Dropping Doubles

[AlphaZealot]

This week, Christopher “Wife” Fabiszak came out with an opinion piece that Smash tournaments should no longer feature Doubles. The general thesis being that Doubles is hurting tournaments and the Smash communities growth.

• Doubles is messy - Hard to see and follow characters, not streaming or spectator friendly
• Doubles does not have healthy competition - Teams aren't consistent tournament to tournament and therefore, doubles play is sloppy
• Doubles is dying anyways - Only about half of singles entrants will enter Doubles

Fabiszak may be right - Doubles may be on the way out. However, he is looking in all of the wrong places and citing all of the wrong reasons. To fully understand the situation, you need to know the history of Smash tournaments and where Doubles came about.

Doubles can be a blast​

Doubles Origins
The story of Doubles goes all the way back to 2002 when Smash tournaments were just beginning. Back then, Smash tournament organizers took inspiration from the traditional fighting game community (FGC) which ran strictly Double elimination, best of 3, and with prize splits as harsh as 70%-20%-10%. This works in the FGC because players show up to an event to compete in 2, 3, or even as many as 5 different games. Smash was viewed with disdain by the FGC and was not held at their tournaments. Therefore, Smash events were exclusive to Smash games, and so organizers needed another tournament type that made traveling worth it for players. Who would travel for hours only to be guaranteed two singles matches, after all?

Doubles was born to draw attendees and create a better Smash tournament. For tournament operations, Doubles hit on all cylinders for Super Smash Brothers Melee.

1. Doubles could be run early, before singles, giving players time to get the venue for the 'main' event if they were delayed or traveling a long distance
2. Doubles was another tournament - it meant players could come and be guaranteed at least 4 matches instead of two
3. Doubles was half the size of singles, so it could run in about half the time - usually completing around 1PM, in time to start singles, and when not completed, enough players would be eliminated to start singles anyways
4. Doubles let 4 players compete on a single setup - maximizing both setup efficiency and attendee play time
5. Doubles let players play with their friends - encouraging players to bring a friend or to get to know another player at the tournament - there is no better ice breaker than "I need a teammate!"

The necessity of Smash Doubles is, or was, rooted in how tournaments operate and grow. Following Fabiszak's piece, many have focused on the spectators sitting at home, streaming needs, and the new interests in the Smash community. As the thesis goes, if something isn't very watchable, or easy to understand, then clearly it must be hurting the growth of the community and should be canned, right?

Wrong.

To understand why there is nothing wrong with Smash Doubles you have to understand what makes Smash different from eSport tournaments. League of Legends, Starcraft 2, Dota 2, and other games can operate tournaments, or league matches, strictly online. The rare tournaments that occur in person are often held or funded (subsidized) by the developer, publisher, or a major eSports organization like Major League Gaming. eSport tournaments will succeed absent success on the ground and in many situations the operation of the event itself is at a operational loss.

"Without the TO though, there is no tournament, there are no entrants, there is no prize pool, and there are no people sitting at home watching a stream."​

Smash TOs need enough people to show up to cover the venue​

Live Smash tournaments are decidedly different. Smash tournaments all occur without any infusion from an outside source - they exist because TOs convince enough players to travel to their event and play in person. To enter and pay a venue fee that covers that cost of the venue. This last concept - covering the venue - is the backbone of Smash tournaments and is an afterthought for everyone but the tournament organizer. Without the TO though, there is no tournament, there are no entrants, there is no prize pool, and there are no people sitting at home watching a stream.

Covering the venue is what causes TOs to work toward running a great event, and a great event is what grows the community. It is why years ago they made sure players had multiple Smash tournaments to play in. It is why Doubles came to exist. Doubles improved the experience of the tournament for most players and gave an extra reason to spend an entire day going to a Smash event. If TOs stop holding Doubles, it will be for a different reason than arguments about the 'spectator friendliness' for those people sitting at home watching a livestream.

"There will be over 1,000 live Smash tournaments in 2014"​

Why Doubles (Maybe) Won't be Around
Despite the historical need for Doubles, the format is on the way out at some events - or at least it should be. 8 years ago, aside from Singles, Doubles was the main alternative format. Brawl didn't exist, Smash 64 wasn't being played, and the FGC held Smash in the lowest of regards. In 2014, TOs are now running Project M, Brawl, and Smash 64, and by 2015, will likely have two additional games to consider in Smash Wii U & 3DS. Simply put - there isn't room in the schedule at a tournament that is already holding 3 or 4 Singles tournaments, to also hold Doubles. These different Smash Singles games accomplish and fill the gap that at one point was best filled by Doubles.

In addition to new Smash games, how Smash tournaments operate has also changed. Singles stopped being run in the FGC double-elimination only format around 2005 and transitioned to a pools > seeded double elimination bracket format. Running this Singles format, plus Doubles, for just Melee, wasn't difficult. Add just one other game at a day long tournament though and the entire schedule becomes burdened. Some would say to move back to a double elimination only format. As it stands though, there will be over 1,000 live Smash tournaments in 2014 and Smash is, arguably, the most played video game in person. This is a huge amount of success and it is partly due to a welcoming tournament structure through thousands of Smash events with trial and error.

What Does it all Mean?
Organizers should probably run Doubles in the following circumstances

• Day long, single Smash game event
• Two day long, 2-3 Smash game event

Organizers should maybe not run Doubles in the following circumstances

• Day long, multi-Smash game event
• Two day long, 3-5 Smash game event
• Day long, single Smash game event if an alternative like Low Tier or Items Smash is offered in Doubles place that would add more to the tournament for potential attendees

The "watchability" or the "spectator friendly" aspect of Doubles only matters as a residual effect. About half of the Singles entrants will enter Doubles, if Low Tier, or Items, or another Smash game (Project M) would grab more entrants, then Doubles should be replaced, but not simply if viewers at home aren't fans. Remember, without people showing up and paying to play there is no tournament and there is no stream. Not fun to watch does not mean not fun to play - and the latter is what gets players to show up to a tournament and what keeps TOs paying their venues and holding events.

Also, this happened in Doubles​

 

[Niko45]

Couldn't care less about the history of doubles. So glad Wife addressed the elephant in the room which is that doubles needs to go for smash to expand further. It takes too much time, serves too little of the community, and isn't interesting to watch.

 

[Dax]

"Some would say to move back to a double elimination only format."
That's probably the worst thing here.
I don't live in the USA but we would never, ever, take out pools here. Pools mean you pay to play at least 4,5 matches at minimum before getting eliminated.
If we did Double Elimination only, attendances would drop every time here, as the new players would just refuse to pay for that
Sure, there is freeplay, but it's not the same.

I reckon that Smash 3DS\WiiU will put a big problem. I guess TOs will be forced to make some choices.... the good thing is that they will hopefully also bring new players, and possibly more setups =p

 

[Renji64]

Well that sucks but i can understand why it isn't that fun to watch but fun to play.

 

[Generalardj]

Awesome read!

 

[AlphaZealot]

Would not recommend dropping the pools > double elimination format - thought the benefit of that format was clear after stating how successful it is.

 

[AbbiDood]

I personally really enjoy Brawl doubles, especially with double MK gone. Melee doubles can be really hectic at times, but are still fun to watch most of the time.

 

[sneakytako]

I agree with most of the article, especially about the time constrictions it covers at the end.

 

[Radical Larry]

Doubles has always been a nice thing to have, save for when it's always top tier doubles, for that is when they become stale and nothing really hypes it up. When we see a diverse doubles match, that is when it is better.

And yeah, I always loved Wombo Combo; that's one of the few things that makes me want to see doubles stay; there's always the possibility it could happen again.

 

[Fizzi]

There seems to be two differing schools of thought emerging within the community. There are those that are beginning to lean towards the "for the viewers" philosophy and those that are "for the players".

Historically, I think "for the players" has been the predominant attitude. The tournaments have been run by us, for us, and thus targeted towards player enjoyment. Spectators were in numbers that were relatively insignificant and so there was hardly a need to cater to them. However, in recent years our spectator count has increased.

Those that are starting to push the "for the viewers" philosophy are the dreamers. They are those that want smash to become the biggest e-sport to ever exist. They want the notoriety of a professional athlete for the top players. They think the game is so deep and so beautiful that it has the potential to compete with sports the like of tennis, or perhaps less ambitiously, chess. There is only one thing that can drive the kind of prestige desired by the dreamers - viewership.

You have written off Wife's reasons because you think primarily from a "for the players" attitude. As a dreamer, I say that your points are good but your ambition is low.

 

[HRR2b23]

I am pretty firm on the belief that doubles needs to continue to stay at smash tournaments. I don't know about other people, but for me the most fun matches that I have played at tourneys have been the doubles friendlies. Now I know friendlies are completely different from tournament matches, but the point stands that doubles is a completely different and uniquely fun playstyle. Going along with that, the doubles metagame still has a lot of time to develop, as not as much work has been put into this format. With a more developed metagame comes a greater understanding of the format, and this will lead to more people watching and appreciating the style of play. Doubles needs to stay.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

I did not know it was even an issue these days for people. Seems like an issue popping out of no where. There probably just needs to be more separate events. I do not mean events at a single tournament. I mean literally having more tournaments dedicated to only a specific game. If anything, I think its a dreadful idea to run so many events at a single tournament.

From my perspective, I only want to enter one game type at a tournament rather than trying to do both brawl and melee at the same one.

 

[AlphaZealot]

@ Fizzi The biggest eSports are all subsidized by the developer/publisher at some point in the spectrum. It is easy to be "for the viewer" when a massive company and their funds are backing an endeavor.

Smash doesn't have that benefit. You go under once as a TO and it is usually the end. And Smash needs the local TOs since that is the primary outlet for competitive play on a consistent basis.

Should also note, at current, Smash TOs don't see a dime of the money from stream revenue, and in many cases, actually pay for someone to come stream the event. The long-term play being that enough people see the event that, maybe, more people will show up and pay that venue fee in the future. But it's a long term play.

 

[sneakytako]

So I've been thinking about the time constriction issue for awhile. The last grassroots KY tournament I went to finished GF at 2AM, it ran 5 events from Brawl, melee, and PM (no PM doubles)

Obviously running multiple smash games is a huge hurdle. With the rise of PM, the melee and brawl scenes are growing closer with all three games making it into the same tournaments.

My question for you AZ is do you think Brawl and Melee should divorce their tournaments and return to what it used to be? None of the major melee tournaments host brawl, should local brawl scenes segregate themselves from melee to run PM and doubles?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I've never been a big fan of doubles personally.

It's fun, but the lack of a consistent teammate is where he issue usually is.

 

[ITALIAN N1NJA]

I never realized having Doubles caused that big of an issue. They could always be a side event. Not a main event. I always thought that playing doubles made you a much better player due to how precise and patient you needed to be because you have 3 to account for versus having only 1 other player to account for. Increasing precision and patience makes you a much better player in singles overall.

 

[Xyzz]

"Not fun to watch does not mean not fun to play"
I totally agree with this statement. I don't enjoy watching doubles that much (it's fine, but nowhere near as fun as singles), but I do enjoy playing them just as much as singles, if not more.

 

[M@v]

Love this post AZ, but I also like to add that doubles is one of the most unique things about smash. No other FGC game has 2 players vs 2 players at once. The closest comparison is MvC style tag teams, which is still one player tag teaming between multiple characters.

 

[JakieWinks]

I perform a lot better in doubles and tend to come back and try harder when I'm losing in doubles, rather than singles. It's all about the mentality that if I lose/stop trying, it's at the loss of someone else, not only myself. I don't want to lose because I don't want to make my partner lose. I win for them.

 

[NeffJeff95]

But.. I like doubles >.<

 

[infomon]

I love doubles, and don't want to lose it. But this is an excellent article; we have to acknowledge the time constraints that TOs are faced with, and decide which events are going to make the cut. Each tournament may have different events.

Doubles is super fun to watch on stream; though it would help a lot of Smash4 has better colour discrimination between teams!! (Sonic and Lucario are the green team?? aaaaaaaaaa)

 

[CyberZixx]

Real talk, PM being canned and melee doubles staying at FP4 is some sillyness.

 

[PhantasyStar]

Project M doubles go hard as hell though.

 

[Problem2]

I am terribly AGAINST having Doubles REMOVED. So much, that I really don't like that this is being seriously considered. The Texas DFW community maybe in the minority, but we have been known to enjoy doubles greatly. I think it benefits when players have a static partner. One day, I would like to see a team circuit where you have a static partner the whole way.

Doubles can be a spectacle to watch, but it often requires having static partners in order to see concrete strategies in action. Otherwise, it is often a chaotic mess of 4 players implementing their "singles" strategies.

 

[Mew2King]

I disagree HEAVILY. Melee teams is one of the best things about smash, and it is FAR less campy than singles are. Armada agrees with me too.

 

[Tech-Nelium the Shark]

Doubles needs to stay. It is one thing that we have over other fighters and should not be abandoned. As for time constraints, I'm sorry fellow smashers if you want this game to grow and become professional tourneys may have to start before 12 and everyone show up on time. This running on smasher's time (aka running an hour late) is what needs to go and tourneys need to start at earlier time.

 

[extremechiton]

i love watching doubles. its amazing to see team synergy like false and nakat's double warrios just wreck the field.

 

[Osennecho]

I have friends who can't even follow what is going on in melee doubles on smaller stages. I can without a problem, but plenty can't. If smash is to be absorbed into ESports, this could be a problem. The issue is the entirely polarized towards the highest levels of play at this point due to how far the meta has evolved. Don't get me wrong, I love doubles, but I entirely understand the perspective of losing melee doubles and don't entirely disagree with it, especially as tournaments grow larger and smash 4 coming into the scene and PM being huge. There's a limit to how many events there can be. I'd still rather keep melee doubles, but being realistic... I see the problem.

 

[Linguini]

This is ridiculous, almost to the point were it's blasphemous. Shame on you wife....

 

[Diana's Safe Landing]

Doubles is great and exponentially increases the depth of the game. Teamwork is a coveted skill in every aspect of life, why rip it out of smash?

 

[4% APR]

If doubles is gone I would go to significantly less tournaments.

 

[TheLegendOfVenusaur]

I honestly prefer to watch doubles. (Especially when things like that video happen) maybe I'm a little off but that's my preference.

 

[Leviathan]

personally, smash doubles is what built the game. Growing up and playing smash brothers, i always found myself calling up my friends (before we even had cell phones), and asking them to come over for a game day, where we beat the **** out of each other for 8 hours playing SSB64. This carried over into all games in the series, and i still to this day call my friends over to play. We have to remember folks, its a FUN game too. This can easily suffice for a justifiable answer to doubles, but lets delve deeper.

Smash brothers is a game that has been around for about 20 years, and the competition has obviously changed. In recent years, Melee players have developed new play styles, techniques, and strategies. This has come mostly from singles matches, but that doesn't mean that doubles matches dont have their own play styles, techniques, and strategies, players just haven't discovered them yet. There are more variables! The "wombo combo" is a perfect example, being a 0-death combo, of what destruction can unfold in these matches, and truly causes an uproar in the crowd. Doubles takes more minds to develop into a healthy game, and it seems that Wife is not putting as much trust and faith into his fellow smashers.

As for the part regarding commentary, lets all face it - Smash bros has POOR commentary, but that's what we love about it! It brings so much more character to the game. In other games (I am a huge fan of League of Legends), commentary is just a play by play, and not a "partially biased LETS GO USA" personality on the mic ranting awesome stuff about the players on the screen and what prank they pulled on them the night before. This makes Smash commentary UNIQUE. I enjoy hearing Scar talk **** on the microphone because i know he is funny. I ENJOY hearing D1 and Prog say silly **** on the commentary, where they still give good play by play. The part where Wife speaks about the camera and difficulty to follow the match is not very accurate> im sure most pros would not complain about this.

Sure the games get messy and the camera is panning and zooming all over the place, but it is a different dynamic that singles cannot offer. It takes more awareness to win in a doubles match, and more strategy indeed. The fact that you have to dish out damage, get your teammates back, and NOT HIT THEM (this is huge because unlike all competitive games, all attacks on your teammate grant 100% damage and 100% knockback) makes it very unique. This creates a very large amount of pressure and a very fair game, with actual downsides to wrong inputs/bad spacing/etc.

 

[Fizzi]

@ AlphaZealot I understand your point. You're taking a very current day practical approach in the way you view things.

That said, if viewership grows, if more real teams pick up players, if events start getting so many viewers that major companies are ready to put in real money to advertise there then things can begin to change.

We're bringing up viewership as being extremely important because it's the enabler. I believe viewership has more potential to bring money to an event and TO than attracting a large amount of players as you have suggested. Viewership attracts companies while more players attracts a larger cost to run the event.

It is more profitable to run a 32-man event (with only top players) that gets 1 million viewers than to run a 1024-man event that gets less. I really think we should start looking at the tennis infrastructure for inspiration.

Just because other e-sports that have been successful had backing companies doesn't mean it's impossible for one that isn't so well backed. Was hockey created by a company? No, a company was built around an interesting sport. How do you think the NHL is doing? This is the level we should be talking about.

 

[yamatosenpai]

This was a very good read in my opinion.

 

[M@v]

Also from experience, you can run 4 events in one day max. If its a really big 1 day event, you either have to cut that down to 2 or 3 events with the 3rd being limited, or you run bracket pools.

 

[the wizard howl]

I will never put the satisfaction of stream viewers above that of the people that actually show up to play at any tournament I have any part in organizing.

Doubles is here to stay. Problems with Doubles are almost always symptoms of bad organization or straight ignorance.

 

[Daftatt]

WHAT IF... YOU DON'T STREAM DOUBLES, BUT STILL PLAY IT?

I always find it thrilling to watch doubles. And with the incredible character variety in P:M I find it a lot more interesting there. As for melee, wife makes a good point in that people don't practice so it looks bad. If people were actually good at doubles and it had a metagame then maybe it would be cool to watch, less chaotic. More players deciding which opponent to take, then ganging up on one opponent when the time arises.

 

[Cancel]

All i can say is lets see how it will run if doubles were to be removed.

 

[EZVega]

HAPPY FEET! WOMBO COMBO! THAT AIN'T FALCO!

Doubles should still be a part of Smash tourneys. This isn't like Street Fighter or Tekken where you have nothing but singles. I believe doubles keeps the community going because they sometimes end up creating new teams that don't mind partnering up with each other and making friends. I've known people to just tag with random people they aren't even familiar with and it turned out amazing. Though I will say, if anyone's using doubles to warm up, they will end up building a dependency on someone to help them. (At least I can say that for me and my crew)