Downloadable balance patches?

[S_B]

I've thought about it and gone back and forth, but frankly, I wouldn't mind if they tweaked the game for balance after release through online patches.

The way I figure it, Sora can never test the game to the extent where they could avoid tiers. So why not? Yes, you wouldn't get the balance patches without internet connectivity, but guess what? If you're posting on this forum, you can't complain about that, now can you?

Consider that, with the advent of online SBBB, Nintendo will have access to millions of online matches and their results (it's tracked for Strikers and the like). By statistical data ALONE, Nintendo could see which characters are played the most and the least. They could see which characters badly need a buff to their abilities because that character seldom wins in online matches and is barely played anymore.

In essence, people will not be able to whine about balance to Nintendo: Nintendo already has all the data they'd need to make decisions.

So what do you think? Would you cry bloody murder at balance patches or would you rejoice when ultra-nerfed characters are brought back for their day in the sun?

 

[maxpower1227]

As long as there are a limited number of them and the process is completed fairly quickly, I'm ok with it. But it still raises the question of whether they balance the characters accounting for the advanced techs or not. It's a very complicated issue and it's probably better if they just leave the game as it is when they release it.

 

[Blazer]

No, changing characters after release is bad. People will use who they want regardless of tiers and if they want to be good with someone then that's what they'll do. The moment you change a character they're game gets thrown off.

 

[Falco&Victory]

I made a topic like this, but I had a mod lock it because someone was saying "there's no way the servers could handle downloadable content, it would crash", lol.

Yes, the idea is very possible, even probable. I would love to play a characters I love out of love of the character, not of their ability.

 

[Kazuya]

No thanks. Sakurai's had enuff time to "balance"/"patch" up anything in Brawl. He's got about another 4 months left, thats ample time to fix anything.

I don't wanna buy the game only to realise a few characters are too strong and others are too weak and that I need to download a patch to make things even.

Thats called poor programming. I highly doubt it'll happen.

 

[S_B]

Yes, the idea is very possible, even probable. I would love to play a characters I love out of love of the character, not of their ability.

That's exactly how I feel on the subject.

I suspect that the characters I love will, once again, be crap in Brawl and, if I want to seriously compete online, I'd need to adopt a character I'm not fond of, and that sucks.

Thats called poor programming. I highly doubt it'll happen.

Er, it DID happen: Melee has a definite set of tiers and it's ultra-rare to see anything but a top/first tier character winning a tournament.

That's not so much of an issue with Melee, but if Brawl goes online, how boring will it be if EVERYONE plays Fox/Falco/Metaknight or something?

 

[Star105]

I also made a similar thread about this idea........

Mine got locked too :smiliegor:burst: so its a common but good idea

I still think that they should (but probably won't) do this

 

[S_B]

I think online play changes matters.

As for downloadable content from servers, what does everyone think Wii Channels are?

It's perfectly possible.

 

[Adi]

I hope so but I also know that if he changes stuff it'll completely throw off people's styles/characters unless they're very small changes, like those that occured in PAL. I do hope he patches stuff however, just limited to NEW material like new stages/characters.

 

[Hyperion]

In a way I would like it, but I would hate having to change characters/styles every time they nerfed my current one. Also, some people here may not have wireless internet, and it wouldn't be good if you practiced with a character one way, only to go to a tournament and have him play differently. Finally, it would take too much of the Wii's already limited internal memory. My vote is no.

 

[VgtPrncfllSyns]

I think part of the fun of the game is that people can pick lower tier characters so it's more of a challange.

 

[ecstatic]

I think that they should make little balance fixes, but with a strict criteria: The only time they should make patches is when they make new versions (e.g. PAL). That way everything would match up. Also, they proved with MPH that patches are possible. (Long story short, they made glitchy names illegal.)

 

[S_B]

I didn't hear about them patching Hunters...

What did they do, exactly? (they should have nerfed Sylux...)

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

(I tried posting this last night, but the boards were all being dumb...)

Patching SSBB is a very delicate subject. It has huge positives as well as glaring negatives. It would have to be handled with great care, otherwise it would annihilate the competitive smash scene.

There would have to be large gaps of time between patches (unless a blatant mistake were made in a previous patch). Think about how far Melee has come in its almost six years. Supposedly 'broken' characters/stages/tactics suddenly have weaknesses as players continue to experiment with unorthodox tricks. I remember when my friends and I all called Sheik utterly broken. Now, she rarely makes appearances because we all became too good at defeating her. She just got overused, I guess.

Anyway, the point is that Nintendo cannot pump out a new patch every month as complaints shift from one character to the next. Players are entitled to learning a character in the long term without his or her physics suddenly being revamped overnight. Patches would need to be restricted to being released once per year. Even that is pushing it. Much time is needed to observe the game and notice which characters need enhancing or handicapping. It is also dangerously easy to overdo an adjustment. Many players might agree that a certain move is too strong, but does that character have anything else to make up for it being patched weaker?

 

[PitIcarus]

Last thing we need is "ZOMG NERF PIT" threads.

 

[RyokoYaksa]

I would be very much for these. Melee in particular could have benefited from such a feature (you might see more than 4-5 characters out of 26 winning tourneys). However, the game can't truly be explored and devloped upon until it's in the hands of the player.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I would be very much for these. Melee in particular could have benefited from such a feature (you might see more than 4-5 characters out of 26 winning tourneys). However, the game can't truly be explored and devloped upon until it's in the hands of the player.

After almost six years of abuse, yeah, I think Melee was quite ripe for a patch. Let's see: disable Marth's c-stick, nerf Fox's up-smash and up-air, change Falco's down-air to a meteor, remove Sheik's throw, ...

And yes, it would be wonderful to see a variety of characters win tournaments.

 

[S_B]

It is also dangerously easy to overdo an adjustment. Many players might agree that a certain move is too strong, but does that character have anything else to make up for it being patched weaker?

Actually, I was thinking it would be the other way around, and I think I'll explain myself with an obtuse metaphor! :D

I imagine character updates in the same manner as a lava lamp: Bowser, Ness and other bottom tier characters are the clumps of wax which fall to the bottom of the lamp while Marth, Fox and Falco are the superheated bits of wax which float on the top.

The job of these patches isn't to push the wax at the top down but to heat the wax at the bottom so it rises up.

Basically, we know that certain characters are going to sink to the bottom of the tiers. When that happens, it's time to adjust that character so they stand a fighting chance again.

In a perfect world, they'd watch for the tiers and balance them accordingly. I understand that there can be upsets when certain characters are suddenly brought to the top tier, but after so much time, I don't think characters like Ness, Bowser and Yoshi will be finding their way back up the tiers.

And yes, it would be wonderful to see a variety of characters win tournaments.

In the end, that's all I'd want as well. I'm not big into the tourney scene or anything, but I like to think that I'd be able to choose a character based upon which character I like rather than being forced to pick a character for their tier placement.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I would be perfectly fine with the character selection being nothing more than an intricate web of counterpicks. We run into problems when one character counters more than half of the cast. >_<

 

[Wreked]

Some balance should happen. Nintendo might not know now that one character is going to have one or two moves that are unbalanced. A nightmare for me would be having one of my favorite characters make it into Brawl, but they totally suck. And i'm sure tons of people will freak if they find out somene like Ridley, Diddy, Krystal, or Sonic sucks. They're not going to use them if they suck. And how does nintendo fix this? Downloadable balance patches.

 

[S_B]

I would be perfectly fine with the character selection being nothing more than an intricate web of counterpicks. We run into problems when one character counters more than half of the cast. >_<

I know what you're saying, but a "rock, paper, scissors" style of gameplay just doesn't work very well, as evidenced by MP: Hunters which suffered from the same issue.

I didn't mean to suggest that we'd gravitate toward that kind of setup, only that crap characters should be retooled so they do a better job standing toe to toe with top tiers. Rather than nerfing the strong, buff the weak.

Though, if it's a choice of counterpicks and one character which WTFPWNZ all, I'll take counterpicks as well.

 

[Fawriel]

I'd very much like it if they went to such lengths to make the game more balanced. Well, chances are there won't be any such painfully obvious injustices as in Melee ( Sheik and Zelda - the ultimate combo-character... uh, wait, Sheik is better than Zelda at everything... ).

I'd really hate to have to play a Melee where Fox's up-smash is that powerful and stuff like that...
Good thing I don't have to since I have the PAL version. They already did make balance patches. So I don't see why they won't do it once more.

 

[TheManaLord]

millions of online competitive games get patches

do they automatically fail? no

patches are for glaring balance issues, not minor ones

it'd be perfect for this game

 

[Adi]

Lol the Up-Smash wasn't nerfed by that much in PAL. The main thing that was nerfed was Sheik's d-throw which can be di'd from.

Anyways I really hope if they do have patches they don't have one at a rate any less than one per 6 months. People always complain about something new, they just need time to adjust and find out strategies to counter it.

 

[Takalth]

Last thing we need is "ZOMG NERF PIT" threads.

EXACTLY!

I'm an RTS player, and one of the things I hate is the mentality that comes with patches. Whenever people lose, they ignore playings skill and demand nerfs/buffs instead of developing new strategies.
While broken tactics occasionally came up which demanded a balance change, 90% of the changes were made in response to mediocre players who wanted to be able to win without changing their own tactics or developing better skills.

If Melee had balance patches, the first thing they would have nerfed would have been Link's Up+B, as a result of all of the complaints by people who refuse to learn to exploit lag. Ganondorf would be nerfed across the board, as he can easily kill with button mashing. Pika's Down+B would be nerfed as it is incredibly effective in chaotic FFA battles.

Then you could watch what would happen when masses of non-competitive people watched a good player. Somebody would get 4-stocked by a Samus who happened to use the Fountain of Dreams recovery (likely just showing off) and it would spark threads about how Samus is impossible to kill.

While it's true that a few much-needed adjustments would occur (Peach's downsmash would probably get nerfed), most of the changes would not be beneficial to good competitive play.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Imagine being able to create custom patches! There would be absolute chaos on these boards if members knew that the people in charge of the "official tournament patch" were here. At the same time, it would be nice to know that the managers are in touch with the tournament community and not just some random Nintendo execs.

 

[RyokoYaksa]

While it's true that a few much-needed adjustments would occur (Peach's downsmash would probably get nerfed)

You were posting so well up until this point.

 

[behemoth]

You all know that this question of downloadable patches has sparked such debate simply because no one wants to dare hope for the true golden goose: downloadable new characters, items, stages, or gametypes.

But since the Wii has teeny memory space, patches are the only likely addition. One possibility that I haven't seen addressed is that you could save the patches, but only apply them selectively, so that if the community decides against a certain patch, the older version could be played.

I mean, the tournament scene banned certain stages, is it that unrealistic to expect certain patches to be rejected?

 

[theONEjanitor]

i dont like "balance" patches.

it makes you have re-learn a game almost.

 

[MookieRah]

millions of online competitive games get patches

do they automatically fail? no

patches are for glaring balance issues, not minor ones

it'd be perfect for this game

Well that is true, but it doesn't help the patching argument for a fighting game. This isn't an FPS, we can't just adjust the spray, power, and effect of guns and it be a minor thing to adjust to, this is a fighting game. Another thing that should be noted is that balance is based on the metagame, which constantly changes on it's own without the help of someone actively trying to "balance" things. We may discover that a character that recieved a ton of buffs early on had some kind of crazy trick that made him **** good, but with the buffs they would have to nerf him back. That said, Nintendo wouldn't nerf a character based on advanced techniques, if anything they would be more liable to remove the trick entirely or ignore it. This could end up causing more of an imbalance if not done correctly.

There are some things that should be patched, and some things that shouldn't, but it's a very very slippery slope. We have no idea how the buffs or nerfs that take place could have adversely effect the tournament scene. If anything, having the game patched very rarely would be the best option (Buzz's 1 patch per year is a good idea imo), cause it would give us plenty of time to adjust and it would be in place for while.

 

[the grim lizard]

PLEASE STOP COMPARING BRAWL TO MELEE. >_<

Melee had tons of obstacles: In two years time, they added 14 characters, 24 stages, tons of new modes, changed a large portion of each returning character's moveset, not to mention the fact that they had to make an entirely new engine. There was plenty of stuff that was intended that didn't have time to be done. Adding characters like BF, Mach Rider, Siguard, and others for one, adding a Fire Emblem stage and other stages as well. They ran into lots of problems and were under a time crunch.

Brawl does not have this problem! They are using the Melee engine. It seems most of the character animations are being retained for the movesets. All they have to do to balance things is change stats. They have nothing but time. Sakurai's probably had the roster done for ages...Melee ran into a lot of issues, sure. But Brawl does not have the same issues that Melee did.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

Both yes and no...

Balance is nice, I have been a player if World of Warcraft for a while.. Not anymore.. But the continuous patches were both good and bad....

Fixed somethings.. broke some others.. A few very small tweaks would be good... I'm mostly for it but still expect to see many.. many.. many many complaints..

 

[Kirbychwan]

The people who complain about balance patches tend to be the same people exploiting
the issue getting fixed anyway.

I'd be in favor of balancing patches. Developers can playtest their games and programs all they want, but issues will never spring up until it's in the hands of the market.

 

[GregUnit]

World of Warcraft completely screwed this up, and I'd hate to see Nintendo do it.


Basically, the most powerful characters don't get nerfed, it's basically whoever *****es the most gets what they want, that's why I quit WoW because I couldn't stand how you could get whatever you wanted by whining enough (like Rogues). Plus, people would more than likely just mess around with their Brawl so they could avoid a path that nerfed whatever their favorite character was.

Good idea, but it would just be abused so much it would become a hassle.

 

[goodkid]

Downloadable patches would not be good for Brawl. Brawl will sell millions of copies, and people won't want to update the game. However the game comes out, is how it will stay.

 

[Shine-Fu]

I know what you're saying, but a "rock, paper, scissors" style of gameplay just doesn't work very well, as evidenced by MP: Hunters which suffered from the same issue.

I didn't mean to suggest that we'd gravitate toward that kind of setup, only that crap characters should be retooled so they do a better job standing toe to toe with top tiers. Rather than nerfing the strong, buff the weak.

Though, if it's a choice of counterpicks and one character which WTFPWNZ all, I'll take counterpicks as well.

THANK YOU.

I have been so sick of hearing the same arguments 'NERF THIS' 'GET RID OF THAT' 'ADD LAG TIME TO THIS' etc. The most fun I have comes from top tier fights. Always. Dumbing down the best characters to the level of the worst is a way to ruin the game.

I would love to see every character be competitive, but not at the expense of the strong, fast paced fights that already exist.

I mean, who would want to play at all if every character were as "good" as pichu?

Case rested.

Edit - also, no patches. Maybe to keep the game in-line with a different version release, but other than that, no. Unless some broken thing comes into play (uncounterable un-DIable etc throw chain, its a Bad Idea(tm)

 

[S_B]

Here's the thing which I think most people are forgetting...

Hypothetically, what data would Nintendo base their patches on? Why, the online battle data, of course! (which I assume they WILL have access to).

Now, if Melee had an online 1v1 mode, what would Nintendo be seeing? It would probably see over 50% of the players playing as either Fox or Falco and VERY few players playing as Bowser, Ness, etc. They'd also see who is winning which matches with which characters.

I understand that it seems like a dodgy subject when player input is taken into consideration, but the thing is, player input is in the form of character selection data and nothing more.

I'm sure you have people who have complained that Fox is too weak in Melee, but Nintendo wouldn't be listening to THEM. They'd be watching the actual data to see which characters are revealed as cheap and which characters are revealed to suck.

Balance patches in Brawl will be based on cold, hard data, not opinion.

 

[RyokoYaksa]

They would need unbiased players, both casual and serious, to actually make good assessments of what needs to be nerfed and what needs to be buffed.

On one end, though, it doesn't take a genius to tell that Sheik's forward air in Melee is one of the most overpowered moves in the game...

 

[ash808]

patches would be great. If anything these patches would be just like the halo 2 multiplayer patches. They affect MULTIPLAYER. the patches might only take effect when you play online. that way everyone who is playing will already have the patch because in order to play online you need to be connected to the internet (der) so that means you can download the patch. Maybe, just like in halo, one large multiplayer patch and a few small ones to stop glitches.

 

[Killer Tree]

I made a topic like this, but I had a mod lock it because someone was saying "there's no way the servers could handle downloadable content, it would crash", lol.

Yes, the idea is very possible, even probable. I would love to play a characters I love out of love of the character, not of their ability.

Wow you actually asked a mod to lock the thread because of that?


wtf