Gamespot Sakurai Interview: Character Customization, Smash a '4-player Battle Royal Action game'

[Mr.Showtime]

I feel like people aren't understanding what we are saying. We like the idea of having both a competitive and casual option. Trying to remove the competition from a game that was already once competitive (on purpose, this is confirmed many times, do some research if you wish to prove me wrong) isn't a great game design move. It is EASILY possible to do this. Most games today have an option for fun and for competitive.

League of Legends has a All Random All Middle and if you want to be a little more competitive you can player normal maps. If you are really competitive, play ranked.

Starcraft 2 has the EXACT same system. If you want to play for fun, play custom matches. If you want to play seriously, play ranked.

For Smash 64 and melee you have the EXACT same system. If you want to play for fun, turn items on and have random stages. If you want to play seriously, take them off and have set stages.

If you want to play any Halo game casually, turn on random weapons. If you want to play seriously, play with Battle Rifles and other tournament type weapons.

Why is it so hard to understand this concept?

 

[Erimir]

the way to bring casual gamers is to get more casual games on the Wii U. Changing the hardcore games into casual games is a method that is NOT going to work to bring casual gamers to buy games.

Smash Bros supports a hardcore audience, sure. But it's not a game I think of as being a super-hardcore game. I hear plenty of people say that they love Smash Bros who are not hardcore gamers. It's good for a broad range of players. By comparison, I don't know anyone who, say, played Xenoblade Chronicles and was not a serious gamer.

But ummmmm it's pretty popular with the casual crowd. The tourney crowd doesn't account for very much of the millions of sales. It's popular with lots of people who are definitely not hardcore. If they don't think about the casual audience, it will hurt them and the Wii U, because it's going to help sell consoles and not just to people like you.

I'm not saying this to argue in favor of a making the game for casuals and ignoring the more competitive players. All I'm saying is that it would be dumb for them to cater to the hardcore crowd at the exclusion of the casual crowd and to make a game that doesn't appeal to them.

Obviously I prefer them to find a balance and ways to accommodate both types of play.

Casual gamers like games like The Sims, Candy crush saga (#1 free game on android market right now), UNO, angry birds, scrabble, wii sports. they aren't gonna like Smash no matter what you do to it. At least if we're talking about the casual crowd that the Wii managed to grab - people who barely play video games.

Ok, see, when I think of casuals I don't think of Angry Birds players. I think of people who aren't very competitive and not into very hard games. People who like Mario Party and Mario Kart and other party games. And to lots of people, that's what Smash Bros is. A party game. I don't think of people who play only Angry Birds as gamers per se... Or at least, they're in the hyper-casual group.

I think about my friend, and in particular his girlfriend. He used to be more into video games, but nowadays he doesn't like to dedicate a lot of time to it. They love to play New Super Mario Bros and Mario Kart, but they're not going to get hardcore into a lot of games, they like the games you just have some friends and pop it in and people have fun even if they're not all awesome at it and there's some variation in skill level. But they like real video games, not just little mini-games.

If a casual gamer doesn't like Melee with 4 players with all the items and stages on, then no matter what changes you make to the physics of any new smash games, you just aren't going to get them to like it with little changes like auto sweetspot, or less hitstun, or whatever...they can't even tell the difference. It's just not a game for them. The only people these changes affect are the hardcore crowd.

I never said that Sakurai should make changes like that.

I was just put off by your dismissive comment basically suggesting that this game isn't for casual players and they shouldn't care about them.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

I think we are talking about two entirely different groups of people. I agree with you that Smash is totally for casual players, and should remain catered so casual players (as you define it) should enjoy them. I think Smash64, Brawl and Melee all accomplish this. However, to me it seems Sakurai is referring to casual gamers as the Angry birds crowd, so when I say Smash isn't for casual gamers, I'm talking about the crowd that Sakurai seems to be referring to. (A crowd that has never played a smash game in their life, maybe even never played a mario game before!) Sorry for the confusion!

 

[lordvaati]

This vid sort of explains why Smash is defined that way.

Let's use what was said as an example

Now due to their origins, traditional fighters all have the core aesthetic of Competition, as the traditional Arcade systems of before were all about asserting you dominance(like the "Place your Quarter on the line" rite of tribute from then has shown). Smash on the other hand uses competition, but not as the core aesthetic. The closest aesthetic that Smash most likely has the most of is discovery(much like Sakurai's other series Kirby), in that the main feature of Smash is about finding all the hidden characters,stages, trophies, stickers, etc. Traditional fighters have a form of discovery as well, but it's usually static and never moves beyond 3 types: discovering how to perform a specific move,discovering a sequence of moves todo a combo,and discovering the inner workings of a character matchup. In comparison Smash has all3 of those plus the hidden goodies it is well known for.

The real aesthetic that seperates Smash from the others however is that it has Abnegation/Submission, one of the weakest aesthetics of the traditional fighter. With a traditional fighter,if you boot it up you can sometimes play an arcade mode run but eventually it just doesn't feel enjoyable without someone else there due to how the game is built solely for competition-it's the same as playing that LoL tutorial with you vs. bots, as it just doesn't have that same amount of enjoyment as playing against someone else does. Smash however does not have this problem,as it was built in a way that there are tons of way to casually pass the time and enjoy yourself when no one is there,due to the various modes, challenges, and ways you can customize the playstyle to your liking. now of course there are some exceptions (P4A If I recall added a 30+ hour story mode similar to the RPGs that people can get enjoyment out of), but none quite take it to the levels of Smash Bros.

so the reason why some have issue seeing Smash as a fighter is that while competition is a major aesthetic,it's not the most dominant, making the game not present itself like one up front. and due to the very fluid and customizable design of Smash, some people who never looked into the competition aesthetic may doubt there even is one(or file it under the"everything can be made competitive!" excuse). when Sakurai talked about Smash not being a true fighter, he was right because it moves beyond the static features of the fighter and displays traits of it's own.

 

[smashmachine]

Are you suggesting they make it for hardcores and ignore casuals because they aren't on the Wii U right now?

Because I mean, it's not like bringing a multi-million selling franchise that casuals love to the Wii U will help them with that problem. They should just make it for hardcores and forget about getting that casual base to come back.

ok you know what
let's take a bet on whether the Wii U version outsells Melee
I say nope

 

[[Corn]]

ok you know what
let's take a bet on whether the Wii U version outsells Melee
I say nope

Dat unspecific question

 

[lordvaati]

^depends on what you mean outselling-do you mean moving more then 8 million copies, or having 1/3rd of Wii-U owners have the game?

 

[SonicFlash]

Alot these posts. Tl:dr. Or if you really hate me spewing memes, you unfunny koopas, I'll just say too long, didn't read.

But i'm just going to be honest and just say this. Just assuming that everyone is worried about melee.
Too be honest I thought brawl was better then melee. but then again it took me 2 years untill I got bored of melee. but for brawl I am not that bored of it.
But I do agree that melee does have better fighting mechanics then brawl. (I just wished that melees adventure mode wasn't so.. random)

 

[SonicFlash]

^depends on what you mean outselling-do you mean moving more then 8 million copies, or having 1/3rd of Wii-U owners have the game?

You see that orange text on the right that says "reply" yeah click it instead of doing "^".

 

[Mr. Mumbles]

This vid sort of explains why Smash is defined that way.

That was surprisingly educational.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

You see that orange text on the right that says "reply" yeah click it instead of doing "^".

All hail SonicFlash, the new Moderator of the boards.

If you are that lazy to read and must have a TLDR....there are some problems. You're going to have a bad time. Any type of good argument has explanations. I'm not saying the longer the better (that's what she said), I'm talking about good solid facts, good ways of explaining your reasoning, etc.

On topic: Extra Credits does usually have pretty good explanations of game design techniques.

 

[SonicFlash]

All hail SonicFlash, the new Moderator of the boards.

If you are that lazy to read and must have a TLDR....there are some problems. You're going to have a bad time. Any type of good argument has explanations. I'm not saying the longer the better (that's what she said), I'm talking about good solid facts, good ways of explaining your reasoning, etc.

On topic: Extra Credits does usually have pretty good explanations of game design techniques.

Too be honest I do get a little OCD when users use ^ instead of reply button. but if your being serious then, Thanks :D.
I understand what your saying, but I was joking about the tl:dr part. (between you me and this thread I was a little tired when I posted that.)

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Too be honest I do get a little OCD when users use ^ instead of reply button. but if your being serious then, Thanks :D.
I understand what your saying, but I was joking about the tl:dr part. (between you me and this thread I was a little tired when I posted that.)

Don't be cranky!! =)

 

[smashmachine]

I don't know what the ^ discussion was for, but anyway

^depends on what you mean outselling-do you mean moving more then 8 million copies, or having 1/3rd of Wii-U owners have the game?

8 million+ is the primary one, but if the Wii U Smash 4 attach rate beats Melee's, call it a draw (because the Wii U is somehow tracking behind the Gamecube saleswise)

 

[Erimir]

ok you know what
let's take a bet on whether the Wii U version outsells Melee
I say nope

What does that have to do with what Nintendo's optimal strategy is?

It might be that neither a casual-focused nor a hardcore-focused game would beat Melee's sales.

The question that they have is "which one will sell more Super Smash Bros for Wii U/3DS?" and "which one will increase owners of Wii U and 3DS more?"

^depends on what you mean outselling-do you mean moving more then 8 million copies, or having 1/3rd of Wii-U owners have the game?

The attach rate is probably a better comparison if the Wii U ends up doing worse than the GameCube, but if it ends up significantly outselling the GameCube maybe not.

 

[SmashChu]

This vid sort of explains why Smash is defined that way.

Let's use what was said as an example

Now due to their origins, traditional fighters all have the core aesthetic of Competition, as the traditional Arcade systems of before were all about asserting you dominance(like the "Place your Quarter on the line" rite of tribute from then has shown). Smash on the other hand uses competition, but not as the core aesthetic. The closest aesthetic that Smash most likely has the most of is discovery(much like Sakurai's other series Kirby), in that the main feature of Smash is about finding all the hidden characters,stages, trophies, stickers, etc. Traditional fighters have a form of discovery as well, but it's usually static and never moves beyond 3 types: discovering how to perform a specific move,discovering a sequence of moves todo a combo,and discovering the inner workings of a character matchup. In comparison Smash has all3 of those plus the hidden goodies it is well known for.

The real aesthetic that seperates Smash from the others however is that it has Abnegation/Submission, one of the weakest aesthetics of the traditional fighter. With a traditional fighter,if you boot it up you can sometimes play an arcade mode run but eventually it just doesn't feel enjoyable without someone else there due to how the game is built solely for competition-it's the same as playing that LoL tutorial with you vs. bots, as it just doesn't have that same amount of enjoyment as playing against someone else does. Smash however does not have this problem,as it was built in a way that there are tons of way to casually pass the time and enjoy yourself when no one is there,due to the various modes, challenges, and ways you can customize the playstyle to your liking. now of course there are some exceptions (P4A If I recall added a 30+ hour story mode similar to the RPGs that people can get enjoyment out of), but none quite take it to the levels of Smash Bros.

so the reason why some have issue seeing Smash as a fighter is that while competition is a major aesthetic,it's not the most dominant, making the game not present itself like one up front. and due to the very fluid and customizable design of Smash, some people who never looked into the competition aesthetic may doubt there even is one(or file it under the"everything can be made competitive!" excuse). when Sakurai talked about Smash not being a true fighter, he was right because it moves beyond the static features of the fighter and displays traits of it's own.

Why do people post Extra Credit and think it's a good source of information. They either state the obvious or say something very stupid (which is why I couldn't finish that one). Sakurai is someone to listen to on game design because he has been successful. I have no ides what games extra credits has made.

Smash is a fighting game because your goal is just to beat people up. Most fighting games today are made for a small niche group who get angry when someone makes a game they don't like and call it a fighting game. Compeititveness is not the nature of the genre but only becomes one because the games in the genre are made for a niche crowd. Smash just says "Hey, if we make this game easier to play and less focused on a niche crowd, more people will play it." And guess what happens.

 

[Zonderion]

Why do people post Extra Credit and think it's a good source of information. They either state the obvious or say something very stupid (which is why I couldn't finish that one). Sakurai is someone to listen to on game design because he has been successful. I have no ides what games extra credits has made.

Smash is a fighting game because your goal is just to beat people up. Most fighting games today are made for a small niche group who get angry when someone makes a game they don't like and call it a fighting game. Compeititveness is not the nature of the genre but only becomes one because the games in the genre are made for a niche crowd. Smash just says "Hey, if we make this game easier to play and less focused on a niche crowd, more people will play it." And guess what happens.

I don't know the credit-worthiness of Extra Credit, but logically what was in the video makes sense. I don't know how far you made it in the video, but they drew similar comparisons between Portal and FO3. Just because you can draw similar comparisons between games doesn't make them of the same genre. I personally feel that competitiveness is too broad of a stroke because, as humans and to fill our need of dominance, we will turn ANYTHING into competition. I'm not saying that Smash isn't a fighting game, but there's more to it than looking at the surface and making a declaration.