Critique Super Smash Bros.

[UserKev]

Mods, delete delete delete

 

[Perkilator]

You know…Crazy Hand being fought by himself is a big feat, and yet people who only do Classic Mode on 9.9 runs would only know that by playing WoL and reach the Dark Realm. That’s how insignificantly Classic Mode treats the poor guy.

If I were designing Classic Mode:

A). I would have more characters fight him ()
B). I would make it so Master Hand doesn’t join the battle on 7.0 or higher

 

[Ryu Myuutsu]

I mean, I have been outlining changes I'd like to see made to the characters along with those "loose" definitions. But if you need to me to, I can define those terms as well:
"creatively" = able to freeform gameplay and switch up their gameplan on the fly, rather than being forced/encouraged to stick to one mostly linear strategy
"expressively" = in a way that opens up a wide range of possibilities and depth based on a character's capabilities and enables individuals to play the same character uniquely and in a way that works for them
"effectively" = being good in the traditional sense; "viable", as we gamers would say it
Now that you know for certain what these terms mean (just because you don't know what a word means doesn't mean it's meaningless), hopefully you can see how designing character movesets this way would be better than how Smash currently does it. Essentially, I think Smash doesn't try hard enough to make its characters practical or think about what that character aims to do to win. I'll take the superheavies for instance, since I've already been talking about those. The superheavies (which, to be clear, includes anyone above and including Charizard and Incineroar on Ultimate's weight list) are designed to have a very dangerous threat bubble (i.e. the total area they can cover with their attacks), but struggle to bring it anywhere. This on its own isn't a bad start, but the issue is that most of them are slow as molasses and lack any form of ranged pressure, meaning anyone faster than them can run circles around them, while anyone with a solid ranged option can just sit back and pepper them with spam all day. Ergo, they are countered by a majority of the roster by design, ergo, they are not designed to succeed. Heavyweights being slow is a core part of their design philosophy and a big part of what makes them unique, so I went with the idea to make them better at range, either by giving them a projectile or by extending their threat bubble in some drastic way. I don't think every current superheavy necessarily needs a projectile - Bowser, maybe not, since he's arguably the only superheavy in Smash bar Brawl Snake to be genuinely good - but if they're gonna be a bunch of big slowpokes, some way of pressuring reluctant opponents into approaching (and, ideally, making punishable mistakes) would be a big help.

I understand what those words mean, but I'm afraid that doesn't make what you are saying more meaningful. You are just telling me that movesets are going to be better by making them "more creative, effective and viable", but you are not telling me the how. By that I mean moveset and gameplay design concepts. Don't know why that is so hard for you to grasp.

Take Sakurai for reference. In 2008 he did a presentation at the GDC: https://sourcegaming.info/2015/07/11/gdc-2008-translation/

He makes it a point about being able to describe a character's playstyle in a few words, putting his thoughts into moves and visualizing them with attack poses. That's ten times more meaningful that using buzzwords to make everything sound prettier. If you are going to tell me that the movesets you are proposing are going to be better, then you damn better be able to show me why.

You at least made some effort by talking about the heavies' struggles, but I'd argue there are better, more simple and more realizable ways to improve them right now instead of implementing dramatic changes. A projectile would help someone like Incineroar but it also goes against the archetype he is representing; so instead, increase his ground speed. Incineroar is the slowest runner in the game but his tools are extremely lethal at close proximity. Make him faster and he becomes more of a threat. Too much speed however could tip him in the opposite direction, so how much one should increase his speed would be a sensible matter.

I'd argue against Charizard and DK fitting the description of "slow as molases" because right now the former has good ground speed, the latter one good air speed and both have decent frame data. I also don't know why you think those guys need help with pressuring opponents when they struggle more defensively. DK's limbs cover a decent area at mid-close range and his Bair is good for aerial pressuring. Let's say we replace DK's current neutral B with the Coconut Gun. The ranged option will help for pressuring, but is not going to take away his fundamental problem of being combo food or susceptible to camping. Anyways, getting rid of a character's weaknesses doesn't exactly make for good design. If you really want to make DK better, a superior alternative would be to make the startup of his Nair faster since the move begins at frame 10, and shave some frames of it's endlag as well. Perhaps even make it's hitbox slightly bigger. That would make his disadvantage state better without completely removing his core weaknesses.

When it comes to proposing moveset changes, it just seems to me that you are aiming for the moon instead of focusing on the stuff at a smaller scale that would actually make a bigger difference.

I never said that superheavies can't succeed at all, mate. I just said they aren't designed to succeed, i.e. they aren't designed with success in mind, which I entirely stand by mainly for the reasons stated in the previous paragraph (as well as being combo food, generally having poor recoveries, having an awful time landing leading to painful juggle scenarios and piss-poor disadvantage states, etc.). If anything, when people do succeed with superheavies like Ben Gold did with K. Rool, I mostly see that as being in spite of their character and not because of them (people can do well with bad characters if they put the time and effort in to overcome that character's weaknesses, which is great for them, but it doesn't exactly paint a pretty picture of the character themselves). Ultimate Bowser I feel is the exception to this, and that's mainly because the game designers actually thought to give him unique strengths among the superheavies like good all-around mobility and passive armor (along with being the heaviest, nigh hardest-hitting guy around to boot). If every other superheavy were designed to have their own unique strengths like Bowser, I feel they'd all be in a pretty respectable place right now - for instance, go all in on DDD's pseudo-heavy-zoner archetype and give him a projectile that's actually good for zoning. It speaks volumes to me that even other superheavies that people generally speak well of like DK still have bottom-tier results on the whole. Sure, it is better than it was in games like Melee and Brawl where superheavies had virtually no chance of success at any level other than casual (besides Snake, who was notably designed to play at range unlike most superheavies), but just because it's good for Smash standards doesn't mean it's actually good

Hey, can't blame me for misunderstanding that, bud. You make that claim without enough context to back it, so you'll have to understand my confusion there. You are stil wrong though ¯\(ツ)/¯¯ .

Those characters being designed with having weaknesses in mind doesn't mean they can't succeed in general (and from now on, when I say succeed I mean winning matches at any level of play). I thought that a skilled player winning a major with an underdog character thus upsetting matches against higher tier charactes was supposed to be something to be celebrated; and yes, it's very obvious that is because of the player and not necesserily because of who they played as. But it shows how a great player can optimize a character and make that an insteresting sight to witness. Effort and practice can help make a difference as well. Many players who pick Joker, who is probably a top five or ten, don't necessarily succeed despite using a superior fighter, but MK Leo does because he put the time and effort into it. Oh, and not so long ago, Hikaru won a japanese offline major using solo DK.

This seems like something we're just going to have to agree to disagree on; I find Smash to be absolutely dreadful as a competitive game and only get frustrated with it when I try and play in a non-hyper-casual setting, while most everyone else seems to think it's fine despite near-constant gripes about the handling, the online, the movement, etc. I dunno, maybe I'm just crazy. I will say, though, that I find Smash much harder to control than any other game I play, even with the optimal control setup, which is both funny and somewhat baffling considering how accessible it sets out to be. I guess you can say I don't get what people see in this game gameplay-wise, as when I ask people why they like Smash as a game, the only reason I ever seem to get is "the characters tho".

I would say that incompetence, laziness and unwillingness to adapt plays a huge role in that matter. That's why I mentioned earlier that modern fighting games have many conveniences which is good, but also ends up spoiling players making them weak-willed. If the game is not your cup of tea that's fine, but just because you are not willing to explore it gameplay wise doesn't make it a shallow experience or a failure as a competitive game. There is a lot to learn about it. This year I've been learning about doing attack cancel and doing proper wave bouncing. The former has optimized my game with characters like Mario, DK and Fox who have good follow ups into Bair. The latter is still challenging to perfom in a fight because I still don't have it integrated on an unconcious level, but I hope to get there with enough practice. Just because you don't want to take the time to learn something doesn't make it dreadful.


You said the game doesn't feel good to move and players can't do anything remotely cool. You also seem to think that characters get two or three combos at most, and that isn't me putting words in your mouth. Yet I frequently see people doing all of that on highlight reels and tourneys. I'm nowhere near top level and even I can do that. I get a rush from zipping around the stage with Mario or Fox and doing horizontal and vertical combos with them, flowing seamlessly across the stage. I recall you saying that you picked Dedede because you couldn't move well; you just decided to stop there and there was nothing left, limiting to your own mindset. Just because you decided that that was it for you it doesn't mean that there wasn't any more depth to explore.

I also remember you complaining a bit too much about petty stuff in the Unpopular Opinions Thread. My point in bringing that up is: If non-trivial stuff is enough to ruin your gameplay experience, that just shows that you are simply too much of a candy ass to learn and adapt. Most successful people spend their time polishing their craft instead of complaining on a daily basis about what they can't control. You gripe about anything, so of course you get frustrated. You don't take accountability for your shortcomings so you naturally blame the game for sabotaging your experience. But just because you are a failure as a player it doesn't make it the game's fault, at least in it's entirety. Needless to say, I wouldn't trust your judgement on how to make a reboot for the better.

It is true that there will always be campy players in any game, but unlike in other games I play, in Smash, that ****'s encouraged. The lack of movement makes going on the offensive in general a complete and total slog, and even with the nerfs shields and dodges have gotten, defensive options are still stronger than offensive ones to the point that it's just a pain to play if that happens to be your preferred playstyle. And it's not totally a stage issue, either, I speak from experience when I say that people will find a way to camp on any stage if it keeps their ass safe, even tiny, tourney-legal ones like Battlefield. While I could just play their game and "outlame" them, at that point, I have to question if I'm having fun with the game anymore. Maybe it's just me, but if the game I'm playing forces me to play in a way that runs contrary to my preferred playstyle, then quite frankly, why not just play something else?

Then you don't have that much experience playing Street Fighter or other games for that matter. In every ST game, spammy Ryu is going to be a thing at all levels of play. They will spam Hadouken, force you to approach, then will uppercut you when you jump to approach. Guile and Sagat are other offenders. Marvel vs Capcom 3 had the Dr. Doom/Morrigan combo which produced a bullet hell that made it nearly impossible for an opponent to approach. There's also Magneto. Pokken has Chandelure and Braixen which are exclusively keep away. Injustice 1 has Deathstroke, Injustice 2 has Deadshot, MK10 has Kung Jin, and so on. There are still many examples to name.

With this in mind, it's baffling why you think this problem is exclusive to Smash and particularly encouraged in it. Sorry, but that's simply not true. Every game has this kind of stuff. You only need a character who has a spammy projectile and a player who is willing to play lame or too lazy to play any other way. I'd argue that this is less problematic in Smash because of the platforms and the ability double jump and dodge in the air. Play against a campy Ryu player in Street Fighter, where your space and movement options are more limited, then come back and tell me how bad is it in Smash by comparison. And the short answer to your question: Yeah, it's just you. The longer answer is two paragraphs above this one.

Not even that, necessarily. Increasing hitstun would certainly extend combos, but I'm talking about just tweaking characters' toolkits to be more conducive to combos in the first place. Stuff like changing the knockback angles and frame data on certain attacks to make them better combo starters; I sure as hell know Mewtwo's Dtilt could use some better angles on it, for instance. If you're still worried about combos being too extensive or whatever, then make DI stronger to make DI mixups more prominent and common (y'know, like in Melee).

Adjusting frame data and knockback angles? What sorcery are you talking abou-... oh, you mean buffs? So basically, what they've been doing in patches since Smash 4.

Did you play late Smash 4 Mewtwo? That was the peak of his design. He got a lot of mileage of Dtilt in that game, being able to combo into Utilt, Up Smash, Nair, Uair and Fair. He could do Fair>Fair or Nair then a follow up. They nerfed it in Ultimate by increasing it's endlag a little. It still true combos into Utilt, Nair, Uair and Fair, but Fair no longer combos into itself. I'm all for reverting it to the way it was in Smash 4, but I don't understand why you are suggesting an angle change when it was a perfectly fine combo starter. What angle did he need to cover when you could do Dtilt>Fair>Fair? You now seem to be complicating yourself by being too ambitituous and ambiguous.

There are also very combo heavy characters like Mario, Sheik, Fox, Joker, etc. so I don't why we are talking as if the game was lacking those kinds of playstyles. But then I remember that you can't play this game to save your life.

I'm all for more buffs that allow combos. Falco and Falcon got some nice changes in the latest patches and now they have some combos that they couldn't do before.

 

[meleebrawler]

I understand what those words mean, but I'm afraid that doesn't make what you are saying more meaningful. You are just telling me that movesets are going to be better by making them "more creative, effective and viable", but you are not telling me the how. By that I mean moveset and gameplay design concepts. Don't know why that is so hard for you to grasp.

Take Sakurai for reference. In 2008 he did a presentation at the GDC: https://sourcegaming.info/2015/07/11/gdc-2008-translation/

He makes it a point about being able to describe a character's playstyle in a few words, putting his thoughts into moves and visualizing them with attack poses. That's ten times more meaningful that using buzzwords to make everything sound prettier. If you are going to tell me that the movesets you are proposing are going to be better, then you damn better be able to show me why.

You at least made some effort by talking about the heavies' struggles, but I'd argue there are better, more simple and more realizable ways to improve them right now instead of implementing dramatic changes. A projectile would help someone like Incineroar but it also goes against the archetype he is representing; so instead, increase his ground speed. Incineroar is the slowest runner in the game but his tools are extremely lethal at close proximity. Make him faster and he becomes more of a threat. Too much speed however could tip him in the opposite direction, so how much one should increase his speed would be a sensible matter.

I'd argue against Charizard and DK fitting the description of "slow as molases" because right now the former has good ground speed, the latter one good air speed and both have decent frame data. I also don't know why you think those guys need help with pressuring opponents when they struggle more defensively. DK's limbs cover a decent area at mid-close range and his Bair is good for aerial pressuring. Let's say we replace DK's current neutral B with the Coconut Gun. The ranged option will help for pressuring, but is not going to take away his fundamental problem of being combo food or susceptible to camping. Anyways, getting rid of a character's weaknesses doesn't exactly make for good design. If you really want to make DK better, a superior alternative would be to make the startup of his Nair faster since the move begins at frame 10, and shave some frames of it's endlag as well. Perhaps even make it's hitbox slightly bigger. That would make his disadvantage state better without completely removing his core weaknesses.

When it comes to proposing moveset changes, it just seems to me that you are aiming for the moon instead of focusing on the stuff at a smaller scale that would actually make a bigger difference.



Hey, can't blame me for misunderstanding that, bud. You make that claim without enough context to back it, so you'll have to understand my confusion there. You are stil wrong though ¯\(ツ)/¯¯ .

Those characters being designed with having weaknesses in mind doesn't mean they can't succeed in general (and from now on, when I say succeed I mean winning matches at any level of play). I thought that a skilled player winning a major with an underdog character thus upsetting matches against higher tier charactes was supposed to be something to be celebrated; and yes, it's very obvious that is because of the player and not necesserily because of who they played as. But it shows how a great player can optimize a character and make that an insteresting sight to witness. Effort and practice can help make a difference as well. Many players who pick Joker, who is probably a top five or ten, don't necessarily succeed despite using a superior fighter, but MK Leo does because he put the time and effort into it. Oh, and not so long ago, Hikaru won a japanese offline major using solo DK.



I would say that incompetence, laziness and unwillingness to adapt plays a huge role in that matter. That's why I mentioned earlier that modern fighting games have many conveniences which is good, but also ends up spoiling players making them weak-willed. If the game is not your cup of tea that's fine, but just because you are not willing to explore it gameplay wise doesn't make it a shallow experience or a failure as a competitive game. There is a lot to learn about it. This year I've been learning about doing attack cancel and doing proper wave bouncing. The former has optimized my game with characters like Mario, DK and Fox who have good follow ups into Bair. The latter is still challenging to perfom in a fight because I still don't have it integrated on an unconcious level, but I hope to get there with enough practice. Just because you don't want to take the time to learn something doesn't make it dreadful.


You said the game doesn't feel good to move and players can't do anything remotely cool. You also seem to think that characters get two or three combos at most, and that isn't me putting words in your mouth. Yet I frequently see people doing all of that on highlight reels and tourneys. I'm nowhere near top level and even I can do that. I get a rush from zipping around the stage with Mario or Fox and doing horizontal and vertical combos with them, flowing seamlessly across the stage. I recall you saying that you picked Dedede because you couldn't move well; you just decided to stop there and there was nothing left, limiting to your own mindset. Just because you decided that that was it for you it doesn't mean that there wasn't any more depth to explore.

I also remember you complaining a bit too much about petty stuff in the Unpopular Opinions Thread. My point in bringing that up is: If non-trivial stuff is enough to ruin your gameplay experience, that just shows that you are simply too much of a candy ass to learn and adapt. Most successful people spend their time polishing their craft instead of complaining on a daily basis about what they can't control. You gripe about anything, so of course you get frustrated. You don't take accountability for your shortcomings so you naturally blame the game for sabotaging your experience. But just because you are a failure as a player it doesn't make it the game's fault, at least in it's entirety. Needless to say, I wouldn't trust your judgement on how to make a reboot for the better.



Then you don't have that much experience playing Street Fighter or other games for that matter. In every ST game, spammy Ryu is going to be a thing at all levels of play. They will spam Hadouken, force you to approach, then will uppercut you when you jump to approach. Guile and Sagat are other offenders. Marvel vs Capcom 3 had the Dr. Doom/Morrigan combo which produced a bullet hell that made it nearly impossible for an opponent to approach. There's also Magneto. Pokken has Chandelure and Braixen which are exclusively keep away. Injustice 1 has Deathstroke, Injustice 2 has Deadshot, MK10 has Kung Jin, and so on. There are still many examples to name.

With this in mind, it's baffling why you think this problem is exclusive to Smash and particularly encouraged in it. Sorry, but that's simply not true. Every game has this kind of stuff. You only need a character who has a spammy projectile and a player who is willing to play lame or too lazy to play any other way. I'd argue that this is less problematic in Smash because of the platforms and the ability double jump and dodge in the air. Play against a campy Ryu player in Street Fighter, where your space and movement options are more limited, then come back and tell me how bad is it in Smash by comparison. And the short answer to your question: Yeah, it's just you. The longer answer is two paragraphs above this one.




Adjusting frame data and knockback angles? What sorcery are you talking abou-... oh, you mean buffs? So basically, what they've been doing in patches since Smash 4.

Did you play late Smash 4 Mewtwo? That was the peak of his design. He got a lot of mileage of Dtilt in that game, being able to combo into Utilt, Up Smash, Nair, Uair and Fair. He could do Fair>Fair or Nair then a follow up. They nerfed it in Ultimate by increasing it's endlag a little. It still true combos into Utilt, Nair, Uair and Fair, but Fair no longer combos into itself. I'm all for reverting it to the way it was in Smash 4, but I don't understand why you are suggesting an angle change when it was a perfectly fine combo starter. What angle did he need to cover when you could do Dtilt>Fair>Fair? You now seem to be complicating yourself by being too ambitituous and ambiguous.

There are also very combo heavy characters like Mario, Sheik, Fox, Joker, etc. so I don't why we are talking as if the game was lacking those kinds of playstyles. But then I remember that you can't play this game to save your life.

I'm all for more buffs that allow combos. Falco and Falcon got some nice changes in the latest patches and now they have some combos that they couldn't do before.

Just gonna interject to say Braixen is far from a pure Zoner; if you tried to play her like that against someone like Chandelure she'd be crushed in the damage race and projectile priority. It is only really effective against slow characters like Machamp lacking good (anti)zoning tools of their own.

Which just illustrates how your own character choices can influence the playstyles you deal with.

 

[Perkilator]

Friendly reminder that R.O.B. is the only series on the ENTIRE PLAYABLE ROSTER without a stage.

 

[Perkilator]

You know…if Classic Mode wants us to rush it, the least it could do is give us a 99-second time limit (as in, the numbers 99.0 are displayed where the Timer usually is).

 

[Ze Diglett]

I understand what those words mean, but I'm afraid that doesn't make what you are saying more meaningful. You are just telling me that movesets are going to be better by making them "more creative, effective and viable", but you are not telling me the how. By that I mean moveset and gameplay design concepts. Don't know why that is so hard for you to grasp.

Take Sakurai for reference. In 2008 he did a presentation at the GDC: https://sourcegaming.info/2015/07/11/gdc-2008-translation/

He makes it a point about being able to describe a character's playstyle in a few words, putting his thoughts into moves and visualizing them with attack poses. That's ten times more meaningful that using buzzwords to make everything sound prettier. If you are going to tell me that the movesets you are proposing are going to be better, then you damn better be able to show me why.

You at least made some effort by talking about the heavies' struggles, but I'd argue there are better, more simple and more realizable ways to improve them right now instead of implementing dramatic changes. A projectile would help someone like Incineroar but it also goes against the archetype he is representing; so instead, increase his ground speed. Incineroar is the slowest runner in the game but his tools are extremely lethal at close proximity. Make him faster and he becomes more of a threat. Too much speed however could tip him in the opposite direction, so how much one should increase his speed would be a sensible matter.

I'd argue against Charizard and DK fitting the description of "slow as molases" because right now the former has good ground speed, the latter one good air speed and both have decent frame data. I also don't know why you think those guys need help with pressuring opponents when they struggle more defensively. DK's limbs cover a decent area at mid-close range and his Bair is good for aerial pressuring. Let's say we replace DK's current neutral B with the Coconut Gun. The ranged option will help for pressuring, but is not going to take away his fundamental problem of being combo food or susceptible to camping. Anyways, getting rid of a character's weaknesses doesn't exactly make for good design. If you really want to make DK better, a superior alternative would be to make the startup of his Nair faster since the move begins at frame 10, and shave some frames of it's endlag as well. Perhaps even make it's hitbox slightly bigger. That would make his disadvantage state better without completely removing his core weaknesses.

When it comes to proposing moveset changes, it just seems to me that you are aiming for the moon instead of focusing on the stuff at a smaller scale that would actually make a bigger difference.



Hey, can't blame me for misunderstanding that, bud. You make that claim without enough context to back it, so you'll have to understand my confusion there. You are stil wrong though ¯\(ツ)/¯¯ .

Those characters being designed with having weaknesses in mind doesn't mean they can't succeed in general (and from now on, when I say succeed I mean winning matches at any level of play). I thought that a skilled player winning a major with an underdog character thus upsetting matches against higher tier charactes was supposed to be something to be celebrated; and yes, it's very obvious that is because of the player and not necesserily because of who they played as. But it shows how a great player can optimize a character and make that an insteresting sight to witness. Effort and practice can help make a difference as well. Many players who pick Joker, who is probably a top five or ten, don't necessarily succeed despite using a superior fighter, but MK Leo does because he put the time and effort into it. Oh, and not so long ago, Hikaru won a japanese offline major using solo DK.



I would say that incompetence, laziness and unwillingness to adapt plays a huge role in that matter. That's why I mentioned earlier that modern fighting games have many conveniences which is good, but also ends up spoiling players making them weak-willed. If the game is not your cup of tea that's fine, but just because you are not willing to explore it gameplay wise doesn't make it a shallow experience or a failure as a competitive game. There is a lot to learn about it. This year I've been learning about doing attack cancel and doing proper wave bouncing. The former has optimized my game with characters like Mario, DK and Fox who have good follow ups into Bair. The latter is still challenging to perfom in a fight because I still don't have it integrated on an unconcious level, but I hope to get there with enough practice. Just because you don't want to take the time to learn something doesn't make it dreadful.


You said the game doesn't feel good to move and players can't do anything remotely cool. You also seem to think that characters get two or three combos at most, and that isn't me putting words in your mouth. Yet I frequently see people doing all of that on highlight reels and tourneys. I'm nowhere near top level and even I can do that. I get a rush from zipping around the stage with Mario or Fox and doing horizontal and vertical combos with them, flowing seamlessly across the stage. I recall you saying that you picked Dedede because you couldn't move well; you just decided to stop there and there was nothing left, limiting to your own mindset. Just because you decided that that was it for you it doesn't mean that there wasn't any more depth to explore.

I also remember you complaining a bit too much about petty stuff in the Unpopular Opinions Thread. My point in bringing that up is: If non-trivial stuff is enough to ruin your gameplay experience, that just shows that you are simply too much of a candy ass to learn and adapt. Most successful people spend their time polishing their craft instead of complaining on a daily basis about what they can't control. You gripe about anything, so of course you get frustrated. You don't take accountability for your shortcomings so you naturally blame the game for sabotaging your experience. But just because you are a failure as a player it doesn't make it the game's fault, at least in it's entirety. Needless to say, I wouldn't trust your judgement on how to make a reboot for the better.



Then you don't have that much experience playing Street Fighter or other games for that matter. In every ST game, spammy Ryu is going to be a thing at all levels of play. They will spam Hadouken, force you to approach, then will uppercut you when you jump to approach. Guile and Sagat are other offenders. Marvel vs Capcom 3 had the Dr. Doom/Morrigan combo which produced a bullet hell that made it nearly impossible for an opponent to approach. There's also Magneto. Pokken has Chandelure and Braixen which are exclusively keep away. Injustice 1 has Deathstroke, Injustice 2 has Deadshot, MK10 has Kung Jin, and so on. There are still many examples to name.

With this in mind, it's baffling why you think this problem is exclusive to Smash and particularly encouraged in it. Sorry, but that's simply not true. Every game has this kind of stuff. You only need a character who has a spammy projectile and a player who is willing to play lame or too lazy to play any other way. I'd argue that this is less problematic in Smash because of the platforms and the ability double jump and dodge in the air. Play against a campy Ryu player in Street Fighter, where your space and movement options are more limited, then come back and tell me how bad is it in Smash by comparison. And the short answer to your question: Yeah, it's just you. The longer answer is two paragraphs above this one.




Adjusting frame data and knockback angles? What sorcery are you talking abou-... oh, you mean buffs? So basically, what they've been doing in patches since Smash 4.

Did you play late Smash 4 Mewtwo? That was the peak of his design. He got a lot of mileage of Dtilt in that game, being able to combo into Utilt, Up Smash, Nair, Uair and Fair. He could do Fair>Fair or Nair then a follow up. They nerfed it in Ultimate by increasing it's endlag a little. It still true combos into Utilt, Nair, Uair and Fair, but Fair no longer combos into itself. I'm all for reverting it to the way it was in Smash 4, but I don't understand why you are suggesting an angle change when it was a perfectly fine combo starter. What angle did he need to cover when you could do Dtilt>Fair>Fair? You now seem to be complicating yourself by being too ambitituous and ambiguous.

There are also very combo heavy characters like Mario, Sheik, Fox, Joker, etc. so I don't why we are talking as if the game was lacking those kinds of playstyles. But then I remember that you can't play this game to save your life.

I'm all for more buffs that allow combos. Falco and Falcon got some nice changes in the latest patches and now they have some combos that they couldn't do before.

I'mma be honest, I completely missed this post since I don't check Smashboards too regularly anymore and I made this post nearly 3 months ago. Full disclosure, I don't particularly care what happens to Smash anymore since I stopped playing it entirely and mostly play Rivals of Aether these days (especially now that the Definitive Edition is out, wayo), but I still do stand by all of the problems I've stated beforehand. That said, I do find it funny that you're still going on about me being a "candy ass" (your words, not mine) who isn't willing to adapt or learn anything, when I quite clearly have done that with Rivals considering I've been playing it for the better part of the past year or so. Why? Because it's fun. You talk about how much of a rush it is to "zip" around the stage as Mario and Fox in Ultimate, but for me, there's nothing more thrilling than dashing and bashing as Ori in Rivals of Aether, a much more aggressive and fast-paced game. I don't have fun learning and adapting in Smash because of how bogged down it feels, so I stopped playing it. It's really that simple. If you're willing to stick with Ultimate because you think it's fun, great. You do you, I'll do me. But I do still think Ultimate has many mechanical and general gamefeel issues that people are either ignoring or just putting up with due to recency bias, and people will begin to see more clearly once the "honeymoon phase" is over, so to speak. (If some of the videos that have been posted here are any indication, several people already have.)
Anyway, I suppose if you want a neat little capstone on my side of the argument, IMO Smash is great as a party game, but terrible as a fighting game, and the more people come to realize this, the better. It could be great as a fighting game and as a party game if Nintendo really tried, but frankly, I don't expect them to and that's what I have good ol' RoA for anyway.
Oh, and yes, I did play Mewtwo in Smash 4. That's precisely why I'm complaining about how his conversions are ****ed in this game. (And pro tip, it's generally not a great idea to make potshots at one's ability at playing a game when you've never seen or played against that person in your life. It proves nothing and literally just makes you look like an ass - then again, if you were at all concerned about that, I doubt you would've made half the posts you have thus far, so forget my dumb ass said anything.)re

 

[StrangeKitten]

I find Ultimate to still be super duper fun despite the flaws. Rivals also looks really fun, I'll have to get it sometime. It even has another flaming cat for me to main!

 

[Perkilator]

I don't mean to sound ungrateful, but man...the Nintendo characters we got as DLC so far really got the short end of the stick when it comes to remixes. Nearly every single 3rd party character so far got a boatload when put together, whereas Byleth and Min Min put together got a grand total of THREE (four if you count the JP version of the Three Houses Main Theme remix).

 

[CaptainAnime]

Melee is sick, Ultimate is lame

Don't @ me

 

[StrangeKitten]

I don't mean to sound ungrateful, but man...the Nintendo characters we got as DLC so far really got the short end of the stick when it comes to remixes. Nearly every single 3rd party character so far got a boatload when put together, whereas Byleth and Min Min put together got a grand total of THREE (four if you count the JP version of the Three Houses Main Theme remix).

Now that you bring that up, it is very weird. It's Nintendo's music. You'd think they'd go ham

 

[Perkilator]

Now that you bring that up, it is very weird. It's Nintendo's music. You'd think they'd go ham

Yeah, but instead they went kinda (how do I say...?) weenie.

 

[Rocketjay8]

Yeah, but instead they went kinda (how do I say...?) weenie.

Weenie LMAO

It's kind of disappointing because the remixes in this game are incredibly good. Better than smash4.

 

[The Smash Nerd II.0.]

Melee is sick, Ultimate is lame

WHAT DID YOU SAY!

 

[pupNapoleon]

Fans want a movie and it should just happen so that the game can be a separate experience. And also earn more money to go on forever.
Also- since we treat it as a video game hall of fame, and they seem to when they desire that commentary, I wish they would go fully in on that. I imagine they don't because then they lose leverage in negotiations with more known characters.

As far as guest characters go- it would be silly for a company to not want to be in Smash.

 

[CaptainAnime]

WHAT DID YOU SAY!

Mhm I said it

 

[Gimj]

I don't care if I posted this already or not but:

FIX ULTIMATE'S [VOICE LINE] AUDIO!!!!

Brawl Wolf: What's the matter, SCARED?
Ultimate Wolf: Are you scared?

I legit can't understand, how the guy in charge of sound overlooked how jarring the voice levels are in Ultimate. So many characters personalities are undetectable because the volume is just too low to hear it.

Nintendo: Records new voice lines
Also Nintendo: Puts volume so low you will almost never hear it, and will never understand what they just said. Only way is to literally crank up your TV volume to max, stop fighting, and listen. "Oh that's what (he/she) said, cool."

proceed to lower TV volume again to play without your entire country hearing it

I would also like the crowd to enunciate more than just a handful of characters properly, so like, you know, WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE CHEERING FOR.

ASDOIJfjoiasdlkfmoijineedhelpasdfnsdfsldkfjsadio

 

[Perkilator]

Man, it kinda makes me sad that DLC is only really utilized for Challenger Packs and Mii Costumes.

 

[StrangeKitten]

Man, it kinda makes me sad that DLC is only really utilized for Challenger Packs and Mii Costumes.

Same. I'd love to see DLC that adds music, costumes to non-Mii characters, and stages. Sure, we got Small Battlefield, but there's no guarantee we'll get more stages like that.

 

[Princess Rescuer]

Forget dodgy character choices or general bloat...

My problem is with the amount of moving stages or stages with too many obstacles. The game's called "Smash" not "Navigating Obstacles". Especially when introducing the game to casual novices, I want battles to be won by fighting strategy and reactions, not being able to platform faster when the screen rapidly moves. Thank goodness for Battlefield variants of stages, I have a feeling they're a result of the regular stages just not cutting it.

As for complaints about things not in the game yet... why can't we customize a different amount of lives for each player in Stock Mode or Points in Time Mode? Such a feature would mend friendships. Experts would never get bored of playing with casuals again if they can just give themselves fewer lives. I'm SHOCKED I've never seen anyone talk about this.

Come to think of it... why can't we customize everything? Change the amount of knockback for individual players, even restrict better players from picking up/using certain items, etc? Why does every choice have to apply evenly to all players? And this customization would lead to some INTERESTING research/challenges too. It seems like such a basic thing to implement and I'm surprised that after combining Stock AND Time, they never thought to take the next step and individualize players who will most certainly be at different skill levels.

Even since the first Smash game, the FIRST, Classic Mode has different life counts for you and the computer players AND normal-sized "Teams" with a unique level of weakness that makes them easy to KO in a hit or two. They can have Kirbies who START with Copied moves. Clearly different stock counts is far from being beyond the series capabilities. It's the same way where we could have unique, unplayable characters since the first game or matches with 6 characters onscreen at a time, each having their logo and damage represented since Melee.

 

[Slabfish]

Mod EDIT: Hate Speech Removed

 

[Arcadenik]

Friendly reminder that R.O.B. is the only series on the ENTIRE PLAYABLE ROSTER without a stage.

R.O.B. needs a Gyromite stage.

 

[UserKev]

I miss "Congratulations" at the end of Classic Mode. "Nice work" is so uninspiring and "Why?" We know Sakurai works hard on these games, which why we purchase them.

 

[Perkilator]

I miss "Congratulations" at the end of Classic Mode. "Nice work" is so uninspiring and "Why?" We know Sakurai works hard on these games, which why we purchase them.

Huh? "Congratulations" appears at the end of each character's credits game. If it helps even a little, the announcer says "Great!" in the Japanese version.

If anything, I kinda miss this little bit in Mario's Classic Mode (go to the Final Round) where Bowser's theme from Super Mario Bros. 3 keeps playing even when Bowser transforms into Giga Bowser.

 

[Janx_uwu]

I really miss transformation Final Smashes. Landmaster, Super Sonic, Giga Bowser, Warioman, and all the others. They gave you such power that felt great, and with enough skill you could even take two whole stocks. Nowadays with Giga Bowser it just feels like all I do is wait for the opponent to airdodge and then press A. Super Sonic is a less reliable kill move than his smash attacks, and sorry, but the Spacies' new final smashes are pretty lame imo.

 

[Lenidem]

I really miss transformation Final Smashes. Landmaster, Super Sonic, Giga Bowser, Warioman, and all the others. They gave you such power that felt great, and with enough skill you could even take two whole stocks. Nowadays with Giga Bowser it just feels like all I do is wait for the opponent to airdodge and then press A. Super Sonic is a less reliable kill move than his smash attacks, and sorry, but the Spacies' new final smashes are pretty lame imo.

I understand, but for the space animals, I think the Arwing and Wolfen + the support of their team are way more fitting than the tank. And they look cool!

 

[Janx_uwu]

I understand, but for the space animals, I think the Airwing and Folfen + the support of their team are way more fitting than the tank. And they look cool!

True, I just found the Landmaster more fun to use, even if it didn't make sense for Falco and Wolf. The new one does look cool.

 

[Gimj]

As for complaints about things not in the game yet... why can't we customize a different amount of lives for each player in Stock Mode or Points in Time Mode? Such a feature would mend friendships. Experts would never get bored of playing with casuals again if they can just give themselves fewer lives. I'm SHOCKED I've never seen anyone talk about this.

Come to think of it... why can't we customize everything? Change the amount of knockback for individual players, even restrict better players from picking up/using certain items, etc? Why does every choice have to apply evenly to all players? And this customization would lead to some INTERESTING research/challenges too. It seems like such a basic thing to implement and I'm surprised that after combining Stock AND Time, they never thought to take the next step and individualize players who will most certainly be at different skill levels.

Even since the first Smash game, the FIRST, Classic Mode has different life counts for you and the computer players AND normal-sized "Teams" with a unique level of weakness that makes them easy to KO in a hit or two. They can have Kirbies who START with Copied moves. Clearly different stock counts is far from being beyond the series capabilities. It's the same way where we could have unique, unplayable characters since the first game or matches with 6 characters onscreen at a time, each having their logo and damage represented since Melee.

I've had this idea for a while now. Basically a port-specific Special Smash. This would enable us to make our own "Event" Matches. And if this would steal the thunder from the true Event Mode, make it unlockable or something. Like who doesn't want to play as a giant Bowser vs 3 friends?

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

I really miss transformation Final Smashes. Landmaster, Super Sonic, Giga Bowser, Warioman, and all the others. They gave you such power that felt great, and with enough skill you could even take two whole stocks. Nowadays with Giga Bowser it just feels like all I do is wait for the opponent to airdodge and then press A. Super Sonic is a less reliable kill move than his smash attacks, and sorry, but the Spacies' new final smashes are pretty lame imo.

The Landmasters did feel more unique than the Blue Falcon copycats. But considering how distasteful it can be to wait almost a quarter of a minute for such Final Smashes to end, that can likely explain why Ultimate ditched all the fully controllable Final Smashes and Final Smash movesets.

 

[CaptainAnime]

Mod EDIT: Hate Speech Removed

I wonder what he said for that to happen

 

[CheeseAnton]

I feel some of the stages are underwhelming

• For example, why, oh why, did they give us Pac's stage from Wii U and not from the 3DS. I'm sure that was way better than PAC-LAND.
• Sakurai, please stop thinking we like 75m.
• I think Yggdrasil's Altar is just a moving stage without moving (as in, you see different things, but never experience different things).
• The Great Cave Offensive is offensive (I get it's a big stage made for 8 players, but it's meant for 8 players, no 80)
• Smashvile and Town and City are so similar I can't tell them apart sometimes.
• I could be wrong, but I don't think Pictochat 2 has all the same drawings as Pictochat from Brawl. If that is the case, then yeah I wish it would've gotten the Flatzone X treatment in Ultimate, and have Pictochat X.
• Personal bias, Living Room might not be an objectively bad stage, but I just find it boring.
• Norfair is No fair at times (looking at you, Blue Escape pod that opens AFTER that lava wave comes)

However, I will admit this probably all comes from my sadness that Pokefloats ain't back (it might not have been the greatest, but I loved it for what it was), and Rainbow Road from 3DS.
However, we do have (I think) 100+ stages, so a few rotten apples won't spoil the patch (unless they do, I don't know crap about fruits)

 

[Ryu Myuutsu]

I'mma be honest, I completely missed this post since I don't check Smashboards too regularly anymore and I made this post nearly 3 months ago. Full disclosure, I don't particularly care what happens to Smash anymore since I stopped playing it entirely and mostly play Rivals of Aether these days (especially now that the Definitive Edition is out, wayo), but I still do stand by all of the problems I've stated beforehand. That said, I do find it funny that you're still going on about me being a "candy ass" (your words, not mine) who isn't willing to adapt or learn anything, when I quite clearly have done that with Rivals considering I've been playing it for the better part of the past year or so. Why? Because it's fun. You talk about how much of a rush it is to "zip" around the stage as Mario and Fox in Ultimate, but for me, there's nothing more thrilling than dashing and bashing as Ori in Rivals of Aether, a much more aggressive and fast-paced game. I don't have fun learning and adapting in Smash because of how bogged down it feels, so I stopped playing it. It's really that simple. If you're willing to stick with Ultimate because you think it's fun, great. You do you, I'll do me. But I do still think Ultimate has many mechanical and general gamefeel issues that people are either ignoring or just putting up with due to recency bias, and people will begin to see more clearly once the "honeymoon phase" is over, so to speak. (If some of the videos that have been posted here are any indication, several people already have.)
Anyway, I suppose if you want a neat little capstone on my side of the argument, IMO Smash is great as a party game, but terrible as a fighting game, and the more people come to realize this, the better. It could be great as a fighting game and as a party game if Nintendo really tried, but frankly, I don't expect them to and that's what I have good ol' RoA for anyway.
Oh, and yes, I did play Mewtwo in Smash 4. That's precisely why I'm complaining about how his conversions are ****ed in this game. (And pro tip, it's generally not a great idea to make potshots at one's ability at playing a game when you've never seen or played against that person in your life. It proves nothing and literally just makes you look like an ass - then again, if you were at all concerned about that, I doubt you would've made half the posts you have thus far, so forget my dumb ass said anything.)re

You adapted to Rivals you say? That's a legitimate life skill right there. Make sure to write that down on your resume, someone else besides me is bound to be impressed by that.

Jokes aside, I don't see how this counters my point about your personal failure to adapt in Smash. Most games take time and practice to become competent at them. When training in fighting games, you have to deliberately focus on the skill you are trying to master rather than attempting to commit to several of them at a time. People who are unconciously incompetent are going to stagnate faster than those who are aware of their own lack of competence. And then when you pick a skill, you may be able to do it on a concious level at first but it takes practice to be able to have an unconcious usage of it.

When you say that players can't move or combo in this game when clear examples of that exist, it shows to me a player who simply failed to explore beyond the surface. You even mentioned before that you picked Dedede who is a character who doesn't excel in movement or combos, thus deliberately limiting your scope. Pick someone like Mario, and you'll see how a competent player can flow and combo through the stage with him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfIW70KI4gw

Master wavebounce and you'll even get more movement options like this Lucas player: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncVGfspDMc4

If you don't find the game fun enough to practice, that's fine as it is a subjective matter. But when you say that there isn't room to learn as a competitive game and it doesn't allow for stuff like movement, interesting combos or cool tech, it just shows that you don't understand the game as well as you think. So when looking at you, I see a guy who stagnated but is clueless about his own incompetence so he blames the game for it. Hence a candy ass.

But I do still think Ultimate has many mechanical and general gamefeel issues that people are either ignoring or just putting up with due to recency bias, and people will begin to see more clearly once the "honeymoon phase" is over, so to speak. (If some of the videos that have been posted here are any indication, several people already have.)

What honeymoon phase are you talking about? The game has been out for almost two years. It's very lazy and unintellectual to dismiss something like that. People who like the game have stuck with it, while those who didn't have moved on. I doubt that posts from a board that has seen better days that at most gets a 1000 users a day is a clear indication of anything significant.

Some of these mechanical "issues" aren't significant enough for others to consider them real problems. It's not that they are putting up with them, it's just that they've learned to play the game without it becoming a significant detriment. Every community has their personal gripes with their games; some people think that the Super Dash mechanic is bad for DB Fighterz, some in the Tekken community feel that Akuma is unhealthy for the meta, many MK11 players don't like the fact that they removed running, etc. Ultimate isn't perfect, but it isn't nearly the competitive atrocity you are painting it out to be.

Oh, and yes, I did play Mewtwo in Smash 4. That's precisely why I'm complaining about how his conversions are ****ed in this game.

No you weren't, at least not in the beginning. You were talking about the "wonders" of Smash having longer combos, then after I pointed out the potential problems, you transitioned to suggesting angle adjustments and frame data changes, which is something the devs have been doing in patches since Smash 4. Perhaps I misunderstood the whole thing, but you made it sound like you were suggesting some ambicious overhauls on the combo system only to then say what has been the devs' buffing philosophy all along.

And if you played Smash 4 Mewtwo, then you would know that instead of a radical change what he needs is to be able to do more consistent follow ups off his Nair and get less endlag off his Dtilt and Fair. Fair used to combo into itself, but that is no longer possible. Smash 4 Mewtwo was his prime and a good design example of a fast glass cannon.

(And pro tip, it's generally not a great idea to make potshots at one's ability at playing a game when you've never seen or played against that person in your life. It proves nothing and literally just makes you look like an ass - then again, if you were at all concerned about that, I doubt you would've made half the posts you have thus far, so forget my dumb ass said anything.)

Let me see if I can one up myself then: without seeing you play or playing against you, I'm confident in saying that you are poor excuse of a player based on my interactions and observations alone. You've more or less admitted that you can't move or perform combos, but instead of taking it as a chance to improve you directly blame the game for sabotaging your experience. Other players from many skill levels have managed to learn their characters enough so they move optimally and attack in the best possible way as shown in my above examples which shows plays from Blucas playing as Lucas and Anti or DarkWizzy using mario. There are Youtube channels out there who explore techs like wavebouncing, attack cancel, etc. and when you managed to learn them and implement successfully you feel that you've made progress. Add to that I recall you complaining about mostly trivial stuff in the past (KO kill screen coming to mind). Convenience is a good thing, but it also spoils people and their otherwise good experience becomes easily ruined. Answer me this, do you often see people who are successful at a craft whining? Mediocre people tend to blame their circumstances instead on reflecting on their actions, because they are told to have good self esteem. Is it entirely the game or is it you?

This may seem like a mere shot at your person, but I think it's relevant in explaining some of the fallacies and misconceptions you've brought when speaking about the game's mechanics.

You didn't deliver on your moveset ideas for a potential reboot and the know-how of making them more effective or "creative". You probably overestimated your competence in that matter so it's no wonder to think that your arrogance was misplaced when you thought you could do better by just using some pretty superlatives.

I also didn't see anything addressing your take on projectile spam in Smash. But as I said before, if you think Smash encourages it more than other games then you are very short-experienced.

Maybe you felt that you've peaked at the game and there isn't anything left for you to learn which is sad. When you have a high opinion of yourself you'll rarely think that there is something that you need to improve on. If your understanding of this game peaked, then that just shows that your best wasn't that impressive in the first place and your knowledge may be more lacking. But this is a good thing. Most people don't learn about their shortcomings until too late and go around pretending they know stuff. I learned that a while ago and at least I understand that I can't afford to think that my knowledge is always going to be enough. No that I care what you do with this knowledge, but I won't hold back on my take. Need me to be more of an ass now, little man? Cheers.

 

[Ze Diglett]

Ok, I know I implied I was done with this last time, but by golly, there are some things here that just have to be addressed.

You adapted to Rivals you say? That's a legitimate life skill right there. Make sure to write that down on your resume, someone else besides me is bound to be impressed by that.

Jokes aside, I don't see how this counters my point about your personal failure to adapt in Smash. Most games take time and practice to become competent at them. When training in fighting games, you have to deliberately focus on the skill you are trying to master rather than attempting to commit to several of them at a time. People who are unconciously incompetent are going to stagnate faster than those who are aware of their own lack of competence. And then when you pick a skill, you may be able to do it on a concious level at first but it takes practice to be able to have an unconcious usage of it.

When you say that players can't move or combo in this game when clear examples of that exist, it shows to me a player who simply failed to explore beyond the surface. You even mentioned before that you picked Dedede who is a character who doesn't excel in movement or combos, thus deliberately limiting your scope. Pick someone like Mario, and you'll see how a competent player can flow and combo through the stage with him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfIW70KI4gw

Master wavebounce and you'll even get more movement options like this Lucas player: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncVGfspDMc4

If you don't find the game fun enough to practice, that's fine as it is a subjective matter. But when you say that there isn't room to learn as a competitive game and it doesn't allow for stuff like movement, interesting combos or cool tech, it just shows that you don't understand the game as well as you think. So when looking at you, I see a guy who stagnated but is clueless about his own incompetence so he blames the game for it. Hence a candy ass.

So you call me a "candy ass" who isn't capable/willing to adapt, and yet when I list an example of a game that I was willing to learn and adapt to in order to have fun with to prove you wrong, you mockingly dismiss it as bragging? It's always a zero-sum game with you, isn't it?

I'll be honest, all I'm really getting from these examples you're posting are "only the high-tiers have extensive combos" and "wavebouncing is the only [applicable] universal movement tech". If you think I'm wrong, please show me something else that fits the bill, because in all my time spent playing and watching this game, I haven't seen it. (And I'm not talking character-specific stuff or garbage like this game's frame-perfect "dash-dance" that only serves as a niche mixup if you're able to pull it off correctly.)

I also see you're still hung up on the Dedede **** from before. How about Mewtwo, then? Mewtwo's one of the fastest characters in the game in terms of pure movement stats, yet I still feel like I can barely move as him. At that point, can you really act like it's entirely a character issue? I think not.

Say what you will about me, but I also don't think it's disingenuous to imply that a game like Smash has way less combo potential and freedom of movement than a game like Rivals of Aether. At that point, it's not even a subjective opinion, it's just a statement of fact, and if you're willing to deny this, you definitely haven't played the latter.

What honeymoon phase are you talking about? The game has been out for almost two years. It's very lazy and unintellectual to dismiss something like that. People who like the game have stuck with it, while those who didn't have moved on. I doubt that posts from a board that has seen better days that at most gets a 1000 users a day is a clear indication of anything significant.

Some of these mechanical "issues" aren't significant enough for others to consider them real problems. It's not that they are putting up with them, it's just that they've learned to play the game without it becoming a significant detriment. Every community has their personal gripes with their games; some people think that the Super Dash mechanic is bad for DB Fighterz, some in the Tekken community feel that Akuma is unhealthy for the meta, many MK11 players don't like the fact that they removed running, etc. Ultimate isn't perfect, but it isn't nearly the competitive atrocity you are painting it out to be.

I'm talking "honeymoon phase" in a similar sense to how people thought Smash 4 was a good competitive game back when it was current - you know, the game that people universally laugh at in retrospect. And I'm not just talking about posts made in this thread; I'm talking about videos like this. If you're willing to disregard the word of someone like me, can you really handwave away these exact same criticisms when they're coming from someone who does play the game at a competitive level?

No you weren't, at least not in the beginning. You were talking about the "wonders" of Smash having longer combos, then after I pointed out the potential problems, you transitioned to suggesting angle adjustments and frame data changes, which is something the devs have been doing in patches since Smash 4. Perhaps I misunderstood the whole thing, but you made it sound like you were suggesting some ambicious overhauls on the combo system only to then say what has been the devs' buffing philosophy all along.

And if you played Smash 4 Mewtwo, then you would know that instead of a radical change what he needs is to be able to do more consistent follow ups off his Nair and get less endlag off his Dtilt and Fair. Fair used to combo into itself, but that is no longer possible. Smash 4 Mewtwo was his prime and a good design example of a fast glass cannon.

First off, I never "transitioned" to anything, mate. You just misunderstood my point to begin with. Second, yes, I obviously know Smash has balance patches and character changes. My issue is that the devs aren't willing to do enough in this regard. Even Smash fans can admit that Smash patches are generally weak ****, and if you're willing to deny this, you either have your head firmly up your ass or you haven't been paying attention. Hell, even in just this past patch that came with Steve yesterday, of all things, they buffed Lucario's aura. Really? You buffed his aura? Arguably the one thing about his kit that didn't need to be buffed? Bravo, team. (Reminder that buffing a character's strong points is not how you make a more balanced character; it makes them more imbalanced, if anything.) They also gave Sonic and Ness a bunch of buffs for whatever reason (it's like they want online players to suffer), meanwhile several of the undisputed bottom-tiers like Ganondorf and Dr. Mario remain virtually untouched. Granted, some characters that needed buffs like Bowser Jr. and Ice Climbers got them as well, but even in those cases, they hardly give those characters new viable options and certainly don't help them much in terms of their standing on a tier list.

The problem with Smash's character changes, in my opinion, is twofold: the devs aren't willing to make big, committal changes to the characters that need them (presumably out of fear of "alienating" their playerbase, which is incredibly asinine), and they're also out of touch with what the fans want to begin with. Obviously, there are exceptions to the rule, like when Mewtwo got a bunch of killer buffs in Smash 4 that actually made him a really good character, and if that were the norm for Smash patches, I'd probably be able to get a lot more excited for them. But seeing how it's basically a diceroll which characters get changes to begin with (let alone if they're even good ones), I can't get my hopes up.

Let me see if I can one up myself then: without seeing you play or playing against you, I'm confident in saying that you are poor excuse of a player based on my interactions and observations alone. You've more or less admitted that you can't move or perform combos, but instead of taking it as a chance to improve you directly blame the game for sabotaging your experience. Other players from many skill levels have managed to learn their characters enough so they move optimally and attack in the best possible way as shown in my above examples which shows plays from Blucas playing as Lucas and Anti or DarkWizzy using mario. There are Youtube channels out there who explore techs like wavebouncing, attack cancel, etc. and when you managed to learn them and implement successfully you feel that you've made progress. Add to that I recall you complaining about mostly trivial stuff in the past (KO kill screen coming to mind). Convenience is a good thing, but it also spoils people and their otherwise good experience becomes easily ruined. Answer me this, do you often see people who are successful at a craft whining? Mediocre people tend to blame their circumstances instead on reflecting on their actions, because they are told to have good self esteem. Is it entirely the game or is it you?

This may seem like a mere shot at your person, but I think it's relevant in explaining some of the fallacies and misconceptions you've brought when speaking about the game's mechanics.

You didn't deliver on your moveset ideas for a potential reboot and the know-how of making them more effective or "creative". You probably overestimated your competence in that matter so it's no wonder to think that your arrogance was misplaced when you thought you could do better by just using some pretty superlatives.

I also didn't see anything addressing your take on projectile spam in Smash. But as I said before, if you think Smash encourages it more than other games then you are very short-experienced.

Maybe you felt that you've peaked at the game and there isn't anything left for you to learn which is sad. When you have a high opinion of yourself you'll rarely think that there is something that you need to improve on. If your understanding of this game peaked, then that just shows that your best wasn't that impressive in the first place and your knowledge may be more lacking. But this is a good thing. Most people don't learn about their shortcomings until too late and go around pretending they know stuff. I learned that a while ago and at least I understand that I can't afford to think that my knowledge is always going to be enough. No that I care what you do with this knowledge, but I won't hold back on my take. Need me to be more of an ass now, little man? Cheers.

Wait... you're bringing up the KO screen talk, of all things? A post I made in a completely different thread over a year ago?? Jesus Christ, man. At least before, you were ragging on me over stuff that was situationally relevant. This is just glorified ad-hom.

As for the moveset talk, if you recall, I did provide a specific example of how Smash's character design could be better with the heavyweight example. But evidently, that wasn't enough for you; if I try and summarize my points or go in-depth on one specific example, you fault me for being nonspecific or not broad enough and write off everything I say. Honestly, I probably could write up specific character changes I'd want for nigh every character in the roster (save some of the newer ones since I'm obviously not as familiar with those), but I don't do that because 1.) that would far exceed Smashboards' character limit, and 2.) we'd be here all day if I did that, and believe it or not, I am interested in doing other things with my time. But apparently, if I don't provide a full dissertation on every specific change I think should be made to Smash, I have failed and every word I say can be accordingly discarded.

Other than that, all I can say is that responding to any criticisms I have of a game with "you're just bad," believe it or not, is not going to convince me that the game does not feel bad to play. I honestly don't think I've peaked at this game, and I recognize that if I put the time and effort in, I could get a lot better at it than I currently am. But I haven't, and I don't want to, because I find the game to be clunky and restrictive and other games to be much more rewarding and worth putting time into, hence my point.

 

[SvartWolf]

My ideal scenario would be they working on a expansion pack/new edition for the next switch iteration. where they focus on more stuff like game modes adn the like, and keep the extra characters bulk in the fighter passes.

I love the idea of giant stages like the great cave offensive, but in practice they are terrible impractical due to rewarding running away. A king of teh hill mode should be easy to implement and immediatly removing the running away factor. also money smash making a return in 8 player smash could potential bring new and interesting mechanichs into 4v4gameplay. and is not particulary hard to implement having the neccesary hardware.

While i dont think that trophies per say should necesarily return, something as simple as a model viewer and diorama set that lets us summon a stage, summon characters, background characters, assist trophies or bosses models, and make them run an animation would do WONDERS for the casual crowd, while having 0 impact on the competitive crowd. Plus the bulk of the mode relies on already in game assets.

A mode where you can choose an assit trophies along your character and having a way to summon it like a final smash gauge could also be a decent consolation prize for assit trophy characters supporters.

As for resources sinks. I think that giving spirits unique descriptions, and maybe an alternative "character and spirit set" challenge (likea challenge to fight against the boss spirit as snake with specific spirit team) could really help to give spirits more value. still over 1000 descriptions in several different languages could be a huge undertaking. still, it doesn't need the attention of teh core development team while they could work on other stuff, if teh resources were allocated to it.

A great break teh targets mode really could bump severally the singleplayer replayability value of smash. whilegiving a small taste of adventure platforming withouth creating a whole super mode. there is always the issue that designing over 80 break teh targets isnt as easy. but if you optimize it enough (like using it to upgrade also clasic modes or adapting teh stage builder to create this stages) You can give it toooons of replay value.

And this is not even touching teh option of treating it like a sequel and using development resources of a sequel to do a full fledged SSE 2, or something like that that likely would generate tons of buzz.

 

[CaptainAnime]

Say what you will about me, but I also don't think it's disingenuous to imply that a game like Smash has way less combo potential and freedom of movement than a game like Rivals of Aether

64 and Melee exist

 

[Perkilator]

I’m honestly surprised that none of the summons on Midgar are Spirits. And honestly? I wish they were.

 

[asia_catdog_blue]

I say the "Final Smash" System is in need of a change in general. I like PSASBR's idea, but it could be better.

Why not tone it down to 3 "Super Smashes?" Basically, a fast, strong invincible attack that his hits one or more other fighters, something like MVC, CVS, KOF, or Skullgirls.

Like, Mario's would be...

1. Super Mario Tornado: Mario will do a bigger, stronger version of his Mario Tornado that works like Ryu's Shinnku Tatsumaki Senpuukakyu.

2. Fiery Blast: Mario will blast out two huge fire orbs that will fly in a fast, straight direction.

3. Coin Heaven Combo: Mario does an powerful combo attack that ends with a devastating Super Jump Punch. It's similar to Ken's Ultra Combo 2.

 

[MacSmitty]

I say the "Final Smash" System is in need of a change in general. I like PSASBR's idea, but it could be better.

Why not tone it down to 3 "Super Smashes?" Basically, a fast, strong invincible attack that his hits one or more other fighters, something like MVC, CVS, KOF, or Skullgirls.

Like, Mario's would be...

1. Super Mario Tornado: Mario will do a bigger, stronger version of his Mario Tornado that works like Ryu's Shinnku Tatsumaki Senpuukakyu.

2. Fiery Blast: Mario will blast out two huge fire orbs that will fly in a fast, straight direction.

3. Coin Heaven Combo: Mario does an powerful combo attack that ends with a devastating Super Jump Punch. It's similar to Ken's Ultra Combo 2.

You know, part of me wants something like this in the Form of Terry's GO! for the cast, but it would take away from the simple nature of Smash...

 

[asia_catdog_blue]

You know, part of me wants something like this in the Form of Terry's GO! for the cast, but it would take away from the simple nature of Smash...

I thought about this. I also thought a bout a new HUD, but... eh.

There will be a power gauge that reach up to 3 levels, like Capcom & SNK Fighters. When the bar reaches up to one level, you will have access to one "Super Smash." You can press the Select Button to toggle between "Super Smashes" during battle. There will be some "Super Smashes" that will require all 3 levels.

That's how I would vision it.

 

[MacSmitty]

I thought about this. I also thought a bout a new HUD, but... eh.

There will be a power gauge that reach up to 3 levels, like Capcom & SNK Fighters. When the bar reaches up to one level, you will have access to one "Super Smash." You can press the Select Button to toggle between "Super Smashes" during battle. There will be some "Super Smashes" that will require all 3 levels.

That's how I would vision it.

Well, the bar could be like the Final Smash meter with a few changes... so there's that. And I guess maybe it could be activated by pressing A+B or something like that?