EVO 2015: Melee or Smash 4?

[Sparklepower]

Speaking of crouch cancelling it's probably the worst Melee mechanic by far. Probably the only really bad one. Just from a competitive perspective it makes no sense for moves to be punished on HIT. You get punished for landing a hit, just think about that for a second. It severely limits viable options at low percents. Which is ironic considering Melee players love to boast about the options the game provides.

You know, there's this really interesting mechanic in another very popular fighting game known as a Focus Attack...

 

[Diabolical]

What you're saying here is pretty dumb and doesn't help your argument at all. This is coming from someone who loves 64 and Melee and dislikes the two newest games, by the way.

The only problem with Smash 4's "auto-cancel" is that the landing lag on certain moves hasn't been balanced properly, which prevents us from doing the stuff we enjoyed in Melee. For example, Marth can barely combo because someone on the dev team though that adding a bunch of extra lag on his Fair was a good idea.

Yeah, that's why Melee L-canceling gives more options for combos and therefor better

 

[TheFoolishPhilosopher]

Melee makes more sense. Players will be better (and were recruited to specific esports team for this very game, so they have incentive to perform) and the fanbase has already shown itself to be dedicated. Melee needs to be there to establish the game as a tradition; Smash 4 will have its time to shine, but it shouldn't be at the cost of a game that is already trying so hard to make a resurgence. EVO is supposed to be the showcasing of the pinnacle of strategy; Smash 4 doesn't have a developed metagame quite yet. Players will still play Smash 4, Smash 4 will still develop, I just think that EVO should showcase the most effort put in, and Melee is the game to do it on.

 

[SmashChu]

It should be Smash 4 and this shouldn't even up for debate. It's the newest game. It's the one the majority of people are going to be familiar with. Having Melee would only please the in-crowd and not spectators or Smash fans as a whole. It also gives us a chance to see if there is any new blood. No one new is going to take the best players down so we already know what top 8 will look like without running the tournament. It's time to move one.

 

[The Soap]

How does a game being new justify it being at Evo?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

How does a game being new justify it being at Evo?

It's new, literally that.

Though I think that precedent has more to do with the companies behind the games than Evo. Though evo might have that precedent to support the newest game as well.

 

[DerfMidWest]

It would be very stupid to choose smash 4 over melee for evo, I hope mr. wizzard comes to understand the following before making a decision:

Smash 4 is new and doesn't have an established competitive scene. Melee has been out for 2001 and outlived its competitors due to the amount of depth and freedom given to the player.
Smash 4 may be fun and enjoyable to many players (myself included) but at this point in time it does not have that depth or freedom. There isn't even a real established skill gap yet.

The new smash game will have a following for at least a few years. But melee is an anomaly. It's a game that has so much more depth and creativity involved in play that the majority of the competitive scene now plays it, or project M (which basically tries to replicate it).
Smash 4 is basically only going to be successful for being new. Once the game is tapped, which it will be, the scene will die out, similarly to brawl.
But smash 4 has very little to offer in terms of growth and development so far.
Melee does. For as long as it's been around, it's still developing.

Oh and melee is just super fast and smooth, has vast freedom in combos and movement, and just options in general, which make it amazing to both play and watch.

I literally see no reason to include smash 4 other than the fact that it's new. It offers nothing.

 

[NeoAkira]

Melee is in its "Platinum Age" and Smash 4 is only in its infancy. It only makes sense to keep including Melee since it's a huge crowd pleaser and decidedly already seen as a more competitive game than it's successors.

 

[MTL Kyle]

And what if lag got cut in half without the button input, aka all aerials had landing lag like they cancelled.

In Melee context, in low or middle level, characters that are considered technical would rise.
Nothing changes at high level.

Not sure how much it would affect other games.

It's new, literally that.

Though I think that precedent has more to do with the companies behind the games than Evo. Though evo might have that precedent to support the newest game as well.

EVO is supposed to be the superbowl of fighting games, not a PRfest of fighting games producers.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

In Melee context, in low or middle level, characters that are considered technical would rise.
Nothing changes at high level.

Not sure how much it would affect other games.



EVO is supposed to be the superbowl of fighting games, not a PRfest of fighting games producers.

Tends to happen when a series based on video games happens.

 

[vileguy]

Can people stop saying that Melee is more competitive than Smash 4? If players are able to win based on skill and not a dice roll, then the game is competitive. If the game rewards you fairly for your skill and is not biased, then it's perfectly competitive. Both games are perfectly competitive, so none is more competitive than the other. Advanced techs that were removed from Melee are problematic because they reward the player on an exponential curve, which makes it difficult for new players to see improvement and thus discourages them. Low-tier and mid-tier players will see consistent results based on difference of skill, but the godlike players will more often get crushing victories. Elements like L-canceling and wave-shining allow for top-tier execution to provide dominating 1-sided matches.

Plenty of people enjoy melee despite this, and they should, as it's a very challenging game and that makes it even more rewarding to be good at, but Smash isn't less competitive when the curve is changed from exponential to linear. Making the game more friendly towards casual gamers doesn't undermine the competitive play; it's still perfectly competitive with random elements in items and stage hazards removed.

There are valid arguments for Melee being chosen over Smash 4 (and the opposite), but Smash 4 being less competitive is not one. Which game would potentially bring a larger number of entrants is entirely speculative other than analyzing polls.

Lastly, any requirement for a game to be at Evo can be satisfied by Smash 4. In a world where Melee did not exist, there would be no question that Smash 4 is a good enough game to play at Evo. The event exists for competitive gamers to play the games they enjoy on a national level, and there are plenty of people interested in that level of competition for Smash 4, including some Melee and Brawl/PM notable.

Being a new game is a good reason to be featured at Evo, as long as that comes with a large number of interested participants, which in the case for Smash 4 it does. Participation is one of the primary factors for Evo consideration, but it's not likely the only one. Everyone who would prefer to see Melee there are right to voice their opinion, but to say that Smash 4 isn't good enough for the stage or hasn't earned the spot is a mistake.

 

[MTL Kyle]

Tends to happen when a series based on video games happens.

There are other models to profit off viewership, I really dislike MLG's model.

Though I feel

In a world where Melee did not exist

I wouldn't like living in this world. /fanboy

 

[MookieRah]

This goes out to those that are pro-melee. Don't post with any anger, please, it's annoying for everyone to read, especially other pro-melee people. While there is just as much dumb and anger from the opposing side, the average person would regard it as being pro-Sm4sh is somehow a morale high ground (it isn't, but the precedent is new = better, and melee is in the way). It's best to try and post to things logically and take things with stride.

With that said, all of this hatred over l-canceling in the past page is very silly. Nobody hated on l-canceling much until Brawl, and then it became a huge debate over whether or not there is a point to it. Prior to Brawl, there weren't threads talking about how difficult melee was to play or pick up, because it was considerably easier than any other fighting game. It was only after Brawl that there was this sudden dislike of the notion of technical difficulty within smash at all.

An important distinction to be made here is that this view seemed to stem not from Pro-Brawlers, but from casual players that haven't posted or contributed to this community post Brawl's release.*

At the end of the day, l-canceling is actually one of the easiest things to learn in melee, and even if you dislike that it's a bit of a barrier, it's rather ridiculous to judge the entire game so harshly based off of one, small mechanic you don't like.

I know that the retort to this will be the criticisms of Sm4sh's mechanics, but these criticisms are towards core mechanics of the game. To compare the criticisms towards Sm4sh to disliking l-canceling would be to make a false-equivalence logical fallacy. Even without melee's AT's and added technical skill barriers, it would still be a faster paced game that rewarded offense, as a lot of amazing tech stuff is inherent within the core mechanics. The DI system within melee alone is one of the most subtly amazing systems and lends itself to so much depth that it's just silly.

* Personally I'm beginning to think that much of the hate towards melee is more from random casuals that post on the boards for a few months and then are never heard from again, but these people exist in a large number outside of the smash boards. I think a lot of the schism is coming from people who actually have very little information about what is going on, and quickly throw the blame on the melee community because it's easy to assume we are elitists or stubborn just because we prefer an older game. It just so happens that a lot of brawl people early on came from this group, and came into the community with misconceptions about melee players, and melee players misconceptions towards brawl players.

TL:DR - I think a lot of the hatred actually is coming from outside of the community, and it is causing a lot of trouble here.

 

[Maki]

Lastly, any requirement for a game to be at Evo can be satisfied by Smash 4. In a world where Melee did not exist, there would be no question that Smash 4 is a good enough game to play at Evo. The event exists for competitive gamers to play the games they enjoy on a national level, and there are plenty of people interested in that level of competition for Smash 4, including some Melee and Brawl/PM notable.

If Melee didn't exist Smash would be seen as a joke fighter like Dragon Ball games.

Pros prefer Melee over Sm4sh because they are frightened. They don't want to evolve. They are lazy to learn new techniques, new situations.

What new techniques and situations?
Most people that played 64 and Melee are already nearly skill capped in SSB4 because every hard aspect of them is gone.
The hardest thing now is killing someone in a defensive stance because hitstun, blockstun, combos, gimps and edge hogging are opressive and "discourage new players from playing Smash".

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

There are other models to profit off viewership, I really dislike MLG's model.

Though I feel

I'm with ya there on this. It's something I wish didn't force people out on over just pushing new games in regardless of the time differences. I'd rather Smash 4 figure itself out before even considering putting in main stage at Evo.

@ MookieRah I get what you are saying but in the end I can't support re-adding a tech like that if it's not going to actually have a real purpose in the game for adding real depth. I don't like frame 1 links in fighting games, even more so when online play is becoming more mainstream. L-Cancelling is far easier than doing that but I do not think it's needed nor does it add much to the game as is. I'd rather they just set frame data to that level so I don't need to see people get frustrated and quit because they can't L-cancel consistently in an up to 24 minute set.

I'm not trying to dumb down Melee, I'm want something gone that really isn't adding depth to the game and is making the skill floor higher as a result. I don''t even play Brawl anymore at this point over Melee and sometimes PM. But I can't see this being a pro as a designer and see it as a flaw in Melee for people trying to get into it.

 

[TreK]

I'd rather not see any Smash game at EVO 2015 than having to choose between Melee and Smash Wii U.
Melee trying to force itself onto SSB4 will hinder both Melee's and SSB4's growth because newcomers will still think of us as a bunch of elitist nerds.
SSB4 trying to force itself onto Melee will hinder both Melee's and SSB4's growth because the Melee crowd is extremely impulsive and will boycot and badmouth the game.
This is not a matter of "who do I think would be the best bet". Both choices presented here are bad bets.

It's not like I believe in that one unit bullcrap anymore. It's just that, I don't think infighting is going to help any one of our communities grow stronger. I'm only interested in my own community's growth (PM/eventually Brawl), and experience has proven me that my own community's growth is extremely dependant on the other Smash communities not messing up.

What new techniques and situations?
Most people that played 64 and Melee are already nearly skill capped in SSB4 because every hard aspect of them is gone.
The hardest thing now is killing someone in a defensive stance because hitstun, blockstun, combos, gimps and edge hogging are opressive and "discourage new players from playing Smash".

I don't like people who spread misinformation. So if anyone read this post and agreed... Go read this.
http://smashboards.com/threads/perfect-pivot-foxtrotting-dashdancing.371139
Not having discovered any of the game's depth does not mean you have reached the game's depth. Techniques like this are discovered by the daily.
Saying that we have only scratched the surface would be an understatement.

 

[MookieRah]

I get what you are saying but in the end I can't support re-adding a tech like that if it's not going to actually have a real purpose in the game for adding real depth. I don't like frame 1 links in fighting games, even more so when online play is becoming more mainstream. L-Cancelling is far easier than doing that but I do not think it's needed nor does it add much to the game as is. I'd rather they just set frame data to that level so I don't need to see people get frustrated and quit because they can't L-cancel consistently in an up to 24 minute set.

I'm not trying to dumb down Melee, I'm want something gone that really isn't adding depth to the game and is making the skill floor higher as a result. I don''t even play Brawl anymore at this point over Melee and sometimes PM. But I can't see this being a pro as a designer and see it as a flaw in Melee for people trying to get into it.

I don't think the melee community, on the whole, really cares about the inclusion or exclusion of l-canceling if you were still capable of doing things in a more melee fashion. Yeah, people probably do say it's a big deal for them, but honestly that sentiment would disappear rather quickly. I personally like l-canceling, and the reason for that is very hard to explain, and many people wouldn't share my feelings. I feel that the added tech there gives players a reason to practice. That sounds ridiculous, but part of why I didn't stick with Brawl is because it felt like there was nothing tech-wise worth practicing. I know that isn't the case with Brawl today, as Brawl tech exists.

What it boils down to is that if something isn't difficult to perform, people typically don't have hype over it. That's why crazy CF combos are impressive, because everyone that plays melee knows that they are hard to pull off and require a lot of precision. I think a lot of people felt that there wasn't much of that in Brawl, and it's looking that way for Sm4sh as well.

I don't like people who spread misinformation. So if anyone read this post and agreed... Go read this.
http://smashboards.com/threads/perfect-pivot-foxtrotting-dashdancing.371139
Not having discovered any of the game's depth does not mean you have reached the game's depth. Techniques like this are discovered by the daily.
Saying that we have only scratched the surface would be an understatement.

That movement does look really cool, and perhaps other ATs can be found to speed up the game and etc, but the problem is still that the core mechanics of the game are not set up for it to be offensive, and will still result in a very defensive oriented match. This discovery would only make the neutral game a bit more exciting, but honestly I don't suspect that this tech would be hard to do on a gamecube controller (I mean, it's easier inputs than wavedashing) so it wouldn't take long for any smash veteran to master this, thusly the game is capped. Unless some crazy ATs are discovered, there isn't much of anything to learn outside of existing smash fundamentals such as spacing/zoning/etc.

 

[ZMan]

How does a game being new justify it being at Evo?

politics. evo can be thought of as a giant advertisement for the latest games, its in the better interest for developers to have their new game at evo rather than an old one. ggac is my all time favorite fighter, but bbcp was newer so that got in the lineup last year. the truth of the matter is that nintendo is way more interested in selling wii us than gamecubes at this point so winning over new players with a strong showing at a tournament is a good way to do so.

there seems to be some misunderstandings about evo, but here are some facts to keep in mind while debating:

* some people said that smash 4 won't develop enough from now until july (so like, 9 months?). mk9, injustice, and sfxt all got into the evo roster in years before despite only being out 4-5 months before the event.
* some people also say that a melee side tournament will have more entrants than main events. in 2009, the bbct side tournament had more entrants than sc4 and (i think) ggac (don't have numbers). bb wouldn't join the evo roster until 2011. to be fair, bbct came out like a week or two before evo. the whole tournament would have been a ****show

the likely lineup for next year would be something like:

* usf4
* umvc3 (no debate about these 2)
* smash 4 (nintendo politics)
* arcsys game (more than likely xrd over p4a2/bbcp/uneil, i honestly think that 2 arcsys games are more likely to happen than 2 smash games)
* ttt2 (namco money + free advertisements for tekken 7)
* netherrealms game (injustice or mk10 if its out)
* killer instinct (xbox sponsorship and season 2 on the horizon)

that's my opinion on the matter. been awhile since i posted on here lol

 

[Yomi-no-Kuni]

Reading through alot of this thread, here is my take on it:

Why Smash4?
Smash4 is a new game. That means it generates hype and it will generate hype. Smash4 Streams are way more popular on Twitch currently (mostly becuase it wasnt out and people tried to get a peak), but also because many many many players who are neither into smash or any other fighting game will pick up the new game, play it for a while, try their hands at a tournament, and then might (maybe they will all stick around, very unlikely though) disappear.
--> Smash4 at EVO will draw a huge crowd, quite possibly bigger than Melee, with many players unfamiliar with the FGC. A chance for growth.
Apparently Smash4 is being pushed by Nintendo.
--> That means less struggle for EVO-Organizers, more prizes, more publicity.

Why not Smash4?
The Super Smash Bros. Series is not game designed for competitive play. To play it competitively, the community needs to create a way in which it can be played competitively. If that ruleset is not fully fleshed out, competition will not be as functional as it should be and would be for games designed for the tournament ground.
--> Smash in general needs an established ruleset to run in a competitive environment. Having a unsatisfactory Showcase at EVO may hurt Smash4 in the future.
Smash4 seems to be developing into a more defensive direction. Eventhough it is too early to make exact predictions about how the Gameplay will develop, a general direction can be guessed. Defensive Games are not as appealing to viewers as offensive games are. Campy Fighting Games often get crapped on, defensive Starcraft Players are often less likable, and so on and so forth.
--> Viewability is being questions by some. Maybe just Melee fanatics, maybe not.

Why Melee?
Melee's scene is still more active than ever. It seems to draw in enough people to warrant it being on the main Stage.
--> Predictable number of Turnouts
While some Players may be bored by Melee, new techniques are being implemented into tournament play regularily. Shielddropping comes to mind. Matchups are still changing and new players still manage to showcase and master characters previously left unnoticed (Armada, Axe, Amsa come to mind)
--> Gameplay is not yet stale, developements can be seen

Why not Melee?
CRT-Troubles

"oldness" of the game. Barely any Profit can be had for companies involved. Viewership on old games are usualy dwindeling. There isn't alot of ways to get new Players. Melee had a Boost through Brawl-Newcomers and recent developments, but over time, it will fall of again, if the communiy doesn't grow in some form (new Smash Games, new Smash media, new Smash tournaments)

Supporting Melee might actually support a seperation between the Melee and Smash4 communities.



Conclusion
From a Business point of view, picking up Smash4 is the profitable thing to do for 2015 and will offer much more exposure than a repeat run of Melee would. No predictions about Longterm Profitability can be made yet, but Online Support makes a strong case towards longveity, at least for a couple of years.
From a competitors point of view, I am concerned about wether or not Smash4 will be ready to be presented, in a competitive setting, to the rest of the FGC and to passive bystanders. As previously mentioned, Smash is different, and needs a Set of Rules to make a viable competitive game.
I would love to see Melee make a return, since Melee has proven to be around no matter what. I would also love to see Smash4 get the respect it deserves and I hope cooperation with Nintendo will do the competitive Smash scene well.
In that sense, I would love to have both games at EVO, since they are indeed very different from the way they look and play out. The only realy similarity is the unique style of the Kill and Damage (and Combo) system, which will always stay true to smash (but has been used by others (PS:A) aswell) So why not expand on that category of fighting game? In the future it might not only be Smash anymore that works with a damage meter that goes upwards and a flexible combo game.
If that is impossible, i have more concerns about Smash4 making a succesful event than i do with Melee, which means i would not mind picking up Smash4 in 2016 instead of 2015.


Please help me find more arguments for and against the inclusion of either game, i will try to add to this post and hopefully flesh out the conclusion.

 

[Tiradash]

Smash Bros 4 should be at Evo. Putting Melee in Evo instead would really alienate new players and will make them feel like learning Smash 4 doesn´t help them fight in a competitive environment. Melee isn´t fit for another Evo since it´s pretty hard to get a copy Melee of Melee to play it. Also, I think players will have figured out enough of the game by the time the next Evo starts to have much skill and play exciting matches.

 

[standardtoaster]

You can use approved monitors and wii2hdmi instead of having to use CRTs. It's already been proven the approved monitor + wii2hdmi does not lag. I don't think CRTs are a valid reason against melee this time around.

 

[Yomi-no-Kuni]

Thanks for the input, but doesn't that mean they still have to get new setups for melee and can't use what they have or what they are being offered?

I didn't intend to have this as a big counterargument, but i didn't want to leave the "why not melee" field too empty. There are a lot of reasons against Melee imo, but those are strongly tied to the business aspect and to the "why smash4" aspect.

I'm very happy if that is the your objection towards my post!

 

[SmashChu]

How does a game being new justify it being at Evo?

As Red Ryu said, but there are multiple reasons why communities move on.

1)It's New: The game is new and shiny, It's more likely going to be the game people own and know the most about.
2)Spectators will want to see a new game: For multiple reasons. One is the game has better graphics. The other is people have already seen the game before. Along with #1, the new game bring in new mechanics, characters and other features.
3)New Blood: In older games, you would get to a point where there are the best players and they always win. In Starcraft, you had Flash and JDong. They were Startcraft Gods and you couldn't beat them. They had so much time to play and starting now, you'd haven to make up for the years lost. At the same time, they are still practicing. You aren't going to get new blood. A new game means a fresh start. The best players have an advantage over you, but only slightly. They understand the game, but this is new with new characters, features and a different engine. There is more of an even ground. For example, when Starcraft 2 came out, we saw a few new people start winning.

I think the issue is the Smash community can't let go. For every other game, everyone always jumped to the new game. Street Fighter 4 replaces 3S. Dota 2 replaced Dota. Starcraft 2 replaced Starcraft 3. Halo 3 replaced Halo 2. And so on. I don't see a good reason to stick to an old game.

 

[MTL Kyle]

3)New Blood: In older games, you would get to a point where there are the best players and they always win..

"Dudes are good and put a lot of time in trying to be the best. Better try another game to see if I randomly get gifted the #1 title in the world lolzzzzz"

That's a really disgusting argument IMO.

 

[Artonkn]

As Red Ryu said, but there are multiple reasons why communities move on.

1)It's New: The game is new and shiny, It's more likely going to be the game people own and know the most about.
2)Spectators will want to see a new game: For multiple reasons. One is the game has better graphics. The other is people have already seen the game before. Along with #1, the new game bring in new mechanics, characters and other features.
3)New Blood: In older games, you would get to a point where there are the best players and they always win. In Starcraft, you had Flash and JDong. They were Startcraft Gods and you couldn't beat them. They had so much time to play and starting now, you'd haven to make up for the years lost. At the same time, they are still practicing. You aren't going to get new blood. A new game means a fresh start. The best players have an advantage over you, but only slightly. They understand the game, but this is new with new characters, features and a different engine. There is more of an even ground. For example, when Starcraft 2 came out, we saw a few new people start winning.

I think the issue is the Smash community can't let go. For every other game, everyone always jumped to the new game. Street Fighter 4 replaces 3S. Dota 2 replaced Dota. Starcraft 2 replaced Starcraft 3. Halo 3 replaced Halo 2. And so on. I don't see a good reason to stick to an old game.

Consider Counter-Strike. Many top teams played 1.6 competitively. When Source came out people started to try to play it competitive, but it never caught on as much until the CSS comp scene died. People continued to play 1.6. GO came out and it was ****. But it was improved on, people began to realize it was time to move on and now competitive CS is almost exclusively GO.

Obviously Smash is different, it won't be built upon like CS:GO can be (but updates will still happen, but no way will they be as frequent and large). I believe that Smash 4 is looking good, and will eventually be what we want to see. However I don't think just because it's new should be the reason. I think 2015 should be melee, but after that it should be 4 or both

 

[SmashChu]

"Dudes are good and put a lot of time in trying to be the best. Better try another game to see if I randomly get gifted the #1 title in the world lolzzzzz"

That's a really disgusting argument IMO.

Let's be frank. Do you want to see the same Top 8 every tournament. Or do you want to see someone new? Everyone loves an underdog story. You aren't going to have that in Melee.

 

[Joe Hickey]

melee bc i just love it. im not gonna bash smash 4. i'll definitely play it and i already have the 3ds version. however i will always prefer melee

 

[Venks]

I want to see Smash 4 at EVO. Melee isn't going anywhere. It can still be huge within our community and be at MLG and Apex. But EVO is that one time that the outside world actually cares to take a look at what the FGC looks like. Smash 4 will pull in more viewers simply because it is new and has new characters. The more people interested in Smash the better.

 

[MTL Kyle]

Let's be frank. Do you want to see the same Top 8 every tournament. Or do you want to see someone new? Everyone loves an underdog story. You aren't going to have that in Melee.

aMSa ? Axe ? Hax ? Leffen ?
Nintendude ? Fiction ? Shroomed ? PPU ? Colbol ?

There are a lot of people rising up and people questioning the skills of the top 5 nowadays.

In Sm4sh you are going to see a lot of faces repeating from Brawl.

 

[Venks]

I really liked this comment on SRK so I thought I'd share it here:

I don't really understand why this is a discussion.

Almost every time a new game comes out the community gives it a chance, why not the same with smash 4? Whether it's terrible or not, Evo always gives these games a chance to at least show what they're capable of, just look at SFXT for example.

Giving the game time to breath before being in the tournament makes no sense. We don't do that with ANY OTHER GAME because we want it be shown off at the highest level possible as early as possible to see the game be discovered naturally. Ultra SF was out for less than 2 months in the states. AE around the same timeframe. SFXT had 4 months. Injustice had 3 months. Now we're saying half a year isn't enough time for Fighting Game Players to break down a game? I really have NO IDEA why this is an issue.

It doesn't mean anything against melee, I mean practically everyone is asking for both to be there, but if we can't have both, let Smash 4 be there, and if it's not received well just make melee the game next year.

If the community really wants to not let a new game be presented to the public, then we should just write off every smash game forever unless it isn't melee.

What's also really funny is that because those new games had a spotlight shown on them they got patched and improved in all the areas players wanted them to

I don't think Smash 4 is gonna suddenly be this super competitive game if we give it another year. I know there are things we still haven't discovered, but the core mechanics are all there. If no one likes it in 2015 I doubt it'll be enjoyed in 2016 either.
Personally I prefer Brawl over Melee just as I found SFIV easier to enjoy than SFIII. And well Smash 4 just feels like Brawl, but improved in every way. I enjoy watching both games, but the one I want to see at EVO is Smash 4.

 

[SmashChu]

aMSa ? Axe ? Hax ? Leffen ?
Nintendude ? Fiction ? Shroomed ? PPU ? Colbol ?

There are a lot of people rising up and people questioning the skills of the top 5 nowadays.

In Sm4sh you are going to see a lot of faces repeating from Brawl.

I looked at some tournaments for 2015, and the only one of those in top 8 was aMSa, once. Leffen won one torunmanet and didn't rank since. Otherwise, It's Hungrybox, Mango, Mew2KIng and Armada consistently. Hax has been around since 2008. Given, I'm doing a quick look so I'm sure I'm missing some finer detail, but regardless, the names that are coming up are always the same. There is no underdog story. It's going to be Armada, Mew2King, Hungrybox or Mango.

With Smash 4, you are going to see some up and comers. I should probably add #4.

4)More people will play: People aren't interested in going to find a CTR, a Gamecube or Wii, the cube controllers and a copy of Melee in order to learn how to play a 13 year old game. They are already buying Smash 4. And they'll say, "Hey, why don't we play in the local tournament?" And this will get people interested in watching streams for the game and playing themselves. Smash 4 is what people are interested in see. They don't want to see Melee, AGAIN.

 

[Blank Mauser]

There is plenty of action in Melee, the scene is nowhere near stale.

Smash 4 if Nintendo threw down money for it to be at Evo would be appropriate. It isn't anything new for a company to back their game with $$$ and get it at Evo.

However I'd rather see Melee. It's become one of the things to look forward to during the "Summer of Smash." I don't think either community will really die from one or the other being chosen though. Pretty sure all three (Counting PM) will still go strong.

 

[Blank Mauser]

I looked at some tournaments for 2015, and the only one of those in top 8 was aMSa, once. Leffen won one torunmanet and didn't rank since. Otherwise, It's Hungrybox, Mango, Mew2KIng and Armada consistently. Hax has been around since 2008. Given, I'm doing a quick look so I'm sure I'm missing some finer detail, but regardless, the names that are coming up are always the same. There is no underdog story. It's going to be Armada, Mew2King, Hungrybox or Mango.

With Smash 4, you are going to see some up and comers. I should probably add #4.

4)More people will play: People aren't interested in going to find a CTR, a Gamecube or Wii, the cube controllers and a copy of Melee in order to learn how to play a 13 year old game. They are already buying Smash 4. And they'll say, "Hey, why don't we play in the local tournament?" And this will get people interested in watching streams for the game and playing themselves. Smash 4 is what people are interested in see. They don't want to see Melee, AGAIN.

There are plenty of players on the rise. Who is to say that Smash 4 won't just be the same people dominating Brawl?

If people are interested in Smash 4 they should watch...streams of smash 4? Evo is not always the pinnacle of smash play.

People like Melee thats why it was revived. The goal is to cross-breed players into the communities so they can try every game for themselves in my opinion.

 

[Peredonov]

As Red Ryu said, but there are multiple reasons why communities move on.

1)It's New: The game is new and shiny, It's more likely going to be the game people own and know the most about.
2)Spectators will want to see a new game: For multiple reasons. One is the game has better graphics. The other is people have already seen the game before. Along with #1, the new game bring in new mechanics, characters and other features.
3)New Blood: In older games, you would get to a point where there are the best players and they always win. In Starcraft, you had Flash and JDong. They were Startcraft Gods and you couldn't beat them. They had so much time to play and starting now, you'd haven to make up for the years lost. At the same time, they are still practicing. You aren't going to get new blood. A new game means a fresh start. The best players have an advantage over you, but only slightly. They understand the game, but this is new with new characters, features and a different engine. There is more of an even ground. For example, when Starcraft 2 came out, we saw a few new people start winning.

I think the issue is the Smash community can't let go. For every other game, everyone always jumped to the new game. Street Fighter 4 replaces 3S. Dota 2 replaced Dota. Starcraft 2 replaced Starcraft 3. Halo 3 replaced Halo 2. And so on. I don't see a good reason to stick to an old game.

I felt compelled to make an account to address this point. This point is a false analogy. The Smash series is not like other fighting game series. This is the basic misunderstanding that has led the Evo organizers to raise this debate. The fact is that Smash 4 is not Melee's successor game.

The logic that players move on from the old game to the new one does not apply to the case of Smash.That logic does apply to other fighting games featured on Evo because new games are developed specifically as competitive fighting games that build upon or introduce superior competitive fighting features into the new games. Players of the older games may be reluctant to move on for various reasons, but almost in all cases their experience and skills are greatly transferable to the new game, only needing to make very specific adjustments for the new game's new features. This is not the case between Melee and Smash 4. The latter was specifically not developed by Sakurai as a competitive fighting game. For the same reason, most Melee players did not "move on" to Brawl.

Since Smash 4 is a fundamentally different game in relation to Melee, in spite of sharing the name "Smash Bros.", Melee players would not move on to Smash 4, Melee players would switch to Smash 4. This is the key difference that seems to not have been articulated properly in this discussion.

I do not know if MrWizard or other Evo folks are still following this thread, but I hope that this post gets articulated to them. They probably already have an intuitive sense of it. It is important not to become confused by the fact that Melee and 4 share a series name, which is misleading.

The two games need to be treated as separate games, with largely separate tournament entrants. Gimr has made this point, and it is very important. If Smash 4 is to appear at Evo, then, it needs to do so from its own merit, not as an alleged successor to Melee.

 

[MTL Kyle]

I looked at some tournaments for 2015, and the only one of those in top 8 was aMSa, once. Leffen won one torunmanet and didn't rank since. Otherwise, It's Hungrybox, Mango, Mew2KIng and Armada consistently. Hax has been around since 2008. Given, I'm doing a quick look so I'm sure I'm missing some finer detail, but regardless, the names that are coming up are always the same. There is no underdog story. It's going to be Armada, Mew2King, Hungrybox or Mango.

2015 ? R U A WUZURD ?

In all games, you are going to see top players getting top 8 all the time.
64 ? Superboomfan, kikoushi, Jousuke, Isai
Melee ? Armada, Hbox, M2K, Mang0, PP
Brawl ? Nairo, ZeRo, ADHD, M2K, Ally
UMVC3 ? KoF ?

Good games reward good players.

PM is the most volatile Smash game, due patches, no global ruleset yet and a lot of characters that still need to be worked upon to create healthy atmosphere in the game.

It's not going to be different in Sm4sh dude.

4)More people will play: People aren't interested in going to find a CTR, a Gamecube or Wii, the cube controllers and a copy of Melee in order to learn how to play a 13 year old game.

Statistics say otherwise, White GC controllers went from 25$ to 50$ before the new Nintendo GC was announced, because more and more people wanted to play this dead game. Viewership increased exponentially, players quit their jobs and can live of subscriptions and sponsorships. There are sponsors and a bright future ahead.

Don't put words in people's mouth like you put your finger in yours dude, it's not cool.

 

[BlueXenon]

@ MTL Kyle In brawl, you did not see the same players getting top 8 all the time, that's not even close to accurate. In any major brawl tournament (Apex and Sktar for example), it was impossible to predict the top 8.

 

[MTL Kyle]

@ MTL Kyle In brawl, you did not see the same players getting top 8 all the time, that's not even close to accurate. In any major brawl tournament (Apex and Sktar for example), it was impossible to predict the top 8.

While I agree in parts with you, you still had top players that werehuge contenders for top 8, like it happens in every other games
Melee is a more consistent game, so it's easier to predict that the top 4 won't be upset before the top 8.

 

[SmashChu]

I felt compelled to make an account to address this point. This point is a false analogy. The Smash series is not like other fighting game series. This is the basic misunderstanding that has led the Evo organizers to raise this debate. The fact is that Smash 4 is not Melee's successor game.

The logic that players move on from the old game to the new one does not apply to the case of Smash.That logic does apply to other fighting games featured on Evo because new games are developed specifically as competitive fighting games that build upon or introduce superior competitive fighting features into the new games. Players of the older games may be reluctant to move on for various reasons, but almost in all cases their experience and skills are greatly transferable to the new game, only needing to make very specific adjustments for the new game's new features. This is not the case between Melee and Smash 4. The latter was specifically not developed by Sakurai as a competitive fighting game. For the same reason, most Melee players did not "move on" to Brawl.

Since Smash 4 is a fundamentally different game in relation to Melee, in spite of sharing the name "Smash Bros.", Melee players would not move on to Smash 4, Melee players would switch to Smash 4. This is the key difference that seems to not have been articulated properly in this discussion.

I do not know if MrWizard or other Evo folks are still following this thread, but I hope that this post gets articulated to them. They probably already have an intuitive sense of it. It is important not to become confused by the fact that Melee and 4 share a series name, which is misleading.

The two games need to be treated as separate games, with largely separate tournament entrants. Gimr has made this point, and it is very important. If Smash 4 is to appear at Evo, then, it needs to do so from its own merit, not as an alleged successor to Melee.

Your argument makes no sense because what I'm saying applies to all games, not just fighting games. Last I checked, Dota, Halo and Starcraft (all in my original post) are not fighting games.

I'm not sure why Smash gets to be a special snow flake. Just because it's a different fighting game doesn't all of a sudden mean the community doesn't have to support Smash 4. I also don't know why Melee was all of a sudden a different game from Smash 4. Is 3rd Strike, SF 4 and SF 2 all different games now too.

What I'm seeing in this thread is excuses on why the community shouldn't play Smash 4 and just play Melee. The Brawl scapegoat is gone so now we need to find a new excuse. "We need to give it time." "It's a different game even though it's in the same series." "Melee players wont move." (On the last note, if they don't want to move, screw them. No one complained when top Brawl players were left behind for Melee).

It boggles my mind why this is even a debate. Why the community is even questioning getting the newest game into the biggest fighting game tournament around? I feel like these people aren't fans of the series and just want to play Melee for another 6 years. Maybe it's why Peredonov said they should be treated as separate games.

I wanted to add one more point
5)It sends signals to Nintendo: Two things, first, playing Smash 4 encourages Nintendo to keep supporting Smash 4. If people are playing it, then they will be inclined to keep patching it and even adding DLC. Also, it tells Nintendo what kind of game the community wants. Nintendo tries to make Smash 4 appeal more to the diehard player by fixing issues they complained about. The game is faster, less floaty and tripping is gone. Isn't that what people asked for? Supporting Smash 4 tells Nintendo that they should consider the community's interest. Playing Melee tells Nintendo that these people are no hope and it's futile to even consider their opinions.

While I agree in parts with you, you still had top players that werehuge contenders for top 8, like it happens in every other games
Melee is a more consistent game, so it's easier to predict that the top 4 won't be upset before the top 8.

I did the same thing for Brawl. I looked up tournaments for 2013 and 2014. In none of the tournaments did the same person win twice. Top 8 in general was more varied. I think it has more to do with Melee is stagnant.

 

[MTL Kyle]

Your argument makes no sense because what I'm saying applies to all games, not just fighting games. Last I checked, Dota, Halo and Starcraft (all in my original post) are not fighting games.

I'm not sure why Smash gets to be a special snow flake. Just because it's a different fighting game doesn't all of a sudden mean the community doesn't have to support Smash 4. I also don't know why Melee was all of a sudden a different game from Smash 4. Is 3rd Strike, SF 4 and SF 2 all different games now too.

What I'm seeing in this thread is excuses on why the community shouldn't play Smash 4 and just play Melee. The Brawl scapegoat is gone so now we need to find a new excuse. "We need to give it time." "It's a different game even though it's in the same series." "Melee players wont move." (On the last note, if they don't want to move, screw them. No one complained when top Brawl players were left behind for Melee).

It boggles my mind why this is even a debate. Why the community is even questioning getting the newest game into the biggest fighting game tournament around? I feel like these people aren't fans of the series and just want to play Melee for another 6 years. Maybe it's why Peredonov said they should be treated as separate games.

I wanted to add one more point
5)It sends signals to Nintendo: Two things, first, playing Smash 4 encourages Nintendo to keep supporting Smash 4. If people are playing it, then they will be inclined to keep patching it and even adding DLC. Also, it tells Nintendo what kind of game the community wants. Nintendo tries to make Smash 4 appeal more to the diehard player by fixing issues they complained about. The game is faster, less floaty and tripping is gone. Isn't that what people asked for? Supporting Smash 4 tells Nintendo that they should consider the community's interest. Playing Melee tells Nintendo that these people are no hope and it's futile to even consider their opinions.

"Your argument doesn't makes sense cuz I said X lewlsss"
Erm. No.

Yes, Smash 4 and Melee are 2 different games, it doesn't matter if you think they are the same because you are one little snowflake in the middle of a lot of people (including those saying that Brawl, melee and Sm4sh are all different lol) that disagree with you.
USF4 and SF4 are already way different one from the other. Heck, SF2 and SF2T are way different.


In games like DotA or Starcraft, you change faces every year. And then you still have consistent players in the spotlight. Is that a problem ? NO, IT'S NOT A PROBLEM LOL.

Nobody is saying "DONT PLAY SMASH 4, IT IS BAD, THAT AINT MAYLAY", people are discussing "IF ONLY ONE COULD BE AT EVO, SHOULD IT BE SMASH 4 OR MELEE".
You are really dumb and shouldn't be participating in this discussion.


Also, at this point, Melee community doesn't really need Nintendo support anymore.

 

[Peredonov]

Your argument makes no sense because what I'm saying applies to all games, not just fighting games. Last I checked, Dota, Halo and Starcraft (all in my original post) are not fighting games.

I'm not sure why Smash gets to be a special snow flake. Just because it's a different fighting game doesn't all of a sudden mean the community doesn't have to support Smash 4. I also don't know why Melee was all of a sudden a different game from Smash 4. Is 3rd Strike, SF 4 and SF 2 all different games now too.

This topic is about Evo, a fighting game tournament. It is not about MLG or other esports event. Smash 4 is not a successor fighting game to Melee. It is in fact very arguable if Smash 4 can be a fighting game at all, but it is certain that Sakurai did not develop it as one. The point is that you cannot apply how other fighting game communities embrace sequels to the case of Smash, because Smash 4 is not a fighting game successor to Melee.

I wanted to add one more point
5)It sends signals to Nintendo: Two things, first, playing Smash 4 encourages Nintendo to keep supporting Smash 4. If people are playing it, then they will be inclined to keep patching it and even adding DLC. Also, it tells Nintendo what kind of game the community wants. Nintendo tries to make Smash 4 appeal more to the diehard player by fixing issues they complained about. The game is faster, less floaty and tripping is gone. Isn't that what people asked for? Supporting Smash 4 tells Nintendo that they should consider the community's interest. Playing Melee tells Nintendo that these people are no hope and it's futile to even consider their opinions.

You know what is the best message we could send to Nintendo? That they did not develop the competitive fighting game that we really wanted. Vote with your wallet.