Has "For Items" Competitive Smash Officially begun?

[SmashBrawl2]

Hey guys,

I noticed ironically that the largest and biggest Smash Bros tournament has included a portion of Classic Smash Bros items matches on stages and what-not...

I found this too be quite exciting.

Me and my friends have been wanting a "For Items" tournament, based around the real, traditional Smash Bros,
with items, stage hazzards, weapons, moves, etc...

I know this was attempted before, and i know they stopped doing it, because alot of Competitive Melees from Gamecube couldn't really handle all the mechanics involved competitively: meaning the dodging, defensive and offensive gameplay required in the real core game, outside of the "no items" meta-game. And also because of tripping apparently...

With-that said, I am really suprised Nintendo would embrace something that really would have been great to pursue...

So i believe this may lead to a revival of Competitive play based around the full game...

I know some people will claim its too hard or random, but the reality is you have to face off against more game mechanics, and use alot of different skills to win, in comparison to the "no items", "moves only", meta-game....


So either this is the beginning of something more?

Or maybe the core, traditional Smash Bros fans that play the full game: "items, stages, moves, hazzards, weapons" way

don't really care about this type of competition.... Though i think the Smash Tournament changed that a little...

Everybody had a great time and enjoyed watching!

So what do you think? Do you think this could branch off into more Competitive competitions based around the core game? Or is competitive Smash "too niche" for the majority of gamers that play the traditional, real items way?

-Sound off in the comments below, cheers.

 

[Canuckduck]

A so-called "For Items" tournament would be largely based on luck rather than skill. Plus, it would discourage actually fighting the opponent and encourage camping. I mean, look at the invitational. Most of the players there just waited for Smash Balls and other items to appear.

A SSB4 tourney needs to be based upon straight up SKILL.

 

[Chibi-Chan]

Play it if you want. There's no way it will happen unless Nintendo starts hosting many tournaments with this ruleset (Like it happened with Pokemon RPG). The current competitive Smash community has went through this debate dozens of times...Result has always been the same.

 

[DunnoBro]

If they could work in more items like the boomerang, bananas, the gyro, etc that can boon both players slightly with repeated, but mediocre use, and make only those legal with set spawn points then maybe items could be something to consider. (Might be nice if there was one otherwise competitive stage that had an item spawn point)

But overall they're extremely anti-competitive.

 

[SmashBrawl2]

A so-called "For Items" tournament would be largely based on luck rather than skill. Plus, it would discourage actually fighting the opponent and encourage camping. I mean, look at the invitational. Most of the players there just waited for Smash Balls and other items to appear.

A SSB4 tourney needs to be based upon straight up SKILL.

Objectively its more competitive to include items, and technically you have to use alot more skills within the core game:
Ability to get items, health and or weapons, avoid them, avoid projectiles hazzards, get Smash Balls, avoid stage hazzards, set them up, along with using moves too. Factually, you have to use far more skill (not saying that to be mean, you really do) in the traditional, core, classic game...

Play it if you want. There's no way it will happen unless Nintendo starts hosting many tournaments with this ruleset (Like it happened with Pokemon RPG). The current competitive Smash community has went through this debate dozens of times...Result has always been the same.

What happened with Pokemon RPG? Curious to know...

 

[DunnoBro]

Objectively its more competitive to include items, and technically you have to use alot more skills within the core game:
Ability to get items, health and or weapons, avoid them, avoid projectiles hazzards, get Smash Balls, avoid stage hazzards, set them up, along with using moves too. Factually, you have to use far more skill (not saying that to be mean, you really do) in the traditional, core, classic game...

Technically, yea. You need to use and learn more skills and there's other tactics to use with items, but overall the effects of luck triumph over skill and no matter how good you get with items, the player the pokeball spawned closest too has the advantage.

 

[Chibi-Chan]

What happened with Pokemon RPG? Curious to know...

Originally we had community rules, created in Smogon forums (Nobody told people how they should play, so good players made the backroom thing and agreed on those), where the competitive community gathers (Like Smashboards).
General rules was 6v6 singles with intricate banlist/tiering system. Sleep clause, species cause, suicide clause and Evasion clause. (Read more at Smogon site)

Then Nintendo hosted the VGC tournaments, which are 4v4 Doubles play with a VERY VERY different banlist, item clause and other differences.

It's a completely different meta (Doubles) and many switched to it so they could participate in big Nintendo sponsored stuff. Smogon still dominates the singles meta but... It's not the same, and community is kinda split about it.

Not the place for a Pokemon lesson though. But it goes to show that if Nintendo starts offering money to play by some random rules they choose, then a good amount of people will learn and play those... It could even become the standard if Nintendo keeps hosting tournaments on a regular basis.

 

[Nstinct]

Honestly, during the Invitationals the items were entertaining. Then when we got to Grand Finals I was even more excited because it was 1 vs 1 and less crazy. In short, 4 player FFA with items is kind of crazy and makes it difficult to understand all that is going on. I actually watched some of those matches again focusing on another character and it felt like a totally different match.

But I'm an open person so I wouldn't be against at least trying something like that out, but that would be it's own metagame since characters like Sonic and Palutena could reach items first, then there's the Villager who can store any item (even barrels..)

 

[GrownCannoli]

This website is 2008 srk all over again. Whoopie..

Just to stay on topic items are very bad for competitive play. Added randomness with less control. That about sums it all up.

 

[Nstinct]

But it goes to show that if Nintendo starts offering money to play by some random rules they choose, then a good amount of people will learn and play those... It could even become the standard if Nintendo keeps hosting tournaments on a regular basis.

That's pretty much what I was going to say. Is the very thing we were excited to hear about to become a vacuum sucking in all new and potential smash players into what we would consider a more casual tournament? We'd then probably be criticized by the newer players for holding what they consider to be strict rules. Then again they could be intrigued, the more "stable" standard tourney rules combined with good players can make for some exciting matches.


Another thing to ask yourself is, would their ever be "Big Contenders" in tournaments with items and/or FFAs. Would anyone have a consistent win record? When many understand the basic metagame (whether it'd be running away or always being first to items) they'd all become but a single tree in the forest. Even sports which are competitive become much more exciting when there's big players or strong teams with great scores or many wins.

 

[tyc]

If Nintendo would be going for a VGC (pokemon's tournament series) kind of competition for Sm4sh i think they would go for the "For Glory" rules as with Pokémon they go for the same rules as ranked matches. That would be silly of them to put a built in competitive mode in their online options but ignoring it and go for FFA with items for their tournaments.

 

[Venus of the Desert Bloom]

If they can get people interested in a item-based competitive tournament, then I'm ok with it but I guarantee any tournament won't include items as they tend to be random and require less skill than actual competitive play.

And yes, while this latest Nintendo tournament did include items, the Grand Finals was more well received as it was reminiscent of competitive tournaments.

However, I do feel a Nintendo sanctioned tournament will most likely include items and stage with hazards. Though I doubt that most competitive smashers will bother participating unless a huge incentive.

So yeah, I only see item/stage hazard tournaments if Ninrendo or a grass roots movement can start it up.

I also wouldn't call that the core-traditional way of playing. The beautiful thing about Smash Bros. is how people interpret and play it. There's really no incorrect way to play the game

 

[Vintage Creep]

I love items and always play with them, but it's undeniable than matches without items, based on skill and technique, are far more logical and even more spectacular to see.
The Sm4sh Invitational was awesome for what it was, a promotional party hosted by Nintendo itself, it was fun, cute and the sense of brotherhood of the community was strong as hell.
EVO championships though must stay the same, and I hope Sm4sh is good enough to create at least the same following as Melee.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

If and when Nintendo does their own smash tournament setup I can see it including items and/or "unfair" stages. I even imagine it'd get the same reaction as VGC. Loathing, followed by acceptance, followed by enjoyment. It'd just be a different kind of thing and of course traditional tournaments would still happen, but it'd be just as fun as the invitational was.

 

[D-idara]

Hey guys,

I noticed ironically that the largest and biggest Smash Bros tournament has included a portion of Classic Smash Bros items matches on stages and what-not...

I found this too be quite exciting.

Me and my friends have been wanting a "For Items" tournament, based around the real, traditional Smash Bros,
with items, stage hazzards, weapons, moves, etc...

I know this was attempted before, and i know they stopped doing it, because alot of Competitive Melees from Gamecube couldn't really handle all the mechanics involved competitively: meaning the dodging, defensive and offensive gameplay required in the real core game, outside of the "no items" meta-game. And also because of tripping apparently...

With-that said, I am really suprised Nintendo would embrace something that really would have been great to pursue...

So i believe this may lead to a revival of Competitive play based around the full game...

I know some people will claim its too hard or random, but the reality is you have to face off against more game mechanics, and use alot of different skills to win, in comparison to the "no items", "moves only", meta-game....


So either this is the beginning of something more?

Or maybe the core, traditional Smash Bros fans that play the full game: "items, stages, moves, hazzards, weapons" way

don't really care about this type of competition.... Though i think the Smash Tournament changed that a little...

Everybody had a great time and enjoyed watching!

So what do you think? Do you think this could branch off into more Competitive competitions based around the core game? Or is competitive Smash "too niche" for the majority of gamers that play the traditional, real items way?

-Sound off in the comments below, cheers.

Although I agree that Items tournaments are very exciting and unpredictable, this 'real way' or 'full-game' terminology you use...that's just straight-up flamebait :/ Try to avoid sounding condescending, you're being as bad as the people you're criticizing, I understand why some people play without Items, I personally play both, but you shouldn't call a way to play 'real'.

Although most tournaments should be all skill-based, some more hectic stages would be fine for competitive play, and I don't think it would hurt anyone to have a Items Tournament side-event, as opposed to what most people believe, an Items match is not really 90% luck, the better player will most likely win, even with items.

 

[Nstinct]

the better player will most likely win, even with items.

B-but Ken.

(Although I understand his character was changed and that was a large contribution.)

 

[Overswarm]

I've had some experience with items. Not as much as @Jack Kieser of course, but I've entered in item (and FFA!) tournaments and hosted a few myself. They're typically side events, but we're fun and competitive in the midwest.

I'll start by clarifying a few things:

1. Certain items just need to be banned. This is typically any item that makes the optimal strategy "run away" rather than "dodge". You can dodge a turtle shell or a smart bomb. You cannot dodge a invincibility starred opponent or prevent them from grabbing a heart that spawns next to them.
2. Smashballs are off or on. When on, they contribute to the balance of the character roster. When off, they don't. You can't really say smash balls aren't "fair", because they are known aspects. So-and-so may have a bad final smash, but that just goes to balance.
3. With the right item list, items are balanced for competitive play. This means that you have "consistent results", and that's all it means.
4. Items *narrow and compress the tier list*. The only exception would be Smash Balls, which make some great (Sonic) and others mediocre.

That said, the individual results of item-based matches DOES have more variance than your typical set. It can be upsetting to people to see they're about to win and then an item spawn in mid-air, be grabbed, and change the obvious result. The end result is typically the same because this is fairly rare, but it can be a "that is bull****" factor that people dislike.

The most crazy thing we found is that while items narrow and compress the tier list, they EXPAND the gap between competitive and non-competitive players in 1v1 settings! You'd expect it to be more of a toss up, but it isn't. If you're a top player and you can maneuver easily around the stage you're going to dominate a player who can't, and items help you get KOs very easily.

The reason most don't want to play with items is typically an emotional one. It's not "their smash", and that's fine! It can work competitively without items, as we've all seen.

Items also make FFAs WAY more competitive. We've had a lot of those around here. Trick is to give one pass to whoever survives (wins the match) and one pass to whoever has the most KOs at the end. FFAs without items typically end up as a "gang up on the winner" with the winner having no options, but items give those opportunities. It's fun.

Don't expect items to become mainstream though.

 

[Ginger Hail]

At this point, an Items ruleset would most likely end up as only a side event and never part of the main tournament. Items essentially change the focus of the match from the actual fighting to whoever gets the items first.

 

[Renji64]

Items can be a side event for fun with casuals and people who are into it. But it should remain the same no items matches have a ton of hype and great moments. Minus the stalling one at the invational.

 

[Networker1]

The only way I see items getting in is if they only go for items like green shell, beam sword, screw jump, etc, No hammers or lightning, because those are totally OP. Pokeball/Assists/Smashball would be where the debate is

 

[menotyou135]

thred is 11/10. wud thred agin

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Honestly this wreaks of troll.

He used several bait phrases like "Real game" or "Real Smash Bros", "True" and "Core".

Immediately when I see those I switch my brain off, dunno about you guys.

 

[menotyou135]

Honestly this wreaks of troll.

He used several bait phrases like "Real game" or "Real Smash Bros", "True" and "Core".

Immediately when I see those I switch my brain off, dunno about you guys.

Glad someone else sees it.

 

[Evil Idol]

While Nintendo hosting a tournament was amazing, it was joke. The inclusion of items, and sudden death for that matter, don't promote fighting at all but rather idling standing around waiting for Smashballs and pokeballs. When it comes to competitive Smash, no items will always be the preferred method as it promotes actual fighting rather than item camping.

 

[Spellbinder]

To me, there are three types of Smash Bros. Skills.

Fighting, resourcefulness, and survival.

Fighting is using the character's move set to defeat your opponent. Resourcefulness is adding items to defeat your opponent. Survival is being able to survive on whichever board you are on and still be able to defeat your opponent.

People often say items involve luck but the items are equally available to both players.

I would also be for the at least low inclusion of items and a random board select (how I host tournaments).

I think the "only a few boards" and "no items" is more for players who want to focus on just fighting and don't feel like practicing their resourcefulness or survival.

People argue the characters are imbalanced but with all boards and all items, they become more equal. Some characters are better at survival. Some have weaker moves but are great at snatching items.

You alienate a lot of characters with a fighting only tournament.

 

[Phantom High]

I don't really want items tournaments.
It'll just make the more mobile characters more dominate.

Also the luck factor will be so huge that the scene will lose credibility

 

[World]

I know this was attempted before, and i know they stopped doing it, because alot of Competitive Melees from Gamecube couldn't really handle all the mechanics involved competitively: meaning the dodging, defensive and offensive gameplay required in the real core game, outside of the "no items" meta-game. And also because of tripping apparently...

This could be a troll thread but I'll just respond normally regardless.

The argument of random factors like items and tripping adding more mechanics to competitve play just falls apart
when you read Sakurai's view of adding such mechanics to make the game non-competitive.

This should tell you all what you need to know on Sakurai's view on what Items mean for Smash:

 

[Hitzel]

The most crazy thing we found is that while items narrow and compress the tier list, they EXPAND the gap between competitive and non-competitive players in 1v1 settings! You'd expect it to be more of a toss up, but it isn't. If you're a top player and you can maneuver easily around the stage you're going to dominate a player who can't, and items help you get KOs very easily.

This is a line of thinking that I'm often bothered by and feel like commenting on^^^

We shouldn't care what happens between good and bad players; we should instead be worried what happens between good players and other good players.

Most "bad" competitive games I've seen aren't bad because of the gameplay between good and bad players, they're bad because the gameplay between good players is shallow / boring / random / etc. Bad players don't matter; they're going to lose anyway so who cares?

If anything, a game should take steps to make sure a new / bad player is still having fun in ways that don't disrupt higher levels of play, that way beginners aren't scared off so easily and are more likely to get into the game and grow the community.

I suspect that you didn't quite mean this explicitly in the way I just said, but I still see so many more of these "good players should be able to destroy bad players" comments over "evenly-matched good players should have plenty of room to outplay each other" comments. I want to see more of the latter.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

What I hate about items the most is that a bomb can appear on top of you at any moment and explode when you do an attack. Thus, killing you. Skill? No...

 

[RODO]

The thing is, when you are at a tournament with money on the line you don't want to lose your money because of chance.

 

[FooltheFlames]

I know this was attempted before, and i know they stopped doing it, because alot of Competitive Melees from Gamecube couldn't really handle all the mechanics involved competitively: meaning the dodging, defensive and offensive gameplay required in the real core game, outside of the "no items" meta-game. And also because of tripping apparently...

That's a really shallow way of thinking... are you sure you're not a troll?
I dont agree with any of this core game concept you speak of
if you really want an item tournament then host one yourself and see how many people show up agreeing with your philosophy

 

[LiteralGrill]

I've had some experience with items. Not as much as @Jack Kieser

You beckon him to the thread but didn't link the Item Standard Play Thread? Shame on you Overswarm!

Your post still was excellent though. If we are to use items even for side events, something similar to ISP should be used.

I actually made two items related threads a bit back for discussing them in Sm4sh here and here. Overall the impressions seemed that there was a decent sized group that would like to see them tested and have a new ISP for the next game. It probably will never be as big as a main event, but if people want to play with Items and there are enough of them tournaments can happen (at a bare minimum online tournaments.) If you are a person who likes items just give me a shout out and if there really is interest I can try hosting something online once Smash is out.

 

[Overswarm]

This is a line of thinking that I'm often bothered by and feel like commenting on^^^

We shouldn't care what happens between good and bad players; we should instead be worried what happens between good players and other good players.

It's incredibly important.

Most "bad" competitive games I've seen aren't bad because of the gameplay between good and bad players, they're bad because the gameplay between good players is shallow / boring / random / etc. Bad players don't matter; they're going to lose anyway so who cares?

The bad players care.

In one of my first competitive ventures with Smash, I got destroyed by Darkrain. But it was a fun way of being destroyed. It encouraged me to move on in that direction. If it was with all items on and he beat me by throwing a bob-omb at me or a pokeball I have an opportunity to say "this is BS" and quit.

More importantly, it's not just "#1 player vs. #590249 player". It's also "#43 player vs. #55 player". The gap between those players increases as well, to the point where minor advantages can become overwhelming. That's disparaging.

If anything, a game should take steps to make sure a new / bad player is still having fun in ways that don't disrupt higher levels of play, that way beginners aren't scared off so easily and are more likely to get into the game and grow the community.

I suspect that you didn't quite mean this explicitly in the way I just said, but I still see so many more of these "good players should be able to destroy bad players" comments over "evenly-matched good players should have plenty of room to outplay each other" comments. I want to see more of the latter.

It's one of those "common sense" things that turns out to be awful in hindsight. You wouldn't play Smash if everyone could defeat you with relative ease and there was no hope of improving. This is just that same concept in a more realistic setting.

You beckon him to the thread but didn't link the Item Standard Play Thread? Shame on you Overswarm!

Your post still was excellent though. If we are to use items even for side events, something similar to ISP should be used.

I actually made two items related threads a bit back for discussing them in Sm4sh here and here. Overall the impressions seemed that there was a decent sized group that would like to see them tested and have a new ISP for the next game. It probably will never be as big as a main event, but if people want to play with Items and there are enough of them tournaments can happen (at a bare minimum online tournaments.) If you are a person who likes items just give me a shout out and if there really is interest I can try hosting something online once Smash is out.

Online, if it works, would be a good place to test such things.

 

[DakotaBonez]

This could be a troll thread but I'll just respond normally regardless.
This should tell you all what you need to know on Sakurai's view on what Items mean for Smash:

Who gives a sh#$ what Sakurai thinks about competitive smash?
If anything, the final destination stereotype is an insult to the competitive community, who have more often than not incorporated stages with platforms like Battlefield along with final destination.

I felt that Sakurai gave better final smashes to characters that he thought were underpowered.
Sakurai did build the games balance around items. I mean a character like Mario may be low tier in a 1v1 final destination match, but if you add items, then suddenly his ability to reflect them with his cape makes him the best character in the game.

Anyway, the point is that most people just have more fun without items, or, since brawl, no items except smash balls.

 

[Canuckduck]

Who gives a sh#$ what he thinks about competitive smash?
If anything, the final destination stereotype is an insult to the competitive community, who have more often than not incorporated stages with platforms along with final destination.

I felt that Sakurai gave better final smashes to characters that he thought were underpowered.
Sakurai did build the games balance around items. I mean a character like Mario may be low tier in a 1v1 final destination match, but if you add items, then suddenly his ability to reflect them with his cape makes him the best character in the game.

Anyway, the point is that most people just have more fun without items, or, since brawl, no items except smash balls.

I feel that he should balance the game with taking items OUT of mind and putting stages IN mind.

Once again I will say this: there should be Battlefield versions of the stages for For Glory mode as well.

 

[Neoleo21]

Simply as others said, items depend heavily on luck and remove skill from the equation, even smash balls appear randomly and should not be included

 

[MooseSmuggler]

Me and my friends have been wanting a "For Items" tournament, based around the real, traditional Smash Bros,
with items, stage hazzards, weapons, moves, etc...

alot of Competitive Melees from Gamecube couldn't really handle all the mechanics involved competitively: meaning the dodging, defensive and offensive gameplay required in the real core game, outside of the "no items" meta-game. And also because of tripping apparently...

So i believe this may lead to a revival of Competitive play based around the full game...

I know some people will claim its too hard or random, but the reality is you have to face off against more game mechanics, and use alot of different skills to win, in comparison to the "no items", "moves only", meta-game....

Or maybe the core, traditional Smash Bros fans that play the full game: "items, stages, moves, hazzards, weapons" way

Or is competitive Smash "too niche" for the majority of gamers that play the traditional, real items way?

-Sound off in the comments below, cheers.

Well ain't you the high-tom-ti**y.

Seriously though, it's like others have already said, there's no "traditional" way to play the game, there's no "real" way, and there's no "wrong" way. That's the point of the series: you play it the way you want. You can enjoy the game with items/hazards/whatever, that's your choice and you're entitled to it. But your way is not the "real" way, so stop acting like it is.

As for the topic at hand, I personally prefer luck being less of a factor, and thus prefer items off. But as with Brawl, I'll probably do a few matches with items just for kicks when I first get it, but 95% of my playing is gonna be 1-on-1, no items. That's my preferred way to play, and it's no better or worse than your way.

 

[Canuckduck]

Well ain't you the high-tom-ti**y.

Seriously though, it's like others have already said, there's no "traditional" way to play the game, there's no "real" way, and there's no "wrong" way. That's the point of the series: you play it the way you want. You can enjoy the game with items/hazards/whatever, that's your choice and you're entitled to it. But your way is not the "real" way, so stop acting like it is, because it makes you look like an arrogant git.

As for the topic at hand, I personally prefer luck being less of a factor, and thus prefer items off. But as with Brawl, I'll probably do a few matches with items just for kicks when I first get it, but 95% of my playing is gonna be 1-on-1, no items. That's my preferred way to play, and it's no better or worse than your way.

I prefer items on very low, with Smash Balls, Pokeballs, Fans, Bumpers, and Assist Trophies turned off.

 

[World]

Who gives a sh#$ what Sakurai thinks about competitive smash?

We all basically care about Sakurai's mentality on competitive smash in this forum and other Smash related websites
with petitions and arguments on how Smash 4 can be more competitive.

If anything, the final destination stereotype is an insult to the competitive community, who have more often than not incorporated stages with platforms like Battlefield along with final destination.

I felt that Sakurai gave better final smashes to characters that he thought were underpowered.
Sakurai did build the games balance around items. I mean a character like Mario may be low tier in a 1v1 final destination match, but if you add items, then suddenly his ability to reflect them with his cape makes him the best character in the game.

Anyway, the point is that most people just have more fun without items, or, since brawl, no items except smash balls.

Sakurai and his team are trying to balance Smash 4 with everyone (casuals and competitives) in mind:

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/06/10/masahiro-sakurai-super-smash-bros-balanced/

Sakurai went on to note the importance of not catering to one specific audience while developing a Super Smash Bros. game. Doing so would definitely make developing and balancing the game easier, but it would also reduce the number of people that would play and enjoy the game.

One of the goals for Super Smash Bros. is that it’s a party game—Nintendo want people to pick it up and have fun together. This is why “For Fun” and “For Glory” modes are separated within the game, to allow for both competitive and casual players to enjoy themselves.

Whether or not competitive players will be content with the final product is something we'll see after release.

 

[BombKirby]

Who gives a sh#$ what Sakurai thinks about competitive smash?
If anything, the final destination stereotype is an insult to the competitive community, who have more often than not incorporated stages with platforms like Battlefield along with final destination.

They were probably trying to explain it to him in an UNDERSTANDABLE and SIMPLE way. Overcomplicate the explanation of "stages without hazards" and you risk getting a mangled version of competitive stages thats even worse than an FD version of everything.

If you never played a competitive version of a game and you had to be taught everything about it in a short amount of pre-production time, you too would probably give us the most simplified version of the competitive game imaginable. Casual playstyle outweights competitive by MILLIONS in every single game on the planet. I wouldn't be shocked if Sakurai never looked too much into the ruleset of competitive at all. There are millions of...lets say for example... Pokemon fans that don't know the first thing about the competitive side of that even if they've played since Red/Blue. It's not uncommon.

-----------------------------------------------

Anyways I don't think Items tournaments will ever be accepted until there's a way to have a set time/place where an item will appear. A mode where 1 item appears every 30 to 60 seconds in the center of the stage could be interesting. People would fight over center stage dominance waiting for it to spawn. There would probably be banned items too like the hammer or smash balls since they take away a free stock easily.

They only put them on at the tournament at E3 because the demo has no way of shutting them off AND to showcase them. Final Smashes are fun to watch. They get the crowd going. Tons of programmers/artists brought those FS and items to life. No reason to shut them off while trying to show off everything the game can do.