EON_MagicMan
Smash Cadet
Hear me out first, please, before replying!
I do not want to make a stir, and I want to start off by saying I love Brawl to the core of my being. While it has gone many changes from Melee, it is certainly still very much a Super Smash Bros game. Even if only for the new characters, stages and modes, I love Brawl and have no intention to pick up Melee again.
Now, that being said, there is obviously a lot of (legitimate) outcry about the changes from Melee to Brawl. This outcry goes beyond trolls and ****stirrers, as well, but comes from people who adored and played unimaginable amount of hours of Melee.
I think the observation that it is slower, and on a basic level, easier to pick up for a first timer, is an accurate one. If you dispute this, look around you, and then if you still dispute this, you're deluded.
Within my small community, it has definitely leveled the playing fields. A friend who was just learning the Melee ropes in anticipation for Brawl and was defeated more often than not by the rest of us, now wins quite a bit of the time in fights that are almost always very even (although that's not to deny that there is skill necessary in Brawl in Melee-- we always play sans items, but he had a lot of catching up to do from Melee, loaded with difficult-to-execute-and-master advanced techniques).
Another good example of the increased accessibility/decreased difficulty (whichever euphemism you prefer) is the change in suicide rates between the game. In Melee, it was easy to commit suicide. In Brawl, it's difficult to commit suicide (the occasional one of course can even happen to the best of us).
Also in favour of the simplification from Melee to Brawl is the removal of L-cancelling (intentional feature in Melee that was difficult to master, but payed off, kind o f like teching), and the inclusion of new items that even the playing field even more than the previously list of items (Final Smashes and the Dragoon comes to mind).
But I digress, for this is not what this thread is about.
My question to you, is as follows: Do you think Sakurai has anyl regret for the simplification of Brawl, on a strictly personal level?
Consider this: The Nintendo Wii targets a far broader audience than the other next-gen consoles on the market. One of the main business strategys is making the product accessible to as many demographics as possible. The most obvious result of this strategy is that the conventional controller has been ditched. People hear about the Wii through the media from articles about how even seniors are playing the thing, and of course about how popular it is. Then, of course, they try it at a friend's house, and see it's the real deal! They're playing baseball, bowling, tennis, using real motions! It's incredible!
The kicker is, that instead of plinking down ~$400-$600 for the console (as very few non-gamers are willing to do), all they need to do is throw down the relatively cheap ~$270.
I'm sure the case quite often is that after a few months, these Wiis sit there, collecting dust, with Wii Sports still in the drive, coming out only when the friends are over, or maybe being revived for Guitar Hero III (another game with a lot of mainstream hype).
Now comes creating Super Smash Bros for the Wii.
Super Smash Bros is a guaranteed hit. Melee's sales will tell you that. Smash Bros will be a huge success. That's not the problem here, though. The problem is that it will only be a success because it will only be picked up by all the conventional gamers, the same gamers who (if they can get past fanboyism) are also interested in Xbox360 and PS3 games.
So the question here, is, since we've expanded our target audience sooooo much, how do we appeal to them with a game that can only use a conventional control style?
I'm not sure if you have all tried to introduce Smash Bros Melee to a non-gamer, such as a family member. I'm sure many of you have, and most of you have probably discovered that Melee can be quite tricky for the first time for someone who is a non-gamer. That's definitely a turn-off for a lot of people. It's at first, due to the speed, difficult to control yourself and easy to kill yourself. Even something so simple to us as the third jump is difficult to grasp, initially, for a first-timer.
Now, I just want to get something out of the way:
For Nintendo (as with any company), potential profits have a say in the final product. I don't mean this in some sort of sinister, anti-capitalist way, but c'mon, they're a business! If you think Nintendo is trying to make the best possible game for a select few hardcores, you're sorely mistaken.
What I'm saying, here, is that I'm positive that Sakurai, somewhere down the line, must have been prodded to adapt the game so the final product would yield more profits. Nintendo would be crazy to not try to guide the game in the direction of more profits.
What I am implying as well, is that in order to increase Smash Bros' demographic range, it must be made easier to pick up than the previous incarnation. Lets face it, it's not like the majority of the people who tested Smash Bros were hardcore gamers. I'm sure most were the non-gamer types, with dusty Wiis, still loaded with Wii Sports. For Nintendo to only collect the limited input of hardcore gamers would be ludicrous, and no business-wise.
All this is not to say that this game wasn't Sakurai's game, I'm quite sure he poured his soul into this game. However, every designer has their specs to work with, and seeing this game is to appeal to a far wider audience, I'm sure the general message from Nintendo to Sakurai is "lets make this game easier to pick up".
This is where things get controversial.
It is a common opinion, one that I share, that because of the changes between Melee and Brawl, Brawl has less depth than it's predecessor.
Now, if you think this means I prefer Melee to Brawl, take a moment to reread the first paragraph.
My opinion is also subject to change, should some new information and techniques be discovered (and I think there is a good likelyhood of that possibility). As it currently stands, with what we know about Brawl, my opinion is that the fighting as a whole has less depth.
Do you think Sakurai would rather play a Brawl that was more like Melee?
I find Sakurai to be mysterious, and of course, it would be hard to find any transcript or footage of a private conversation to give us a better idea to find more about his game opinions outside of the public eye.
For those who are curious, my opinions on how Brawl could be improved are that it would be better if it were sped up a crank (not quite as fast as Melee), if it were made a little more difficult in certain regards (ie not being able to grab a ledge while facing the opposite way), and if they gave back L-cancelling, as another technique that while difficult to pull off, rewards the player for doing it.
So, profits aside, how do you think Sakurai would make Brawl differently?.
I do not want to make a stir, and I want to start off by saying I love Brawl to the core of my being. While it has gone many changes from Melee, it is certainly still very much a Super Smash Bros game. Even if only for the new characters, stages and modes, I love Brawl and have no intention to pick up Melee again.
Now, that being said, there is obviously a lot of (legitimate) outcry about the changes from Melee to Brawl. This outcry goes beyond trolls and ****stirrers, as well, but comes from people who adored and played unimaginable amount of hours of Melee.
I think the observation that it is slower, and on a basic level, easier to pick up for a first timer, is an accurate one. If you dispute this, look around you, and then if you still dispute this, you're deluded.
Within my small community, it has definitely leveled the playing fields. A friend who was just learning the Melee ropes in anticipation for Brawl and was defeated more often than not by the rest of us, now wins quite a bit of the time in fights that are almost always very even (although that's not to deny that there is skill necessary in Brawl in Melee-- we always play sans items, but he had a lot of catching up to do from Melee, loaded with difficult-to-execute-and-master advanced techniques).
Another good example of the increased accessibility/decreased difficulty (whichever euphemism you prefer) is the change in suicide rates between the game. In Melee, it was easy to commit suicide. In Brawl, it's difficult to commit suicide (the occasional one of course can even happen to the best of us).
Also in favour of the simplification from Melee to Brawl is the removal of L-cancelling (intentional feature in Melee that was difficult to master, but payed off, kind o f like teching), and the inclusion of new items that even the playing field even more than the previously list of items (Final Smashes and the Dragoon comes to mind).
But I digress, for this is not what this thread is about.
My question to you, is as follows: Do you think Sakurai has anyl regret for the simplification of Brawl, on a strictly personal level?
Consider this: The Nintendo Wii targets a far broader audience than the other next-gen consoles on the market. One of the main business strategys is making the product accessible to as many demographics as possible. The most obvious result of this strategy is that the conventional controller has been ditched. People hear about the Wii through the media from articles about how even seniors are playing the thing, and of course about how popular it is. Then, of course, they try it at a friend's house, and see it's the real deal! They're playing baseball, bowling, tennis, using real motions! It's incredible!
The kicker is, that instead of plinking down ~$400-$600 for the console (as very few non-gamers are willing to do), all they need to do is throw down the relatively cheap ~$270.
I'm sure the case quite often is that after a few months, these Wiis sit there, collecting dust, with Wii Sports still in the drive, coming out only when the friends are over, or maybe being revived for Guitar Hero III (another game with a lot of mainstream hype).
Now comes creating Super Smash Bros for the Wii.
Super Smash Bros is a guaranteed hit. Melee's sales will tell you that. Smash Bros will be a huge success. That's not the problem here, though. The problem is that it will only be a success because it will only be picked up by all the conventional gamers, the same gamers who (if they can get past fanboyism) are also interested in Xbox360 and PS3 games.
So the question here, is, since we've expanded our target audience sooooo much, how do we appeal to them with a game that can only use a conventional control style?
I'm not sure if you have all tried to introduce Smash Bros Melee to a non-gamer, such as a family member. I'm sure many of you have, and most of you have probably discovered that Melee can be quite tricky for the first time for someone who is a non-gamer. That's definitely a turn-off for a lot of people. It's at first, due to the speed, difficult to control yourself and easy to kill yourself. Even something so simple to us as the third jump is difficult to grasp, initially, for a first-timer.
Now, I just want to get something out of the way:
For Nintendo (as with any company), potential profits have a say in the final product. I don't mean this in some sort of sinister, anti-capitalist way, but c'mon, they're a business! If you think Nintendo is trying to make the best possible game for a select few hardcores, you're sorely mistaken.
What I'm saying, here, is that I'm positive that Sakurai, somewhere down the line, must have been prodded to adapt the game so the final product would yield more profits. Nintendo would be crazy to not try to guide the game in the direction of more profits.
What I am implying as well, is that in order to increase Smash Bros' demographic range, it must be made easier to pick up than the previous incarnation. Lets face it, it's not like the majority of the people who tested Smash Bros were hardcore gamers. I'm sure most were the non-gamer types, with dusty Wiis, still loaded with Wii Sports. For Nintendo to only collect the limited input of hardcore gamers would be ludicrous, and no business-wise.
All this is not to say that this game wasn't Sakurai's game, I'm quite sure he poured his soul into this game. However, every designer has their specs to work with, and seeing this game is to appeal to a far wider audience, I'm sure the general message from Nintendo to Sakurai is "lets make this game easier to pick up".
This is where things get controversial.
It is a common opinion, one that I share, that because of the changes between Melee and Brawl, Brawl has less depth than it's predecessor.
Now, if you think this means I prefer Melee to Brawl, take a moment to reread the first paragraph.
My opinion is also subject to change, should some new information and techniques be discovered (and I think there is a good likelyhood of that possibility). As it currently stands, with what we know about Brawl, my opinion is that the fighting as a whole has less depth.
Do you think Sakurai would rather play a Brawl that was more like Melee?
I find Sakurai to be mysterious, and of course, it would be hard to find any transcript or footage of a private conversation to give us a better idea to find more about his game opinions outside of the public eye.
For those who are curious, my opinions on how Brawl could be improved are that it would be better if it were sped up a crank (not quite as fast as Melee), if it were made a little more difficult in certain regards (ie not being able to grab a ledge while facing the opposite way), and if they gave back L-cancelling, as another technique that while difficult to pull off, rewards the player for doing it.
So, profits aside, how do you think Sakurai would make Brawl differently?.
