• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Discussion: Capricious Design Elements, Situational Decision-Making, & Fair Item Use

Fordo35@aol.com

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13
Location
NYC/Providence
I was inspired to write about the role of items and chance-based events (like item spawning or stage interaction) in Smash Bros after looking at the new Team Healer item. To me, this is another example of the carefully designed, lovingly created elements of Smash which keep the game interesting, that the developers labored over for countless hours to properly implement, and which will ultimately be rejected and cast aside by a large part of the community. Sounds almost ungrateful....

These are my thoughts, you're in no way obliged to accept them. I can't hope to control what other people will say, but I'm more interested in other people's personal views on the role of capricious design elements, like Team Healer or scrolling stages, as well as the strategies and levels of depth which they lend to the game. If at any point it seems like I'm implying that the designers intended for the game to be enjoyed with items on, I probably am. How totally unreasonable, eh?

I think that Smash Balls, as well as all other items, should be allowed in tourneys, because whether we like it or not, they're part of the game's core design. Sure, the designers have made Smash customizable and flexible enough that everyone can be happy, but in general I have issues with people who want to strip out elements of a game's design and play on the most flat, non-moving levels available "because that's the only way you can see who truly is more skilled."

Sometimes, it seems like people who defensively argue this position are more interested in Ego Trippin' over a video game than um... having fun playing a video game?

Yes, competition is important, but you can't (and won't) always win and when you set up sterile, static conditions where-in players better acclimated to said conditions can more consistently execute winning strategies without worrying about improvising to varying circumstances, you're not only eliminating a whole spectrum of possibilities and additional strategies, you're cutting out the very unpredictability that is the soul of real combat.

I don't know how many of you guys actually practice martial arts, knocked somebody out, taken one to the head, or have gotten into a real BRAWL, but fighting in the real world isn't clean cut, even in the comparatively sterile environment of organized, style-specific tournaments.

Fighting is about thinking on your toes, responding to the unpredictable and reacting unpredictably. It's about living in the moment, being completely open to the unexpected.

With every new element of the design Masahiro Sakurai reveals, it becomes more apparent to me how much he really wants SSBB to be hectic, chaotic, exciting, and unpredictable: like a real bar BRAWL, preferably with a screen full of players. This was not designed purely as a 1 on 1 fighting game, it has more depth to it than that.

Before I go any further, let's look at the new Team Healer item, which serves as a great model for the inherent balance intentionally designed into item play. It's an item that promotes team play, and it does something that almost every hardcore player considers 'cheap' or 'broken': it recovers health! And the higher your damage, the more you recover.

But wait, it's not that simple. It can only recover the health of the person who it's thrown at, not the person who picks it up. And if it somehow hits a member of the opposite team, they get healed instead.

So, in actuality, it's not a broken, pure-luck item that should be banned from tournament play, but rather just another piece on the board, which can be manipulated into the flow of combat and turned to a team's advantage by either side, even after it has been picked up.

The Smash Ball functions in the same way, because even after it has finally been cracked open and claimed, there are still opportunities to turn the situation to your advantage, or even claim it for your own.

A Smash Ball-related quote by Mr. Masahiro Sakurai best sums up this crucial core design principle: "Do you use it as soon as you get it? Or save it for later? Do you run from an enemy who got it? Or do you chase him? You’ll need instant SITUATIONAL decision-making!" [My emphasis]

For every inherent winning strategy connected to an item, there is a counter-strategy.

A truly skilled fighter doesn't bemoan or curse an item presenting itself closer to his opponent, instead he factors this chance into his strategy and turns his opponent's fortune into his own victory.

Every item, from the Smash Ball to the Golden Hammer to the Assist Trophies, has some kind of built-in balance mechanism, some kind of weakness or opportunity to exploit, even when on the receiving end.

You'd be hard pressed to find a truly skilled Fox, Falco or Ness player who doesn't delight at the prospect of facing an opponent equipped with projectile-based items. "Turn on Ray Guns and Super Scopes? Be my guest!"

I take solace in the fact that it seems Mr. Masahiro Sakurai and his team have endeavored to instill chaos and whimsical fun into their design wherever possible, from levels to items to characters, in order to keep the game play fresh and the combat up in the air. Sometimes even literally.
 

Saor Gael

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
151
Eh, I think the reason professionals are so obsessed with making things as un-randomized as possible is because they're doing it for money. They don't want to lose money because an opponent had a bob-omb appear next to him and used it to win the match.

That said, I agree with your point. I LOVE items and randomness. :chuckle:

Just a thought (and question) to the tournament people who are sure to reply to this: are there any tournaments that use a point system to determine the winner? Like in World Cup qualifiers.

Wouldn't that be a slightly better way of finding out who is truly the most skilled?
 

Captain J

Smash Rookie
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
23
Right on.

It does seems that the countermeasures given to the items would create a more stable item match than Melee's complete item randomness. If given a chance (not likely) it could prosper.

Though I agree on the money match point, as that would suck hard.
 

Spellman

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
623
Location
Brickway
I agree with all of this, and would be on board with whatever plans you may have with this idea. Although, you certainly can't convert the current tournament community with this logic, I'm sure a new one could be built with minds like yours, and followers who like how you think.

I am hoping an argument doesn't spawn from this, all-in-all, this is a non-threatening idea about how items can be used in future tournament scenes, so let's not get all uppity at each other, comprendé?
 

Witchking_of_Angmar

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
1,846
Location
Slowly starting to enjoy my mothertongue again. :)
In real life fights, there is no random element like a big bomb that is throw at you.

Also, in boxing, the setting could be described in smash terms as "No items, fox only FD," so that comparison is horrible, especially considering that a large amount of stages are allowed at tourneys.

It's just that adding luck to the game does not deepen strategie, it removes it. Using an item is *always* the best course of action, and thus eliminates variety instead of adding more.
 

kashikomarimashita

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 12, 2002
Messages
477
Location
Gotemba, Japan
Ive always liked items, but some can be too cheap. Especially in one on one matches. I mean whoever gets a Zelda heart just got a life back. Though I do find the team healer interesting because it does not necessarily benefit the person who gets it nor that team if they pass it off wrong. I also wonder if it can be knocked away and still used.
 

DragonBlade

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
273
Nothing is stopping anyone from including items or using any other setting in tournaments. There is no reason you should be trying to argue for it when no one is stopping it. If you are so lazy that you don't want to start a tournament with your settings, then thats your problem.

With that said, items not only do not add anything to competitive smash, they also take away from the depth of the game and hinder players from improving. Items have always taken away a required level of technical skill, timing, and strategizing and replaced it with luck and randomness. If you think smash balls and some new items are going to change that, you haven't you've never played competitively (by my standards). Also, most competitive players have fun doing so. Adding randomness and removing depth to the game is not fun.

Yet an other unless thread made by someone completely uninformed...
 

SJAK47

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
448
Location
NJ
Good argument. I wish I can say the same but most of my friends would feel that having fun is all about winning.
 

Eaode

Smash Champion
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
2,923
Location
Glen Cove/RIT, New York.
You (and many others) say that you don't care about changing other peoples' opinions. But if that were true, why did you make this post?

Why does it matter how tournaments play? You can play whatever way you want. Whether you think it's fun or not is irrelevent, tourneys are played for money, so luck and randomness should be reduced as much as possible, ie turning off items and banning stages like Big Blue, Icicle mountain, etc. etc.

Tournaments will not consider adding luck and unneeded chaos to the game because someone thinks it's more fun.

But maybe you realize this. Maybe you see that tournaments are playd for money and that there shouldn't be luck involved. Then why do you have a problem with people turnng off items, etc.? I mean, they're not in a tournamnet why would they still suck the fun out of the game? Answer: They have more fun playing without items, and trying to cange how they have fun is just ignorant and rude.



I'm sorry if I sound harsh. I know you mean well, but really any post like this boils down to the same thing: You want to project your idea of 'Fun' on other people.



And for the last time people: SCROLLING STAGES ARE NOT BANNED.
 

happynoodleboy

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
82
Location
Reed College, Portland, OR
EXCELLENT post! It's just too bad some people aren't willing to open their minds a bit and even CONSIDER what you have to say beyond the first few lines.

To those saying that items REMOVE strategy--how so? Does it not require the player to think ahead even MORE than without items? Not only must they prepare for certain attacks from their opponent, but they must ALSO prepare for an item appearing.

Meh, I don't know--I like to play with items on sometimes, sometimes with them off. Just depends on my mood. I don't have a problem with people playing with items off, I just have a problem with those with closed minds.
 

Fordo35@aol.com

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13
Location
NYC/Providence
In real life fights, there is no random element like a big bomb that is throw at you.
This is an absurd juxtaposition and it weakens your point. Unfortunately, friend, in the real world most fights and conflicts are more or less unplanned and unfold in unpredictable ways, especially brawls. In fact, most of them end up on the floor. Your point seems to be 'In real life fights, there [are] no random element', which isn't true but could be supported. You back up your claim with 'like a big bomb that is throw[n] at you', which tries to evoke sharp contrast to make a point, but is ultimately immaterial. Of course people in the real world don't walk around with big throwing bombs, but that doesn't discount, disprove, or preclude the myriad number random elements that do occur in real fights. Example: The person you're shoving around happens to stumble into the path of a bicycle or moving vehicle. Woops! All in all, however, this probably wasn't worth the attention since you're picking at straws and dealing in semantics instead of addressing the substance of the topic.


Also, in boxing, the setting could be described in smash terms as "No items, fox only FD," so that comparison is horrible, especially considering that a large amount of stages are allowed at tourneys.
Again, semantics. I'm not 100 percent sure how to follow the logic of your sentence, it's not worded very clearly, but I'd caution you against blinding yourself from general truths by being overly specific. I also never brought up boxing, and in general boxing isn't a good example because it's an organized sport based around a limited form of combat. So in a sense, you're right that boxing resembles no-items, tournament style play.


It's just that adding luck to the game does not deepen strategie, it removes it. Using an item is *always* the best course of action, and thus eliminates variety instead of adding more.
Using an item is always the best course of action, huh? I can disprove that even using the Melee design. What about when you pick up a Hammer, but the head falls off? Is using the Hammer always the best course of action then? What about using the Super Scope against an opponent who shield-reflects your charged up shot back at you? Or worse, against Fox, Falco or Ness? It's never black and white. Also, you say 'eliminates variety', but I think perhaps you used the wrong word, because we're talking about possibilities and alternate options, not diversity. Either way, I disagree with your statement. But hey, that's just me, you're entitled to your thoughts.
 

Fordo35@aol.com

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13
Location
NYC/Providence
Nothing is stopping anyone from including items or using any other setting in tournaments. There is no reason you should be trying to argue for it when no one is stopping it. If you are so lazy that you don't want to start a tournament with your settings, then thats your problem.
Most of this is immaterial to the discussion, but I'll humor you anyway. You're taking a very precarious stance here, because the crux of your argument above seems to be that 'nobody is stopping anyone from using items competitively, so therefore don't talk about it' and you follow that up with 'Hey, keep your items out of my competitive play! They don't belong in competitive play!"

I really don't think it's fair, purely from an intellectual standpoint, for you to have your cake and then eat it too.

Thanks for insinuating that I'm lazy, by the way, and for essentially putting words in my mouth by forcing me in your logical construct to adopt the kind of stance you imagine I hold. Speaking of which...


With that said, items not only do not add anything to competitive smash, they also take away from the depth of the game and hinder players from improving. Items have always taken away a required level of technical skill, timing, and strategizing and replaced it with luck and randomness. If you think smash balls and some new items are going to change that, you haven't you've never played competitively (by my standards).
I can't really respect your opinion on the matter because you haven't addressed any of the core issues I talked about, you just stated your opinions about items as if they were facts in and of themselves, without backing up a single thing you said with any reasoning or logic.

How do items not add anything to competitive Smash? How do the take away from the depth of the game? On what grounds do you suggest that items hinder players from improving, and for that matter, improving at what? Playing the game? Are not the items part of the game? Or do you mean improving at something else, like wave-dashing or short hopping? It what ways do items take away from a required level of technical skill, as well as timing and strategizing? How do they replace it with luck and randomness? And if they ALWAYS have, as you suggest, then you're implying a great deal about supposed past events which you really should quantify.

No, I don't think that Smash Balls and some new items are going to 'change that', that's not what I said and that's not what I'm talking about, it's what you're talking about. And even if I did, which for your arguements sake, let's pretend for a second that I do, how does that opinion justify your allegation that I haven't played competitively? Even by your standards, as lofty or as specific as you want to make them, how do you have any idea what kind of player I am? Do you know me? No.


Also, most competitive players have fun doing so. Adding randomness and removing depth to the game is not fun.
I know, I have fun competing, too. Funny thing is, that doesn't really say much, it's inconsequential. At the end of the day, fun is subjective, it's different for everybody. It's impossible to make a general statement about what is or isn't fun, regardless of the fact that you haven't even proved whether or not items 'remove depth', making your point moot. Most people don't play video games, so they couldn't understand how we have fun playing Smash. It's all about personal perspective. Do what makes you happy, but don't condemn other people out of your ignorance of what makes them happy.

Yet an other unless thread made by someone completely uninformed...
Yes... I'm the one who's uninformed. Because I'm clearly the one who's jumping to conclusions, making baseless, sweeping generalizations, and making assumptions about a person I've never met, huh? At least I know how to spell 'another' and 'useless'.

Let me make this clear. I'm not here to change anyone's opinion, and I could care less how you like best to play Smash Bros. Far be it from me to tell you how to have your fun.

I'm here to have a discussion, to express myself, and to talk about ideas which interest me. I hope that's not a crime.
 

Mr. M

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
306
Location
Pensacola, FL Wargh! King Dedede, how dare you be


Heh, wow. Someone that can actually blow away simple and biased arguments. Amazing.

I can agree to some extent on this, till money/prizes are on the line in a tournament, unless I know specifically that the tournament is an item based one (which I have never seen to this day).
 

Gill

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
229
Location
New York
Me and my friends aren't competitive players, meaning we don't go to tournaments or play for money, but we still don't play with items. We want to win as much as possible on skill alone. Winning on luck simply leaves a bad taste in our mouths. Items just get annoying anyway, cause everybody rushes for them.

Every items topic I've seen so far brings up how much fun the randomness of them are or something. Can we stop bringing up fun? Fun is subjective, its completely irrelevant in a debate.

It pisses me off (This is not towards you, Fordo, or anybody in particular) how people tend to say "Well geez, its only a game" when somebody wins and gets excited/celebrates/rubs it in the loser's face. When I win at something, I don't want to shake the other person's hand and tell them they did well. I want to get excited in my victory, and I don't get angry when somebody else does this, it only makes me want to challenge them again and hopefully defeat them. If its only a game, why not get silly about winning and losing?

That whole rant was completely worthless to the topic, but I wanted to get it off my chest.
 

Jumpinjahosafa

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
883
I feel the exact same way about music.

This post is win.

Okay Fordo, Completely ignore my post and go after the arguments you know are easy to refute. And while double posting, too.
Wow..

Childish much?

Or do you just want to start a flame war.
 

DMAJohnson

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
395
Location
Texas
I've never understood what the big stink is about items. Last I checked, there wasn't an item that spawned which, when grabbed, automatically ended the match with you as the winner.

I don't have anything against anyone that doesn't use them, but playing with items, to me, doesn't take away from the depth, it adds to it. Take today's team healer, for example. You can't use it for yourself, so not only do you have to get it, you have to work with your partner to get together so that it can be used. But what if the partner that doesn't need it is the one furthest from it? Should the partner that does actually need it grab it and use it on the partner that doesn't just to keep it away from the other team? Or is the other partner close enough that they can attempt to block the other team just long enough for them to get there?

To each their own, I suppose.
 

Spellman

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
623
Location
Brickway
Every items topic I've seen so far brings up how much fun the randomness of them are or something. Can we stop bringing up fun? Fun is subjective, its completely irrelevant in a debate.
O.K., but I really don't think this is supposed to be a debate. The Smash Community has always been split up over the one simple idea clash:

Randomness has or has no place in competitive play, and items do or don't take skill.

He's not saying you've been playing the wrong way for the last 5 years, he's introducing a new idea that in no way threatens the current tournament community or your personal preferences. Of course his entire post is mostly an opinion, but he doesn't have to say "IMO" at the end of every line. If he says something is fun, he's not implying it's fun for everyone.

If anyone wants to dig up that ridiculous fight anyways, there's plenty of old topics to bump.
 

Foe

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
436
Location
San Diego
I play without items and play competitively but reading this made me think: Isn't it hypocritical for people to say 'No johns' then go and complain about items? Items could be just as random as if the tv is 'laggy'.
 

omiz144

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
199
The professional scene is by no means a large part of the Smash Community. Most Smashers are high-school students who use the game as a game should be played, for fun.

I'm going to guess that the pro-scene is about 9% of the total population.

These items will be used, and pros are in for a sad shock when they go on wifi and most people will want items on.
 

Dragonbreath

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
881
Location
Big, spooky castle in eastern europe.
O.K., but I really don't think this is supposed to be a debate. The Smash Community has always been split up over the one simple idea clash:

Randomness has or has no place in competitive play, and items do or don't take skill.

He's not saying you've been playing the wrong way for the last 5 years, he's introducing a new idea that in no way threatens the current tournament community or your personal preferences. Of course his entire post is mostly an opinion, but he doesn't have to say "IMO" at the end of every line. If he says something is fun, he's not implying it's fun for everyone.

If anyone wants to dig up that ridiculous fight anyways, there's plenty of old topics to bump.
That's a good point bolded. Here's my thoughts on it. What a lot of people tend to forget that tournament smashing is a professional sport. If a player tripped on a hole int the gorund in the superbowl, they'd stop the game and try to compensate for the imbalance. If they tripped on a hole in the backyard league, they'd just tell you to walk it off and keep playing. This is a matter of cold, hard cash, and people don't enter tournaments to gamble. Which is why some stages and items are banned.

I agree with every point Fordo makes, but a tournament is not a barroom brawl. It's a boxing match.

Okay Fordo, Completely ignore my post and go after the arguments you know are easy to refute. And while double posting, too.
And you? If you're pro-professional play, shouldn't you oh, I don't know. . .act professionally? Refuting the points you can refute is exactly what people are supposed to do in arguments. You wouldn't tell a boxer that he's not allowed to punch people, would you?
 

Ebonyks

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
160
Location
Puerto Rico
I have to give you credit for an articulate and well-written rant. The only factor which i can see facilitating the removal of items in tournament play is the gambling element of it. However, I agree wholeheartedly with your perspective, many of the inclusions in brawl imply a great deal of thought and effort into balancing play with items and other 'randomized' factors.
 

Metroid_01

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
453
Location
Atlanta, GA (school yr), Miami, Fl (summer)
Example: The person you're shoving around happens to stumble into the path of a bicycle or moving vehicle. Woops! All in all, however, this probably wasn't worth the attention since you're picking at straws and dealing in semantics instead of addressing the substance of the topic.

I think you sort of miss the point. A brawl in the street is more akin to a ffa with items on at your house/dorm/etc with some friends. (so mebbe you dont get into a real fistfight in the street with buddies, but you get the idea). Just about anything could happen during that fight. But thats just a mess. Just like in smash, winning one of those brawls is not entirely indicative of skill. Its very easy to imagine a random event (like being hit by a car as you point out) taking what was an otherwise easy victory away.

That is why tournaments are essentially straightforward matches. You are in a simple ring with no outrageous random events to worry about. (Sort of like a limited stage selection with no items). In the case of a more random type fight (like MMA due to the variety of styles), its still just like character picking.

This sort of skirts the point, but also refutes much of what you say in your initial argument. The way tournament rules are set up for melee are rather similar to an actual martial arts tournament. Theres no cars flying at people, no ridiculous obstacles...just you and your opponent. The randomness comes from your opponent's technique. Learning it, mindgaming it, etc.

Now to really hit at more of your argument: You state that there is inherent balance within every item, but I disagree. Most items are not so bad...most items are pretty balanced...but not all. The hammer is an excellent example. Yea, theres a chance the head falls off, but its relatively small, and if you dont...its almost a free ko on many stages. There are some things that can be done against such a weapon, but many characters are just not equipped to handle it. Also, defensive items tend to be so ridiculous. The healing item shown today is great, I think its amazing... but what about hearts, stars, tomatoes. Whoever gets those gets a tremendous boost. There is no balance to it, and as it has been pointed out countless times.

Over some infinite number of trials, who do you think will come out ahead (ie. getting the item more): bowser or fox? What about pikachu vs fox? or falcon vs fox? Some characters are faster, better at grabbing, etc. They are put at a huge disadvantage when those types of items come into play.

And when you make the argument about how a skilled Fox,Falco,Ness would love a dual pistol foe...thats those THREE. THREE. The rest of the characters are pretty much screwed.

At any rate, my main point here (since I wouldnt want to read this much of a ramble) is that not all items are balanced, not all should be included in tournament play because its just too much given to random factor.
 

DMAJohnson

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
395
Location
Texas
These items will be used, and pros are in for a sad shock when they go on wifi and most people will want items on.
Why are they in for a shock? They already expect it, and with or without items they're going to pummel the competition.
 

ShortFuse

Smash Lord
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,523
Location
NJ/NYC
Fighting is about thinking on your toes, responding to the unpredictable and reacting unpredictably. It's about living in the moment, being completely open to the unexpected.
Sure... I'd like to know how you'd react when you get pushed off the ledge and a Smash Ball appears in front of your opponent (Samus), he smashes the thing and while you try to recover, you get destroyed by a giant blue beam.

Oh well, I guess that money put down before the match is meaningless.

It's all nice and fun in friendlies, but not tournaments.
 

PopeOfChiliTown

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
520
Location
Isabela, PR
To those saying that items REMOVE strategy--how so? Does it not require the player to think ahead even MORE than without items? Not only must they prepare for certain attacks from their opponent, but they must ALSO prepare for an item appearing.
Explain to me how exactly one prepares for a randomly appearing item? Is the strategy involved in that somehow similar to stocking up on supplies for an earthquake or just such as keeping a bucket of water handy in case you spontaneously combust?

Learn what depth and strategy mean, then try to squeeze your way into a discussion.

Another point I find funny is an attitude shared by seemingly all of the anti-tournament rules legionnaires; that they feel we owe something to the developers beside our money for making this great game. The fact is, once we purchase the game, it is ours and we need not please anyone but ourselves with what we do with it. There is no reason to play "the way the developers intended". They labor for months and years to create a game, and they get quantitative remuneration for their efforts once it's released. The cycle ends. Sakurai should not cry if the metagame doesn't turn out as he expected. He doesn't have the right to tell us how to play, and it is unreasonable for him to expect us to. He's getting rich off of us, and now we take his creation and enjoy it how we want.

I hope this argument can help to shut down future attempts at playing the "way the developers intended" card. I hope the pretty bolded letters help to that effect. It's a weak argument anyway. Find others. Rant over.
 

Witchking_of_Angmar

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
1,846
Location
Slowly starting to enjoy my mothertongue again. :)
This is an absurd juxtaposition and it weakens your point. Unfortunately, friend, in the real world most fights and conflicts are more or less unplanned and unfold in unpredictable ways, especially brawls. In fact, most of them end up on the floor. Your point seems to be 'In real life fights, there [are] no random element', which isn't true but could be supported. You back up your claim with 'like a big bomb that is throw[n] at you', which tries to evoke sharp contrast to make a point, but is ultimately immaterial. Of course people in the real world don't walk around with big throwing bombs, but that doesn't discount, disprove, or preclude the myriad number random elements that do occur in real fights. Example: The person you're shoving around happens to stumble into the path of a bicycle or moving vehicle. Woops! All in all, however, this probably wasn't worth the attention since you're picking at straws and dealing in semantics instead of addressing the substance of the topic.

In streetfights, you aren't fighting to show skill at fighting, you're fighting to get alive out of that ****, so you can't really compare that to the tournament rules of smash.

Again, semantics. I'm not 100 percent sure how to follow the logic of your sentence, it's not worded very clearly, but I'd caution you against blinding yourself from general truths by being overly specific. I also never brought up boxing, and in general boxing isn't a good example because it's an organized sport based around a limited form of combat. So in a sense, you're right that boxing resembles no-items, tournament style play.



"[but fighting in the real world isn't clean cut], even in the comparatively sterile environment of organized, style-specific tournaments." I interpret that as boxing/kickboxing/judo/other fighting sports in tournaments.

Using an item is always the best course of action, huh? I can disprove that even using the Melee design. What about when you pick up a Hammer, but the head falls off? Is using the Hammer always the best course of action then? What about using the Super Scope against an opponent who shield-reflects your charged up shot back at you? Or worse, against Fox, Falco or Ness? It's never black and white. Also, you say 'eliminates variety', but I think perhaps you used the wrong word, because we're talking about possibilities and alternate options, not diversity. Either way, I disagree with your statement. But hey, that's just me, you're entitled to your thoughts.

If the opponent has a reflector, you can throw the item, which is still using it, which is still the best course of action. The hammer head falling off is something that happens after you use the item. You cannot predict it, and the chances are low enough that grabbing the hammer is still the best course of action

Powershielding is hard enough to do against projectiles that are relatively easy to predict (Falco's lasers). In an item match, it becomes a matter of almost pure chance. You have an item, you use it. That's all there is to it. Maybe you have 2 or 3 different options as to how you're going to use it, but you will never achieve the amount of options that you have when items are off.


Answers in red. I agree with Eaode btw.
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
First, a few direct questions to the OP. How many tournaments have you attended? Do you plan to attend tournaments for Brawl? Why do you think that someone who hasn't been a part of the tournament scene, which has been evolving over the course of... I don't know... SIX YEARS has any validity in his opinion? Have you seen some of the massive disruptions and upsets caused by item use? Could you have, when the fated meeting of Eddie's Ganon's foot and the capsule that defined his loss, confronted Eddie who was furious and told him that it was definitely OK for that to happen because the chances of it are really low?
To me, this is another example of the carefully designed, lovingly created elements of Smash which keep the game interesting, that the developers labored over for countless hours to properly implement, and which will ultimately be rejected and cast aside by a large part of the community. Sounds almost ungrateful....
Get off your high horse. Stop acting like we are "ungrateful". For starters, it's not like that item is some kind of amazingly unique creation never before seen. Secondly, if I was in a team tournament, and that item spawned next to my opponents and they were able to heal themselves out of a deficit I would be ****ing pissed. If it benefited me, I would feel like a douche as well, because it was a random element that just "lucked" out for me. As a long time competitive player I realize when things happen out of sheer luck and when it comes from skill, and when I just get dumb lucky I admit it.
I think that Smash Balls, as well as all other items, should be allowed in tourneys, because whether we like it or not, they're part of the game's core design.
Oh, so we should just bend over and allow it to violate us because you think it's part of the game's core design. Actually, to me, the game's core design is simply the characters and the physics battling it out on stages. The "core design" does not entail all the happy add ons that Sakurai has thrown in. Also, just cause you feel that it is an intricate part of the game, it doesn't make it balanced or any better for the competitive scene.
but in general I have issues with people who want to strip out elements of a game's design and play on the most flat, non-moving levels available "because that's the only way you can see who truly is more skilled."
You do realize that Pokefloats and Rainbow Cruise are tournament legal stages? As well as some oddball stages such as Mushroom Kingdom II(well in some places it still is), Brinstar, and Jungle Japes. Before criticizing known stereotypes, why don't you take some time to actually research the topic you are trying to debate.
Sometimes, it seems like people who defensively argue this position are more interested in Ego Trippin' over a video game than um... having fun playing a video game?
Tournaments aren't about fun, they are about determining who is better, and to be perfectly honest, IT IS FUN! People don't go to tournaments if they don't think it's fun. Also, the amount of people that I know that play the game casually as much as I have played the game competitively is ZERO. I'm going to say that the competitive players get WAY more fun and play the game WAY more than the casual players, as a whole.
you're cutting out the very unpredictability that is the soul of real combat.
Go to a tournament. Watch some heated matches between two very skilled and equally matched opponents. Watch them win some, and lose some in a set of best 3 out of 5, and THEN tell me that there isn't some realm of diversity within this "sterile" environment. This isn't about rendering unpredictable results. This is about determining the true victor.
I don't know how many of you guys actually practice martial arts, knocked somebody out, taken one to the head, or have gotten into a real BRAWL, but fighting in the real world isn't clean cut, even in the comparatively sterile environment of organized, style-specific tournaments.
If you are referring to sport based fighting, then they have VERY strict and rigorous rules. Also, who the **** said this is ****ing Fight Club??? This is a GAME. It doesn't have to be realistic. Last time I checked, a furry yellow rodent doesn't stand a chance against a super technologically advanced armored suit manned by the most athletic female that the galaxy has ever seen.
Fighting is about thinking on your toes, responding to the unpredictable and reacting unpredictably. It's about living in the moment, being completely open to the unexpected.
I ask this cause you don't know of what you are saying. Have you played on a high level in the game? I can tell you that there is SOOOOO much going on in my mind when I'm up against an excellent opponent. We are very much reacting as unpredictable as we can to throw off our opponents, and or constantly thinking about how to confuse them, predict them, and out think them. Don't act like this doesn't exist in the tournament world, cause you would be ****ing ignorant to assume this.
With every new element of the design Masahiro Sakurai reveals, it becomes more apparent to me how much he really wants SSBB to be hectic, chaotic, exciting, and unpredictable: like a real bar BRAWL, preferably with a screen full of players. This was not designed purely as a 1 on 1 fighting game, it has more depth to it than that.
I don't ****ing care if Sakurai wants this to be hectic. It doesn't matter what he thinks. Also, YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT EITHER! He could be like "well lets throw some stuff in there that is fun for the kiddies." I do not profess that as the truth, because I don't know if it is or not. Also, randomness =/= depth. Do you know what depth in a fighting game is???
So, in actuality, it's not a broken, pure-luck item that should be banned from tournament play, but rather just another piece on the board, which can be manipulated into the flow of combat and turned to a team's advantage by either side, even after it has been picked up.
Oh yeah, it's not broken or pure-luck, but it's on a random timer, with a random spawn point, and it is one of the many items that could appear. Oh wait, that might mean that it could randomly benefit another team sometimes. Oh well, that is to be expected and that is alright!

-_- no it's not alright.

I'm tired of random people thinking that we are ****ing dumb for the rules that were created by the competitive scene. I'm tired of them acting like we are wrong and that they are "righteous" in their cause to add items or whatever bull**** they advocate. This "Sakurai intends" business is BULL**** because WE can make the game play as we want. His intentions don't mean crap when we are establishing rules in the tournament scene.
 

Shadic

Alakadoof?
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
5,695
Location
Olympia, WA
NNID
Shadoof
tl;dr

Are you a lawyer?
If you can be bothered to read it, don't post in the topic, simple as that. Nobody wants to read your post, if all it consists of it "This is too long. Postcount ++;"

Anyways, tournaments for this game have been designed to cut the randomness of the game for a long time. They don't believe it to be fair, and as such, they don't include it in the game. I may enjoy playing with some items that aren't insanely overpowered (Wand, sword, bat,) but that doesn't mean it's necessary for a tournament. Majority rules, and it seems most tournament plays are against items in these matches.
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
Majority rules, and it seems most tournament plays are against items in these matches.
Well it's not just the majority, it's the simple fact that the competitive method is tried and true. Also the fact that we started WITH items and all stages and we phased out of it because it became unfair and luck based. All things considered, it makes no sense to regress to how things were in 2002 just because there are some fresh faces around who don't realize this stuff yet.
 

Shadic

Alakadoof?
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
5,695
Location
Olympia, WA
NNID
Shadoof
All things considered, it makes no sense to regress to how things were in 2002 just because there are some fresh faces around who don't realize this stuff yet.
You're assuming that everybody will go anti-items in time, which may or may not be the case. Either way, tournaments are how they are now because the majority of people want them this way. That's what matters in the end.
 

Superninjabreadman

Smash Lord
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,396
Location
Sheik Slaying.
Great Post/Theory/w/e you wanna call it.

I'm going to eventualy turn items off, I'll admit it. they can make the battle less straight forward. ususaly, I only turn on afew of my favorites, Beamsword, Freezie, Ect.

Im wondering if you can throw the ball up/down and heal yourself? hmm.
 

Witchking_of_Angmar

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
1,846
Location
Slowly starting to enjoy my mothertongue again. :)
You're assuming that everybody will go anti-items in time, which may or may not be the case. Either way, tournaments are how they are now because the majority of people want them this way. That's what matters in the end.
And the majority of people want it this way because it has been shown that it works, and that this is probably the best ruleset.

Also, "anti-items" is a weird way to put it. Items are the same as in melee, so the same things apply to them.
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
Either way, tournaments are how they are now because the majority of people want them this way. That's what matters in the end.
So the Earth is considered round now because the majority of the people want it that way too? You guys seem quick to disregard our reasoning, yet not that long ago we felt the same way as you. That's the thing that you refuse to understand.

If items are still at random spawn points at random time intervals with random items then they will be banned in Brawl's tournament scene. It's just that simple. Let go of this foolish "idealism" you have towards being a smash purist and try to wrap your head around the fact that lots of money will be at stake.
 

Xanderous

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
1,598
Funny how the only people that disagree with Mookie are people that are new to the game.
 

ShortFuse

Smash Lord
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,523
Location
NJ/NYC
Start your own tournaments. Simple as that. You try convincing people it's a good idea. Start with your friends. Do $20 match and play with random items and see how long that lasts until you start banning levels and items.


I'm sorry, Mookie. I'm afraid we can't convince everyone.
 
Top Bottom