FINAL QUESTION for E for All Expo Attendees (Brawl: Failure or Success?)

[valoem]

FINAL QUESTION for E for All Expo Attendees
Brawl: Failure or Success?

Before I begin this discussion I would like to emphasize I was not at E for All. I am not here to say anything about why brawl sucks or is good. I am simply here to ask the most important question that has been missed. Just scroll down to read the question if you don’t feel like reading my concerns first. I'll make comparisons between other fighting games and why everything Gimpyfish said should raise RED FLAGS to competitive gamers.

----- Skip this if you want to see the question -----

Gimpyfish said that Brawl is fun. This comes as no surprise Nintendo has a great history with making fun games what we should be asking is:

Is Brawl a competitive fighting game or we gonna be gambling our money with a party game?
Did we devoted all this time to melee just to see Nintendo completely revamp Brawl and skill not transfer?

After all why did we come to smashboards. It would be surprising if most people came here JUST because the game is fun. Smash is a fun game no doubt, but I came to smashboards to get better, play competitively and hopefully become the best. I am sure that many of you came for the same reasons.

So why did melee have such a HUGE competitive cult following?

Two reasons:
1. Because the game is fun and EASY TO PICK UP.
2. Because the game is deep. (The game is hard to master, arguably the deepest fighting game)

How does one determine the depth of a fighting game?

There is only one way: Consistency

Smash is one of the few fighting games in which one player can dominate as the best player with no question. From 2003-2006 it was Ken, now it is Mew2King. This means the game is SO deep that only one player sees the game differently from his competitors and as a result, play one notch above the rest.

Street Fighter for example is also a very deep game however in Japan there is no consistency different players take the title each year. Yet the Japanese dominate Americans. This game has been out for almost ten years which only goes to show that it still has remarkable depth.

Tekken does not have the level of consistency that Smash has but still has consistant top finishers. Top players constantly change therefore is not as deep a game.

MvC2 does have a top player which is arguably Justin Wong. Therefore out of the 4 most popular fighting games (Smash, Tekken, Street Fighter, and MvC2) each share one similarity, the ability for consistancy.

Smash is a remarkably deep game and such depth needs to be preserved for the competitive scene to survive.

Fighting game failures

One of the best franchises to collapse competitively is Soul Calibur III. During the era of Soul Calibur II the scene was much larger than it is today. Major tournaments such as Evo has sponsor SCII from time to time. Today however, Evo has dropped SCIII and tournaments are scarce. Why? Because the competitive scene has deemed the game broken and uncompetitive. This is a result of Variable Cancel Technique which allows for abuse to the point where the learning curve is destroyed. As a result people start gambling with their money and once a player reachs a certain level it becomes anyone's game. The game is deemed not as deep as its predecessor therefore the scene died. So for those of you who think if brawl sucks we can just revert back to melee, you are wrong. The scene will slowly die because no new players will pick up an old game when a newer version is out.

This should be our biggest concern in smash brawl. The game must be deep, in fact, the game must as deep to deeper than its predecessor.

Red Flags

There are TWO things that Nintendo has done with Brawl that is most disturbing. Nintendo promised that Brawl was going to be the best smash game in history and is target toward the “hardcore gamer” (ref http://www.nintendolife.com/articles/2007/05/07/iwata_to_satisfy_hardcore_gamers) yet I have seen Nintendo do little to show this.

1. In all other fighting games that have strong scenes the relationship between gamer and creator is constant. The creator understands that their most valuable customer is those who have devoted their lives to the game and not the causal gamer. As a result the only changes in the game are increased depth and a few new additions. The engine for the most part remains the same. In fact many gamers hate it when there are too many new additions to a game. For example Capcom, the designers of Street Fighter III, understood that competitive players were their most valuable customers so after the release of the initial version, they released a new version, "Street Fighter III 2nd Impact" that had few changes such as additional characters and increased depth and balance. Seeing the increased success of 2nd Impact they release SFIII: 3rd Strike (the most successful version) with a few more changes, even more balance, and their fans loved it. So why change something that already works? Most major fighting game developers understand this and rarely make drastic changes in new releases. Almost always the physics and engine of the game remains the constant. It seems Nintendo is more interested in change, than the players. There is a time for change and this is not the time. Once a game has developed a competitive scene the developer should be very wary of major changes. The causal player will buy the game regardless of advance techs because no one forces anyone to play the game competitively. If someone didnt enjoy smash 64 and melee they are not going to buy brawl just because the game is different. It disturbs me to see Gimpyfish say that initially we will not like the game. If Nintendo targeted the game toward hardcore gamers (aka smash players) why would they change the game so drastically that we would not like it immediately.

2. When a company releases a sequel to a competitive game they normally seek input from pro gamers. An example of this is Bungie. They used the best Halo 2 players to ensure that this game would be deep and competitive. When Halo 3 was released everyone loved the game because of its similarities to Halo 2. Why would they NOT ask the best Melee players for input? Such actions lead me to fear the depth of this game.

My Interpretations of Gimpyfish's blog

Keep in mind these are my opinions.

Air Dodge

Removal of directional air dodge seems to be decrease a large amount of mind games and therefore lowers the learning curve of the game.

Removal of conventional Lag Cancel

There is no way this is good. L-cancel was the fundamental difference between a pro and a noob in both 64 and melee. Without it there is no boundary and as a result the game will become completely random. This means we only need to focus on comboing and not both as a result the game requires half the time to master.

Some have argued in this thread that L-cancel is a barrier and without it everyone can be faster and better and therefore it is better for the scene. This couldn't be further from the truth. The only barrier L-canceling creates is the seperation of those who are willing to practice timing and get better and those who are not. If you are not willing to practice, you are probably not interested in the scene so advance techs should have no effect on you. No one forces you to L-cancel and if the only reason you dont play competitive is because of that then you are one sad soul. Man up practice and get better.

Land Canceling B moves

This seems to remove a lot of depth in the game. Now what a beginner can't do a pro can't do either.

----- READ HERE -----

FINAL QUESTION

Many of you attendees of E for All Expo are pro smashers. I know the game is still in development, therefore now is the time to speak to Nintendo if you have any concerns about the ability of this game to perform competitively.

Based off your experiences with Brawl, do you feel that Brawl can be potentially equal or deeper than Melee?

This is the most important aspect that determines the game's success and the future of the smash community. If brawl is nothing more than a party game than major tournament will eventually come to an end. I know that you only had 4 days experience, but based off the amount of smash you've played in the past, hopefully you could determine whether or not this game has equal or more potential than Melee.

Note:
Another thing, i hate when people say "Look at 64 that game didnt have washdashing or anything fancy and it was competitive". For those of you who don't know me, I am a high level 64 player and this game IS NOT COMPETITIVE. It is no where near as deep as melee. There are about 30 people in this country that play this game at a high level do you call that a scene? Smash needs to evolve not devolve. I play 64 and I hope this game does not become like 64 not because i dont like 64 (i love the game), but because I want the game to grow and become more difficult not weaken and become more basic.

 

[Misto-Roboto]

I hope you mean Smash competitive community, because even if Smash does not meet the competitive's level, there will still be a large Smash community. And since when did Sakurai mentioned the game was for the hardcore? This is for the Wii. The idea is to make games more accessible to people, not to limit them simply because someone has a bug up their ass about how game mechanics need to follow a strict and arbitrary standard..

 

[Kor]

Did we devoted all this time to melee for nothing?

No matter what happens with Brawl, it will not have any impact on your time with Melee.

That'd be like saying... 'Well now that I'm in college, I guess all that time I spent in High School was for nothing."

You contradicted yourself here:

I am a competitive 64 player and this game IS NOT COMPETITIVE.

 

[Eggm]

Well, from what I read it doesn't seem as deep as melee, or as competitive. I liked the point you brought up that they must see the game differently from their competitors thats pretty cool way of looking at it. In any case, if unchanged from the DEMO yeah it seems quite shallow. But i heard the melee demo sucked too, so hopefully they change it, cause of now i'm probably just goin to play it as a for fun game and continue melee as my competitive game or starcraft 2 if its ever released and play this for fun, again unless they change it from the demo.

 

[GOTM]

i think im going to play this competitive no matter what, even if its shallow as hell, lol. people are going to be better than others, guaranteed. no matter how simple a game is, there will be noobs and pros always. experience is the main factor most of the time anyway, not just tech skill.

 

[valoem]

I hope you mean Smash competitive community, because even if Smash does not meet the competitive's level, there will still be a large Smash community. And since when did Sakurai mentioned the game was for the hardcore? This is for the Wii. The idea is to make games more accessible to people, not to limit them simply because someone has a bug up their *** about how game mechanics need to follow a strict and arbitrary standard..

Please dont response if you dont play smash competitive. Trying going to a tournament sometime and see how fun it is. If melee was a shallow game then there wouldnt be a tournament scene and smashboards wouldnt be what it is. Also you seem to not understand that the game doesnt have to be the same it just has to be deeper and what people love. It just so happens that competitive players enjoy similarities. Why are you here if you dont play the game competitively?

And Iwata said in the nintendo press conference at the end of 06 that the games coming out in 07 will be geared toward hardcore gamers on the list of games he mentioned ssbb.

Maybe you should get your fact stright before acting like a pretentious prick. What are u, a hipster?

No matter what happens with Brawl, it will not have any impact on your time with Melee.

That'd be like saying... 'Well now that I'm in college, I guess all that time I spent in High School was for nothing."

You contradicted yourself here:

.... I guess your right since we dont need to apply anything we learned in high school at college. <_<

 

[Gilgamesh]

I've been here for like, forever. And i'm not part of the competitive community, i could care less about tourneys. The game's sheer fun and coolness is what made me hang out around smashboards. And i have noticed many more that do just the same, you just have to look at the Back room community; most of the people there just enjoy the game but are not REALLY competitive about it, and some of them are the oldest members around.

 

[SmashChu]

Yeah, there are a few things you (and probably most people here) need to learn

1)Competitive=/=Hardcore: When Reggie says it's for the hardcore, he does not mean Smashboards. He means the people who play "higher games. The ones that would love Metroid Prime 3 and Twilight Princess. Not the people who can't stop playing Wii Sports. You guys are the Megacore. The people who need to find a new hobby. That take this game very highly. They aren't going to shot for you because your market is too small.

2)Focusing on only the Megacore=Failure: Like I said, the "Megacore" as I have termed it is to small. You made the example of Halo 3. Well, did you know it's now much easier to pick up and play Halo 3 then Halo 2? If you focus only on that one group of people, you won't sell. Sure, Mew2King and Tnga aren't going to buy the game know, but now so will a whole heck of a lot of people. Now the game works much easier for them. And, sadly for you, they are a much larger market.

3)Change is good: People fear this too much. Hack, I welcome it with open arms. It's a good thing. It prevents a game from becoming stagnant and will allow it to stay in rotation for a long long time.

4)Not all non-competitive players are n00bs: I really hate this statement. Just because you dedicate your life to it doesn't mean that everyone else is a n00b for A)Not knowing any of this BS or B)Because they don't care. That's what really irks me. Just because someone doesn't play like how you play doesn't make them any less then you. Actually, it makes them better as they aren't near as annoying about it.

Sorry if it's harsh. I feel many "competitive" players have a disillusion about Smash, and the reception of games.

 

[Heavyarms2050]

i think the only reason people will say brawl is a failure is because there no wavedash. Plus i thought lag cancel is still in

 

[valoem]

Yeah, there are a few things you (and probably most people here) need to learn

1)Competitive=/=Hardcore: When Reggie says it's for the hardcore, he does not mean Smashboards. He means the people who play "higher games. The ones that would love Metroid Prime 3 and Twilight Princess. Not the people who can't stop playing Wii Sports. You guys are the Megacore. The people who need to find a new hobby. That take this game very highly. They aren't going to shot for you because your market is too small.

2)Focusing on only the Megacore=Failure: Like I said, the "Megacore" as I have termed it is to small. You made the example of Halo 3. Well, did you know it's now much easier to pick up and play Halo 3 then Halo 2? If you focus only on that one group of people, you won't sell. Sure, Mew2King and Tnga aren't going to buy the game know, but now so will a whole heck of a lot of people. Now the game works much easier for them. And, sadly for you, they are a much larger market.

3)Change is good: People fear this too much. Hack, I welcome it with open arms. It's a good thing. It prevents a game from becoming stagnant and will allow it to stay in rotation for a long long time.

4)Not all non-competitive players are n00bs: I really hate this statement. Just because you dedicate your life to it doesn't mean that everyone else is a n00b for A)Not knowing any of this BS or B)Because they don't care. That's what really irks me. Just because someone doesn't play like how you play doesn't make them any less then you. Actually, it makes them better as they aren't near as annoying about it.

Sorry if it's harsh. I feel many "competitive" players have a disillusion about Smash, and the reception of games.

are you talking to me? Because i didnt say anything about non competitively players being noobs. I was suggesting that most fighter games (i.e. street fighter) does not change much over the years because people like the formula.

 

[Gilgamesh]

are you talking to me? Because i didnt say anything about non competitively players being noobs. I was suggesting that most fighter games (i.e. street fighter) does not change much over the years because people like the formula.

Yes, but won't Brawl be the same? It won't change "much" because it'll most probably keep the basic smash formula (at least if one is to believe Gimpy). If you compare SFIII 3rd strike to Street Fighter II, i think you'll find a lot more changes than those we'll see in the transition from the original Smash 64 to Brawl, at least in the game's core.

 

[valoem]

Yes, but won't Brawl be the same? It won't change "much" because it'll most probably keep the basic smash formula (at least if one is to believe Gimpy). If you compare SFIII 3rd strike to Street Fighter II, i think you'll find a lot more changes than those we'll see in the transition from the original Smash 64 to Brawl, at least in the game's core.

This is a very good point, however the design of SFIII was to be deeper and more competitive(man this word has been used a lot). SFIII was a success and SFII benefited strongly from this. My fear is a brawl was design to be counter-competitive.

Ironically i created this thread to get an opinoin from e for all attendees. I respect that you play the game causally however I wanted an opinoin from those who intended to compete in the scene. I also can see that the mindset in Brawl sub forum is considerably different from those in Tournament Discussion section and SRK.

 

[NES n00b]

Reggie said that it was for the hardcore Mister-Roboto.

Anyways, this game has strayed from Melee's formula and it does seem to aim for the casual gamer. It made lots of things easier, removed depth by taking away wavedashing and directional airdodge, and made nonsensical balance descisions (Samus nerfed while Peach is still good? Yoshi as a whole). However, we have seen in the last few days alone that new techs are in the game which have some depth. I don't think any Melee ones (besides the old ones from SSB) were discovered quite so fast. We don't know the depth of the game so why don't we wait and find out because I don't think anyone would have thought that Melee would have as much depth as it did.

About pro gamers giving advice for fighting games, most fighting games have a smaller base that rely much more on the competitive gamer than SSB does. SSB like it or not is a casual game that was just made very well and had some accidental exploits that made the game that much more deep and fun. If it comforts you any, Sakurai supposedly had a team that played lots of Melee and if they played over 10,000 matches or whatever, that they must know something about competitive play. Also, I think it is intersting that both casual and pro style broken tatics got nerfed (Link's upb good n00b tatic got nerfed as well as Fox's shine hijinx).

Anyways, give it a chance. Let's see where this goes for about two years. I bet it won't be as bad as it seems now. Just like you, I was worried when I saw all the simplifications, less options, weird balance descisions, and removal of techs. It seemed the opposite direction that Melee from SSB went (it had more of everything and it essentially had no removals of anything) while Brawl seemed like it removed alot. Now, with all these discoveries of new techs, hearing the balance was nearly as bad as I thought it would be (yes, demos can show who the new Sheik is easily but it hasn't happened so far), and remembering that Sakurai is a pretty good developer, I got new hope that this game won't be that bad.

@Mister-Roboto, Depth =/= Hard to learn. Guilty Gear XX I picked up fairly quickly as it was pretty easy to learn the basics, but it is a very deep game and hard to master. Very accessible but arguably one of the deepest games. Remind anyone of a certain game? Also, yes the COMPETITIVE smash community will die if this game is not deep enough for a competitive scene to survive. The reason being that depth is what keeps competitive people going due to more room to improve. If there is a low ceiling, then people will eventually get bored due to either random winners (if it is shallow enough to the point that random people win from random factors) or that they do not improve. If the competitive community shrinks, then the smash community as a whole will shrink more than you think since competitive gamers are the people who visit each other and are essentially the base of this community. There will still be one I am sure, but it will be more like an Nsider community or other such sites that just say how cool the game is and do not go indepth or bring people together quite as much.

These are my opinions anyway.

Edit: You didn't know that topic creator? lol. Bring a flame sheild, because you are not allowed to be worried about this game in anyway. Yes, this forum is more about the casuals, but there are some competitive people.

Edit: What is with casuals in the backroom Gilgimesh? lol Is it like there is a different group of backroom people because there is suppose to be these Smash backroom people that discuss Smash indepth and try to standardize the tournies more.

Edit: It would be more than the lack of wavedash that would make Brawl a failure to most people. Most casual games have really bad imbalances, have extremely broken and fairly easy tatics, and have random winners due to lots of these random factors that come from lucky uses of said broken tatics. If Brawl ends up like this, it would have to be alot more than just the exclusion of wavedash. Now having less depth than Melee, that is much more probable. We will have to see, but some weird descisions have been made about this game which removes depth that didn't really need to be removed. Luckily, some things have been added, too.

 

[Ferio_Kun]

i think the only reason people will say brawl is a failure is because there no wavedash. Plus i thought lag cancel is still in

That's a good thing IMHO. Wavedash was clearly not how the game was supposed to be played.

Sakurai took the glitch out because that is not how he meant his game to run. If he wanted wavedashing, he would impiment an easy button combination to do so.

Since he implimented no such combo... It is clearly an exploit.

I say that with all logic. I know how to wavedash AND how effective it can be in certain situations. However, anyone with any sort of logic can see that it was not meant to be used like it is.

Airdodging was supposed to be just that: A dodge done in mid-air. Not an animation where your character slides backward or forward.

Brawl without the majority of 'advanced' techniques has taken so long to perfect because Sakurai is FORCING everyone to play his game how it was meant to be played.

It sounds bad, but wouldn't you do the same thing if you saw people abusing the fighting engine of your game? All of the people you see playing it are playing it using glitches, exploits and the sort? I certainly would create a better game, eliminating glitches and exploits.

Brawl is just that. Melee perfected, with no exploits or glitches. (to our knowledge)

 

[SmashChu]

are you talking to me? Because i didnt say anything about non competitively players being noobs. I was suggesting that most fighter games (i.e. street fighter) does not change much over the years because people like the formula.

Yes, they were dirrected at you. I also can't seem to locate the sentence I'm talking about so for now, disregard it. The idea I brought was the reason developers in this day and age wouldn't do what you (and many others here) want them to do.

 

[NES n00b]

That's a good thing IMHO. Wavedash was clearly not how the game was supposed to be played.

Sakurai took the glitch out because that is not how he meant his game to run. If he wanted wavedashing, he would impiment an easy button combination to do so.

Since he implimented no such combo... It is clearly an exploit.

I say that with all logic. I know how to wavedash AND how effective it can be in certain situations. However, anyone with any sort of logic can see that it was not meant to be used like it is.

Airdodging was supposed to be just that: A dodge done in mid-air. Not an animation where your character slides backward or forward.

Brawl without the majority of 'advanced' techniques has taken so long to perfect because Sakurai is FORCING everyone to play his game how it was meant to be played.

It sounds bad, but wouldn't you do the same thing if you saw people abusing the fighting engine of your game? All of the people you see playing it are playing it using glitches, exploits and the sort? I certainly would create a better game, eliminating glitches and exploits.

Brawl is just that. Melee perfected, with no exploits or glitches. (to our knowledge)

Wavedash is most likely an exploit and I can agree with that. I, however, cannot agree with the logic "if it was not kept in Brawl, it must be an exploit" or else directional airdodging, djc with yoshi, b landing cancels, and L canceling would have to be considered not intentional either (two of the 4 I listed are fairly obvious that they were ment to be in).

Also, if Sakurai is forcing people the way he wants them to play and not simply learn from the competitive scene to make a more competitive game, then he is very selfish. Most fighting games keep any exploit or glitch that adds depth to the game, but that is because they are more competitive. They do take out exploits that are broken to balance or add no depth, but wavedashing is definitely neither of those so Sakurai shouldn't do that really. I guess he could take it out if he wanted to add something new so that it would add depth, but highly doubt it.

 

[AthrunZala]

umm guys he asked for peoples impressions on who went to e for all. if none of you did then go voice your opinions somewhere else. he asked the pros a simple question to answer. he didnt ask the community its take on the game. there are many more threads for that.

 

[Heavyarms2050]

What wrong with fighting against noobs? I don't remember anywhere its say the competition are only for the Pros. There nothing cooler to see a player dubbed "Pro", because he has alot of technical skills, lose to a "noob" who had a better fighting strategy.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Edit: What is with casuals in the backroom Gilgimesh? lol Is it like there is a different group of backroom people because there is suppose to be these Smash backroom people that discuss Smash indepth and try to standardize the tournies more.

My point when saying that was that the Broomers are the oldest members around and i think they all love smash as much as i do, yet the -very- competitive players are a minority there (i think). This was to reflect on what the OP said about people coming to smashboards (and staying) mostly to get better in the competitive scene, which i would say is mostly erroneous. I'm trying to say that many people, like me, can play this game for years without ever trying to reach competitive level (xD ok i swear this is the last time i type the word "competitive") and that basically, you can enjoy a "good" game for as long as you can enjoy a "deep" game. And yes, i might say that the kind of people in the Broom is -very- different to that of the Smash Broom, especially since i have been a member of both in the past.

But of course, i have faith that Brawl will be at least as deep -and- fun as melee. Right, i have nothing but hopes to back this up so i never use it as an argument. I might not be compe... wait... a professional player, but i do know the game mechanics and while i admit i probably wouldn't do good at tournaments because of my lack of tourney practice, i did take the time to master all of melee's advanced techniques -just never had the need to really use them, given my lack of real competition-.

I fully understand your side of the argument, and i find your worries totally acceptable, it's just that based on my own esperience with melee and smash 64, i don't think that Brawl will be a failure, and moreso, i'm pretty sure that it'll have a very long lifespan.

Cheers!

Edit: sorry if my grammar seems a bit wacky sometimes; the fact that english is not my native language starts to show when i write longer posts.

 

[Mew2King]

10,000 matches isn't a lot at all I've played 5000 hours and countless times more than 10,000 matches, you need GOOD players to test it, the GOOD players are the ones who know what they are talking about. We need smart people like King to talk to them so they realize what a mistake this is.

BTW tech skill is merely a big part of smash ability, the good players also have better fighting strategy 9/10 times. The really top players have both. Fast tech skill allows for more options though, and that's a big issue when concerning DEPTH.

--

I would also like to add that I didn't approve of tactics such as wavedashing and CCing and CGing and all that stuff when I wasn't as good. Can you guess why? I wasn't good enough to intigrate it into my game completely, although I could do it consistently. Being able to do something consistently, and being able to do something NATURALLY are two different things, adding more elements to a game only makes it's replay value longer for a competitive scene. Perhaps if brawl is deep enough it will go to MLG or EVO or possibly other big events or names. Stuff like this would be good to have.

BTW valoem is a 64 player who knows the 64 competitive scene really well and he realizes all it really is is camping for one hit which has ridiculous hitstun and doing a 0-death combo or long combo into an edge guard.

 

[BrianM]

Er, wow, why do people NOT even comprehend the **** topic title?

 

[Gilgamesh]

Er, wow, why do people NOT even comprehend the **** topic title?

Maybe because other people can comment until an actual E4A attendee comes and gives his opinion on the question at hand? Since i imagine the topic was more than just that question, given that it wasn't posted in the sticky thread that is just for that.

 

[NES n00b]

Good post
Edit: sorry if my grammar seems a bit wacky sometimes; the fact that english is not my native language starts to show when i write longer posts.

LOL, no worries.

I think casuals like depth as much as competitive people in a sense. Button mashers aren't usually as popular as titles with more depth. Sure, "pros" go deeper with the title but there is already plenty of stuff on the surface so casuals love the great stuff that they see there.

I understand completely about playing the game for a long time without going competitive. I played like a year by myself until I got bored. The only reason I got bored because I was literally playing by myself. If there was like three other people wanting to play that game, I would have played it for much longer, but alas, nobody wanted to play. They wanted to play Halo 2 or some kind of **** game like that. (lol I kid)

I am no longer worring about the game since the discovery of the new techs. I was really worried about the fundamentals the most (slower, directional airdodging removed, floatier and harder to conrol?), but now it seems like this could work out very well. I can't wait to try and break this game. lol

Also, what Mew2King said about depth. Technical things usually add more depth because they allow more options. Sure, some are artificial barriers, but even fairly simple stuff like DJC, FC, and wavedashing adds to what you can do in your strategy. Darn it. I got to stop spamming this thread and let E 4 All people post.

Edit: I responded since it seemed more like a thread about the implications were of depth being removed and his views on it. If it was just a qestion, he would have asked in either the sticky thread or would not have made all the other stuff about what it would mean if depth was removed.

2nd Edit: After playing Melee competitively, I didn't really like 64 very well. It had less depth with more broken stuff. It made me sad to try and play that game.

 

[jdub03]

Watch the interview with the developers of the new street fighter and super street fighter II hd remix. They actually took some players from EVO and used them to help add moves and balance the game. Thats what a real developer of a fighting game should do. I wish sakurai was smart enough to do that. That being said I have no doubt smash will be deep enough for the competitive scene. It might not be as deep as smash but even if its a smidgen less deep it will still be pretty deep.

 

[Aryman]

If Melee's physics exploits and glitches are what gave it the competitiveness it had, that's great for melee. But we shouldn't expect the developers to leave glitches in a new game when they weren't supposed to be there in the first place. If this is the case, then Brawl will most likely not be as competitive as Melee is. But it will be a better and more balanced game.

 

[TheFifthMan]

Have you ever played a game of chess or go/weiqi/baduk? It didn't take long for me to pick up either game; after an hour from my dad I was able to pick up chess, and after 20 minutes with my friends I was able to pick up Go, and the mechanics of both games are incredibly simple. However, the best professional players of either game are still able to keep their titles.

I'm hoping that this is how Brawl will be like. As much as I like the lightning fast play that advanced techs bring, they should be secondary to the mental game.

Edit: Oh, and you said that an exploit was what broke Soul Calibur 3, right? Something called Variable Cancel? That's the risk of allowing exploits and glitches to remain in a game. At its best, it opens options. At its worst, it can render a game unplayable at a high level.

 

[GreenKirby]

Translation for a the topic creator's long *** paragraph:

WAHH!! I'm afraid of change! I think this game will suck cause it won't cater to the hardcore despite the facts that there will be options for the hardcore. WAAAAAAHHHHH

 

[GOTM]

has this thread gotten a little offtopic? lol

 

[NES n00b]

Translation for a the topic creator's long *** paragraph:

WAHH!! I'm afraid of change! I think this game will suck cause it won't cater to the hardcore despite the facts that there will be options for the hardcore. WAAAAAAHHHHH

Valid concern not valid I guess.

I think the translation of this statement is "I am a casual gamer. I don't care what happens to the game's hardcore appeal so I don't understand your side at all. Suck it up. I will not read the part about the options for the hardcore."

Seriously, this is the most intelligent topic about this subject yet. He asks the E for All people if there seems to be enough depth and does not complain about it being different. He is concerned with the direction of making Brawl easier to play and removing techs that made Melee deep. Don't act like removing advance techs does not seem concerning at all to people who played Melee competitively and want Brawl to be as fun and deep as Melee.

 

[mushroomedmario]

the reason people are replying that didn't go to e4a is because his post is really long for asking a question, and parts of his post is very controversial.

If he didn't have such assumptions as "i came to smashboards for the competitive scene, and im' sure most of you did the same"(or something like that....i didn't bother copying it) than he wouldn't get all these 'off topic posts'

he really could have worded it better, maybe saying "i came to smashboards for the competitive scene, and there are a lot of people here that did the same" than maybe people wouldn't respond to him

another thing he basically said(again could be wrong" if brawl isn't competetice than we wasted all our time on melee for nothing"

well if melee was the last ssb, than would you not get it cause it would 'be a waste of your time?', what he said basically made no sense and deserved someone correcting him

and this is a forum, it's not off topic if it has to do with what the op said,

say if someone made a topic asking

"wow i can't wait until next april when brawl comes out.....did you guys reserve your copy"
would you get angry if someone corrected this person, and would you consider the person that corrected him being off-topic?

 

[GreenKirby]

Valid concern not valid I guess.

I think the translation of this statement is "I am a casual gamer. I don't care what happens to the game's hardcore appeal so I don't understand your side at all. Suck it up. I will not read the part about the options for the hardcore."

Seriously, this is the most intelligent topic about this subject yet. He asks the E for All people if there seems to be enough depth and does not complain about it being different. He is concerned with the direction of making Brawl easier to play and removing techs that made Melee deep. Don't act like removing advance techs does not seem concerning at all to people who played Melee competitively and want Brawl to be as fun and deep as Melee.

LOL your assumption of me is cute. I do play on the hardcore side as well.

And the fact he asks if Brawl will be success or failure based on a science-****ed demo is no different from all the other topics concerning Brawl's so called 'slow down' speed.

 

[Kittah4]

Pardon me for seeming blunt, but even with the removal of ALL "advanced techs" from this game, this game will probably sell more than Melee. In the end, Smash Bros is about fanservice and fun. It seems to me like Sakurai inadvertently made Melee deep, and now who knows what way Brawl will go. Even if Sakurai earns himself the enmity of every super-competitive player out there, I doubt that would really hurt sales. After all, once they've sold you the game, they've got your money, they dont LOSE money when you return it, the brick-and-mortar does, and even then you're taking a loss.

So Sakurai's job is basically to make the game as appealing to everyone as possible, to drum up hype, and to sell copies. I don't think we've even SEEN quotes from him that acknowledge the competitive aspect of Melee. A somewhat confirmation of this was the almost carbon-copied tourney mode from Melee in Brawl, when I don't think any tourney even uses that mode to enact play.

 

[VanillaMummy]

Have you ever played a game of chess or go/weiqi/baduk? It didn't take long for me to pick up either game; after an hour from my dad I was able to pick up chess, and after 20 minutes with my friends I was able to pick up Go, and the mechanics of both games are incredibly simple. However, the best professional players of either game are still able to keep their titles.

I'm hoping that this is how Brawl will be like. As much as I like the lightning fast play that advanced techs bring, they should be secondary to the mental game.

Edit: Oh, and you said that an exploit was what broke Soul Calibur 3, right? Something called Variable Cancel? That's the risk of allowing exploits and glitches to remain in a game. At its best, it opens options. At its worst, it can render a game unplayable at a high level.

That's exactly my opinion. None of these game have extremely hard to remember rules or tactics, its the mental strength and concentration of the competitors that give the games their competitive spirit.

Just because a couple older tactics aren't going to be in Brawl shouldn't raise concern. In fact, in the couple matches people played at E for All they discovered a couple new tricks that could become advanced techs.

Just wait for the game people. It'll be great for casual gamers and still keep its luster for the competitive scene.

 

[Mounshadowz]

I feel, having seen both the casuals play ala; a bunch of guys sitting around plaing the game picking who ever. Compared to the scene at the tournies wavedashing, I've sat next to PC Cris playing fox so I understand the differences of how the game is played. I feel there are two points to make. One is that nintendo is expanding and with that makeing it easier for non-gamers to play. Two the way "hard core smashers" play, I think, is not the way the game was ever meant to be played though with an exploit of a glitch it grew, it really was never meant for it. As a person who has played in tournements knows the advanced tatics and was excited about a game that was going to be a "Melee 2.0". I can honestly say what I was worried about the most was the fact that the game was going to be fun. Apparently the demo was very fun so I am not worried any more. It seems with the 'lack of depth' it has made the game much more balanced. People won't have to play one and only one character to have a chance. I hope to play and dare I say "main" half of the characters that are going to be in the game. And with the new balanced game play I think I'll be able to.
Bottom line from the mouths of all the gamers that went to E.
The DEMO was fun.

 

[Koga]

I think that most of what the OP said is bull, a game doesn't have to take a long time and alot of fancy button skills to master to be a great competative game, now melee does and still is a great competative game, but those arent requirements. Furthermore, if a game has a scene where there is no clear "best Player" but instead has many different players winning, is that a MORE COMPETATIVE game than one where whoever has better finger work is crowned the best and no one can beat him untill they get there button rotation better? 'cause melee is getting to that point right now: the players are becoming so technically skilled that they are finding quicker and better ways to perform their tech skill that they will just jockey for position and start up their perfect button rotations that no amount of DI can stop and then they win, that's not competative, thats just shallow with a lot of weeds to chop down.

from what im seeing brawl is more competative that Melee. With the exception of wavedashing, every tech skill has returned, yes some have changed slightly how you do them, but not in any way that removes depth. If a tech skill now has more options as to how to apply it doesn't that make the game deeper? and if something like canceling becomes more about timing than just pressing a button doesn't that add depth? Now you have to preform L-canceling perfectly to get anything out of it, before as long as you pressed L reasonbly close to when you hit the ground you cut down lag, now you have to fastfall THEN do your arial and you cancel all lag, if you don't do your arial the second you fastfall then you'll see alot of empty short hops just like you can see some empy lazers from Falco if you don't time your SHL perfectly. Whats not deep about that?

Why, also, do you require a huge learning curve and a long amount of time to master for a game to be competative, if every one reaches the peak of tech skill rather quickly wont the acctual strategy of the game come into play more? which would in turn make it more competative? Instead of it being who ever messes up an adv tech skill? that's not strategy, thats kind of a crap shoot acctually.

I'm just tired of people getting all mad and depressed because the game is acctually getting deepre than button skills, the tech skill is still there if not more, but the game is evolving, its the evolution of Smash and we shouldn't be afraid of it, the Depth is there, its just not apparent from the Melee looking glass that we are currently looking through.

 

[MikeMan445]

Pardon me for seeming blunt, but even with the removal of ALL "advanced techs" from this game, this game will probably sell more than Melee. In the end, Smash Bros is about fanservice and fun. It seems to me like Sakurai inadvertently made Melee deep, and now who knows what way Brawl will go.

Ding ding ding.

Here, let me break it down for all of you:

It seems to me like Sakurai inadvertently made Melee deep

I honestly can't believe so many of you have no idea how Nintendo or game development works. They do not care about competitive players, and they do not care about the Melee competitive scene. They care about making a game that's random, wacky, and fun for as many people as possible. The second Sakurai said "Melee was too fast" it should have raised warning bells in all of your heads.

Stop being deluded. Game designers cannot possibly test games at a high enough level to see if they work as competitive games or not. Truly competitive games like Melee are released usually as an accident. Melee was not supposed to be as deep as it turned out to be.

Deal with it.

 

[malva00]

For the record valoem does not play ssb at a high level and he only plays with one character

 

[MikeMan445]

For the record valoem does not play ssb at a high level and he only plays with one character

Yeah also since isai is the best SSB player and like never loses, doesn't that mean that SSB is even more competitive than melee?

dun dun dunnnnn

 

[BigRick]

Sakurai cant ask the best players because the best players are here and Sakurai's in Japan.

 

[err]

[...]
and if something like canceling becomes more about timing than just pressing a button doesn't that add depth? Now you have to preform L-canceling perfectly to get anything out of it, before as long as you pressed L reasonbly close to when you hit the ground you cut down lag, now you have to fastfall THEN do your arial and you cancel all lag, [ . . . ]Whats not deep about that?

the new l-cancelling mechanic could easily reduce possibilities when approaching an opponent with an aerial, because players wanting to l-cancel will have to learn only one -(maybe two)- timings for short hop lag-cancelled aerials, as opposed to melee's options presented to characters like Samus or ganon (think samus' dair, and the alternate ways you can strike with that move... if you want to crash into someone's shield, Lag-cancel and shield bomb, there's really just going to be one speed for it in Brawl;( in melee, you could time that fastfall whenever you wish during the attack and still have the option to lag-cancel ); good smashers will learn these timings of their opponent's intended lag-cancelled aerials (because fewer options exist, therefore we have reduced breadth, therefore we have reduced depth) and i don't even know what the hell will happen after that. It will probably be more like SSB64 where everyone is so good that you *up once, you die.