Where did you get that Top tier-God Tier from?
God Tier specifically exists in Brawl. Check the thread yourself. He's been in a God Tier for more than one Tier list, but ONLY alone. He's never been partnered with someone on that list. For whatever reason.
I'm conscious of the will of the community but from a competitive aspect I think it's sad to obey every single of it's whims.
I'll address the point about competitiveness again in the quote where you did down below.
Okay, regardless of my definition, it still doesn't change that MK holds his own God Tier(labeled it, mind you) as is. And falls under the same points of being a God Tier.
Subjectivity is something that can be reduced, granted it cannot be eliminated completely, but that is just a personal preference.
I think it make situation such as these much less ambiguous and easier to accept for the entire community.
It's not truly objective, but it's the closest we can get regardless. The only objective way to play is All Items, All Characters, All Stages. Nobody would agree to that, however, so we wouldn't be having any Competitive Tourneys. Just all casuals.
I have no real hope of convincing everyone, that's impossible. But I will sure voice my opinion in this kind of thread whenever someone is convinced that MK has been banned because of facts that are actually unrelated and used as excuses in a wrong way.
Well, facts? He's won too much, overdominates in all areas, has the best frame data overall(thus, is superior to every member in the cast), outright REQUIRED a nerfing to even be allowed in tourneys, and wins the most money. Those are all facts. How we take them, is of course, as you said, subjective.
But convincing everyone isn't my ultimate goal, that'd be a waste of time.
Convincing one person won't help, though. You need to convince the majority.
I find this approach dangerous because even after MK's ban, there is no limit to that. I mean what's next?
Nothing. There's no longer a Double Standard. We've banned all items, and banned some courses. And then we ban one character. A double standard would be not banning him if and only if we even apply double standards. All of that is allowed to be banned, or none of it is. Whether or not he needs to be isn't the point of the Double Standard anyway. Saying he CAN'T is how the Double Standard is applied. He can be banned. Whether he should be or not is a different story.
If 60% of the community doesn't like playing with Snake or playing on Frigate will they be banned?
I'd like to note this would apply if that was the poll question in the longrun. The question was "Should MK be banned" nor "Do people not like to play as him?" They're different scenarios entirely. If you don't like playing with Snake, you don't have to. The issue is not if you don't want to, it's whether you're not allowed to play it or not. Snake is allowed be be played for many reasons, the biggest one because he has counters. If he didn't, he'd be sharing the God Tier with MK.
I don't know how I used it wrong, but reading you, this is exactly the sense I mean to use when I say it. The players are indeed what makes the game competitive, not the game itself.
And the rules are what defines the competitive aspect of it. Playing to win is just one part. But without rules, there is no WAY to win. They are both required, regardless. The competitive mindset is about making tons of rules and situations where the best winner can be found. Every game has a rule to it, and no competitive game can be played without some kind of rule. Street Fighting? If it has "No Rules", the actual unwritten rule is when the person dies you're fighting. All competition have natural rules, written or not.
Brawl is a competitive Game because we, the players, are playing it to win. That's all there is to it.
With rules. I can play to win with anything, but once again, no matter how many times you say it, a competitive person does not make a competitive game. It's the rules that allow the competition to even exist. They're both the key crux of the game itself. A game must have rules. A competition requires a game. They go hand in hand. As I said, the competitive mindset has nothing to do with the particular game itself.
Now last time your argument was that without rules, competition doesn't exist.
I'll go even further in that definition to tell you that without rules, the game itself doesn't exist in the first place.
That's why the game displays "GAME" when there's only one player left with stocks or "TIME" when the timer reaches 0.
Those rules are part of the game in the sense that they're the purpose/goal of the game or game mode we're playing unlike the one we add.
All you've shown is that you need players, a game, and rules. Which was exactly what I was saying the ENTIRE time.
It is entirely possible to play a match of Brawl without it being Best of 3 or on Temple, as long as players are playing to win, AKA to reach the goal of the game that you count as rules, they're playing the game competitively.
Which means you're using a particular rule to find that goal. They all go hand-in-hand.
I'd like to understand this focus on the metagame.
The lack of consistency doesn't kill the metagame, it makes it harder or downright impossible to discern which doesn't or shouldn't matter at all.
Competition can exist without needing to control the metagame like we are right now, especially when it's for the sake of fun instead stuff like randomness or time constraints.
Not everybody competes to have fun, so you can throw that out right now. Without the metagame, players cannot figure out how to win. If you're playing to win, you're working within the metagame. And yes, the lack of consistency does kill the metagame. Let me put it more clearly; If there are NO consistent rules, then there is no consistent style to play in. Because many particular ways to play are specific to a time or stock count. If courses are on with say Final Destination banned on one Tourney, and allowed on another, one cannot increase their metagame using the same stage. Thus, when they go onto that banned stage, they won't know what to do. Which means, you have to change your entire gameplan. The problem with this is, you can't have a consistent gameplan, and people cannot practice by going to tournaments because the rules are always different. Players cannot be on equal grounds anymore because of lack of consistency. It kills it simply because it makes it impossible to know how to face a character or course. FD is a bad example, mind you, but the context is the key.
I wouldn't mind. There are other competitive communities that exist without higher authorities that regulate rulesets
Too bad those other games still have consistent rules anyway. The problem is, Smash requires consistency to even work. It is designed completely differently from other fighting games. That stock count is a lot bigger than having lives like in Soul Calibur's Match tournaments. Once you lose, BOTH players are restored back to normal. It does not matter the real numbers of matches allowed, since every game is a neutral standing in the first place. Because we have another stock, only the KO'd player starts off neutral. This changes the entire gameplay in itself.
Again, I wouldn't mind but that is just my personal view on it.
It wouldn't work, since no other community does it anyway. I also explained earlier why their lack of consistency does not hurt them on the same level.
Yes. Because he was the only one that actually needed it and the only one that actually PROVED to have a planking problem that we were unable to beat. Nobody has reliably beaten MK's planking yet.
To remove the true issue of the LGL problem, to remove a character who has proven himself consistently to be the best and dominate the cast, to show that we don't tolerate imbalanced characters either. There is no issue with a LGL beyond MK, and we have yet to prove there is. That's a key note as always.
Yea that's why he shouldn't even be weakened in the first place
Pretty much. Either accept him how he is, or ban him. We've done it for everything else. Why should he be used as a Double Standard?
Well that is an inconsistent way to do what the community wants.
That's still not the point. It still keeps things consistent regardless if the rules are consistent. Who puts them in means zip compared to being consistent.
So sometimes it's just the TOs? Why sometimes one thing and why sometimes the other?
They can input any rule they wish, keep in mind. If people don't like it, they don't attend. However, too many people liked MK being gone, so we got attendees. As for the TO's in general, you require them to have tourneys.
Sakurai only created the game and left us the consumers the choice on how to play it.
He intended it to be played with everything on. It's how he prefers it. Not how we do, however.
I
don't see how his intentions matter, we can follow him if we want but on a strictly competitive playing to win mindset, we don't have to.
We don't need to be competitive whatsoever to ignore his intentions. I'm not a competitive player, I just put on what I like and hate. Doesn't make it good for tourneys, though.
Then re-read me.
I wanted to emphasize on the fact that staleness isn't something that is wrong in the first place, that was the point of me repeating but inserting that part in-between.
It's wrong because we won't have a game to play because people WILL leave(like some have already) due to no changes. It must evolve, or it'll die out. It's been already dying due to the staleness. It's gotten better since his banning, and will continue to grow. You can't have this competition without a metagame, afterall. And if the metagame sucks, you won't have any competition. It goes hand in hand, as usual.
This is something that you seem to be already arguing with Komatik so I won't get inside that too much now.
K.
My definition of a God Tier is a character that cannot be beaten by other characters, which is absolutely not the case with MK regardless of if it's possible to do it in an inconsistent or unreliable way, MK doesn't fit this description, plus he is not a boss character.
Explain why he's in the God Tier officially, then. Our random definitions clearly do not matter. The only one that applies is that nobody is better than him or is on par with him, clearly. Also, Boss characters don't always get thrown into God Tier, they just happen to often be. The bosses in SF2, and I don't mean Akuma, aren't God Tier either. That's just Top Tier(and not all of them too).
In order not to let this debate go in circles anymore let's post our
sources.
God Tier: Characters that are ridiculously good, to the point that it is almost unfair to use them. Most likely some sort of secret boss character that was not meant to be used in normal competitive play. There have been very few games with characters that could be considered to be in this tier, and they are probably banned.
MK has fit this definition already. It's definitely unfair to use him since none of the cast can even decently go even with him. He's not "fair" in any possible way, atleast not under our current ruleset.
The problem for me is not the legitimacy, the problem is the proof
The proof is literally the legitimacy. If there is no proof, it cannot be legitimate.
How do you decide that certain results or tests act as a proof, give me a concrete example
The combined total of all results and tests are what counts as proof, not a random tournament. It's why Apex was not a deciding factor for the URC either way. Despite the fact it furthers Pro-Ban's arguments anyway. But I don't consider it any proof except when combined with everything else. I do not specifically look at every tourney or look for results. I go off of what I have. I can allow someone else to answer that. I do not specifically concede it, but I do admit I cannot currently answer it. But what you want is the TOTAL results of multiple tourneys. And in those results, we both know he's won the complete and utter most. Money-wise, Top Tier combined(Fox, Snake, Diddy) didn't even match his total. It took the next tier to even go above his. So it took already 7 characters to match his money winnings. The rest of the cast, well, I haven't checked that paritcular data, I admit.
I cannot speak for any stages, as I have never gone into those discussions.
winning too much and unbeatable are two different concept for me. I consider the former as Top Tier and the latter as God Tier, to use terms we've already talked about before.
It doesn't matter what you "consider", MK is still stated as officially being the single member of the God Tier. Go off of what exists, not what you think it is. He is currently and undisputably God Tier. You want to argue his Tier placement, go to the Tier thread. But that's not in question either. He's still God Tier regardless.
In addition to that "too much" might be is different from a person to another.
Which was clearly enough to get those damn votes, since 76% of the players found him too much. Which is enough for the URC to take that into account. The majority finds him too much. That's just how it is.
It's the LGL I'm talking about here, especially since you told me that this rule was targetting him directly and that applying it to other characters was just a cover-up.
The LGL goes too far so the LGL should be removed, not MK.
I completely agree with this. I've said that before. Most fear that MK will go beyond dominating and just overdominate to the point of making us throw up, so that's why they refuse to remove it instead of MK. If the LGL leaves, MK can stay. But if they refuse to remove it, he needs to go.
In a pre-ban context, MK was treated differently because of the very presence that LGL especially when he had a lower one compared to other characters.
Yep.
Again, you started that. You just don't remember it yourself :
I don't mind if you want to contradict yourself by saying that discrimination isn't actually the same thing just because I turned the argument against you.
It's more or less a Double Standard problem than a discrimination problem. I probably misspoke. It sounds like discrimination, and I was wrong on that. It's just a horrible Double Standard(which is indeed related to Discrimination anyway)
How? That means you disagree with the ban, the LGL clause doesn't change anything to the fact that you don't think it's okay to treat him different and you think he shouldn't be banned which is EXACTLY what I said.
I disagree with the LGL, not his ban. I personally want to see the LGL go first. But I wouldn't be surprised that without it, he would prove to earn his banning anyway. So they're just cutting out the middleman at this point. The problem is, you're misunderstanding me. Banning him is not treating him differently, it's just banning an option. Making a LGL IS treating him differently. If I said it wrong, this is what I actually mean.
Nobody said he needs it. The community made a rule for him because we want to, that is different from needing IMO.
Throw out the IMO, because a lot of people believe he needs it, including the overall community of every region. It's a general consensus. Most TO's think he needs it, so he gets it.
k.
Yea but that is such a broad term.
It's not really. If something is given more significance, it's more important. That's what important means. As is. MK is more important than any member of the cast. If not all at this point.
I mean by that definition, It's like saying that Peach and Jiggs are more important than other Melee characters just because they got an attribute that other characters don't have.
That's exactly what it means. Keep in mind that there is context, of course. And they're only important in certain areas. Just like with every character that exists. However, in the overall majority, MK is more important in the total list of important attributes than any single character. So he's more important than the rest of the cast. Whether or not he should be is another story. But it doesn't change he is and still is even with the ban. The only way for the importance to drop is if he was completely unplayed, or, IF he gets unbanned, he gets played about as much as atleast the Top Tier of 7 characters.
The implication is made that way. Nobody should NEED to be in God Tier unless they were just that damn powerful. Once again, it was made for him and him alone. Not the other way around.
)
