Does Sakurai actually care what we (fans) want?

[El Duderino]

Jus' saying, you don't have to "justify" a new Smash Bros., especially with "progress" in gameplay.

Sure you do, especially when Sakuari could be off making something new and unique instead. It's a huge waste of his time and the talent gathered to work on the game if the intention is nothing more than to cash-in on the previous work and slap in the fan service scraps left over.

Tittle #4 in most franchises is usually the point where the initial goals have been met and a change of direction is needed to avoid recycling the same game again.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

I don't know where the concept of the "cash in on fanservice" is coming from. Nintendo is literally the last you need to worry about cashing in on things.

Everybody who works on the game loves to do it. It's a huge, unparalleled experience. As an aspiring game maker, it's my wildest dream.

Everybody who loves Nintendo's universes and properties loves to play it. It's a huge, unparalleled experience. As a lifelong Nintendo fan who loves all things Nintendo, it's my favorite franchise.

It's not like this is COD, where a new game comes out every year. Smash Bros. is a huge, unifying thing that spans over several years and studios.

The manufacturing of cynicism is silly.

 

[El Duderino]

I don't know where the concept of the "cash in on fanservice" business is coming from.

I was referring to "cashing in" as in lifting existing gameplay code as is, layering on a coat of additional fan-service, and calling it a day. It's the lack of effort just delivering on the bare minimum and cutting corners without building on what exists.

After 3 tittles I'm sure Sakuari feels the basic gameplay is fairly solidified, while still recognizing this tittle, like every Smash sequel, needs differences to stand apart. He is just being careful not to deviate from what works just for the sake of it, like going full 3D or overly complicating the controls. That doesn't mean we won't see changes, improvements, and additions that fit well within the framework.

 

[Aurane]

Hey, now. No need to be a jerk to him. And this is coming from me, someone's who's been arguing with Chu for years now.

Okay, Kuma. It's ME saying it.

ME.

It's obviously a joke. Everyone knows the dumbest person about all fields of SSB is me.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

All those things are more than welcome, but they don't really constitute dramatic changes.

No doubt those things should be expected, and it would be shameful if what you described happened with a simple extra layer of fanservice. But there's this bizarre idea out there that it's absolutely going to happen with Smash 4. It has never happened before, so there's no reason to think it'll be happening now.

What I mean when I say Smash doesn't need justification is that those small incremental changes are a given considering Sakurai's design philosophy. There's no need for anyone to demand a wide breadth of new and revolutionary mechanics, because the Smash groundwork is well established and received, and small additions and changes can be expected.

Smash Bros. doesn't need revolutions to be justified is all I'm saying.

 

[SmashChu]

The ability to do a lot of things/use different tools/different attacks (or even techniques) in a lot of different ways that give the users more control over the result of a match.This isn't limited to the advanced techniques. In fact, advanced techniques might not have as big of an impact on the matches of the best of the best as the simple aspects of smash.

Things as simple as being able to use Directional Influence, teching and the ability to tech off of various things (the ground, walls, and roofs!), the ability to run and running, wall jumping (and how it impacts recovery), wall clinging, tether recovery, the ability to play off the stage, the ability to kill someone by spiking them, change your speed and momentum, have multiple uses of various attacks (such as how you can use the basic A-A-A combo or A hold down combos, and use them for various combos, tech chases, kills, or positioning) shielding and various simple things involving shield, simple tech chases, grabbing and the grab system (and how it changes offense, defense, and even recovery), etc. have loads of depth, and add a ton to smash bros (competitively, casually, or whatever label you want to put on a player or match).

The list of this simple stuff that all smash bros fans know of that can be used to such a deep and competitive stuff (whether on accident or on purpose) is amazing.

Thanks for answering my question. It kind of sucks your the only one who took it seriously. So, I'll give a serious response.

I can see what you mean from your end. You see it as doing more yes? You want to be able to do more. Kind of like having a tool belt. You want to make sure you have the right tool for the right job. This way, if a problem in the game confronts you, you can deal with it.

From my perspective, I see it as as have a lot of tools already, and there isn't a need for too many more. You mentioned a lot John, more than I was expecting. But it does show how much we have already in a simple game. But, that I have to also mention that do we need more.

See, here is the thing. Part of accessibility is being able to get in as smoothly as possible. Everyone sucks when they play a game the first time, but accessible games get the player better quicker. They can get into it, and while they may not win, they can become a better help to the team or someone who can still do some damage. You mentioned a lot John. It's a lot of things players will have to learn as they get better. Some sooner than later. But if we add more things, there is a divide among the players. Better players will have more tools or understand how to use them. But the newer players are just learning the basic tools. Weaker players not have more tools to deal with and may not understand them. This is all more stuff they have to learn. It's also more stuff that better players use against them. Basically, the skill divide becomes a knowledge divide. Part of the skill gap is that better players understand all of these tools where weaker players don't. If more tool get added, the game gets harder to learn (more things to learn) and the skill divide grows.

Think of it this way. Sakurai tries to streamline a game. I called it all "bloat" for that reason. It's just more stuff. By streamlining it, the game is focused on just the core mechanics. There is less to learn for the weaker players and there is still depth.

Competitive players tends to go towards an extreme on any issue. This is the same for all communities. There is a disjoint. The better players are not the same as the weaker or new players or those that play once and again and those who don't own the game. The majority of Smash players. The competitive players can't understand them. They don't even play the same. How can they understand them. When Sakurai makes the game, he looks at the larger player base. Note that he still tries to keep the game engaging. But competitive players are always at an extreme. Any love not for them is seen as hatred.

What I'm saying is why the game is focused on accessibility and why you can't have your cake and eat it too. I see it as Keep It Simple Stupid. There is no need to complicate something. The same goes for Smash. We have a lot of tools, and we should use and understand those to get better. But we have to understand that for the game to be open,. we have to have fewer. It's streamlining. Focusing on the big picture.

Thanks again for responding John

 

[El Duderino]

There's no need for anyone to demand a wide breadth of new and revolutionary mechanics, because the Smash groundwork is well established and received, and small additions and changes can be expected.

Smash Bros. doesn't need revolutions to be justified is all I'm saying.

No one said the changes have to be revolutionary or uproot the groundwork, just substantial enough to make this tittle stand out as a different and hopefully better playing game. I don't think that is beyond reasonable to expect that from any game sequel. Especially from a 4th installment, 13 year old franchise looking at a shrinking well of novel fan service to drive the content.

 

[V-K]

Sakurai made 2 outstanding games with the first 2 Smashs in my opion. In Brawl Iwata had a too big influence on the development. In an interview he emphasized that Smash Bros should be a fun game that can be played with the family and in which anyone could win.
Oh Yamauchi, why did you leave us?

 

[flyinfilipino]

Competitive players tends to go towards an extreme on any issue. This is the same for all communities. There is a disjoint. The better players are not the same as the weaker or new players or those that play once and again and those who don't own the game. The majority of Smash players. The competitive players can't understand them. They don't even play the same. How can they understand them. When Sakurai makes the game, he looks at the larger player base. Note that he still tries to keep the game engaging. But competitive players are always at an extreme. Any love not for them is seen as hatred.

What I'm saying is why the game is focused on accessibility and why you can't have your cake and eat it too. I see it as Keep It Simple Stupid. There is no need to complicate something. The same goes for Smash. We have a lot of tools, and we should use and understand those to get better. But we have to understand that for the game to be open,. we have to have fewer. It's streamlining. Focusing on the big picture.

See, the problem Smashchu is that you're at an extreme as well. "The better players are not the same as the weaker or new players or those that play once and again and those who don't own the game." I don't even see where you're going with that. Of course the better players are different. Is that inherently bad? Smash Bros. is at its core a fighting game, and there's going to be a winner and a loser(s) in every game. The fighting game genre is inherently competitive. One player is always going to be better than the others, and that player is usually going to win. Can you really fault them for that? If everyone's at the same skill level, then it's just luck that determines the winner, and, forgive the comparison, but you might as well be playing Mario Party.

Johnknight mentioned a big long list of mechanics that you seem to have accepted as alright, for some reason. Yeah, this is stuff that is already in the game, but it's also mostly stuff that anyone that spends more than 5 minutes playing Smash Bros. can grasp. I'm not understanding how intuitively fleshing out the core mechanics of Smash is such a touchy subject for you.


And as for developing new stuff for Smash 4 to "justify" it, I think that it's really just Sakurai's style to change things up with his games. Yes, Smash is mostly a big celebration of all the franchises as a whole and we'll get lots of fanservice as usual, but I think we can expect Sakurai to find something new to keep gameplay fresh as well.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

@Jeff Bridges

Well I agree about the new mechanics, but the idea of the fanservice well being insignificant to the point of novelty is silly. Nintendo has, as of late, introduced less original content than in years past, but there will always be significant amounts of content and eras of Nintendo gaming to represent through all kinds of new content.

Like I said, Smash is primarily a means to celebrate both Nintendo's most recent triumphs and their decorated past. It's about more than just fanservice; it's a Nintendo triumph in and of itself that will always be sweeping and grandiose in scope and purpose.

 

[Johnknight1]

I can see what you mean from your end. You see it as doing more yes? You want to be able to do more. Kind of like having a tool belt. You want to make sure you have the right tool for the right job. This way, if a problem in the game confronts you, you can deal with it.

Quite frankly, as fans of smash, we all want more. More characters, stages, items, game modes, content, collectables, music, online stuff, gameplay options, etc (above all, more fun). This isn't just competitive players or casual players wanting this, but nearly every smash bros. gamer. We want a bigger, bolder, and better smash bros experience. That is exactly what was advertised with the last 2 smash games. Nobody wants a sequel with less of this than its' predecessor, even if the sequel is a superior to the game before it.

From my perspective, I see it as as have a lot of tools already, and there isn't a need for too many more. You mentioned a lot John, more than I was expecting. But it does show how much we have already in a simple game. But, that I have to also mention that do we need more.

The thing with the tools we have, is 99% of commands, inputs, moves, or techniques are simple, one, two, or three button commands. They aren't hard to use at all. They also have both positive and negative outcomes (so you have to be careful as to when to use such things). For example, if I attack with an up smash, I may do damage. However, if the opponent avoids my attack, they may harm me.

People frequently mention "L-cancelling" as an advanced technique. There is nothing "advanced" about it. You press L or R (or Z in Smash 64) before you land. The problem with such a technique is that it is one of the few techniques that can be labelled as "bloat," there is no negative consequence for using it, and quite frankly, all of the frames cancelled should just be automatically cancelled (which is why I think L-cancelling effects should just be automatic).

See, here is the thing. Part of accessibility is being able to get in as smoothly as possible. Everyone sucks when they play a game the first time, but accessible games get the player better quicker. They can get into it, and while they may not win, they can become a better help to the team or someone who can still do some damage. You mentioned a lot John. It's a lot of things players will have to learn as they get better. Some sooner than later. But if we add more things, there is a divide among the players. Better players will have more tools or understand how to use them. But the newer players are just learning the basic tools. Weaker players not have more tools to deal with and may not understand them. This is all more stuff they have to learn. It's also more stuff that better players use against them. Basically, the skill divide becomes a knowledge divide. Part of the skill gap is that better players understand all of these tools where weaker players don't. If more tool get added, the game gets harder to learn (more things to learn) and the skill divide grows.

The problem is additional things are inevitable. We're not going to lose many gameplay features. From Smash 64 to Melee, all we really lost was a few character specific techniques and taunt cancelling (which should be in every smash bros game!). From Melee to Brawl, we lost were a few character specific techniques, wavedashing, wavelanding (well, aside from a small little waveland), L-cancelling, and dash dancing (well, dash dancing in Brawl exists, but most of the time you trip or it actually makes you more vulnerable). You can book in Smash WiiU and 3DS we'll lose random tripping and more character specific techniques. You can also book we'll have more techniques than in Brawl, just like how Melee had dozens of more techniques than Smash 64, and Brawl had dozens of more techniques than Melee.

Naturally, some players won't know some things exist, or won't know (at least not immediately) how to do things. Well, that's what this sites' (and other sites') guides are for, and to an extent, what the Smash Dojos and "How to Play" videos are for. Again, most of these things are simple. If a player is curious enough, they will learn. Besides that, most techniques, moves, and inputs are easy enough to learn. The timing for these things is usually very forgiving. Even something super anti-competitive players deem as "too hard" as wavedashing has forgiving timing (although the length of the wavedash depends on the timing, much like running). With most such techniques, the timing is easy to remember via muscle memory down once you perform it a couple of times.

Think of it this way. Sakurai tries to streamline a game. I called it all "bloat" for that reason. It's just more stuff. By streamlining it, the game is focused on just the core mechanics. There is less to learn for the weaker players and there is still depth.

Like I said before, we want more stuff. By your definition of "bloat" aren't more characters (specifically clones), stages, items, content, etc. just more "bloat"=???

Competitive players tends to go towards an extreme on any issue. This is the same for all communities. There is a disjoint. The better players are not the same as the weaker or new players or those that play once and again and those who don't own the game. The majority of Smash players. The competitive players can't understand them. They don't even play the same. How can they understand them. When Sakurai makes the game, he looks at the larger player base. Note that he still tries to keep the game engaging. But competitive players are always at an extreme. Any love not for them is seen as hatred.

Here is the 1st big issue with what you said. You said that competitive players tend to go towards extreme. Wrong. Fans tend to go towards extremes. Everybody would rather have 100 perfectly balanced characters than 50. That's human nature. We want more. Once humans discovered how to make televisions with colors other than black and white, we wanted more. Once we figured out we can go faster than dial-up internet, we wanted internet faster than DSL. We want more. Most competitive players just want many simple tools that can be used simply. You will find that many casual players want this. Just ask around, or ask yourself, and you will find this to be true.

The 2nd and biggest big issue I have with this statement is competitive players don't understand casual players. That is false. By your broad definition you have established, that would be utterly impossible. That is because every competitive player starts out as a casual player. Every player has to learn how to play smash bros one way or another. Once more, competitive players often tend to play the game casually! In other words, competitive players know more about casual players (in terms of your definition) than casual players know about competitive players. What you are also ignoring is that players can be both "casual" and "competitive" by your very definition. I have a story that proves this...

At the last Melee tournament I went to, all the Fox players tried to beat Alan's Peach in "Giant Melee" on Brinstar. Freaking hilarious stuff. Peach's down smash did over 100% (and had way more range), and whenever Fox got hit by the lava, it was too heavy to go above it, went under the lava, and constantly got hit and brought down to its' death while Fox screamed the night away (Peach was too light to die like that; she would get hit up like lava like in regular matches). It was hilarious, especially watching Fox get tortured while he dies!

Keep in mind Alan is a high quality Peach player, and some of the best players in the world were playing or watching this. It was mad hype. Now tell me, does this sound casual, or competitive=??? We were playing Giant Melee. Who the freak plays Giant Melee, or spams down smash all day with Peach on Giant Melee=??? Smashers having fun playing the game (in unusual ways), that is who!

What I'm saying is why the game is focused on accessibility and why you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Again, you are relying on cliches to prove a point. Don't do that. Say precisely what you mean.

I see it as Keep It Simple Stupid.

Adding things does keep it simple. However, the simple things can be used together, to form complex things. You can use a grab, a grab up throw, a down tilt, a neutral air, and a forward smash apart to be simple 1 or 2 button moves. However, you can string them together, and you have a combo or tech chase.

Smash, even at the highest level, can be broken down simply. Things, both "easy" and "complex" can be done simply because we have total control over our characters. Unless you take away total control over characters, or your strip smash down to be like "Dive Kick," smash can always be played at advanced levels, much like the sports that Sakurai compares smash to.

There is no need to complicate something. The same goes for Smash. We have a lot of tools, and we should use and understand those to get better. But we have to understand that for the game to be open,. we have to have fewer. It's streamlining. Focusing on the big picture.

All of the techniques I listed for you (on my previous post in response to you) could be done simply with 1, 2, or 3 buttons with minimally precise timing. They are flexible. Because of this flexibility, they create some unpredictable timings with it. Mixing this timing up can give anyone a competitive advantage versus someone who does the same timing with everyone the same time.

As for smash' timing, let's compare Street Fighter and Smash. With Street Fighter, each character has 4 types of ground attacks. Let's say right now they're a jab punch, a uppercut punch, a standard forward kick, and a roundhouse kick. You can push 3 different buttons with these to get stronger versions of them. One makes them the "weak" version, one is the "standard" or medium" strength version, and one is the "strong" version. Then, in the air, these moves are replaced with 4 other moves.

With Smash, you got something similar with the "Charged Smash" system. Except instead of 3 different control inputs, you only need 1 control input of 1 or 2 buttons. Uncharged with A+up, down, or sideways (or the C-stick), or charged with those same inputs (minus the C-stick). Due to this system, we have 1/3rd as many inputs. The system with every other attack and one-button command is even less complex.

Heck, nearly all of it is easily explained in the "How to Play" videos and Dojos each smash bros game. The problem with these is they don't break down each character individually. It explains each attack.

Given that we'll get 50 characters (give or take a few), and each character has about 25 moves, that is up to 2,500 moves to learn! That is why Kuma is suggesting a Tekken Tag Team Tournament 2 "Smash Lab" to teach players each of those attacks, and their uses. That or have a story mode that teaches players how to play by letting them playing I think this is what smash bros' direction of teaching players how to play should be more like this (specifically the Mega Man X example). Let players play, and they'll learn. In the first level (of say Adventure Mode), they'll learn the basics. Then in levels after that (like in Mega Man X), teach them more complex stuff.

Spoiler

(that also is a reason why I think Mega Man would fit seamlessly in smash bros)

Of course, having a "Smash Lab" (a mode that teaches players by giving them control over characters) like Kuma has recommended would also be a useful resource, as well as perhaps more "How to Play" videos (for higher levels of play) and more such resources on the Smash Dojos (having L-cancelling on the Smash 64 Dojo is a good example of this).

Anyways, the only techniques that don't end up on such things are the results of physics and/or character moves (most of which are simple, possibly aside from getting down the timing [like wavedashing]). Those are bound to exist in all smash bros games. In fact, each smash bros. game, and each smash bros game has dozens of more advanced techniques than the previous one. Heck, last I checked, Toon Link had about 20-40 advanced techniques of his own in Brawl! (He actually has LESS in Project M!)

Thanks again for responding John

No problemo.

 

[El Duderino]

The idea of the fanservice well being insignificant to the point of novelty is silly.

I don't disagree. I said they have less novel, in other words new, Nintendo fan service to pull from. There is just less they can rely on, partially with how extensive it has been covered in previous games.

You want to make sure you have the right tool for the right job. This way, if a problem in the game confronts you, you can deal with it... From my perspective, I see it as as have a lot of tools already, and there isn't a need for too many more.

I'm happy to hear we are getting on the same page now, appreciating the scope of what Smash's fighting system has to offer. I also agree that too much can be a bad thing when techniques become inaccessible or a juggling act.

Looking at the dedicated Melee fanbase though, there is clearly something to Smash having a little larger tool belt. As a Gannondorf player, I can tell you a thing or two about how devastating even a slight loss of options can be. My main was basically ruined by it, transforming from the deceptively quick countering powerhouse to a slow as molasses turd devoid of any fun. I like Gannondorf in Melee because the game allows me to get creative with him, something that is far less possible with Brawl's limited tool set.

For the sake of freedom of movement, player creativity, and viability of a larger portion of the cast, there should absolutely be more to SSB4's gameplay than Brawl. That is all very possible to achieve without the rote memorization of Melee or throwing the player too many options to handle.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

There is a wealth of untapped older material, as well as all the contemporary Wii era material to draw from. It's is the opposite of having less to rely on. One of the reasons there's casual fan hype over a new Smash is because of the crazy unpredictability of what will be included. I know you aren't saying there's nothing left to add, but there is soooo much, new and old, that remains to be added. The pool of possible new content won't even begin to dwindle until Nintendo stops making games (God forbid).

 

[Vinylic.]

I'm just gonna go off and say this.

It's sakurai's idea and sakurai's creation from his own thoughts.
You guys are fans and critics to him. He's showing what he has made to you so he can get responses to make it better.

He's not gonna add anything for you now as he has already done it after people gave out mixed responses about brawl.

 

[Johnknight1]

@ El Duderino
They can't rely on fan service as much as they did before, yes (because most of the fans of previous smash games will get Smash WiiU and 3DS), if they plan on "growing" the smash bros. audience. However, if the gameplay of both games is a unique experience, the previous "fan service" will feel almost as fresh as new. That's the power of Sakurai's ability to make things original and keeping them fresh without totally changing a system that works.

 

[El Duderino]

There is a wealth of untapped older material, as well as all the contemporary Wii era material to draw from. It's is the opposite of having less to rely on. One of the reasons there's casual fan hype over a new Smash is because of the crazy unpredictability of what will be included. I know you aren't saying there's nothing left to add, but there is soooo much, new and old, that remains to be added. The pool of possible new content won't even begin to dwindle until Nintendo stops making games (God forbid).

After 3 games of fan service, the left over untapped material is just not as exciting or recognizable to most people. Outside of that, Nintendo hasn't exactly created a lot of new resonating IP in recent years that makes sense for the Smash universe.

They have to find additional ways to keep the franchise fresh. Leaving the gameplay identical to the last tittle is a great way of doing the exact opposite and I don't think they will make that mistake.

 

[Blad01]

Why not send a letter signed "Smashboards" to the development team, with some requests for the competitive fanbase ?

The message would be : "We know SSB is made for Nintendo fans before all, and we are Nintendo fans. But please take into account the big competitive scene that also exists while developing the game".

With some precise suggestions, like, in bold, "please make the random tripping removable in the options !", or "Please make sure we can play the game with a GC-controller-like pad & setting".

(And please nerf Metaknight, maybe ? )

Here we go : http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=326488

 

[GiantBreadbug]

I'll just beat a dead horse here.

There is always a new generation of Nintendo gamers to whom the content in Smash Bros. will be new and exciting. Just because we've been around forever and have seen a lot of what we expect in terms of content already, that doesn't mean other people don't find prospective new content exciting or recognizable.

Content from installments in existing franchises is still largely untapped. Maybe there's not a ton of new possibilities in content that are that are exciting to you or someone else, but don't say that's true for "most people."

In my travels, I've noticed that a lot of casual players are most excited about new content in Smash Bros., much moreso than any new possible gameplay mechanics. Even fans who have been around since the series's genesis are thrilled over what could be included from both new era games and classic ones. I'm sure competitive players want that too, but they seem to prioritize what we've been discussing in gameplay changes. I'm not glorifying one point of view over the other, it's just a difference I've noticed.

The appeal of new content is just as attractive now as it has ever been. Over time, yes the series will become stale if the exact same system is maintained, but there is something to be said about the addition of new content. People will always go nuts for Smash Bros. primarily because of what's new in it. People always want something, some gaming memory they cherish, represented in Smash Bros., and they always will. It's what drives most every aspect of all non-competitive fan communities of Smash.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Why not send a letter signed "Smashboards" to the development team, with some requests for the competitive fanbase ?

Because it won't accomplish anything, unfortunately. The "competitive" fanbase aka Smashboards makes up a very tiny amount of the entire Smash fanbase, and the development team isn't exactly taking fan requests on how gameplay should pan out.

In my travels, I've noticed that a lot of casual players are most excited about new content in Smash Bros., much moreso than any new possible gameplay mechanics.

In my travels, a lot of people that play Smash Bros. have no idea where half the stuff in the game comes from. But that's just me. It does make it more fun to educate them, though.

 

[El Duderino]

@GiantBreadbug

One quick look at the character discussion boards and you'll find the majority of requests fall in the range of second rate support characters, non Nintendo franchises, or just reach deep into obscurity. I'm not saying that is necessarily a bad thing, just that the days of franchise headlining, mass appeal Nintendo mascot additions are pretty much over. It makes delivering on new compelling fanservice a far greater challenge and a ton more work. It's also a borderline unrealistic goal to chase after, as Sakuari talks about hitting the quantity wall.

 

[---]

@El Duderino: Well you're right about the characters, and here you don't even post in the character boards. lol


Think we'll definitely be seeing some big gameplay changes, that's a given, but I don't think they'll be as radical as if you were compare 64 to Melee, or Melee to Brawl. I think Sakurai's found his comfort zone and is going to work on building upon it as well as improving on past mechanics and ideas.

Going to bet though that the big focus he has this time is working on the extra stuff that people around here seem to often forget about. SSE, Stickers, and Online Play are the heavy hitters, as well as whatever ideas he has for connecting both versions. Can't also forget some of the extra system based stuff the 3DS and Wii U can do, such as Steet Pass and AR Cards for the former.

 

[El Duderino]

@El Duderino: Well you're right about the characters, and here you don't even post in the character boards. lol

There's a reason I don't go there. I'm not interested in which Rare character to include that Nintendo doesn't own the rights to or shouldn't revive. I could care less about Nintendo filler clones like Waluigi or Daisy. I'll pass on any of the corny F-Zero racers that would fit in a bad saturday mourning superhero cartoon. I'm not going to argue over which of the hundreds of Pokemon they should pick from. And most of all, I don't care about which whiny Sonic cousin in the inter-species bred ****** pin deserves to be in the game. That and I just find character speculation kind of pointless as I'd rather be surprised in the first place.

 

[Johnknight1]

Yeah, as I've said since Brawl came out "there are few 'Nintendo All-Stars' left." Ridley, Mewtwo and K. Rool definitely fit that billing. Maybe the likes of Little Mac, Dixie Kong, Miis (although that causes a fire storm of love and hate), Shulk do, too.

After that, you got a bunch of obscure retro characters and weird whacky choices... unless Sakurai decides to add a particular 2 3rd party characters... >.>

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

How is shulk a Nintendo all star?

 

[Big-Cat]

Shulk's a Marvel character anyway. Automatically invalid.

I'm still curious as to how radical the changes might be for the next game. He already said things like going 3D wasn't going to happen, but everyone's definition is different. Smaller shields to allow a deeper defense game might be considered too radical for Smash as an example.

 

[Kink-Link5]

With balance between the overpowered Powershields, a want to emphasis shield angling, and a want to make shielding an easily accessible thing in mind, I came up with something of a middle ground.

Powershields are replaced by Large flash shields, which then shrink to small size after 1~5 frames. I don't know what the best balance here would be for frame data, but I feel like this would be a nice best-of-all-worlds idea, to make "powershielding" more in line with an automatic "proper" shield. Because of how the Smash series goes about its conventions, the current powershielding mechanic is nearly a crapshoot. Very few moves have a large enough startup with appropriate auditory cues to make powershielding something that can be done as a show of appropriate reaction, rather than a fortunate absurdly, ridiculously more advantageous guard that happens frankly, by pure happening.

 

[Big-Cat]

I like the idea, but if the flash shield is bigger than the smaller, angled shield (which actually might make Link's shield relevant), I feel like that this rewards improper timing on the blocker's end. If the attacker spaces well, he just baited a shield lift out and should be able to take advantage of the situation.

And I'm more than up for individualized shield stun on all attacks. You can easily make a frame trap character as a result.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I don't know where the concept of the "cash in on fanservice" is coming from. Nintendo is literally the last you need to worry about cashing in on things.

7 Mario Karts, 10 Mario Parties, 5 Mario Tennis, 4 Mario Golf, 2 Mario Baseball, 4 Animal Crossing, 4 "New" Super Mario Bros., 4 Variations of the Game Boy, 3 Variations of the Game Boy Advanced, 4 variations of the Nintendo DS.

I love Nintendo but they have their fair share of franchise exploiting. I'm very aware if other companies doing similar things but Nintendo by far has been doing it for the longest. This is coming from a person who grew up on Nintendo and received a gameboy for his first birthday since it was released in August 1989. I love Nintendo, but they really should try to emphasis on enlisting more 3rd party support or emphasize on creating original franchises.

I'll just beat a dead horse here.

There is always a new generation of Nintendo gamers to whom the content in Smash Bros. will be new and exciting. Just because we've been around forever and have seen a lot of what we expect in terms of content already, that doesn't mean other people don't find prospective new content exciting or recognizable.

Content from installments in existing franchises is still largely untapped. Maybe there's not a ton of new possibilities in content that are that are exciting to you or someone else, but don't say that's true for "most people."

In my travels, I've noticed that a lot of casual players are most excited about new content in Smash Bros., much moreso than any new possible gameplay mechanics. Even fans who have been around since the series's genesis are thrilled over what could be included from both new era games and classic ones. I'm sure competitive players want that too, but they seem to prioritize what we've been discussing in gameplay changes. I'm not glorifying one point of view over the other, it's just a difference I've noticed.

The appeal of new content is just as attractive now as it has ever been. Over time, yes the series will become stale if the exact same system is maintained, but there is something to be said about the addition of new content. People will always go nuts for Smash Bros. primarily because of what's new in it. People always want something, some gaming memory they cherish, represented in Smash Bros., and they always will. It's what drives most every aspect of all non-competitive fan communities of Smash.

The expectations for additional content will be met in each iteration of the Smash Bros. series regardless of any content limitations. What many people want in our particular section of the Smash community is the 'Melee Experience'. We don't all want the same exact system with upscaled graphics (An idea that some actually wouldn't mind), but a game that had the same foundation as Melee. You can play it as any other Smash Bros. game, but their was a wide plethora of options for players to expand on the foundation of the game.

Melee had a level of technical depth that was parallel to many other fighting franchises while still maintaining a unique experience. Melee had combos, footsies, spacing, okizime, cross ups, shield pokes etc. which functioned in conjunction with smash specific mechanics like Edge gaurding, Platform use, mindgames and DI. While being a non traditional fighter, Melee met the expectations and standards for being successful at being an intuitive fighting experience. None of these things that existed in Melee compromised the sales or enjoy-ability of the game to the casual consumer.

While i'm very excited to see newer mechanics in smash 4 I am more interested in seeing them implemented in a fashion that makes them expandable in their use. For example: A Short Hop. Easy to execute, practical for executing aerials low to the ground. Brawl made short hops easier to do, but the lack of options allowed players to do onle a few things: An aerial that auto cancels, projectile, or empty jump. Versus Melee, which allowed to SHUFFL any aerial, empty jump, waveland, double jump waveland on platform, projectile, SH aerial then waveland. All of these just being options that are available because of a few minor engine modifications. Nearly all technical and gameplay tactics in Melee were composed of simple tools that became effective when presented to the right player.

Even without these exact tools and modifications smash can become a very successful installment in the franchise for both casual and advanced parties if the new machanics can give players something new while still giving players a variety of options to use in conjunction with them. Offering players more options can make even an old game feel fresh again.

 

[Johnknight1]

I like the shield idea Kink-Link5. It keeps the shield system simple, easy to understand, yet it rewards player for timing (out attacks and opponents) and by knowing the game.

I'm okay with the individual shield stun... as long as a travesty like the Lucas and Ness Brawl stun never happens again!

How is shulk a Nintendo all star?

Maybe Shulk isn't a well-known All-Star, but were I to make a list of the 50 most awesome Nintendo characters, Shulk would definitely be on it. That's without me even playing Xenoblade Chronicles and watching gameplay of it. I also got a feeling a sequel is coming, and whether or not it is a direct sequel, Xenoblade will be a new IP (and Nintendo's answer to RPG fans). Plus, the game was made by Monolith Soft, and some of those guys made games like the Xenosaga Series and Chrono Cross.

Also, "Nintendo All-Stars" IMO simply means the best of Nintendo characters (going off what I first said). Shulk (at least seems to be) one of Nintendo's best characters.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I legit have never heard of who or whatever Shulk is.

I thought it was a shortening of She Hulk until 2 weeks ago.

 

[Big-Cat]

I'm okay with the individual shield stun... as long as a travesty like the Lucas and Ness Brawl stun never happens again!

Oh no, nothing like that. The shield/blockstun would be the same for every character. If a move leaves you at a frame advantage of -5 because Mario blocked it. It'll by -5 on block with every other character.

 

[Johnknight1]

Well, after what happened to Ness and Lucas (both of whom could have been much better in Brawl without that hit stun), I am automatically cautious, even with basic things, as to whether or not I think they will actually be able to function. Then again, that was probably Game Art's fault.

*points at TMNT Smash-Up (especially the roster, which features the Rayman Rabbids!) and laughs*

 

[Kink-Link5]

Lucas and Ness are subject to the same shield stun as every other character.

 

[GiantBreadbug]

@Conversation I've Been Out of for a Bit

It's not just characters. It's an essence of a generation through some music, collectables, stages, and whatever else is included. And there are significant additions to be made in both the character and non-character categories. Like I said, just because lots of new characters seem unnecessary and obscure to you, that doesn't mean everyone else feels the same.

I think you're right about headlining mascot additions not being relevant for the time being, at least until Nintendo creates a new phenomenon in a new IP. That's not all that is significant content-wise, though; it's everything. I'm not advocating a bloated roster for the sake of a bloated roster, but rather saying there's an insane amount of Nintendo yet to be represented in many forms.

 

[Johnknight1]

@ Kink
Yeah, but I never thought in a trillion zillion years that two characters could basically be infinite grabbed because of their knock back related to grabs. You'd think that would be covered. That's why I am hesitant (toward any character having any basic movement/action difference from one another).

@ Giant Bedbug
The Last Story, Pandora's Tower, and (especially) Xenoblade Chronicles might be that "phenomenon" of a new IP... if they get sequels (whether direct, spiritual, or whatnot)

Of course, the re-established Donkey Kong Country, Kirby, and Golden Sun franchises are pretty good for Nintendo, too.

 

[Deleted member]

Well, after what happened to Ness and Lucas (both of whom could have been much better in Brawl without that hit stun), I am automatically cautious, even with basic things, as to whether or not I think they will actually be able to function. Then again, that was probably Game Art's fault.

*points at TMNT Smash-Up (especially the roster, which features the Rayman Rabbids!) and laughs*

Can't really blame Game Arts for Ubisoft's folly. (in regards to the Rabbids)

 

[Johnknight1]

@ Golden
Yeah... I guess you're right.

Still TMNT Smash-Up is proof that without a leader as original, creative, wise, and resourceful as Sakurai that Game Arts can only make average smash (wanna be) games.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

@ Golden
Yeah... I guess you're right.

Still TMNT Smash-Up is proof that without a leader as original, creative, wise, and resourceful as Sakurai that Game Arts can only make average smash (wanna be) games.

I never tried it.

I think all TMNT smash up proves is that if you put Rabbids in a TMNT game, and leave out popular characters from the series, I won't even pick it up!

 

[Blad01]

Because it won't accomplish anything, unfortunately. The "competitive" fanbase aka Smashboards makes up a very tiny amount of the entire Smash fanbase, and the development team isn't exactly taking fan requests on how gameplay should pan out.

And you know that... How ?

I don't agree : In a lot of interviews, Sakurai talks about what the fans what, what they don't want, etc. Let's give himl some data about us !

 

[Johnknight1]

Honestly, Sakurai is aware of the competitive community. He isn't going to do anything to make Smash Bros. "anti-competitive." He's never done any such thing in the past. The problems with Brawl wasn't so much that it wasn't competitive, but that it was boring as hell at the competitive level, defense beat offense way too often, and almost all of the useful offense was either spammy as hell, based around camping/defense/stalling, a tech chase (which I think belongs in smash), and a bunch of infinite or near infinite combos.

I never tried it.

I think all TMNT smash up proves is that if you put Rabbids in a TMNT game, and leave out popular characters from the series, I won't even pick it up!

Yeah, the roster of TMNT Smash-Up was poorly selected by Ubisoft. It almost seemed like it was a Rabbids game promoting Ubisoft instead of a TMNT game.