Example of how ignorant people are to an alternate suggestion.

[Valken]

Tripping is not random. It's actually just very simple. Also suprisingly realistic.

Tripping accurs when your character performs an awkward move that results in a character animation with both their feet off the ground.

I can only assume that this was put in the game as a way to give a slight advantage to the players who know the game in and out. If you don't know the game completely you may try to do a move at a time it doesn't work and result in a trip.

Basically, the more you play your character the less likely you are to trip, in theory.

 

[sweetooth]

doubt it... because most of the time (well all of the time) when you're tripping, you're not paying attention to it because it's random...

 

[Serpit]

>_>

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PmCtH2QTsPw

 

[Yuna]

Funny, I could've sworn someone posted something exactly like this (possibly verbatim) a week or two ago ("Tripping occurs when you perform an awkward maneuvre that takes both your feet off the ground" - No it doesn't. Explain why it happens when you dash). We refuted it then and we'll refute it now.

 

[Mr.100]

Wow this board just repeats itself, new week, new nub (ironic coming from me with <10posts) thinking they have the answer.

 

[veritron]

actually the real reason is that there's a bug in the game where invisible banana peels randomly spawn even if you have items turned off.

 

[Valken]

It happens when you dash sometimes because sometimes right before you dash, your character is on one foot. If your character starts a dash off on the same foot that he has on the ground he will trip. Or maybe vice versa.

Let's say that you dash. Right before you dash (maybe because the joystick wasn't pushed fast enough) your character begins to make a stepping animation. This would result in your character only having on foot on the ground. Now if that's the same foot he needs to dash, he would logically trip.

I find this whole criticism odd. You find it easier to believe that they actually put random tripping in, what may be, the most competetive game of the year, then to believe that someone who just subscribed could possible have an answer.

Why do you find it hard to believe that tripping is caused by this?

 

[Heretique]

It happens when you dash sometimes because sometimes right before you dash, your character is on one foot. If your character starts a dash off on the same foot that he has on the ground he will trip. Or maybe vice versa.

Let's say that you dash. Right before you dash (maybe because the joystick wasn't pushed fast enough) your character begins to make a stepping animation. This would result in your character only having on foot on the ground. Now if that's the same foot he needs to dash, he would logically trip.

I find this whole criticism odd. You find it easier to believe that they actually put random tripping in, what may be, the most competetive game of the year, then to believe that someone who just subscribed could possible have an answer.

Why do you find it hard to believe that tripping is caused by this?

As much as I want to believe you, can you explain the video Serpit posted?

 

[Yuna]

It happens when you dash sometimes because sometimes right before you dash, your character is on one foot. If your character starts a dash off on the same foot that he has on the ground he will trip. Or maybe vice versa.

Stop retconning yourself.

"Tripping accurs when your character performs an awkward move that results in a character animation with both their feet off the ground"

And why would they do this, anyway?! "You'll trip if you happen to get into this situation which happens sometimes because you did something and then immediately dashed afterwards".

Let's say that you dash. Right before you dash (maybe because the joystick wasn't pushed fast enough)

You can trip whether you push it "fast" or "slow".

your character begins to make a stepping animation. This would result in your character only having on foot on the ground. Now if that's the same foot he needs to dash, he would logically trip.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here. I've also tripped out of the very first dash in a game. I guess the game put me in a position where both my feet were off the ground/one foot tripped me or whatever you're trying to claim when I spawned at the beginning of the game.

I find this whole criticism odd. You find it easier to believe that they actually put random tripping in, what may be, the most competetive game of the year, then to believe that someone who just subscribed could possible have an answer.

1) Of course they put random tripping in. They put in overpowered as hell items like the Dragoon and Final Smashes. They're not really very concerned about competitive gaming.
2) See above, they also dumbed it down, removed a lot of options and spent a lot of time on designing casual aspects of the game. The majority of the stages are also bad for tournament play. Sakurai is at heart a casual gamer and loves casual gamers (nothing wrong with that). The game was designed primarily for casual gaming. It's not the most competitive(ly viable) game of the year because you say so or because a lot of casuals want to compete against each other in it.
3) You don't have an answer. You have an assumption you made based on bupkis. There's already been extensive research into Tripping. We've already confirmed a lot of things (that make what you claim impossible).

Why do you find it hard to believe that tripping is caused by this?

Because we have facts and findings that state otherwise while you have bupkis.

 

[ph00tbag]

Bot?

Spoiler

10chachas

 

[Valken]

Logical Response: Maybe you're right Valken, we should do some investigating! After all, anythings possible concidering that none of us know the truth.

Apparently however, people on these boards are more interested in bashing down people than solving problems.

Your Response: If a new subscriber thought of it, it's wrong! No if's and's or but's.


[EDIT]

The video he posted.

Perhaps when a Mario tripped, he activated the tripping but not entirely. The fact that the Mario's were slightly touching each other could have influenced the tripping and made him trip when he normally would not have.

This would explain why only the Mario on the outside tripped and the second Mario seemed to trip after the first one. He could have gotten his timing off very slightly and with that and the fact that the Marios are touching slightly, he could have caused the first trip. With his timing off slightely, the tripped mario could have triggered the second trip.

The second Mario looks as if he tripped in response to the first Mario tripping.

This would also explain why only one Mario tripped the second time. After the first slip, he fixed his timing.

All this timing is so slight that he probably didn't even notice. As far as he knew he did the exact same thing every time.

Maybe.

 

[ska5fe]

We have a hard time believing it, because you can't prove it. Throw a video up on Youtube where you do exactly what you described here:

It happens when you dash sometimes because sometimes right before you dash, your character is on one foot. If your character starts a dash off on the same foot that he has on the ground he will trip. Or maybe vice versa.

with 100% accuracy, and then we will have less trouble believing you. Heck, I'd even take 90% accuracy.

 

[Yuna]

Logical Response: Maybe you're right Valken, we should do some investigating! After all, anythings possible concidering that none of us know the truth.

Apparently however, people on these boards are more interested in bashing down people than solving problems.

Your Response: If a new subscriber thought of it, it's wrong! No if's and's or but's.

Whether you're new or not means nothing. What you say means everything.

What part of "There's been extensive research into tripping" was too hard for you to grasp? Hitaku (among others) have dedicated hours into testing this. Scientific conclusions have been made.

Meanwhile, you just swoop in with this outlandish claim with zero evidence to back it up other than your assumption. Have you even researched this yourself? Or did you just assume (because there's no way for a character on the ground to have both feet off the ground in Brawl).

There are videos and threads out there which disprove your claim. What do you have to prove it?

 

[SFJake]

Logical Response: Maybe you're right Valken, we should do some investigating! After all, anythings possible concidering that none of us know the truth.

Apparently however, people on these boards are more interested in bashing down people than solving problems.

Your Response: If a new subscriber thought of it, it's wrong! No if's and's or but's.

If new peoples stopped posting idiotic non-sense where proof are already presented against them, yet they still continue, it wouldn't be so bad.

You obviously have no idea what the hell you're talking about and just threw out a reason out of nowhere. Hell, this post is very, very similar to another one I saw some times ago, which makes you much more like a Troll.

I would suggest this topic to be closed. It will only bring more flaming.

 

[Valken]

I am making my claim and challenging the thoughts of the majority because I believe it to be false.
And I can't put forth proof that it's true.
I can only give you reasons that suggest that your way is not true.
You give me something that proves it's random and I will respond with another way to look at it.

Never accept what you don't believe. Remember Christopher Columbus.

If only people would be more accepting of alternate possibilities.

 

[Magus420]

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=140600&p=3843644

 

[Valken]

Just a thought.

Perhaps the animation of not having both your feet on the ground had alot of potential for glitches. So they threw in tripping at those times to prevent people from ever getting around it and glitching.

Just thinking out loud.

 

[EmperorCesar]

Lock this trash

 

[Yuna]

I am making my claim and challenging the thoughts of the majority because I believe it to be false.

We have proof for our stance. Where is yours.

And I can't put forth proof that it's true.

If what we believe is wrong and you're right, how come we have proof for our stance you don't have any for yours?

I can only give you reasons that suggest that your way is not true.

What reasons, really? What have you said so far that disproves anything of what Hitaku's been saying about Tripping?

You give me something that proves it's random and I will respond with another way to look at it.

Watch that Youtube video above made by dphanna.

Never accept what you don't believe. Remember Christopher Columbus.

Somewhere someone doesn't believe in science. Doesn't mean George W. Bush isn't an idiot.

If only people would be more accepting of alternate possibilities.

We would be accepting if you weren't refuting already established facts with bogus assumptions with zero proof or even credibility since what you say is impossible and illogical!

Why would they make it work like that and since when could you ever get into a situation where you start a dash with a foot that's not rooted on the ground and thus have both feet off it and trip? What you're suggesting is impossible.

Perhaps when a Mario tripped, he activated the tripping but not entirely. The fact that the Mario's were slightly touching each other could have influenced the tripping and made him trip when he normally would not have.

Say what, partial tripping? Even though the 3 Marios are controlled by the same controller?! If one Mario trips, logically, if Tripping is caused by certain requirements, then all Marios should always trip together. Especially in your assumption of "Both feet off the ground".

This would explain why only the Mario on the outside tripped and the second Mario seemed to trip after the first one.

There was no "in response to". One just tripped and then the other did the same.

He could have gotten his timing off very slightly and with that and the fact that the Marios are touching slightly, he could have caused the first trip. With his timing off slightely, the tripped mario could have triggered the second trip.

You trip because you're touching slightly now? What's with you? Now you're making up new stuff to "disprove" tripping is random instead of trying to prove your claim. So if you're touching someone, you might trip?

There is no "timing adjustment" since all Marios are controlled by the same Wavebird. All Marios have the same timing on everything.

The second Mario looks as if he tripped in response to the first Mario tripping.

Then why didn't the 3rd one trip in response?

This would also explain why only one Mario tripped the second time. After the first slip, he fixed his timing.

Why are you saying everything twice?

All this timing is so slight that he probably didn't even notice. As far as he knew he did the exact same thing every time.

There is absolutely no possible way to fix the timing of just one of the Marios when they're all being controlled by the same Wavebird!

Just a thought.

Perhaps the animation of not having both your feet on the ground had alot of potential for glitches. So they threw in tripping at those times to prevent people from ever getting around it and glitching.

Just thinking out loud.

What is this imaginary animation you believe exists?! There is no such thing! Have you seen it?!

Also, explain why tripping wasn't in the previous games, then. I mean, why would there magically be a new animation where both feet are off the ground in Brawl and not in Melee? And if there was one in Melee (despite the fact that no one's seen it after 7+ years), then how come it didn't glitch then?

 

[Neodudeman]

I am making my claim and challenging the thoughts of the majority because I believe it to be false.
And I can't put forth proof that it's true.
I can only give you reasons that suggest that your way is not true.
You give me something that proves it's random and I will respond with another way to look at it.

Never accept what you don't believe. Remember Christopher Columbus.If only people would be more accepting of alternate possibilities.

Yes, there are other plausible theories to tripping, but the other theories simply don't hold up to the facts.

People have said that the Sun moves around the Earth. That's an alternate possibility; but there are facts that support that the Earth moves around the Sun.

Just like there are facts proving tripping is random.

Heck, by your logic, Brawl Must have been created by a flying ravioli monster. It's an alternate possibility, isn't it? It defies, and challenges the thoughts of the majority, I can't put forth evidence that it's true, and I can simply give reasons to suggest your theory is not true. I refuse to believe that Brawl was made by a Japanese man, only a creature of delicious pasta portions could have made it.

It makes No Sense.

 

[6footninja]

Wow this board just repeats itself, new week, new nub (ironic coming from me with <10posts) thinking they have the answer.

Your pretty much right. ssdd. (same *** dif. day).

...bogging down all the threads worth viewing.

 

[Valken]

You seem to be forgetting that you can never prove something is random. You can prove it is not, but not that it is. So to say you have proof that it's random is an out right lie.

I stand by my statement. Only time will tell who's right.
If I'm wrong, so be it. I don't care, I just want the truth.
If I'm right, I hope you all learn a valuable lesson.

 

[thaxceptional1]

lol Valken you lost, phanna already proved it is completely random, and the funny part is none of the mario's were touching...

And if you were just trying to find a fault in the conclusion that tripping is random, why did you propose a new thread with "The answer to tripping!" but have no evidence or research behind it. You failed in so many ways I never thought possible.

 

[Magus420]

Tripping is not random. It's actually just very simple. Also suprisingly realistic.

Tripping accurs when your character performs an awkward move that results in a character animation with both their feet off the ground.

I stand by my statement. Only time will tell who's right.
If I'm wrong, so be it.

You already are.

 

[Yuna]

You seem to be forgetting that you can never prove something is random. You can prove it is not, but not that it is. So to say you have proof that it's random is an out right lie.

Yes you can. Or are you saying Peach's turnip pulls aren't random?

I stand by my statement. Only time will tell who's right.
If I'm wrong, so be it. I don't care, I just want the truth.
If I'm right, I hope you all learn a valuable lesson.

You mean the statement based on made-up facts (the "both feet off the ground animation") and random ****? Good luck with that.

Time can't tell what isn't there (the imaginary animation). You didn't answer the question: Have you even seen such an animation?! What makes you think such an animation even exists?

 

[Valken]

This isn't a matter of oppinon.

This is a fact of life.

You absolutely can not ever prove that something is random. It is impossible.

You can argue that I'm wrong but you can never say you have proof that it's random.

That's just impossible.

It's a really simple idea, you can't prove something random. Very understandable. It perplexes me how anyone can disagree with that.

Can someone explain how you prove something is random? (aside from asking the game makers)

If you can explain how you prove randomness I'll give you a gold token. If you get three gold tokens you can go to the treasure box at the end of the day, so do your best!

 

[full_95]

maybe i can argue that you are a dumba$s tho... you're a dumba$s. wow, see, i did it!

 

[Valken]

People will never change.

 

[shadydentist]

Claiming that you can't prove something is random does not constitute any kind of proof. Tripping is random UNLESS you can prove otherwise, which you have failed to do.

Randomness can be observed through repeated trials. Throughout all of the time that this game has been out, no-one has been able to find a reproducible condition in which tripping always occurs. This means that it is, to some degree, random.

 

[NickRiddle]

Of course you can prove something is random...Peach pulling no beam-swords for 10 matches, then suddenly pulling out 3 in a row should prove this...

 

[rx-007]

has anybody tripped with robot?

 

[F1R3S70RM]

This will be my first post despite lurking for a while. I was so compelled by this entertaining thread that I felt I need to say something.

Valken, I understand your "point" though it has nothing to do with your original claims. If there's anything you've said so far that I might consider agreeing upon, it would be that something can't be proven to be random. I understand the statement, but don't fully agree. I only agree in the sense that not many things (if any) can be truly random.

That being said, I still think that you are fighting a lost cause. The most you can hope for is that people change their ideas from "tripping is random" to "tripping is seemingly random" or "We can't control how tripping works, so we'll consider it to be random."

Now I won't bash you because I do think people on these forums tend to flame a lot more than necessary, but you have been coming up with pointless arguments. Your theory is flawed, as many others were. What I don't understand is what you're trying to prove at this point. Are you trying to make up a new theory, or just remind people that it's possible for it not to be random?

Until someone finds a legitimate answer, there's little use in saying that we're all wrong because you don't believe in it. It won't change anything as far as how we play the game. Additionaly, it doesn't help to make bogus claims and then try to prove them incorrectly, because that's where you lose credibility. All of this arguing could have been avoided had you simply brought up that it might not be random... but you'd probably still get flamed anyway.
If we trip... we trip. Too bad, so sad.

edit: I laughed at the robot post... R.O.B doesn't exactly have feet, and as a robot he should technically be programmed not for things like tripping to occur...

 

[Yuna]

My, my, what a funny renaming of the thread title. Too bad you're misusing the word "ignorant".

 

[AWrulez]

someone please lock this topic

 

[BananaNut]

Claiming that you can't prove something is random does not constitute any kind of proof. Tripping is random UNLESS you can prove otherwise, which you have failed to do.

Randomness can be observed through repeated trials. Throughout all of the time that this game has been out, no-one has been able to find a reproducible condition in which tripping always occurs. This means that it is, to some degree, random.

^This post wins.^

Since no one can have a controlled experiment where tripping always or never occurs, it must be random. I'm not saying that someone won't ever find a situation where tripping always or never happens. Im just saying that for now, it has been proven (so far) to be random.

 

[Valken]

Ignorant means showing a lack of knowledge.

I use it because understanding alternate suggestions has become understood over the years. Throughout history so many people presented alternate suggestions and were flamed for it. They were later proven right and we have learned out mistake.

Accepting alternate suggestions is now, not only widely accepted, but suggested.

You, however, act as if you have not been tought about history and the acceptance of alternate suggestions.

Therefor you are ignorant to alternate suggestions.


[Reply]

The original point was to put my idea about tripping up. When questioned I presented my alternatives. It was always an oppinion and any intelligent human being would understand this. Then I began to get flamed. I completely disreguarded my oppinion do to the fact that I was flabbergasted at the fact that people believed that they proved something random and are, in fact, ignorant to alternate suggestion.

 

[Yuna]

Ignorant means showing a lack of knowledge.

You're still misusing it. "Example of how ignorant people are to an alternate suggestion." - How can be showing a lack of knowledge to an alternate suggestion? By not knowing what the heck you're talking about because you're being illogical?

I use it because understanding alternate suggestions has become understood over the years. Throughout history so many people presented alternate suggestions and were flamed for it. They were later proven right and we have learned out mistake.

"Someone else said something and people rejected their ideas. They were proven right, as such, I'm probably right as well!"

Yeah, nice try. Come up with valid arguments instead.

And also, pot - kettle, much? Who's being ignorant here, bub? Who's ignoring already established facts about Tripping in favour of their illogical theory? Who here's refusing to accept that certain things have already been proven about tripping simply because it goes against their theory?

Or maybe you just don't know enough about tripping.

Accepting alternate suggestions is now, not only widely accepted, but suggested.

Say what?

Anyway, it's not alternate suggestions in general that aren't accept. It's stupidity. We've already said this (me, others), we don't care that you're a newly registered user. We don't care that what you suggest is new. We care that your suggestion is illogical and has already been proven to be false, yet you insist it isn't using nothing but "Because I say so" and Strawman's arguments and whatnot.

You, however, act as if you have not been tought about history and the acceptance of alternate suggestions.

You act as if you're right because someone else somewhere was proven right once.

Therefor you are ignorant to alternate suggestions.

No I'm not. Still misusing the word.

The original point was to put my idea about tripping up. When questioned I presented my alternatives.

All of which are illogical and based on bupkis.

It was always an oppinion and any intelligent human being would understand this.

Tripping is something based on opinion now? As opposed to based on fact? Wow, my opinion is that Fox's Shine doesn't spike. Must mean I'm right.

Then I began to get flamed. I completely disreguarded my oppinion do to the fact that I was flabbergasted at the fact that people believed that they proved something random and are, in fact, ignorant to alternate suggestion.

We're flaming you for being wrong and refusing to see reason despite mounds of evidence on the contrary of what you're saying.

Also, you still have not answered a question I've had to ask, what, thrice now! Have you ever seen this fabled animation where both of a characters' feet are off the ground?! Have you?!

All of your "arguments" insofar have been refuted. I don't understand why you can't see that. You make a lot of baseless assumptions based on nothing but your own opinion what you believe to be true. That's OK. We present you with evidence on why you're wrong. You ignore them and tell us we're being ignorant/insulting/bla. bla. bla. That's not OK.

Just because you're wrong and we're pointing out why you're wrong does not mean we're being ignorant, insulting your intelligence or even flaming. I have yet to outright flame you in this thread, mind you.

Just to clear things up, what is your current theory on why tripping occurs (because it seems to fluctuate a lot. Each time new evidence is presented (evidence you should be aware of had you not been so ignorant on what's already been established about tripping), your "theory" on why tripping occurs changes drastically. Whenever something you claim is proven spectacularly wrong, instead of admitting defeat, you ignore it as if you'd never said it in the first place and formulate new (and illogical) theorems.

Here's a question, Mr. Pot:
Who's the one being "ignorant" to alternate suggestions here?

You have a theory (which changes with every other post you write). We present you with evidence on why Tripping is Random. Instead of admitting that our evidence is sound (which it is), you resolutely state "No, tripping can in no way be random!" and refuse to accept even the possibility of it being random.

You're dead serious on that you're the only one who's right and that anyone who says tripping is random is wrong despite the fact that we have proof and clinical tests proving our point whilst you have nothing.

 

[Pikaville]

Yuna is f*****g this guy up.Dude im pretty positive its random.The length some guys on these boards go to to test stuff like this is amazing.Dont question the authority(unless you have rock solid proof)

Yuna for president.

 

[Valken]

It's OK. I'm patient. I can wait.

 

[Yuna]

Yuna is f*****g this guy up.Dude im pretty positive its random.The length some guys on these boards go to to test stuff like this is amazing.Dont question the authority(unless you have rock solid proof)

I always do. It's my thing. Because as opposed to Mr. Pot, when I ardently argue for something, I'm not only convinced I'm right, I also have facts to back my arguments up (on rare occasions, these facts might be wrong and I will then be proven wrong, but at least then I'll admit to having been wrong).

Faced with facts they cannot refute, people try to confuse the general populus by changing the subject, ignoring my arguments or flaming in order to, um, lower my credibility (as if).

Valken, would you reply to my arguments for once?! Stop ignoring them because you cannot refute them! You've made some outlandish claims. Substantiate them by at least replying to people replying to your claims!

1) Have you ever seen an animation where both feet are off the ground?!
2) Aren't you a pot calling a kettle black?!
3) Why are you so convinced you're right despite a lack of any kind of proof whatsoever while "my" side has tons of proof?!
4) Do you have anything, at all to back your claims up?