Discrediting For Fun ?

[Foxus]

I believe For Fun is a mode that has been discredited for its contents, but is just as challenging as For Glory,

While the occasional For Fun match may be smelling of taunt parties, most of the time the matches are relatively serious (take it from a serious-minded individual like myself) more so than laid back. In a way, For Fun can be more challenging of a mode than For Glory.

While going in for the kill, you have to deal with the stage hazards and the items, which can be distracting in your plan to create and execute roadkill. So, when we look at FF that way, are we discrediting, disowning FF too early as a mode, or as the saying goes, :"judging a book by its cover?"

 

[Ryusuta]

It's not the "easy" or "hard" that bug me, but the items. Yes, it's the old cliche, but I'd like to know that I got beaten because I got outplayed, not because RNG decided to drop a Bob-omb on my head.

 

[KirbCider]

It's not the "easy" or "hard" that bug me, but the items. Yes, it's the old cliche, but I'd like to know that I got beaten because I got outplayed, not because RNG decided to drop a Bob-omb on my head.

I feel the same way any time I play For Fun. Luck is a huge factor in that mode, and sometimes it is not on your side.

I can't tell you how many times favorable items spawned right on top of or very, very close to opponents I'm facing that happens to save them at the very last second. I'm not going to say skill doesn't exist in For Fun because it can and does; however you can't help but feel you've been beaten by luck instead of skill most of the time. Even worse, some players get so cocky when they win by said luck.

Then again, the mode is called "For Fun" for a reason. Luck or not the items give it the party aspect to make it, ya know... Fun.

 

[EpicSonicLatios]

For me it's really just a matter of knowing that my wins come from actually outplaying my opponent, and not having random smart bombs flying at me. The point of a fighting game is to outplay your opponent, and if one person has better RNG than another in one particular match, they could win even if they were outplayed, because items skew the amount of reward you get. It's kinda like lucario's aura, only you don't need to survive and maintain high percent to use it, as long as you get some luck.

As far as stages go, the plain fact is that most non legal stages are just too big. Matches can't go on forever, and the large stages usually have obscure terrain which limits any sort of grounded movement options that can be beneficial to competitive play. It also limits many projectile users because they don't have a straight line to shoot through.

Some people argue that "it takes real skill to use items and play on hazardous stages", but I'm not seeing it. How hard is it to pick up a bob omb and throw it? How hard is it to pick up an ore club and spam the heck out of it to prevent the opponent from approaching? How hard is it to grab a golden hammer and get 2 kills with just the movement stick? Pretty simple. Regarding stage hazards, Many of these stage hazards make it so you have to concentrate a lot more, and spread your focus thin. While this in itself is a skill, it has the side effect of distracting you from your opponent, and forcing you to focus on some outside factor that is completely unrelated to your end goal: KOing your opponent.

I'm not saying for fun takes no skill at all, and I'm not saying that using unique items isn't fun from time to time. What I am saying is that for fun simply isn't the best if you want an uninterrupted test of skill between you and your opponent, where you can use the unique gameplan of your character without having to worry about unrelated events. I think one thing that leads you to believe that many people hate on for fun is that many people on this site hate on it. The plain fact is, most people here fall under the competitive side of things, meaning most people are for the viewpoint that I have just described. Less people hate for fun than you think, it's just that usually the ones that don't aren't competitive players.

Lastly I just want to go in depth more about RNG and items. It could be argued that both players have an equal opportunity to possess items and use them, but these items change the focus of the battle from trying to gain the upper hand to using outside factors to help you win. Relying on outside factors isn't going to make you a better player, and it will only make you rely on something that won't always be available to you. This is unlike your complete built-in character moveset, which is available to you at all times during a game.

For fun does take some skill, it's just that these skills are not what competitive players prioritize to be the most important skills to learn in smash, which is why many players like me shy away from it.

 

[TempestSurge]

I kind of agree that For Fun is challenging in its own right since there's other factors at play: items, stage hazards, other players etc. to deal with. It's a more chaotic mode in comparison and going into For Fun with the same mindset as you do FG is honestly just asking to be miffed with the mode.

I don't necessarily go into For Fun as much as I do FG, but when I do, it's usually when I want to unwind from countless battles on flat stages and use other characters that I like, but haven't dedicated as much time with as my mains. Considering the wins and losses of this mode aren't recorded, I don't find myself being frustrated at the randomness of a bomb spawning right next to me as I charge an attack and thus killing me. If I didn't want random factors like that affecting the flow of the game and determining wins, I'd just be in FG.

I think the discrediting comes in when people try to hold For Fun to the same standards that they hold For Glory. That items don't determine 'real wins' which there's nothing wrong with thinking that, but FF doesn't even bother to record wins so it doesn't really feel like much of a big deal and sometimes not everyone sees things in such a serious, competitive viewpoint all the time. Even I prefer my wins based on outplaying my opponents and not the RNG of item spawns, but I am able to take the mode of For Fun for what it is. Though I do have to say that I think it's quite the exaggeration to think someone picking up an item like a bomb, hammer, or pokeball automatically means free point. All of those items are avoidable or can easily be countered with some other item. Even with the star power, one can run around and not manage to hit or do much damage to a player. So while FF is far from the ideal competitive scenario, the mode still requires it's own set of strategies and mechanics to overcome.

 

[Foxus]

I see a reoccurring theme here. Items. I ask myself when I see items being turned down, "Why would Sakurai's team go through the trouble of developing these items if they are only to be shunned so terribly?"

I feel the same way any time I play For Fun. Luck is a huge factor in that mode, and sometimes it is not on your side.

I can't tell you how many times favorable items spawned right on top of or very, very close to opponents I'm facing that happens to save them at the very last second. I'm not going to say skill doesn't exist in For Fun because it can and does; however you can't help but feel you've been beaten by luck instead of skill most of the time. Even worse, some players get so cocky when they win by said luck.

Then again, the mode is called "For Fun" for a reason. Luck or not the items give it the party aspect to make it, ya know... Fun.

Luck I think can be prominent in either mode.
Especially Sudden Death.

I think Smash is being more at the edge of your seat if anything, regardless of the mode. To sit back and have genuine amounts of fun, I recommend either Smash's solo mode, or Mario Party/Kart.

 

[Deleted member]

I believe For Fun is a mode that has been discredited for its contents, but is just as challenging as For Glory,

While the occasional For Fun match may be smelling of taunt parties

I'm about to cut you off right there.
People play For Fun mode to have Fun, so don't go criticizing people who want to enjoy themselves rather than mindlessly charging at people like a bunch of high-blood-pressure, impulsive imbeciles.
Just come on to For Fun and if we meet I'll make sure to unleash the wrath of all of my Taunt Party friends on you.

If any of you want to understand why Taunt Parties are superior to mindless fighting, go here.

 

[Foxus]

I'm about to cut you off right there.
People play For Fun mode to have Fun, so don't go criticizing people who want to enjoy themselves rather than mindlessly charging at people like a bunch of high-blood-pressure, impulsive imbeciles.
Just come on to For Fun and if we meet I'll make sure to unleash the wrath of all of my Taunt Party friends on you.

If any of you want to understand why Taunt Parties are superior to mindless fighting, go here.

The OP was in no way meant to be insulting, my apolgies if it came off that way. I'll take a look at that link.

What I was talking about were not the people just enjoying themselves, rather, the fighters that stand around for two minutes, or go after one opponent in general, lead to a Sudden Death situation, once that one opponent is defeated, they self destruct. Its not the people who just go in to relax.

Maybe I'm just too serious, I don't know.

@Mario Smith I'll point out one thing though. I was going to post this in your revivial thread, but this seems more fitting. Smash was originally developed as a fighting game, and still is. Its designed for mindless fighting, whether that is taken lightly or not is a different topic. If you want to explore the course, burn off some extra time, go ahead, but if I crash the taunt party, its because I'm living up to the original purpose of Smash Bros, not to say taunt parties can't do that in their.....special way.

 

[33percentgod]

How hard is it to pick up a bob omb and throw it? How hard is it to pick up an ore club and spam the heck out of it to prevent the opponent from approaching? How hard is it to grab a golden hammer and get 2 kills with just the movement stick? Pretty simple. Regarding stage hazards, Many of these stage hazards make it so you have to concentrate a lot more, and spread your focus thin. While this in itself is a skill, it has the side effect of distracting you from your opponent, and forcing you to focus on some outside factor that is completely unrelated to your end goal: KOing your opponent.

Starting this post with I do NOT have a dog in this fight. I enjoy both For Fun and 1v1 "srs buzness"

You have to see things from the other way. We can say the same thing for your "bread and butter" or "guaranteed KO" combos. How hard is it to hit someone with a Bomb Omb? Well, how hard is it to get that one grab on someone, when you're absolutely guaranteed the follow up to a kill? Do you need more button input? Sure. But the physics and % have been studied enough to know what is a KO and what isn't before you even go for that risk.

You see what I'm saying? It's a guaranteed win/KO, but a different side of the same coin.

 

[Deleted member]

The OP was in no way meant to be insulting, my apolgies if it came off that way. I'll take a look at that link.

What I was talking about were not the people just enjoying themselves, rather, the fighters that stand around for two minutes, or go after one opponent in general, lead to a Sudden Death situation, once that one opponent is defeated, they self destruct. Its not the people who just go in to relax.

Maybe I'm just too serious, I don't know.

@Mario Smith I'll point out one thing though. I was going to post this in your revivial thread, but this seems more fitting. Smash was originally developed as a fighting game, and still is. Its designed for mindless fighting, whether that is taken lightly or not is a different topic. If you want to explore the course, burn off some extra time, go ahead, but if I crash the taunt party, its because I'm living up to the original purpose of Smash Bros, not to say taunt parties can't do that in their.....special way.

Perhaps I did get more upset than needed, and the Sudden Death situation you described is the very point; they are a team, and if you are the crasher, you get destroyed

The genre of Smash is a very controversial subject. On hand hand, just about everyone in sight calls it a fighting game, but then you have the creator of it, who views it as a party game, so there's no proof for either claim, which would ultimately make it best for fighters to be in FG, and party-players to be in FF.

 

[Deleted member]

Starting this post with I do NOT have a dog in this fight. I enjoy both For Fun and 1v1 "srs buzness"

You have to see things from the other way. We can say the same thing for your "bread and butter" or "guaranteed KO" combos. How hard is it to hit someone with a Bomb Omb? Well, how hard is it to get that one grab on someone, when you're absolutely guaranteed the follow up to a kill? Do you need more button input? Sure. But the physics and % have been studied enough to know what is a KO and what isn't before you even go for that risk.

You see what I'm saying? It's a guaranteed win/KO, but a different side of the same coin.

Smash 4 actually has very few useful combos, and what little true combos do exist are instantly outclassed by their faster, stronger, Smash Attacks. a better argument would be to say that FG's character selection is mindless, not the combos. Maybe camping could be included in your argument too, but combos? Not really.

 

[EpicSonicLatios]

Starting this post with I do NOT have a dog in this fight. I enjoy both For Fun and 1v1 "srs buzness"

You have to see things from the other way. We can say the same thing for your "bread and butter" or "guaranteed KO" combos. How hard is it to hit someone with a Bomb Omb? Well, how hard is it to get that one grab on someone, when you're absolutely guaranteed the follow up to a kill? Do you need more button input? Sure. But the physics and % have been studied enough to know what is a KO and what isn't before you even go for that risk.

You see what I'm saying? It's a guaranteed win/KO, but a different side of the same coin.

I do see what you are saying, and I do think that items take a certain skill to use. My thing against items is that you are relying on something that you cannot always use (unless you are like, diddy or toon link etc.) Yes, a grab combo isn't hard to perform, but you always have the grab option available to you, whereas you have to get RNG to use items. You also have to look at it from a character balance perspective. Allowing items gives every single character in the game access to some of the exact same tools (Although on a random basis). This means that characters that are objectively worse, or players that are being outplayed, can still pick up some bob omb and kill somebody at 50% even if that character is designed to have a weak kill game, like sheik.

Also you have to consider that not every character has easy throw combos, and those that do actually have to work to land the grab. Luigi has a hard time landing grabs, and he has to work around this weakness to win, which is not easy against many characters. Also, in general most throw combos kill later than items. Pretty much all throw combos kill past 80% due to the nature of the aerials, assuming that the opponent knows how to DI.

Like I said before, I'm not saying for fun mode takes no skill at all, but what I am saying is that the skills it does require are not usually the ones that competitive players prioritize. They prioritize technical mastery of a character, matchup knowledge, and breaking down the habits of an opponent. That doesn't mean for fun doesn't take skill, but rather that the skills it uses are, well, "more fun" I guess, and less about completely mastering a character, especially when items can balance things out in unprecedented ways.

For fun is great at what it is, which is being a chaotic mode where the victor is unpredictable before the match, and that does have a certain charm to it, especially considering that in competitive play many match ups are super predictable due to the difference in player skill and what not. For fun levels the playing field a bit, but it just isn't good for settling which of two smashers is truly the better player.

I also enjoy playing casually with my friends, because I don't have to go super hardcore on them. So we can just sit back and have a good time, and not get mad over who won, and still enjoy the hilarity that does come with items.

 

[Foxus]

Unpredictable is what you want in Smash though.

You don't want a match to start and instantly know who the victor will be from a mistake or two. It spices a match up when a Bomb Omb sneaks its way into battle.

 

[EpicSonicLatios]

Unpredictable is what you want in Smash though.

You don't want a match to start and instantly know who the victor will be from a mistake or two. It spices a match up when a Bomb Omb sneaks its way into battle.

Yeah, I agree with this, and listed it as one of the strengths of items. Essentially it means that the player with a higher skill has a lower chance of winning. They still have a higher chance than the worse player, but the skill gap is evened out, making silly upsets of players with higher skill gaps more plausible, because the worse character in that matchup gains new options that wouldn't be available to that player, while the other character is already good enough where those new items don't have quite as much of an effect on their already good viability. Get what I'm saying? The good player will still usually win, but if they are a much better player, it seems unfair that the other player should have a higher chance of an upset. It's Kiiiinda comparable to Lucario's aura, only it can happen at ANY percent. For these reasons, this unpredictability is not really beneficial to the gameplay, especially considering that upsets do already happen in smash anyways. Also, if you know who will win because of the reputation of a player, it's because they WORKED for that reputation and have a very high level of skill at the game. They deserve that skill to be reflected in the results as much as possible, and upsets should result from an opponent having to work hard before the set, and during the set, to narrow the gap. I just don't think any more upsets are needed, and upsets are even more hype when they happen without items, because they are more rare.

 

[Foxus]

Yeah, I agree with this, and listed it as one of the strengths of items. Essentially it means that the player with a higher skill has a lower chance of winning. They still have a higher chance than the worse player, but the skill gap is evened out, making silly upsets of players with higher skill gaps more plausible, because the worse character in that matchup gains new options that wouldn't be available to that player, while the other character is already good enough where those new items don't have quite as much of an effect on their already good viability. Get what I'm saying? The good player will still usually win, but if they are a much better player, it seems unfair that the other player should have a higher chance of an upset. It's Kiiiinda comparable to Lucario's aura, only it can happen at ANY percent. For these reasons, this unpredictability is not really beneficial to the gameplay, especially considering that upsets do already happen in smash anyways. Also, if you know who will win because of the reputation of a player, it's because they WORKED for that reputation and have a very high level of skill at the game. They deserve that skill to be reflected in the results as much as possible, and upsets should result from an opponent having to work hard before the set, and during the set, to narrow the gap. I just don't think any more upsets are needed, and upsets are even more hype when they happen without items, because they are more rare.

I agree that there could be an injustice of someone with lower skill.. Take Sudden Death for example (why were falling bombs put in there?). Just why?

 

[Zarxrax]

I like the for fun mode in theory. It could be perfectly fine as an entertaining game, which is what this is supposed to be anyways.
But the main problem with for fun, is simply the LAG.

For glory is no problem. Most people on there seem to have a decent connection, and if not, well, I just kill myself twice and move on. With all of the for fun matches, there are 3 other players, meaning three times as much chance of coming upon horrid lag. AND they are timed matches, which means that if you get into a laggy one, god help you, because there isn't a damn thing you can do to get out of it. Today I innocently tried to go into for fun. Someone was lagging so badly that it literally took two minutes to even get through the "3, 2, 1, GO" part!!! At that point I just resorted to unplugging my router. What else could I do?

I believe that if they actually implemented some kind of lag safeguard like automatically kicking out any player who can't connect to everyone with less than 200-300 ping, then for fun could be legitimately fun. But as it is, I really can't even play it.

 

[Deleted member]

For glory is no problem. Most people on there seem to have a decent connection, and if not, well, I just kill myself twice and move on.

HOLD IT! Stop right there! That could get you banned, so, instead I advise that you use Ban-Blocking!

How does this work?
For 3DS - Pop out your cartridge. Easy, convenient, and no ban time!
For Wii U - Pull the cord... literally. Easy, convenient, and, of course, no ban time!

There is another way on the Wii U (taking the disc out and reinserting it), however that may give you 10 seconds - 1 minute's worth the time, so Ban-Block wisely!

I usually use Ban-Blocking to get out of laggy matches or prevent cheap players from getting the win that they didn't deserve.

 

[Arrei]

You do realize, dropping out of a match just replaces you with a level 1 CPU, so those "cheap players" still get their win whether you ragequit or not? You don't get a loss, but lolFGwinrate

 

[33percentgod]

Unpredictable is what you want in Smash though.

I can't agree with this more. This is the entire reason I even picked up Smash to begin with and have skipped 2 decades of fighting games.

People studying frame by frame animations is not something appealing to me. Now, you take 2 players, put them against each other, and then start throwing a whole bunch of insanity in there? That's my kind of fighting game. It keeps the human/wild card aspect of it and lowers emphasis for the micromanage/dissection and almost computer like play style.

Smash with it's insanity and unpredictability is what keeps it feeling more human and not as sterile and flow-charty as the rest of the fighting game genre.

 

[Deleted member]

You do realize, dropping out of a match just replaces you with a level 1 CPU, so those "cheap players" still get their win whether you ragequit or not? You don't get a loss, but lolFGwinrate

But you don't have to see them win and watch them get on the results screen.
Also, I could probably annihilate you in all 4 Smash games, so I know a "cheap player" when I see one. You have been brainwashed by Fear and Sakurai into thinking that this game is somehow balanced in both characters and playstyles.

 

[Arrei]

You seem to be projecting and assuming an awful lot for replying to a two-sentence post in a simple discussion, so I'll just ignore everything past the first sentence. That's not a can of worms I care to open. Now, I dunno about you, but going to all the trouble of disconnecting my console then reconnecting to the network strikes me as being much more annoying than seeing the results screen, thinking "Man, I shouldn't have lost that", and then just going off to find a different opponent.

Using it to escape horrid lag is one thing, but if you do it to ragequit it's not like not seeing the results screen takes away the knowledge that you lost that match, for valid reasons or otherwise.

 

[Deleted member]

You seem to be projecting and assuming an awful lot for replying to a two-sentence post in a simple discussion, so I'll just ignore everything past the first sentence. That's not a can of worms I care to open.

You don't want to touch on those subjects because you know you'd lose.
And also, by this method, I don't have to be demoralized at the results screen as I watch their character dance around like an idiot in the exact same space where mine should've been at. Not only does this maintain my record, but prevents them from increasing their's or getting a "true win".

 

[Arrei]

Mhm. Whatever you say, champ. Pretty sure their win record still gets one more, while you get to sit there on your hands waiting for your connection to come back up, alone with the knowledge that you lost.


More importantly, it occurs to me I've neglected to respond to the actual topic at hand. Now, I discredit For Fun not because it's too luck-based or whatever malarkey - from an entertainment aspect I still prefer the chaotic ridiculousness of item play over typical 1v1 matches. Sure, I might lose because of a wayward bomb or get pushed into oblivion by that damn gust bellows, but I don't give FF a second glance because it's still stuck on 2-minute Time matches. That's not even enough time to get into the swing of things, let alone really enjoy oneself.

 

[Deleted member]

Mhm. Whatever you say, champ. Pretty sure their win record still gets one more, while you get to sit there on your hands waiting for your connection to come back up, alone with the knowledge that you lost.

They actually get a communication error and get booted back to the For Glory menu. That's why I have all 100%. The thing about me is I'm not going to let this be "anyone's game". If some random person fights me online and isn't in a Taunt Party with me (when I'm on For Fun), then they cannot win. Because I'll simply Ban-Block.

Now, considering that my initial statement wasn't directed towards you, I'd advise that you stay in your lane, and, as you said, return to the topic "at hand".

 

[Conn1496]

I think the main thing to take into consideration when looking at For Fun is that, yes, winning in it is still creditable, but there is a minor luck factor involved, and more openings for cheaper KOs. However, I won't say that winning in For Fun in exactly difficult or a cakewalk. You've got to be aware of the items that are available, who is getting the most kills, etc... But I feel the biggest problem is that there's just no 1v1. Free For Alls aren't really a problem for me, but when you're thrust into it with randoms, the problem becomes apparent - when there's a widely varied skill-range between the players to a point where one person curbstomps game after game regardless of luck, everyone plays certain characters with huge advantages (*cough* Bowser.), or people start teaming up on a particular player or giving others points on purpose, etc.

I think the thing you really have to look at is that - for fun is exactly what it says on the tin - For Fun, so winning in For Fun for me isn't much of an achievement based on that alone, since everyone there likely isn't taking the game as seriously as they do in FG, but winning in FG isn't really a big deal either most of the time.

-and when it comes to taunt parties in For Fun, I tend to leave... Sure, some people find that fun, but I'm a big fighting game fan, so I really do genuinely enjoy fighting, taunt parties just irritate me as it's basically as good as just not playing the game at all IMO.

When it comes to hectic VS controlled though, I find that it's difficult to even switch off the part of my brain that enjoys a more controlled environment, so sometimes the chaos of For Fun is genuinely not as interesting to me. However, the more varied stages and wider range of weaponry available definitely gives me more to tactically think about, and I do enjoy that aspect. For Fun might not be as consistent, but there's more to think about if you really wanna win, and I think that's pretty cool (Some items are pretty BS though, not gonna lie... The whole "Rush for the OP thing to win." is something I've complained about in other games, not just Smash, so...).

As for the whole debate on the consistency of results, I do feel it's an issue, but on the other hand, I don't particularly care about my win % in general, especially in a mode labelled "For Fun". -and there's so many ways you could lose in For Fun that it's difficult to care anyway, whereas winning still kinda feels like something to be proud of. Sure, not as much as in FG, but still, you likely had to put in some skill for that win, regardless of mode. At the end of the day, I'm playing a game - I want to have fun with it (even in FG) - so my win-rate doesn't matter. However, if you really care about being the best at Smash, the lack of consistency and more ways to "unfairly" lose in For Fun will definitely mean that that mode is not for you... -which in of itself is slightly unironic, let's be honest.

[Edit]: Oh, and for the record, I don't mind items at all outside of the occasional 1/2 that I think are just downright excessive or destructive. I believe some items like the Beam Sword, Bumper and Freezies - that have very little impact if players aren't aware how to put them best to use - should even be considered for serious play, since even if you go running for that Beam Sword, for example, chances are it's not gonna bag you an instant win. So items being on is actually one of few, if not only, encouraging factors for me to play For Fun.

 

[link2702]

You don't want to touch on those subjects because you know you'd lose.
And also, by this method, I don't have to be demoralized at the results screen as I watch their character dance around like an idiot in the exact same space where mine should've been at. Not only does this maintain my record, but prevents them from increasing their's or getting a "true win".

by complaining about things and calling them "cheap" and going out of your way to "disconnect" to avoid a lose from these "cheap players" already lets the entire community know that you're nothing but a sore loser who rather then try and learn how to deal with certain tactics, you would rather scream "CHEAAAAAP" and try to discredit your opponents win on you. Further, your attitude reeks of "scrub" where you try to make the claim that others are only "skilled" if they follow your arbitrary set of rules and "code of conduct" aka not playing "cheaply"

the most ironic part of all this though, is that you are also the same person who encourages triple teaming a single player because they don't want to take part of your "taunt party matches"; it's ok for you to do something "cheap" to another player, but should someone else do it to you(and without the aid of 2 other players I might add) it's suddenly "wrong" and you are thus justified in doing a safe disconnect against em.

way to be a hypocrite mario smith.

With all that said, ignore listed. I'd recommend others here do the same to you.

 

[Deleted member]

You've already proven by your actions you're not even half as good as you think you are. by complaining about things and calling them "cheap" and going out of your way to "disconnect" to avoid a lose from these "cheap players" already lets the entire community know that you're nothing but a sore loser who rather then try and learn how to deal with certain tactics, you would rather scream "CHEAAAAAP" and try to discredit your opponents win on you. Further, your attitude reeks of "scrub" where you try to make the claim that others are only "skilled" if they follow your arbitrary set of rules and "code of conduct" aka not playing "cheaply"

the most ironic part of all this though, is that you are also the same person who encourages triple teaming a single player because they don't want to take part of your "taunt party matches"; it's ok for you to do something "cheap" to another player, but should someone else do it to you(and without the aid of 2 other players I might add) it's suddenly "wrong" and you are thus justified in doing a safe disconnect against em.

way to be a hypocrite mario smith.

With all that said, you're not worth the effort of even arguing with anymore, so ignore listed. I'd recommend others here do the same to you.

Come fight me in Smash and get 3-stocked. Now, with that, I ignore you too, my good sir!

 

[Sleek Media]

I just want 1v1 For Fun. It takes too long to find a FFA room with acceptable lag.

 

[33percentgod]

FFA is very awesome fun, but the people who join that...do they even understand how internet works? I swear most of them have to be streaming Netflix on 2 TV's, running Pandora, and downloading an entire music discography, all while jumping into a game.

 

[Foxus]

FFA is very awesome fun, but the people who join that...do they even understand how internet works? I swear most of them have to be streaming Netflix on 2 TV's, running Pandora, and downloading an entire music discography, all while jumping into a game.

Either that, or they're trying to smash from a tepee in Madagascar. Why the game continues to buffer over just spare sanity and disconnect during bad lag is beyond me.

 

[MacSmitty]

I like playing in For Fun since it has Final Smashes, and some slow characters I use benefit from some of the battering items, like Robin.
But in all seriousness, to hell with Taunt Parties. I broke every single one I've come across, ever since the old Brawl days.

 

[Yellowpikmin476]

For Fun mode these days is what I prefer over For Glory. Because, when I play Smash online, it's usually because I'm bored, and I'm wanting to relax a bit. So, if it's a taunt party, I'll play along, and when people actually wanna fight, I'll fight. For Glory just kinda feels stressful for me, mainly because if I let my guard down to relax a second, I'll get killed, and while I'm not really caring about my win ratio, I just don't like having totally serious battles because I play, well, for fun. I don't mind losing, as long as the battle I lost in was fun, and not stressful.

 

[Deleted member]

I like playing in For Fun since it has Final Smashes, and some slow characters I use benefit from some of the battering items, like Robin.
But in all seriousness, to hell with Taunt Parties. I broke every single one I've come across, ever since the old Brawl days.

So you were that guy who I 5-stocked!

For Fun mode these days is what I prefer over For Glory. Because, when I play Smash online, it's usually because I'm bored, and I'm wanting to relax a bit. So, if it's a taunt party, I'll play along, and when people actually wanna fight, I'll fight. For Glory just kinda feels stressful for me, mainly because if I let my guard down to relax a second, I'll get killed, and while I'm not really caring about my win ratio, I just don't like having totally serious battles because I play, well, for fun. I don't mind losing, as long as the battle I lost in was fun, and not stressful.

All you have to do is camp and spam and you will win. Smash 4 is a unique type of game where playing offensively is actually limiting yourself rather than maximizing your character's potential. Just campspam as Shulk, Cloud, Roy, or Bowser, with the occasional hint of Falcon, and you win.

 

[MacSmitty]

So you were that guy who I 5-stocked!

I have absolutely no idea what your talking about. I've never been 5-Stocked in this game.

 

[Foxus]

For Fun mode these days is what I prefer over For Glory. Because, when I play Smash online, it's usually because I'm bored, and I'm wanting to relax a bit. So, if it's a taunt party, I'll play along, and when people actually wanna fight, I'll fight. For Glory just kinda feels stressful for me, mainly because if I let my guard down to relax a second, I'll get killed, and while I'm not really caring about my win ratio, I just don't like having totally serious battles because I play, well, for fun. I don't mind losing, as long as the battle I lost in was fun, and not stressful.

I don't think you can relax on Smash-at least online. You have to consistently be on your game, not one nerve can relax. The Subspace Emissary kinda gave a way to make it so you can relax on Smash.