Does Sakurai actually care what we (fans) want?

[SmashChu]

My point was as far as intrest and activity goes, the mod with wavedashing eclipses every other Smash mod in existence, and many days even Brawl's own general discussion. How can that be if wavedashing is suppose to be so universally hated?

1)Your on a site dedicated to competitive Smash
2)Most people don't mod Smash outside of competitive Smash, or at least not large gameplay mods.. Everyone else just plays custom stages and characters.

 

[I R MarF]

SmashChu, what are you even trying to prove?

 

[Big-Cat]

SmashChu, what are you even trying to prove?

Brawl is better on the basis that it sold more than Melee, especially in Japan which matters a lot for some reason. Depth and accessibility are mutually exclusive. You can't have both. Quantity over quality.

 

[I R MarF]

I thought Brawl had more sales because it had a strong advertising campaign, great expectations set by its predecessors, and had more customers (large amount of wii owners)?

I bought Brawl because I loved the series. Did anyone actually buy Brawl solely based on the reasoning that it has a smaller skill gap than Melee or 64?

 

[Revven]

2)Most people don't mod Smash outside of competitive Smash, or at least not large gameplay mods.. Everyone else just plays custom stages and characters.

IGN says hi + other sites that caught the news story and set the internet on fire giving the mod over 42,000+ downloads in under a month.

SmashChu: The Assumption Man.

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

SmashChu, what are you even trying to prove?

Probably that Sakurai DOES care what the fans want (gameplay-wise), and that competitive Smash fans are an extremely tiny portion of the fanbase.

A content discussion would've been more interesting, but eh, SmashBoards.

IGN says hi + other sites that caught the news story and set the internet on fire giving the mod over 42,000+ downloads in under a month.

42,000+ out of 10.79 million isn't setting anything on fire.

 

[Big-Cat]

For a mod, that's nothing short of amazing, Toise. You seriously can't expect a large portion of the Brawl sales (assuming they were never returned or simply dropped) to play a MOD.

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

Considering it was brought up as a rebuttal to "most people don't play modded Smash," we really shouldn't be talking about relative impact.

 

[Deleted member]

Probably that Sakurai DOES care what the fans want (gameplay-wise), and that competitive Smash fans are an extremely tiny portion of the fanbase.

Summarize why SmashChu wins this thread. While I do have some complaints about the game (such as tripping) and feel as the game can definitely get better, if Sakurai allowing help on balancing and hiring Namco Bandai doesn't indicate that he cares about the game play, I don't know what would.

 

[MR. K]

came here at page 7

saw smashchutroll spouting off nonsense and talking about things he has no effing clue about all over again.

walks out disappointed that people are still arguing with this idiot as he has no clue what he's talking about, both about the fact that how good a game is doesn't always matter much about how well it sells(advertising does wonders you know chu), as well how he doesn't know anything about competitive smash.


seriously i'll ask again the same thing i asked you in another topic smashchu, WHY THE **** ARE YOU EVEN HERE!?

If all you're gonna do is ***** about competitive smash, and post nonsense about stuff you don't have any ****ng clue about, then seriously, GTFO of a site that was made mostly with competitive smash plaeyrs in mind. Everytime people here see ur posts we *facepalm* tremendously, you spout off bull**** about stuff you don't know about(wavedashing is not "universally hated" and do you honestly even know what wavedashing is in the first place?) you contribute nothing to the community, and its idiots like you that make a lot of us hate casuals who "think" they know what they're talking about.

The doors over there chu, don't let it hit your fat *** on the way out.

 

[Big-Cat]

Summarize why SmashChu wins this thread. While I do have some complaints about the game (such as tripping) and feel as the game can definitely get better, if Sakurai allowing help on balancing and hiring Namco Bandai doesn't indicate that he cares about the game play, I don't know what would.

Sorry, but Chu doesn't win this thread by a long shot. Yes, competitive players are a minority, as is the case with every game, but things like balance and having a solid, in depth, engine should be the goal of every game.

The main argument, besides sales, Chu is going for is that accessibility and depth are mutually exclusive when this is anything but true. Let's take Tekkent Tag 2's Fight Lab. This is a tutorial mode in everything but name. The way it goes about teaching how to play Tekken is through a bunch of simple minigames like dodging chickens coming after you. This is like how in school, the teacher might make games out of school subjects to get the kids interested. There's even been a couple of articles on this.

One thing that I will say is absolutely absurd is to make the progression of skill irrelevant. It's like the idea that everyone is paid the same amount of money per hour, but you put in 50 hours compared to your coworker who does half and then expects to be paid the same despite doing less work.

 

[El Duderino]

ToiseOfChoice, I get that you lean further to SmashChu's preferences, but do you really want to be associated with many of the wild absolute assumptions he throws around? It's not worth defending someone who shares your views when they've gone off the deep end.

He works on the basis of claiming something impossible to support is always true, then stubbornly refuses to comprise when clear examples contradict him. In fact the most retreating I've ever seen him do just now happened, admitting the most active dedicated smash community on the web is primarily a competitive one.

 

[I R MarF]

Sakurai misunderstood the competitive aspects of smash. Competitive and casual play were never at war. Melee, Brawl, and 64 are just as pick up and play as the other. So what was the need to alienate a community by reducing the potential skill gap?

Like I said earlier, Sakurai's decisions towards gameplay were motivated primarily by his personal vision and interpretation of the series.

Namco-Bandai is a sign that smash 4 will be more open minded to all aspects of the community.

 

[Reika Kitami]

I agree with that post ^

 

[SmashChu]

seriously i'll ask again the same thing i asked you in another topic smashchu, WHY THE **** ARE YOU EVEN HERE!?

To talk about the next Smash Bros. Looks at my history and it's pretty easy to see.

Probably that Sakurai DOES care what the fans want (gameplay-wise), and that competitive Smash fans are an extremely tiny portion of the fanbase.

A content discussion would've been more interesting, but eh, SmashBoards.

This is why your awesome Toise. Glad it made sense to you.

As for content, probably would be more interesting. Guess I kind of derailed it. [/QUOTE]

Sorry, but Chu doesn't win this thread by a long shot. Yes, competitive players are a minority, as is the case with every game, but things like balance and having a solid, in depth, engine should be the goal of every game.

The main argument, besides sales, Chu is going for is that accessibility and depth are mutually exclusive when this is anything but true. Let's take Tekkent Tag 2's Fight Lab. This is a tutorial mode in everything but name. The way it goes about teaching how to play Tekken is through a bunch of simple minigames like dodging chickens coming after you. This is like how in school, the teacher might make games out of school subjects to get the kids interested. There's even been a couple of articles on this.

One thing that I will say is absolutely absurd is to make the progression of skill irrelevant. It's like the idea that everyone is paid the same amount of money per hour, but you put in 50 hours compared to your coworker who does half and then expects to be paid the same despite doing less work.

Having nice tutorials doesn't make the game accessible. Most old games didn't have them and tried to teach the player about the game. Egoraptor's Sequelitis explains why tutorials are bad and it's better for the game to be able to teach you though the game. Another good example is the original Super Mario Bros. If you want, check out the Iwata Ask for the 20th anniversary of Mario. In 1-1, when you hit the first ? box that gives you a mushroom, the level is set up so you can't dodge it. This was so players didn't run away and realized it would help you. What I'm getting at is that making a tutorial is not a band aid for making the game inaccessible.

The problem Kuma is you only look in absolutes. It's either has competitive depth by whatever standard you set or it's Press A to win.

What I'm actually talking about is making the entry barrier low and don't make the ceiling to high. This is a multiplayer game. A lot of people play it only with their friends and others may not even own the game. Try to have to much "depth," and this will drive people away. You can see this with the fighting game genre as a whole. The fact remains Kuma that this game was not designed for people who want to play for 8 hours a day and then go to tournaments and talk about how good you are. This is designed to be easy to get into and have fun right way. It's trying to do what multiplayer games are suppose to do. Quick fun. Less barrier to enjoy the game. That's Smash. That has been the goal of the series.

There are other comments, but I'll get to them later.

 

[---]

So what was the need to alienate a community by reducing the potential skill gap?

I think that had to do with Sakurai feeling that the skill gap in Melee was too large (hense Melee being "hard"), so I guess it's only a natural response whether you agree with it or not (hense, Melee players may not understand). I'm postive that it wasn't his intention to alienate anyone, though like anyone I'll still question tripping.

It'll be interesting to see where Smash 4 takes us, as we have yet to see Sakurai give the retrospective he gave with Melee for Brawl to get a basic idea to where he'll be taking us gameplay/mechanics wise, in addition to seeing just what NB will actually do (out right stating that Sakurai is the boss raises the question as to how much of their development style will be seen).

 

[Big-Cat]

Having nice tutorials doesn't make the game accessible. Most old games didn't have them and tried to teach the player about the game. Egoraptor's Sequelitis explains why tutorials are bad and it's better for the game to be able to teach you though the game. Another good example is the original Super Mario Bros. If you want, check out the Iwata Ask for the 20th anniversary of Mario. In 1-1, when you hit the first ? box that gives you a mushroom, the level is set up so you can't dodge it. This was so players didn't run away and realized it would help you. What I'm getting at is that making a tutorial is not a band aid for making the game inaccessible.

Please, look at my post once more. I specifically said that Fight Lab was a tutorial in everything but name. The purpose of the fight lab is to teach the player how to play through a series of minigames and missions. That sounds an awful lot like the game teaching you how to play as you go along. Of course, teaching someone to play in a fighting game is very different from every other genre, but I digress.

The problem Kuma is you only look in absolutes. It's either has competitive depth by whatever standard you set or it's Press A to win.

Says the guy who makes absolute assumptions about EVERYTHING. I know games have varying depths, but I don't make it so black and white like you're ASSuming. I think Mortal Kombat 9 has depth, but it does not provide me the depth games like Street Fighter provide so I choose not to play it. That doesn't mean I think it's "Mash A to win". It just means that it doesn't have the depth I look for in a fighter. Anyone else is welcome to enjoy it.

What I'm actually talking about is making the entry barrier low and don't make the ceiling to high. This is a multiplayer game. A lot of people play it only with their friends and others may not even own the game. Try to have to much "depth," and this will drive people away. You can see this with the fighting game genre as a whole. The fact remains Kuma that this game was not designed for people who want to play for 8 hours a day and then go to tournaments and talk about how good you are. This is designed to be easy to get into and have fun right way. It's trying to do what multiplayer games are suppose to do. Quick fun. Less barrier to enjoy the game. That's Smash. That has been the goal of the series.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. If we apply this to something like any field of science, and you'll come out looking dumber than usual.

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

ToiseOfChoice, I get that you lean further to SmashChu's preferences, but do you really want to be associated with many of the wild absolute assumptions he throws around? It's not worth defining someone who shares your views when they've gone off the deep end.

Pretty sure I've already got a reputation for... well, ask around.

Chu stuff

Chu's arguments are usually incoherent, his points half-explained, and his writing style barely legible. Heart's in the right place though.

People keep arguing with him for some reason, particularly Kuma.



@Clint: The six of us in the "Tripping is Cool" club had a vote, we decided you suck. I'm sorry.

 

[trash?]

Chu, why'd you ignore me????? Does the poor text hurt your eyes too much

Honestly, actually going onto the topic: Does he care? ...Yeah, probably. Somewhere between giving the development to a company well-known for their fighting games, and Sakurai dropping "character balance" every other sentence in interviews, it'd be safe to say the guy isn't outright not considering it.

 

[El Duderino]

Try to have to much "depth," and this will drive people away.

It's when players are thrown in the deep end to sink or swim that too much depth becomes catastrophic. All Smash games are soo unbelievably far removed from that problem. You'd have to be overly paranoid to suggest the next tittle is in any danger of going there or any added depth would break the accessibility.

 

[Arcadenik]

All I want is more characters/stages/items like SmashChu wants with tight controls and balanced gameplay like KumaOso wants.

 

[I R MarF]

What I'm actually talking about is making the entry barrier low and don't make the ceiling to high.

Why can't you have both? Why can't you reward the players who wish to improve at the game?

Why can't smash be a game where you can play it however you like?

 

[SmashChu]

Chu, why'd you ignore me????? Does the poor text hurt your eyes too much

It's because I'm responding to a lot of different people and these tend to take a while. I don't like sitting here typing and looking that I wasted 15-30 minutes doing it. It's noting against you. There is just a lot. Also, easier to respond to the newer post than later ones.

@Kuma: I'll make it clearer. Most people don't sit there and dedicate themselves to getting better at a video game. They want to play it with friends and have fun. So the sooner everything clicks, the more they can focus on having fun. This is opposed to the fighting games genre where you have a lot of different things and you need to learn them all. Combos, for one. Smash removes those barriers so everyone can jump in and have a good time. That's the point of Smash. People want to jump in not have to learn all the bells and whistles everyone else uses on them.

It was directed at Kuma but it may answer other's concerns. I'll take Toise's advice and try to be more clear.

 

[---]

@Clint: The six of us in the "Tripping is Cool" club had a vote, we decided you suck. I'm sorry.

I usually agree with most everything you and Chu have to say about game (bar characters), but tripping is just something that I can't help but question Sakurai on. Only thing positive that I can think about it being random is adding to the chaotic nature of the game, is pretty funny when it happens to someone else though.

 

[El Duderino]

I'll make it clearer. Most people don't sit there and dedicate themselves to getting better at a video game. They want to play it with friends and have fun. So the sooner everything clicks, the more they can focus on having fun. This is opposed to the fighting games genre where you have a lot of different things and you need to learn them all. Combos, for one. Smash removes those barriers so everyone can jump in and have a good time. That's the point of Smash. People want to jump in not have to learn all the bells and whistles everyone else uses on them.

No one here is arguing for Smash to become a dial-a-combo, or excessively complex game where you have to jump through extreme memorization hurdles to start having fun. That's certainly not true of any Smash game to date.

Lots of us are just of the opinion that depth adds variety that can make for a lot more dynamic and eventful matches for competitive and average players. Even on a basic level, part of the underlying fun with Smash comes through rolling, spikes, teching, tech-chasing, spot dodging, air dodging, grab strategies, ledge strategies, attack strengths and priorities, chaining moves after reading your opponent well, etc. Perhaps you have just been playing the series for too long like the rest of us, but those are some of the "bells and whistles" new players have to deal with that most will pick up playing through the game and playing hours with friends. Smash is a whole lot more enjoyable with that added depth though because, as I mentioned it, adds more variety to the combat at various levels of play. That is kinda the whole point here, there is so much more Smash can introduce while still remaining rooted in accessibility. Yes, there might be an additional tool or so to learn, but like plenty of the mechanics the franchise has introduced over the years, it ultimately can make for a more satisfying overall experience. Unless of course you feel the formula is tapped and right now is as good as it will ever be.

 

[I R MarF]

I think that had to do with Sakurai feeling that the skill gap in Melee was too large (hense Melee being "hard"), so I guess it's only a natural response whether you agree with it or not (hense, Melee players may not understand). I'm postive that it wasn't his intention to alienate anyone, though like anyone I'll still question tripping.

It'll be interesting to see where Smash 4 takes us, as we have yet to see Sakurai give the retrospective he gave with Melee for Brawl to get a basic idea to where he'll be taking us gameplay/mechanics wise, in addition to seeing just what NB will actually do (out right stating that Sakurai is the boss raises the question as to how much of their development style will be seen).

I think Sakurai had misunderstood the competitive depth of smash for being at war with its accessibility. This simply isn't true. Casuals and Competitives are both completely capable of existing in a game like Smash. Reducing depth to shrink skill gaps is nothing short of alienation, because its telling players they shouldn't both with trying to improve at the game.

@Kuma: I'll make it clearer. Most people don't sit there and dedicate themselves to getting better at a video game. They want to play it with friends and have fun. So the sooner everything clicks, the more they can focus on having fun. This is opposed to the fighting games genre where you have a lot of different things and you need to learn them all. Combos, for one. Smash removes those barriers so everyone can jump in and have a good time. That's the point of Smash. People want to jump in not have to learn all the bells and whistles everyone else uses on them.

It was directed at Kuma but it may answer other's concerns. I'll take Toise's advice and try to be more clear.

The fundamentals you need to learn to start playing at are very consistent between all 3 smash games. Learning advanced techniques isn't required to play, nor is the game advertising such play.

I think what is great about Smash, is that is has to potentially to be played however you want to play it. Why limit that potential by alienating the competitive fanbase?

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

I usually agree with most everything you and Chu have to say about game (bar characters), but tripping is just something that I can't help but question Sakurai on. Only thing positive that I can think about it being random is adding to the chaotic nature of the game, is pretty funny when it happens to someone else though.

I bet you don't like Blue Shells either! Stuff like that can't be appreciated unless you get to see the victim in anguish.

I think Sakurai had misunderstood the competitive depth of smash for being at war with its accessibility. [...] I think what is great about Smash, is that is has to potentially to be played however you want to play it. Why limit that potential by alienating the competitive fanbase?

If anything, competitive players misunderstand Sakurai's intent. It's not about deliberately ****ing any group over so much as designing the game around the most common skill levels (ie, average players). Competitive depth -- or lack thereof -- is just a coincidence.

Even on a basic level, part of the underlying fun with Smash comes through rolling, spikes, teching, tech-chasing, spot dodging, air dodging, grab strategies, ledge strategies, attack strengths and priorities, chaining moves after reading your opponent well, etc. Perhaps you have just been playing the series for too long like the rest of us, but those are some of the "bells and whistles" new players have to deal with that most will pick up playing through the game and playing hours with friends.

Your definition of average is awfully skewed, effendi.

 

[Baskerville]

Why isn't this thread locked....?

 

[Big-Cat]

Toise, I swear you are the most condescending person I have ever met.

I bet you don't like Blue Shells either! Stuff like that can't be appreciated unless you get to see the victim in anguish.

So I suppose we're suppossed to have a sadistic view of these things? That's definitely better than playing competitively because we find it fun. You know, we could just not like random tripping or blue shells simply because we don't like them. You don't have to be a super serious, competitive player to hate them.

If anything, competitive players misunderstand Sakurai's intent. It's not about deliberately ****ing any group over so much as designing the game around the most common skill levels (ie, average players). Competitive depth -- or lack thereof -- is just a coincidence.

I still fail to see what's the problem of offering a plethora of options in gameplay. Yes, you want to keep the average players in mind, but why just stop there instead of casting a bigger net? It's like learning Biology in school. Imagine if all bio and premed majors could only learn as much as someone who only needs to learn biology on a general education level. That's not fair to the ones who want to learn more than at the general level. Likewise, deliberately keeping the depth low is taking away the option to learn more.

You don't want to take away options. After all, you usually want MORE options, not less. Now, the quality of those options are another topic altogether.

Why isn't this thread locked....?

Probably so this kind of discussion is kept into one thread, no matter how bad it gets.

 

[I R MarF]

I
If anything, competitive players misunderstand Sakurai's intent. It's not about deliberately ****ing any group over so much as designing the game around the most common skill levels (ie, average players). Competitive depth -- or lack thereof -- is just a coincidence.

You missed the whole point about Competitive and Casual play not being at war with each other. That is what Sakurai misunderstood. It seems as though he believed skill gaps were corrupting his vision of Smash when they weren't at all.

 

[Johnknight1]

I think some here are selling Sakurai short. He isn't a freaking idiot. He knows how to make "simple yet deep" games (that non-gamers and gamers alike enjoy) extremely well.

Summarize why SmashChu wins this thread. While I do have some complaints about the game (such as tripping) and feel as the game can definitely get better, if Sakurai allowing help on balancing and hiring Namco Bandai doesn't indicate that he cares about the game play, I don't know what would.

That's not what everyone arguing against him said. Some did, but few. Most people who argued against him said Smash is not "anti-competitive." It is aimed at everyone.

This whole "the competitive community is small and thus not worthwhile" is a terrible argument. Most players of nearly every major fighting game franchise aren't competitive players. What drives those games, and especially smash, is that at all levels of play they try to be fun at any skill level, and are easy to get into. Smash easily achieves that.

42,000+ out of 10.79 million isn't setting anything on fire.

How many of those 10.79 million still play the game an hour a month=??? Probably 1 in 8 at most. My brother played Brawl at a friend's pad. His friend hadn't unlocked Sonic!

Seeing what this thread has become is the reason I hardly ever post here. It's filled with babies wanting Melee 2.0 and nothing else new.

This unspecific hyperbole is the kind of crap that makes everyone less intelligent and makes threads stupid. Stop labeling everyone who wants a competitively deep game that. That is how few people here feel, and why you are ignored in such debates. I was reading stuff posted by some of the best Melee players of all-time (who are from NorCal) on facebook, and all the opinions I heard said they want a new smash bros experience in smash sequels. /disproved

If you want to explain your opinion, explain it intelligently and without labeling everyone as something as simple as "you're wrong, I'm right" like an intelligent human being. I mean, as much flack as some people here get on this thread, at least they are explaining their opinions efficiently and without labeling everyone as a stereotype (to talk down to). This is a three dimensional debate with a lot of differences in opinions in several different sub debates, each with their own sub (sub?) debate.

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

@Kuma: What manner of social disorder do you have that puts a serious, hostile tone over everything anyone says? This is why you'll never get a cool guy nickname.

You missed the whole point about Competitive and Casual play not being at war with each other. That is what Sakurai misunderstood. It seems as though he believed skill gaps were corrupting his vision of Smash when they weren't at all.

No, I was implying that Sakurai doesn't think such a rift exists outside of, say, online leaderboards. That, plus the fact that any competitive depth is basically a byproduct from designing a game around what we'd consider average skill.

It's like a bird building a nest on your roof; it's cool, but whatever happens, happens.

How many of those 10.79 million still play the game an hour a month=??? Probably 1 in 8 at most. My brother played Brawl at a friend's pad. His friend hadn't unlocked Sonic!

Your brother's friend is good and true.

Last I heard, Brawl was barely second only to Monster Hunter Tri in average playtime per user (NA statistics, of course). I doubt it dropped off, considering it's still selling.

 

[---]

I bet you don't like Blue Shells either! Stuff like that can't be appreciated unless you get to see the victim in anguish.

Ah, now I see what you're getting at. Been hanging out too long in the Metropolis then.

 

[Big-Cat]

@Kuma: What manner of social disorder do you have that puts a serious, hostile tone over everything anyone says? This is why you'll never get a cool guy nickname.

Please, if I'm hostile to anyone, it's you and Chu considering that neither of you have very nice personalities and that both of you have this "Holier than thou." thing going on, especially when anyone disagrees with you. And I don't need a nickname, especially from you. Now, it's the Ignore List for you.

And for your citation of the average, remember that it's just that, an average. I doubt there's any information of a standard deviation which would tell us so much more.

 

[Ferio_Kun]

What about Pokemon? Those are incredibly accessible games, yet have a well designed progression from novice to highly competitive level play. As long as you have a circle of friends that stay interested, it is not a matter of if, but when.

El Duderino,

I think you honestly could have stumbled upon the "Change of direction".

I think that when Sakurai wanted some type of customization of characters, it may be something similar to Pokemon.

Perhaps customizable movesets, and stats (similar to EVs in pokemon) will be where the change of direction is going.

Anyways just wanted to point this out as being able to tweak your stats/moveset could make smash 4 VERY competitive while still be interesting for casual players.

Just a thought.

 

[kupo15]

Since we are still on the topic of accessibility, I think this fear of a competitive smash game being inaccessible is completely insignificant. Smash bros. is fundamentally and inherently accessible due to its simplistic design. Those being:
-A universal and simple control scheme
-The basic concept of being a king of the hill game instead of using a life bar.

All of the ATs and advanced depth the game can offer (using melee as an example) doesn't in anyway make the game inaccessible to the casuals due to how solid a formula the two points mentioned above are. You don't have to even know about advanced gameplay in order to enjoy playing Smash bros. Proof being that everyone had a blast playing this game when they were still in their noob phase and felt the game was accessible...even melee.

The key here is playing with the right crowd. No matter what game you play, if a noob plays against an expert and gets whooped, they won't have any fun and its "accessibility" becomes noticeable. If you play with equal skilled players its "accessibility" is not noticeable. This is not a design flaw and is not something the developer of any game can control

Because Smash is inherently accessible, accessibility shouldn't have any influence on Smash4

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

How about we change the formula so that getting a smash ball and using it's ability is the only way to kill opponents?

 

[Ferio_Kun]

Rule of thumb: Everytime Smashchu says "everyone" he means "I".

Just to let you know Phoenix. Smashchu isn't the only one with his opinions. While I am more or less on the fence about a lot of these arguments, (wanting a little more techniques but also not liking exploits like wave dashing) I can tell you that the large,... shall we call it casual/competitive scene nearly 100% agrees with Smashchu.

These boards aren't not the majority of players that play Smash. They just aren't. I think Smashchu would be safer to say, "the casual/competitive scene" to reflect his points, but they are all valid points. Just because he basically is "anti-competitive" does not mean his points aren't true. They just are the other side. On the same note, everyone that's arguing against Smashchu also has valid points. But let's think for a second here, which side is Sakurai on? Because that's the only opinion that matters really.

On another note before you burn me for my comment above. I would support a move like wave dashing if it was clearly implemented via some button combo, and wasn't obviously an unintended exploit.

EDIT: Put quotes over anti-competitive because we know he likes the casual/competitive scene, as do I.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

How about we change the formula so that getting a smash ball and using it's ability is the only way to kill opponents?

That wouldn't work very well when you think it over.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I find it odd how people started complaining about competetive smash AFTER Sakurai made a statement against it. Where we're you people before 2008? The only compelling argument is "Sakurai said...". Are you people sheep or do you really believe that competetive and casual play cannot coexist in smash? How can it not when it exists in every other fighting game?

Logically every fighting game is accessible. Every player is capable of executing attacks and moving their character. Eventually they learn rotations and cancels. Just because a game doesn't deliver instant results doesn't make it hard, it just depends on how far YOU want to go with it, and whether you succeed or fail the game will ultimately move on without you. If you can't deal with it then play Coop games, but don't get discouraged or complain how something is unfair. Odds are you won't even understand why you lost, but you can learn.

Competetive smash existed in its on Paradigm that did not conflict casual players whatsoever. Odds are the casual player purchased the game and played it for 1 to 2 months before letting it collect dust on the shelf, so there was no conflict to even exist.

Sakurai is a brilliant designer, but when it comes to understanding the philosophies of competition he is a bit ignorant, or in brawls instance a flaming idiot. I love his games, but the man is no saint. You are capable of thinking independently so do it. Don't take his words at face value.

As for the members who joined here complaining about smash after March 2008. Sorry to sound like an *** but I can't take your opinion seriously. Odds are you ended up here because this site was referred here on the back of the Brawl strategy guide.


Edit: @Fario: I wouldn't burn you. You're clearly making a statement that is true for the most part, I just don't agree with people who believe that competetive smash was a plague on the series and needs to be eliminated.