Generally speaking as of now is Smash 4 or Melee more popular with the tournament scene

[Deleted member]

Both are pretty equal, Smash 4 gets more entrants due to accessability and "less" competitive nature, while Melee gets more viewers as it's a better experience as a fast-paced fighter. I do not see Smash 4 dying out like Brawl, it has tons of stuff that makes it unique and fun.

 

[Denjinpachi]

I would say that smash 4 actualy does have that competitive foundation unlike brawl because when brawl was released they made the game slower, no directional air dodging,& dash dancing became useless because of tripping. this shows an obious attempt to make the game more casual. but with smash 4, there were new mechanics added in that made it better competitivley like the removal of tripping, changeing the ledge mechanics to make edgeguarding more fun, a ton of throw combos, a faster speed than brawl and even melee (without using any tech that makes the game so fast like wavedashing,L canceling,ect), and a huge balanced character roster. plus, they put most of the development time into the main mode instead of in an adventure mode.
Infact, I would ay that smash 4 was built to be competitive MORE than melee originally was as competitive melee was made completely from the players hard work,dedication,and efforts. with smash 4 though, It had a Invitational tournameny before the game was released. also, the character balancing is miles better than melee.

I kinda disagree with the view that smash 4 was made to be competitive. Now, initially, it was inarguable that the title was made to be accessible solely for a casual market. This was, in my opinion, solidified in its mechanics, which are relatively close to brawl in its retention of no direction with its air dodging, lack of L-cancelling or "smooth landing," the generous ledge snapping a majority of the cast has, and even the DLC characters which are pretty much made to ensure that people who are fans of prior smash titles, and other games would buy the game, and in turn, the DLC.

I mean, people are going to make any smash brothers game "comptetitive" solely because the game itself is made for you to challenge your friends to see whos the best with their favorite characters. You also have to think about this, the mechanic of edge guarding was changed so that now its not necessarily more "fun," but people had to find away to get around its generous availability to get back to the stage because of how far you can snap to the ledge. I think it's called "ledge trumping," but you have to occupy the ledge after your opponent does so you can try to hit them after you force them off if they don't try to recover as soon as you try to hop on the ledge. This is the only title where you can even do that.

Not, if you want to even look at the speed comparisons of the games, you kinda start to realize that you already had to say that you can't use the mechanics that made melee competitive, or rather, that are used in its competitive play to try to put the two titles on the same field. That's kinda like telling someone they can't use the things they've learned so you can have a chance to win. Like...what? "Don't wavedash, or L-cancel because I can't do it." That's kinda what it seems like you're saying. I might be misinterpreting, but either way, saying that a title that has different features that smash 4 doesn't have, and then saying to compare the two without those features seems like a really odd way to say which is built to be more competitive. In fact, looking at it, it's like saying "Smash 4 is more competitive than melee if melee didn't have wavedashing, and L-cancelling." It's suggesting an outcome of a comparison that requires a game to be less than what it is in order to be compared to the title you're saying was built more competitively than. Doesn't really make sense.

And tbh, the only "balancing" that happened with Melee was with the release of different versions of the game. Melee didn't get an invitational, because at its release people only anticipated it as a sequel. It had no reason to be hyped up as a major title in a competitive market, because it wasn't built up as one yet. There wasn't any way to update, or add to melee besides the release of newer versions in different regions. And even then, no one knew about the differences until the games were broken down and studied.

But, almost 12 or 13 years later, after two titles before it, you know what game did? Smash 4. Not because people knew if they would like it or not as a competitive title, but because of the competitive history of its preceding titles. Brawl and Melee laid a foundation for Smash 4 to be anticipated as the next "big installment" of the series. And commercially, it'd done really well. Recently it's done well as a competitive title, but just like brawl, this is due to it being a new title, easy to access, and easy to get into as a game. That's its niche. It was made to be just that, a game that was easy to get into, easy to buy, and easy to enjoy.

 

[Spak]

Also, there is proof that Sakurai doesn't want the newer games to be geared as much towards competitive play as Melee. I already made a post about this in a thread about if we should want a Melee HD, but its content relates to this topic.

I don't want to have a Melee HD remake; I want to have 5mash on the next home console to have Melee's mechanics. But as long as Sakurai is in development, that won't happen.

Here's Sakurai telling us himself that he doesn't want to release a game as technical as Melee again:

"I had created Smash Bros. to be my response to how hardcore-exclusive the fighting game genre had become over the years, but why did I target it so squarely toward people well-versed in videogames, then? That's why I tried to aim for more of a happy medium with Brawl's play balance. There are three Smash Bros. games out now, but even if I ever had a chance at another one, I doubt we'll ever see one that's as geared toward hardcore gamers as Melee was. Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult."

He said "Melee is the sharpest game in the series" so he's obviously happy with the way it turned out, but he still thinks gearing the gameplay towards hardcore gamers was a mistake.

(Source)

 

[AjmLink]

I'd say it honestly depends on how the patches pan out.

Sm4sh has the potential, but you also can't be ignorant at the fact that Melee had 15 Years to develop while sm4sh only turned 1. You can't assume sm4sh will be better because we aren't comparing similar data. When melee was released we only knew about smash64, while sm4sh was released we actually had marketing behind it as well as a series fan base of players from all 3 other installments.

Only time will tell

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Also, there is proof that Sakurai doesn't want the newer games to be geared as much towards competitive play as Melee. I already made a post about this in a thread about if we should want a Melee HD, but its content relates to this topic.

Technically none of them were.

Melee was a beautiful accident.

But to add truth to what you are saying here, Sakurai wasn't a fan of how melee turned out in areas.

If anything I would say smash 4 listened to feedback on what went wrong with Brawl, if they literally have no cares for the people who wanted sone competitive play, for glory wouldn't have happened at all.

They care more now, it's clear from Genesis 3 with nintendo's confirmed involvement with equipment and discounted equipment they do care for the community.

But at the same time I don't think they want I repeat melee with the skill floor, they want to keep it easier to get into and learn.

At least that is how I see it.

 

[Dino Domain]

As far as viewership goes Melee is probably more popular. At EVO 2015 probably the most viewed smash event ever, Melee finals peaked at over 200K, whereas Wii U only got around 80K. I'm not sure what the total unique views were, but it's probably around the same ratio. Recently at GENESIS Melee got like 114K, not sure how much Wii U got since I missed it.

 

[Spak]

Technically none of them were.

Melee was a beautiful accident.

But to add truth to what you are saying here, Sakurai wasn't a fan of how melee turned out in areas.

If anything I would say smash 4 listened to feedback on what went wrong with Brawl, if they literally have no cares for the people who wanted sone competitive play, for glory wouldn't have happened at all.

They care more now, it's clear from Genesis 3 with nintendo's confirmed involvement with equipment and discounted equipment they do care for the community.

But at the same time I don't think they want I repeat melee with the skill floor, they want to keep it easier to get into and learn.

At least that is how I see it.

They found Wavedashing in development and intentionally kept it in the game, they included techniques like L-Cancelling and powershielding (the ladder having a resemblance to parrying in SF or Guard Cancel in KOF), they bothered with balance patching, even after the game was released (look at regional differences), and Sakurai even said himself that Melee was geared towards hardcore gamers. There's pretty strong evidence that Melee wasn't an accident; if they didn't think the game would be competitive, why would they bother to add obscure things like V-Cancelling and have a one-frame advantage to higher ports to negate port priority? I'm sorry, but I can't see Melee being an accidental miracle with that level of detail.

Also, I think you mean "high skill ceiling" instead of "low skill floor"; floor assumes that you start at a lower level in Melee than you would in Sm4sh (which doesn't make sense because everyone starts with the same experience level regardless of the game), while ceiling assumes the definition of how far you can extend your skills. Both games are easy to get into at a casual level, and Melee is more rewarding in the long-run if you decide to pursue it competitively. It's non-debatable that Melee has a higher skill ceiling, and I have a hard time figuring out why people think that's a bad thing.

They want to give the appearance of caring about the competitive scene because it's a good financial investment (same as Capcom), and they might start to legitimately care about the competitive community after Sakurai leaves the team. At the moment, though, they just want the publicity since they are helping provide publicity for the biggest game on their system; we'll see how much longer Nintendo cares.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

They found Wavedashing in development and intentionally kept it in the game, they included techniques like L-Cancelling and powershielding (the ladder having a resemblance to parrying in SF or Guard Cancel in KOF), they bothered with balance patching, even after the game was released (look at regional differences), and Sakurai even said himself that Melee was geared towards hardcore gamers. There's pretty strong evidence that Melee wasn't an accident; if they didn't think the game would be competitive, why would they bother to add obscure things like V-Cancelling and have a one-frame advantage to higher ports to negate port priority? I'm sorry, but I can't see Melee being an accidental miracle with that level of detail.

Also, I think you mean "high skill ceiling" instead of "low skill floor"; floor assumes that you start at a lower level in Melee than you would in Sm4sh (which doesn't make sense because everyone starts with the same experience level regardless of the game), while ceiling assumes the definition of how far you can extend your skills. Both games are easy to get into at a casual level, and Melee is more rewarding in the long-run if you decide to pursue it competitively. It's non-debatable that Melee has a higher skill ceiling, and I have a hard time figuring out why people think that's a bad thing.

They want to give the appearance of caring about the competitive scene because it's a good financial investment (same as Capcom), and they might start to legitimately care about the competitive community after Sakurai leaves the team. At the moment, though, they just want the publicity since they are helping provide publicity for the biggest game on their system; we'll see how much longer Nintendo cares.

I meant floor.

Smash 4 is way easier to get into than other titles. I almost want to say even more than brawl but also offers more depth and less jank.

I know they kept things in, but they removed the ones they thought were not needed.

I won't start an L-Cancelling debate here but I did think it was for the better to remove it over lower landing lag, though granted it could have been better but patches helped with that.

Wavedashing eh, changing tk airdodge no screwed that over more of less.

Honestly though, I can't agree with them not caring, https://m.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/41qiwf/had_a_conversation_with_a_nintendo_employee_at/

They do care, they helped Genesis a lot, but for some reason they want to be hush hush about it, dunno why on that but they do care.

I get why you think what you do with Sakurai and such but while I agree he goes against the compedtive crowd more than he should he still wants the game to open up and be played for everyone.

Edit: I did mean skill floor, being able to play the baseline if melee requires a lot of solo labbing up. Smash 4 doesn't and has other tools like a better online to help people learn it better.

 

[O Rai]

Personally i find Melee more attractive overall, but smash 4 has some nice notes that make it try to look competitive. For the whole idea about how melee was too hardcore, is pseudo right but in all honesty playing project M and RoA are safer alternatives in terms of finding a fun time playing at the fast pace (i.e. its easier to learn those two for newcomers since they are better balanced).

Melee's mechanics and sense of balance is pretty much fair considering no updates, since characters like actually had a useful purpose of outranging close range threats like and actually has a reward for having a freaking long sword, whereas in smash 4 fair (an arm) has better range than fair (an arm and a light and (usually) long sword).

For offstage play i'd be torn since grabbing ledge in melee seems like a cheap stock (of course pros have a serious proof on how important recovery is and I'm not criticizing it at all), but in smash 4 the offstage mind games find a whole new explored style of combat between the techs, the constant time spent duking it out in mid air, and how ledge stealing could actually give you a positional advantage/ chance for a follow up spike. Ledge regrabbing is also a risky play whereas in melee/ brawl its kinda exploitable).

I also love Melee since there's no replacement for and the fact that they aren't in smash 4 is still unreasonable to this day (i know the reasons but handhelds shouldn't limit the consoles in terms of having unique cast members return- also i would bet that the New 3DS could probably have handled them). Also the IC's matchup brought a whole new challenge to melee, but missing them in smash 4 is a likely reason why has nearly no bad MU's.

In both games, Heavies will never shine since seems to be the only one to make a notable impact on the (melee) scene outside of the early pseudo-broken customs of . also normal only really makes a dent in smash 4 when someone like Tweak plays them.

 

[DPKdebator]

Another factor that should be considered in this is the ready availability of the games- Melee has been out of print for probably nearly 10 years now, and buying it on eBay will cost seventy dollars (however the console is much cheaper); whereas Smash 4 is newer, still in production, and costs less (usually fifty to sixty dollars).

 

[thehard]

Statistically speaking in entrants

Weeklies/regionals: Smash 4
FGC/General events: Slightly more Smash 4, can be even
Large majors: Melee

 

[Defonic]

Found this thread through Google when searching to see what people considered to be more popular between melee and 4.

Stumbled across this thread and holy hell... I knew melee players looked down on Sm4sh players fairly often, seeing the latest installment as a fisher price diluted version of their beloved game... But wow.

So many people speaking with incredible levels of certainty that sm4sh had seen its peak and will fade away into obscurity similar to brawl. Or at best people thought it would maintain its current level of popularity if not declining just a little, but never being able to touch melee.

However it's shown that sm4sh has brought in more competitors at the big tournaments this year following this post, often in numbers that are significant and beyond a margin that one might try to chalk up as luck.

However I didn't revive this thread just to laugh at those they couldn't predict the future (or more likely those that didn't want to Come to terms with the fact that melee will actually have a installment that could dethrone it); I'm bumping this to ask the same question again...

What do you think is popular now, competitively speaking. Taking into consideration the number of entrants in regionals and national, the number of smaller tourneys/weeklies that cater to the individual games, prize money's for all these events, etc. Also I'm curious as to what you all think will continue to happen in the future. Still thinking sm4sh will fade out in short time with melee sticking around at similar popularity, or perhaps do you think the tides have changed and that melee will soon be giving up the throne in due time.

but just lol at the people who quoted evo 2015 to be the peak

 

[Mr. Oshawott]

While I'm in affirmation that Melee still brings in massive crowds and provides intense competitive action, I'm also aware that its popularity will one day see a gradual decline, if it hasn't already... The reason Sm4sh is garnering more attention and maintaining its player base has to do with its much-simpler accessibility and a fairer skill ceiling.

 

[Lola Luftnagle]

Melee would have to be the better of the two due the desirable fast pace, good balance between offensive/defensive play, and the plethora of advanced techniques. Smash 4 will soon rise to supremacy with a much wider character selection and developing metagames.

 

[Foxy_Faux]

Hey guys, rebumping, and I'm a melee player but consider myself a reasonably objective one at that. HEre are some of my speculations.

Though Sm4sh has the lead in numbers as of this last year from my understanding, Melee has the lead in viewership numbers. There are reddit threads that try to dissect the data and everything. However the previous comments that were made regarding Melee not being as accessible as Smash 4 WiiU are arguably being nullified more and more day by day, because now there are cheaper accessible alternatives to playing melee in the form of emulators and netplay, or faster melee. To the extent that Melee has become as close to accessible as other cross platform and PC games. That doesn't even take into consideration that by playing melee on a pc you are not restricted to using a gamecube controller and adaptor but can even use a keyboard or xbox controller, or arcade stick. This isn't including the 20xx training hack packs and other mods like TE which are more resources for players who can learn more from their replays and pre program inputed training bots. Which I believe in theory has something to do with why Melee is a few hundred players behind in entrants to big tournaments, but often times significantly leading in tournament viewership. Another weakness I see from the melee TO's that may hurt the melee tournament entrant numbers is the reluctance to allow Smashbox/ arcade styled controllers into the tournament legal ruleset, which would be a strong growing point if Melee viewers cross over with other FGC viewer bases. Another point that has been brought up to some extent is the development of each game's meta and how despite Melee's ever impressive depth the meta is supposedly set in stone and stale, whereas smash 4's is still fresh and new. (with the exception of complaints about how broken bayonetta or cloud are) Arguments that have some truth to them, but also aren't the 'be all: end all,' in my opinion. Melee has had some mid/low tier character upsets spring up as of the last couple years, and though the streamlined "optimal" play at the top does get tiring to watch it just goes to show there is more to be discovered in the under developed characters that can still change the meta. That is why low tier character knowledge in melee and character knowledge in general given smash 4's case is something that should be shared more thoroughly. However I believe this issue may to an extent be partilly due to the difficulty and patience it takes to play, learn, and implement successful gameplay with under developed characters, and people wouldn't want to share certain bread and butters or options for the sake of claiming the fame themselves. Soooo, it's all an interesting tossup. Melee likely has more players, that would prefer just to be hidden bosses through netplay ladders than compete in person, it's cheaper and similarly enjoyable if you just enjoy playing the game for the characters and engine(especially if they play with a controller that isn't a GCC).
Lastly, this may be getting long, but another theory I have is parallels between fighting game character archetypes: Grapplers, Zoners, Vortex Characters, Tech Trappers, Shotos, well rounded characters, Heavy Hitters, Light Chippers, and any combination and speed/weight classes of the above. This is where my lack of experience with Smash 4 will show as I can not classify any of the characters in that roster among these styles most relative to the street fighter series (which is the holy grail of fighting games) but Melee appears to incorporate these traits in their characters in such a way that their archetypes or at least styles are significantly noticeable at a glance. This is further emphasized by the significant differences in weight/gravity speeds of characters and why different characters pressure shields or take certain stage positions relative to their toolkit's strengths. One can even go as far as saying the parallels are even obvious for example:
Fox Upsmash ~ Remy's Rising Rage Flash/Guiles Flash Kick
Link/Donkey Kong's Grounded UpB ~ Zangief's Lariat/Ryus Tatsumaki Senpukyaku
Falco's Lasers/Samus Missles ~ Remy's Light of Virtues(varying height/speed projectile)
Link/Young Link Boomerangs ~ Projectiles with varying angles for reading jumps (ie Urien/Akuma)
Shek/Peach's DownSmash ~ Akuma's Tatsumaki Senpukyaku
Sheik's Needles ~ Ibuki's Kunais

This is just a short list off the top of my head, and I'm sure there are more, also any juggles and chaingrabs/tech chases grant multiple characters grappler status for the fast faller match ups. However, I don't know whether mechanically in smash 4 these character traits bear resemblance in play style and archetype to said games. Because i'm sure pacing plays an important role too, and to an extent maybe they are more similar, but graphically smash 4 would lend itself to seem more like SFV. But this is speculation as I do not have much experience playing smash 4 outside of at a bar in downtown riverside on wednesdays when they have game nights. OH! Also community TO's and communities also contribute to the longevity of the game, I have been running Monthly Melee Singles tournaments in San Bernardino at the Brew Rebellion Brewery for almost 2 years now and have recently started doing biweeklies, because it ensures that I have people to play against and get enjoyment out of creating a home for the local smash communities in the Inland Empire of Southern California, and additionally, San Bernardino was one of the city's that filed for bankruptcy because it really has no culture and news outlets like the LA Times are consistently bad mouthing this city in order to make LA look better. So I'm very aware of how social politics affects local economies. Me doing tournaments has been a boon for not only the melee players here, but also a source of revenue for the brewery to stay open here, it's the first one we've ever had. So What i'm saying is, multi faceted problems, have multi faceted solutions. Also I don't run Smash 4 tournaments, because someone else already runs biweeklies for them, and we mutually reached out to each other to experiment with hosting biweeklies on the same days. Presumably in case there is any cross fertilization of entrants.which coincidentally has only happened from smash 4 players who like melee entering my tournaments, 1 each week. If you were to ask me my opinion on why I or most other melee players won't give smash 4 an honest effort, it's because the game doesn't quite feel as rewarding at first, the changes mechanically are really odd, because to me it feels like there are less movement options in a game that I believe relies more on movement than anything else. Movement is an important part of what makes characters viable, in my opinion. Anyway, I hope this strikes up some constructive, creative conversations for how we can work to build sustainable competitive gaming scenes for the benefit of our players, as well as for our regions, some of which are in dire need of economic engines like Esports to bring something new to the area.