it really does seem like you're just trying to recreate melee, because hitlag doesn't give movement, l cancel is just a random technique, wavedashing seems cool, but none of that really tie together in a design decision outside of "They were all in melee so they're all good and we want them all". And if you were in the room creating this game, and you were then told "Fit all of these techniques into this game" it would take away much of the design decisions, and things would end up all the same and we would be the next game to get random updates with no real features added in except a new layout on an old thing. I mean realistically, the way this looks is "remake melee, but with updated graphics and a new roster," even if that's not how you're trying to present it.
I appreciate the games being different. There are some aspects in each one which I would take and put into an overall 'best mechanic choices' - not just melee. And if they were influenced when making brawl and smash 4 to fit this stuff in instead of exploring new territory, those mechanics would have never existed.

 

[Vigilante]

Thus far, the tone of the letter seems respectful enough, which is great.

I do have a few questions though.

Who do we plan to send the letter to? Will this letter be enough? Are there additional activities planned to help get our voices heard?

Also, about the 'verb-age' being used here. Will terms like Buffer/Hitstun/Hitlag/Fast-Fall/L-cancelling/Dash Dancing/etc, easily be understood by whomever it is that we're sending the letter to?

When it's done, I feels ending it to NOA would be our best bet since they appear more open about competitions. I'm giving it two weeks to edit it and make it better. Clearly, we need to involved the Melee community at some point, earlier is easier. We'd likely need a decent ambassador to get the message accross.

I personally see L-cancelling as a movement option (e.g. option to speed up movement), but I could certainly clarify the reasons why it is appreciated.

Also, why you may disagree Rizner, I do appreciate that you've made your contribution. I think it's good that we take into account all impressions. However,t he argument pertaining to hitstun is for another purpose: It is not for movement, it is to improve combo options.

 

[Rizner]

When it's done, I feels ending it to NOA would be our best bet since they appear more open about competitions. I'm giving it two weeks to edit it and make it better. Clearly, we need to involved the Melee community at some point, earlier is easier. We'd likely need a decent ambassador to get the message accross.

I personally see L-cancelling as a movement option (e.g. option to speed up movement), but I could certainly clarify the reasons why it is appreciated.

Also, why you may disagree Rizner, I do appreciate that you've made your contribution. I think it's good that we take into account all impressions. However,t he argument pertaining to hitstun is for another purpose: It is not for movement, it is to improve combo options.

But you could just make the argument you want less landing lag on aerials, not that you want the l cancel mechanic.

Also, you're missing out on the entire smash 4 and brawl competitive scenes. It's a large contingent which seems to be ignored by this project. This letter seems to be drafted as a competitive viewpoint, but you can't just include the competitive scenes which agree with you and say that's how everyone feels.

 

[Vigilante]

Less landing lag, certainly is good, and would be fine with autocancel, albeit the act of L-canceling does add something. It,s a reward for keeping up with pressure.

As for the other scenes, the response I would give you would piss you off, so I would rather not. Let's just say that I can change it to state the majority of the competitive scene, which emans Melee/64/Project M and even a sizeable amount of Brawl and Smash 4 players who play the games but would rather see these implemented.Nevertheless, I don' tthink many can argue that more depth is not required.

 

[Rizner]

Less landing lag, certainly is good, and would be fine with autocancel, albeit the act of L-canceling does add something. It,s a reward for keeping up with pressure.

As for the other scenes, the response I would give you would piss you off, so I would rather not. Let's just say that I can change it to state the majority of the competitive scene, which emans Melee/64/Project M and even a sizeable amount of Brawl and Smash 4 players who play the games but would rather see these implemented.Nevertheless, I don' tthink many can argue that more depth is not required.

You can't just assume that a large portion of each of those scenes feels that way without something to back it up. I honestly don't believe that, and when you make a statement like that it'd lead me to believe nothing in your letter. Get data - get people to sign up, get people to vote, get something more than just saying "This is how it is, trust me I know some people in my area."

Also, L-Cancelling doesn't add that reward because of it existing as a mechanic. It adds that reward because it gives less landing lag and you can act earlier. If it wasn't in melee, but every move had half the landing lag, it would be the same but less technical players wouldn't need to do it. That needs to be addressed if you're trying to argue why it's good to be in the game. What does that do to help? Why is that a fun thing which provides game health?


Also, to not explain your reasoning or decision because you think it would make me mad just gives me the impression that you don't have a real answer for it. I don't really get salty about things. If I don't agree, I'll let you know. I can handle it - feel free to elaborate, and if you think I'm dumb that's fine. We can talk about why, and keep moving forward.

 

[1ampercent]

When I was still a casual Brawler, one of the things I really wanted was the momentum from a dash being retained in jumps. I grew up playing Mario Bros, so it's not something of high difficulty to understand/learn at all. I didn't understand why they'd take it out when it was present in the previous smash game.

Also annoyed about the fact that Nintendo seemingly rushed their game engine/physics, because of the 0-2 frames of controller input delay present in Brawl (which was unknown to almost everyone until years after release), and the fact that they removed DACUS and SOME of the vectoring in smash 4 in later patches, and then decided to stop patching the game so soon after release... I'd rather have the game delayed with it's intended physics engine optimized correctly.

I dislike buffer, but can respect it's decision to implement it, but 10 frames of buffer, + wiimote delay, + random 0-2 frames of input delay was atrocious in Brawl. I don't know how many frames of buffer there is in smash 4 but it's still too much I think. There is no need to have it at 10 frames, both casual and competitive players I know share this view.

 

[zpxociv]

I hate L-cancel and if it's included as part of the requested changes then I won't support this. I and many others. If you don't make compromises in order to achieve the largest amount of support then you won't end up with enough to convince Nintendo the opinions expressed are more universally agreed to than not. L-cancel doesn't "add more depth" because it's either you use it all the time or you don't because you don't know about it or don't care. If that's "depth" to you then your sense of depth is quite shallow. This isn't an argument, I'm actually trying to inform you that your attempt to show Nintendo a collective opinion is being tainted by a bias that is very much NOT part of a majority preference.

 

[MegaMissingno]

I'm not a fan of the button press, but ultimately all that matters to me is the end result of less landing lag. Either way is better than Smash 4's full duration, just do something to cut it down.

 

[OSCA MIKE]

i just want a game that is easy to pick up and hard to master

with a deep engaging mental game that rewards technical proficiency as much as it does mental proficiency, something that is extremely apparent in top level Melee gameplay, like the grand finals of APEX 2015

 

[HalcyonDays]

Well, it seems there's quite a bit of disagreement between those who prefer L-canceling and those who don't. In the end, I feel it's a matter of opinion.

I, personally, actually like L-cancelling. I say this as someone who plays and enjoys all of the Smash games at a proficient level. The argument over whether or not L-canceling adds depth or not has been covered extensively in other topics, so I won't bother to argue for or against its legitimacy, or how I feel about the topic, here.

I think trying to convince the other side of your own point of views towards L-canceling will ultimately be fruitless and will end up de-railing the thread. If you want to continue the arguments further, reading up on previous threads and forums would probably have the same result as giving the same repeated arguments, and would ultimately save us time and energy.

Instead, why don't we search for a solution that aims to please both sides?

I've been playing the 20XX hack pack. It gives the option to turn L-cancelling on or off, with the off function automatically reducing landing lag on all aerials. Giving players this option, among other options such as the choice to use the Melee air-dodge or the Brawl/Sm4sh air-dodge, and perhaps even the dash-dance feature would enable players to mix and match what gameplay aspects they'd like to use for themselves.

This isn't an ultimate solution of course, because then the question becomes, 'So what should the tournament standard be?'

It's a lot more difficult to answer this question, since some scenarios in my head would be to allow 'Melee-style' vs 'Brawl/Sm4sh-Style' tourneys but then, it complicates things further.

Still, having customizable options of this caliber would be a start. At least both sides would get what they want, in a way. As far as Tournament Standards go, it would most likely be up to the TO. This could cause divides in the tournament scene, but then, there were already divides in the communities anyway. At least, in this way, both could have their cake and eat it, organizing their own tournaments under their own rulesets.

@ MegaMissingno The creators of Sm4sh have given a method to reduced landing lag (sort of) through the Smooth Lander equipment, which basically auto-cancels your aerial landing lag. Unfortunately, tourneys have been refraining from using it, because of various difficulties with which to acquire the equipment, along with some stat-changes that the equipment forces on you. It's a real shame, because I would've liked to see where we could've gone with it.

 

[zpxociv]

For tourneys, it should just be to allow them whatever setup they want and this is done by allowing the settings to be set by individual player so an auto-canceler can compete with a manual canceler. Sure, elitism would cause trouble around forums but there is the argument that "demanding controls will ruin hands over time when playing with Fox" so it would end up that elitist sentiment is stupid because there are human limits to how controls should work and they should be made as easy as possible so it's not like other fighting games where it's devolved into pretzel inputs just to do one thing. That stuff is utterly degenerate and drives the newcomers away and smash is special for mostly steering clear of it but things like L-cancel and wavedashing are coasting it towards that direction and I've even feared that a popular mod for smash could very well be driven by elitism right into that territory. Luigi's cyclone recovery and Fox's shine crap should be limited by what human hands can handle and they simply aren't and that's unfair to most and damaging to the hands of the few that can do them. Too bad elitism is exactly what PM is really about and auto L-cancel would have been an option included in PM if it weren't.

 

[1ampercent]

If you want to read up good arguments for and against L-canceling, click here, not everyone who wants L-canceling is an elitist.

On average, the stage blastzones and sizes are quite large, so characters survive into high %'s most of the time. In Melee, there are some smaller competitive stages such as Yoshi's Story and Fountain of Dreams. Brawl, and Smash Wii U lacks these kinds of stages. It's intense staying alive at high %'s, but seeing it happen so frequently makes it boring for spectators, especially with the lack of combos and safe KO moves, it forces players to play extremely safe almost all the time.

 

[zpxociv]

If you want to read up good arguments for and against L-canceling, click here, not everyone who wants L-canceling is an elitist.

On average, the stage blastzones and sizes are quite large, so characters survive into high %'s most of the time. In Melee, there are some smaller competitive stages such as Yoshi's Story and Fountain of Dreams. Brawl, and Smash Wii U lacks these kinds of stages. It's intense staying alive at high %'s, but seeing it happen so frequently makes it boring for spectators, especially with the lack of combos and safe KO moves, it forces players to play extremely safe almost all the time.

The irony is that most of the arguments for L-cancel in that thread IS pure elitism. "Skill barriers are important for weeding out the weak from being able to compete with the better players" -this sums it up real well. These elitists disgust me and they deserve what Sakurai did to the later smash games and may Nintendo never ever consider the letter they make! (the whole thing's a joke anyway)

 

[MegaMissingno]

Wanting skill barriers isn't necessarily "elitist". After all this is a game of skill, and you could describe almost any element or mechanic that way. What's wrong with promoting skill? I may not be a fan of L-canceling myself, but you're grossly oversimplifying things by basically trying to say that skill is bad and Sakurai should remove skill.

 

[Bleck]

I wasn't gonna post in this thread but if y'all are gonna argue about l-canceling I may not be able to stop myself

 

[Ningildo]

See, things like wavedashing and dash dancing are tools that take skill to use effectively and what separate the good from the bad and so on. L-cancelling on the other hand isn't a tool that needs time and experience to master, it's just a button press that you do 100% of the time to not give your opponent frame advantage. Nothing more bar very rare cases.

That said, zpxociv is just focusing on the mention of l-cancelling as a tool and flipping his **** instead of calmly stating why he thinks this to be wrong.

Let's not derail this thread again, maybe?

 

[JOE!]

The merit to l canceling is that it keeps your hands busy, giving you more apm/aps and thus feels good to do. However, it is a placebo of sorts in that it can be replaced with universally reduced landing lag and net the same effect for 99.5% of all interactions in the game.

Overall, not really a needed mechanic. Wd and dd on the other hand add to the game in different ways. The latter would be easier to ask for (why can't I dash back and forth?), as asking for straight up wavedashing seems... Heavy handed toward melee?

 

[zpxociv]

I don't know why I even bothered to argue in here, I don't have the slightest trace of hope that Nintendo would ever pay this letter any attention anyway. Go ahead and tell Nintendo to make a smash game with el cancelo and all the other hand-blistering tryhard muh skillz crap you want. I hope you get stigmata-level weeping open blood blisters from it all. The only thing I wanna know is how the holy hell does this letter even get to Nintendo? Is there a fanmail PO box you send it to? Who is reading it? I bet it gets tossed before they even open it.

 

[PootisKonga]

Confirmed troll, put on ignore

 

[zpxociv]

Confirmed troll, put on ignore

Announcing ignores is just as abrasive and spamming as anything a troll posts but this sheep prefers the wool over its eyes. Sleep tight in your willful ignorance, like a good little sheltered/brainwashed child.

I'm not even trolling, it's a fact that too many inputs ruins hands for Fox users. People like Pootie just want to slap their dumb labels on posters so they can disregard them through that cheap ad hominem mechanism and that's rather pathetic.

 

[MegaMissingno]

People like Pootie just want to slap their dumb labels on posters so they can disregard them through that cheap ad hominem mechanism and that's rather pathetic.

You're the one who came in here calling people elitists and tryhards just for liking a mechanic that you don't.

 

[PootisKonga]

Announcing ignores is just as abrasive and spamming as anything a troll posts but this sheep prefers the wool over its eyes. Sleep tight in your willful ignorance, like a good little sheltered/brainwashed child.

I'm not even trolling, it's a fact that too many inputs ruins hands for Fox users. People like Pootie just want to slap their dumb labels on posters so they can disregard them through that cheap ad hominem mechanism and that's rather pathetic.

No offense, but you are using a lot of buzzwords and phrases that just scream "conspiracy theorist" to me. I'd pay you more heed if you could be a bit less fervent about your opinions and backed them up better, or even offered logical reasons to why you feel this is a fruitless endeavor in the short- or long-term

 

[Vigilante]

I think we mostly agree that less landing lag is necessary. Now on the methods to achieve it, I think we can spend days arguing them.

I think we can agree that landing lag itself is an issue. It needs a way to make it faster. While I think that L-canceling is a great mechanic, I wouldn't appose a means of adding a crutch / learning tool for those hwo have a hard tiem with it at first.

Nevertheless, I've said many times that this is a template. If you don,t want to sue the term "L-canceling", you may send the letter by just saying you want les slanding lag. Still, I believe that any option that reduces landing lag or gives the option to reduce it is better than the current alternatives.

I'm fine with you guys editing the letter a tiny bit to reflect that you only want to see landing lag, but despite those minor differences, we should at least unite on the whole.

@ Rizner : I don't see Brawl especially as a game that really needs to be pandered to in this movement as its goal is in major part to have games derail from that drection. Hence, I don't think it would make much sense to change the public statement of the movement in order to pander to those who demand the complete opposite of what our demands are. We can try to be inclusive as much as possible, but we need some coherence.

@Everyone else: This letter will be revisited at the latest, Sunday next week. I want to let more feedback come in. I want to reiterate: If you disagree with minor points in it, you don't have to bring them up. However, we need to stay united on the core of it all. I will argue for L-canceling. You do not have to, and thus you can merely argue for less landing lag. There cannot be in-fighting within the ranks.

 

[OSCA MIKE]

I don't mind L-cancelling existing as it is right now, but if it is removed, I certainly wouldn't mind

In fact, it might even be better, as that's one less button I have to press

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I don't know why I even bothered to argue in here, I don't have the slightest trace of hope that Nintendo would ever pay this letter any attention anyway. Go ahead and tell Nintendo to make a smash game with el cancelo and all the other hand-blistering tryhard muh skillz crap you want. I hope you get stigmata-level weeping open blood blisters from it all. The only thing I wanna know is how the holy hell does this letter even get to Nintendo? Is there a fanmail PO box you send it to? Who is reading it? I bet it gets tossed before they even open it.

Confirmed troll, put on ignore

Be respectful, no need for harshness.

Let me ask this for this to be worded better.

What purpose does L-Cancelling serve. Ignore Melee for a moment. People want lower landing lag, then why are we making it require a button? If it does, is there choice to not pressing it?

I think that is better discussed than trying to shout at people who want it back in.

 

[Bleck]

why should there be lower landing lag

 

[Rizner]

@ Rizner : I don't see Brawl especially as a game that really needs to be pandered to in this movement as its goal is in major part to have games derail from that drection. Hence, I don't think it would make much sense to change the public statement of the movement in order to pander to those who demand the complete opposite of what our demands are. We can try to be inclusive as much as possible, but we need some coherence.

Ok, with that in mind, let's drop brawl from the previous statements.

What about the current smash 4 community? You should either include them, or post instead that this is a letter from the Melee community. Even then, get numbers to back it up, get polls going, etc. My point still stands that you should not state you're a large part of the competitive community, when you have no real substance to back that up.

It seems you're making a lot of assumptions about scenes and general outlooks.

As for the other scenes, the response I would give you would piss you off, so I would rather not. Let's just say that I can change it to state the majority of the competitive scene, which emans Melee/64/Project M and even a sizeable amount of Brawl and Smash 4 players who play the games but would rather see these implemented.Nevertheless, I don' tthink many can argue that more depth is not required.

Why would you say the majority of melee/64/project m people want this? How is 64 included in that group; who have you talked to from that scene asking for dash dancing, wavedash, less landing lag?
What do you consider a sizeable amount of smash 4 players who want these techniques? What about the possibly larger part of the smash 4 competitive scene who like what it has?

 

[MegaMissingno]

why should there be lower landing lag

So that aerial approaches are more viable options instead of being the most laggy and easily punished moves in the game.

 

[Bleck]

why should all aerial moves be viable approaches

 

[GP&B]

Not all aerials should be (and a good chunk of them even in Melee and PM aren't unless spaced really well), but being able to approach from the air can make up for awful ground game on some characters.

 

[MegaMissingno]

Why should all aerial moves be unviable approaches?

 

[Bleck]

burden of proof is on you, bub

 

[PandaPanda Senketsu]

why should there be lower landing lag

1-Because they're in a fight and probably wouldn't do things that leave them hilariously vulnerable.

2-They don't have that kind of end lag in their own games.

3- "I just love end lag it adds so much depth!" No one ever says that.

Everyone I know would rather have less end lag so they can get back into the fray faster. So far it just makes all the characters seem slow and lethargic, the game would be much smoother with reduced end lag.

 

[JayTheUnseen]

I think a pretty simple solution is to simply say in the letter, something to the effect of:
"Less landing lag on aerials should be introduced, whether through the existence of L-Canceling or not."

Most everyone would like less landing lag on aerials. It adds a more fluid air to ground game.
L Canceling is far more controversial. I am fine either way with the inclusion or exclusion of this mechanic.
It adds satisfaction if used in a combo, yes.

But on the other hand, it adds an extra, unneeded button press and adds an extra skill barrier that Nintendo most likely would not want to have.
Plus, some people may not even care enough to try learning it in the first place.

So I'd say no to L Canceling, personally.

 

[Bleck]

1-Because they're in a fight and probably wouldn't do things that leave them hilariously vulnerable.

2-They don't have that kind of end lag in their own games.

3- "I just love end lag it adds so much depth!" No one ever says that

all of these reasons are bad and you should feel bad

 

[PandaPanda Senketsu]

Any suggestion that will make the game look + feel smoother is a pretty good suggestion if you ask me.

Don't delude yourself into thinking poor design choices are good because they're in smash 4.