Correlation Between Popularity and Viability

[Purpletuce]

I think there is a correlation (not perfect) between character viability and how commonly they are played. Obviously some people will play the characters they like instead of the ones they think they would be best off with, but I think those players would be selected, so to speak, out. Natural selection in smash, where those that tend to lose (bad players, characters or otherwise) will tend to lose, and adapt(switching playstyles, mains, etc.) or quit. I also think it should be considered that when people look for a new main, if they don't know for sure, they think about higher tiers first.

It should seem obvious that at the most basic level this correlation holds up (in the competitive scene) just by looking at most players you face, it is mainly that top 6 or so accounting for about 50% of the players, and then upper/mid tier taking an additional majority, and low tier mains being relatively rare.

Just wondering what others thought.

 

[Jockmaster]

I've always thought this mostly applied to Captain Falcon especially. Like, while he is a great character with decent comboing ability, I always thought his metagame was much more advanced than his actual strengths vs. weaknesses deserved.

People just love the Cap so his metagame was developed. He had ENOUGH strengths to justify using him at a high level.

 

[Dan Salvato]

I agree with this, and it explains, in my opinion, the sprinkling of mid-tiers among the top players (Wobbles, Shroomed, Axe). If anything, these players demonstrate the complete viability of these characters. However, if a character is unpopular then less people are willing to main that character, further perpetuating that character's lack of popularity. The lack of popularity brings people to assume that the character is less viable. In my opinion, it's a cycle that prevents important metagame from being developed among many characters.

 

[Purpletuce]

Jock, I actually started thin,king about this specifically about CF, so you're not the only one.

 

[Jockmaster]

I feel that specifically Pikachu is one character who has an extremely underdeveloped metagame for his apparent ability.

Like size of his shield and grab range aside, Pikachu on paper looks like a pretty good character.

 

[The Star King]

^I actually thought the same thing.

Spoiler

Also Yoshi.

 

[ph00tbag]

More often it's the other way around. Characters who wouldn't be particularly popular get more use due to how good they are. The Star Fox games are a relatively niche series, and few people really play spacies because they think Fox and Falco are the greatest mercenaries in the Lylat system. Most people play them because they're clearly among the best characters in the game. Sheik was around for really only part of Ocarina of Time, and in smash, she's pretty much always boring. But she's a popular character because she's easy to play at a large range of skill levels.

On the other hand, Link is probably the most popular character in the game. He's still ****.

 

[Dan Salvato]

More often it's the other way around. Characters who wouldn't be particularly popular get more use due to how good they are. The Star Fox games are a relatively niche series, and few people really play spacies because they think Fox and Falco are the greatest mercenaries in the Lylat system. Most people play them because they're clearly among the best characters in the game. Sheik was around for really only part of Ocarina of Time, and in smash, she's pretty much always boring. But she's a popular character because she's easy to play at a large range of skill levels.

On the other hand, Link is probably the most popular character in the game. He's still ****.

I think there's a difference between popular in the casual world and popular in the competitive world. A character who is popular among casuals won't see any development whatsoever, but a character who is popular among competitive players will see its metagame and viability increase quickly.

 

[Kimimaru]

The tier list heavily influences this as well. I remember when they changed the SSB64 tier list and Fox was placed above Kirby; everyone online suddenly started playing Fox more. Once he got moved back down, fewer people were playing him all of a sudden. You also have to take into account the fact that since higher tiers are more popular, they also have more resources and discussion available to them (most of the low tier boards barely get any activity), so their metagames get more advanced while the others get left behind. This in particular is one of the reasons I think some of the mid/low tiers have more potential than most people think they do.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I agree that there is a correlation, but that in the (very) long run, that correlation's impact becomes less and less.

I was thinking more about Yoshi and Marth, but Falcon is a good example too. There's also that self-fulfilling nature to it, but that only really applies at the amateur level. Top players will always be top players no matter who they use.

 

[Construct]

Popular characters are popular because they're fun to play; being fun just happens to go hand-in-hand with being viable for the most part. Nobody wants to awkwardly struggle with Mewtwo when they could have a much easier, and enjoyable, experience playing Sheik or Fox.

The main exceptions to this would be the Ice Climbers and Jigglypuff. Both are extremely viable, yet underplayed because they function in such an off-kilter manner. Conversely, these two characters have the highest average ELOs on ssbpd. Interesting stuff.

 

[Purpletuce]

I think, and most people will probably agree with me here, that low tiers are more fun to play. . . when is that last time you thought, boy, I really miss laser camping with Fox, or Bair camping with Jiggs? Also, Jiggs is pretty popular.

Definitely agree with tier list bias, but it is what it is.

 

[DerfMidWest]

I really enjoy some low tiers... But you need to be a special kind of player to enjoy some of them.
People tend to enjoy fox and falco, etc not just because they are good, but because they are just... Fun lol.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Fox and falco are mad fun to play. Same@falcon. Kirby is boring as **** but i dont care I still love him. That said there is something to be said for popularity defining viability. While competitive players will always lean towards characters that are just obviously better, certain characters, falcon especially gained huge amounts of metagame expansion just because of the sheer number of players who play him, thus increasing his viability.

 

[Deleted member]

mario funnest character easily

 

[Wake]

I think, and most people will probably agree with me here, that low tiers are more fun to play. . . when is that last time you thought, boy, I really miss laser camping with Fox, or Bair camping with Jiggs? Also, Jiggs is pretty popular.

Definitely agree with tier list bias, but it is what it is.

I don't think playing the low tiers is more fun than playing the top tiers. I guess I generally have more fun if I have more viable options to utilize. That being said, I enjoy playing Ness, Pichu, Zelda, Mario, and Ganon.

Peach is the most fun to me. That's why I play her.

 

[The Star King]

I think, and most people will probably agree with me here, that low tiers are more fun to play. . .

lol most people won't

 

[Twinkles]

i'm one of those people
most low tiers are mad boring to me compared to high tier chars

 

[Dan Salvato]

I think the joy people get from playing a low tier is simply from succeeding with a bad character. Seeing a low tier do well against a high tier sends hype levels through the roof, and for the player it provides a great sense of personal accomplishment. Also, maining a low tier gives players a greater area with which to explore, since the metagame is not so excruciatingly developed.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I like Pichu because he can up-B twice in the same direction *shrug*

 

[DerfMidWest]

I like Pichu because.... I'm not really sure. But I mained him for a long time and he's still one of my favorite characters ever.

I don't think anybody mains a character that they don't find to be fun. Thats a lot of commitment and if you don't enjoy it there is no point.

However fun is subjective, so while one person could find, say, Yoshi to be the most fun, another could enjoy laser camping fox the most.

 

[Jockmaster]

I think Roy is one million times more fun to use than Marth

Dont know why...

I still get really salty about how he can't recover at all though. Like every single match.

 

[KirbyKaze]

I think, and most people will probably agree with me here, that low tiers are more fun to play. . . when is that last time you thought, boy, I really miss laser camping with Fox, or Bair camping with Jiggs? Also, Jiggs is pretty popular.

Definitely agree with tier list bias, but it is what it is.

Yeah, bomb-camping with YL for 6 minutes sure beats playing top tier!

 

[MasterShake]

mario funnest character easily

Agreed, ****ing love playing as mario.

 

[stabbedbyanipple]

I think, and most people will probably agree with me here, that low tiers are more fun to play. . . when is that last time you thought, boy, I really miss laser camping with Fox, or Bair camping with Jiggs? Also, Jiggs is pretty popular.

Definitely agree with tier list bias, but it is what it is.

That's like the opposite of what's true. Top tiers have the most options, and can therefore do the most stuff, so if anything you don't need to laser camp or bair camp. Low tiers BY DEFINITION have less options/more flaws and therefore have to play more defensively and wait for mistakes, because they don't have the options to just go in and **** **** up.

 

[Jockmaster]

Ehh...variety of options =/= viability of character.

He is correct in that, by the sheer number of comparative options, Jiggs doesn't have many like other top tiers do. What she DOES have is an extremely strong approach in her bair+aerial mobility.

Many low tiers have lots of options, they are just terrible ones. Roy essentially has the same options as Marth, except his ability to abuse them is drastically inferior.

But yeah Fox does have like loads of different approaches to any given situation so he isn't comparable to Jiggs.

 

[Massive]

People love Mario, yet he does not have many players at all. Why? He's not fox.
Same thing with Link and Samus. These are flagship characters many people recognize, but they're underrepresented because they're not as easy to pick-up-and-play as Sheik or Fox/Falco.

The biggest issue with lower tiers is that so few of their moves are viable, that is "safe", that they get pigeonholed into certain tactics that are usually counter-able once you figure them out. Maybe you can exploit their recovery, maybe they have laggy aerials, maybe their shield is garbage, maybe they can't jump out of shield, it doesn't matter.

Figuring out these weaknesses means a character without them immediately has the advantage.

Generally speaking though, beating somebody with a low tier (assuming it's not that character's gimmick matchup) is generally a display of better fundamental understanding of gameplay than your opponent... or incredible luck.

 

[Bones0]

I agree with this, and it explains, in my opinion, the sprinkling of mid-tiers among the top players (Wobbles, Shroomed, Axe). If anything, these players demonstrate the complete viability of these characters. However, if a character is unpopular then less people are willing to main that character, further perpetuating that character's lack of popularity. The lack of popularity brings people to assume that the character is less viable. In my opinion, it's a cycle that prevents important metagame from being developed among many characters.

<3

I like Pichu because he can up-B twice in the same direction *shrug*

So can Pikachu.

 

[Wake]

He probably likes Pikachu too. lol

 

[Kink-Link5]

I don't think Bones knows anything about either character if he thinks Pikachu can QA twice without changing angle.

I hate Pikachu because of how much less lenient Uair is to combo, up-B, U-smash, D-smash, and aesthetically, bair. It just makes more sense that Pichu hits by spinning hit head around his body as a pivot than whatever the **** Pikachu does when he bairs.

 

[ShrieK1295]

People love Mario, yet he does not have many players at all. Why? He's not fox.
Same thing with Link and Samus. These are flagship characters many people recognize, but they're underrepresented because they're not as easy to pick-up-and-play as Sheik or Fox/Falco.

The biggest issue with lower tiers is that so few of their moves are viable, that is "safe", that they get pigeonholed into certain tactics that are usually counter-able once you figure them out. Maybe you can exploit their recovery, maybe they have laggy aerials, maybe their shield is garbage, maybe they can't jump out of shield, it doesn't matter.

Figuring out these weaknesses means a character without them immediately has the advantage.

Generally speaking though, beating somebody with a low tier (assuming it's not that character's gimmick matchup) is generally a display of better fundamental understanding of gameplay than your opponent... or incredible luck.

+1 to this. I used to play Luigi and thought he was pretty good because he has a lot of boons on paper, but once I started playing people who knew how to counter him, that ****er is not fun to play.

 

[DerfMidWest]

I don't think Bones knows anything about either character if he thinks Pikachu can QA twice without changing angle.

Pikachu can... Its just harder.

I hate Pikachu because of how much less lenient Uair is to combo, up-B, U-smash, D-smash, and aesthetically, bair. It just makes more sense that Pichu hits by spinning hit head around his body as a pivot than whatever the **** Pikachu does when he bairs.

He's fat too.
But Pika is pree fun. If only he wasn't as laggy :/
Also his bair is stupid and isn't useful. Pichu's bair does have uses though.
And Pichu isn't laggy.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Pikachu can... Its just harder.

Elaborate. Pikachu has to change his angle when using the second up-B.

 

[ph00tbag]

I think there's a difference between popular in the casual world and popular in the competitive world. A character who is popular among casuals won't see any development whatsoever, but a character who is popular among competitive players will see its metagame and viability increase quickly.

Go back to 2001. The competitive community back then was almost indistinguishable from the casual community. In many places, they were one and the same. There would have been many more Link, Pikachu, Kirby players in those days. But then, people realized that these characters weren't worth playing when they're really only marginally viable at best.

Falcon fits into this as well. At low to mid levels, he was simply better than other characters, whether he was popular or not. So fewer players dropped him for high tiers.

 

[Mahie]

Elaborate. Pikachu has to change his angle when using the second up-B.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUrKbyyJWas

 

[DerfMidWest]

Yea basically that.
You rotate it really fast.
I can't do them consistently with pika since I don't really use him anymore, but it is possible.
Its easier with Pichu tho. Like a lot easier.

 

[Kink-Link5]

It's only being done upward in the video. Is there any vid of it going in any /other/ direction twice, as Pichu can with any diagonal?

 

[Dan Salvato]

Falcon fits into this as well. At low to mid levels, he was simply better than other characters, whether he was popular or not. So fewer players dropped him for high tiers.

I actually don't agree with Falcon being better at low to mid levels. Think about what players in these category enjoy using most: Dash attack, special moves, and smash attacks. Captain Falcon isn't really known for any of those, especially when used alone. On the other hand, Fox and Sheik are, for the most part, fantastic in these categories, which would cause players to lean toward their play. Also Marth, because fsmash.

The point I'm making is that I don't believe there is a correlation between viability and casual popularity. Fox and Sheik were likely the first to be discovered and rise up because of their casual popularity. However, as the casual demographic and the competitive demographic began to separate more and more, we see less obvious characters rise to the top, such as Captain Falcon and Jigglypuff. Jigglypuff's incredibly slow rise to the top was likely a result of her not being popular on the casual front, but later gaining popularity on the competitive front.

 

[Purpletuce]

When I say I enjoy playing low tiers, I mean to say I have more fun playing them, omitting Yoshi, I would never go low tier if I want to play well, they are more fun, but pretty bad when you play it like that. Ex: I don't worry about how boring bomb camping is with TL, because I don't do it.

Another note: I'm a mid level player in Oregon who has played(competitive and tourneys, long time for casual/watching videos) for about 1/2 yrs.

 

[Bones0]

I don't think Bones knows anything about either character if he thinks Pikachu can QA twice without changing angle.

Do you enjoy being an *******, or is that just a side effect from being ignorant?