How Can We Save Brawl?

[Jackson]

I'm unsure if a similar thread has been made before (not counting Toronto Joe's State of Brawl info thread), but I wanted to open up a discussion about this. Brawl was my first Smash. I've always loved the game, and as such, I do not want to see it go. Many Smashers are saying that Brawl is dead. They say if Project M (no hate on it, I enjoy it too) hasn't already killed it, Smash 4 will deal the death blow to Brawl. Personally, I think it doesn't have to be. In this thread, I want to discuss with all of the other Brawl fans about what we as a community can do to keep our game alive. Here are some ideas:

1. One Stock Ruleset. Aside from the campy Grand Finals, I think we can agree that this worked well at GOML. Watching the games at home, it was great to see Melee players like Mango playing Brawl and a substantial crowd watching the matches. This Ruleset is more dynamic than the three stock rules and allows for less time for the difference between top tier characters and mid tiers become evident. It's more exciting. I really liked what I saw at GOML with the One stock Ruleset and I think its usage in future Brawl tournaments will be beneficial.

2. Ban MK and possibly ICs. I don't mean to offend anyone. But I do think this has been a long time coming. Meta Knight's superiority over the rest of the cast has been increasingly evident as he wins so many tournaments. It's tiring seeing Top 8s full of Meta Knights. I think the metagame would be more diverse and interesting with his absence. Now, Ice Climbers. Before I say anything about them, I want everyone to understand this: I have the utmost respect for Ice Climbers players. The technical skill needed to pull off their chaingrab is not to be understated. That said, I don't think they are healthy for the game. As mentioned above, at the GOML grand finals, MK vs ICs was not fun to watch. It's very campy and it can easily lead to time, which makes Brawl look bad. I understand that you do what you have to do to win, but again, it makes Brawl look bad. With the banning of these characters, or at least MK, the metagame would be more diverse and interesting to watch.

Those are two potential options. Again, I really did not mean to offend any MK or IC players. In fact, I respect you. I just think the change would be healthy for Brawl. Now, everybody, what are YOUR opinions? What can we do as a community to save Brawl's life?

 

[Djent]

What should I vote if I think Brawl will live on, but only as a small side event (basically, like 64 at some tournaments)? Does that count as "dead?"

 

[Jackson]

What should I vote if I think Brawl will live on, but only as a small side event (basically, like 64 at some tournaments)? Does that count as "dead?"

Hmm. I would say that's alive. I hope it remains bigger than that though.

 

[DeLux]

Your options don't address the core of the issue which is community wide- we alienate our new and low/mid level players as a common practice. You want to save the game? Cater to them.

 

[Luco]

You'll find the MK ban issue was debated on for a very, very long time and for a small period of time MK was actually banned under unity ruleset.... before the unity ruleset got disbanded and he became legal again after enough backlash came in.

Our latest national tried the one-stock ruleset. It's.... interesting. I was originally appalled at the idea but now i'm just kinda 'eh' on the whole thing. In regards to this, I think it has the potential to go either way.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Your options don't address the core of the issue which is community wide- we alienate our new and low/mid level players as a common practice. You want to save the game? Cater to them.

I do not know what you mean by this. Was not the general problem being that Brawl is less interesting as a whole compared to the available Smash games to play? There seems to be inherent flaws with the game that cannot be fixed with a few ruleset changes or appeal to newer players.

 

[Mozza]

Pretty much every tournament viable character in Brawl promotes a campy play style. It's a campy game in general and is usually boring to watch. Don't mean to hang poop on yr Smash of choice, Brawl was my introduction to the Smash community too, but most people have moved on for a reason.

I meant that in response to point 2.

 

[Jackson]

Our latest national tried the one-stock ruleset. It's.... interesting. I was originally appalled at the idea but now i'm just kinda 'eh' on the whole thing. In regards to this, I think it has the potential to go either way.

I feel the same way about the Ruleset. When I first heard of it I was skeptical, but I was pleasantly surprised when I saw how it played out in pools. If anything, it could shake things up.

 

[Luco]

But that's just the thing. A tournament is supposed to be a measure of skill. Upsets are great but are rarely meant to occur, otherwise they wouldn't be called upsets right? My thought process on this is convoluted and weird and I end up torn between the primary focuses of what we ultimately wanna do. Basically this changes our definition of a good player from one who can adapt and endures towards one who can play really good in bursts. Whether that's a good or bad thing.... I dunno.

I asked quite a few players about it too at the tournament itself and got similar replies.

 

[Modesty]

I think it kinda depends on SSB4. If it has a good competitive scene, I think Brawl will die out almost completely. Brawl is fun, but it's just to slow moving and campy be more attractive than melee.

 

[Jackson]

I think it kinda depends on SSB4. If it has a good competitive scene, I think Brawl will die out almost completely. Brawl is fun, but it's just to slow moving and campy be more attractive than melee.

Sounds about right. As things are right now, Smash 4 looks to be the verdict on Brawl's life.

 

[Celestis]

I think Brawl will slip into the are of 64 just cause Smash 4 looks like Brawl 2. A little faster, no tripping, and less randomness. Most Brawl players will just migrate to the new shiny toy that plays similar to the game they know.

 

[MP8]

I think Smash 4 will be its own game and differentiate just like the rest of Smash games from one another. I think Brawl will be similar to as Smash 64 is now and be a small but living community; it won't "die out".

 

[pickle962]

Brawl is practically being cremated as we speak thanks to PM's rise to success in the last few months/year On a serious note, we probably WON'T be seeing Brawl anymore except at maybe friendlies for ****s and giggles once Sm4sh on the Wii U comes out and (hopefully) takes the competitive scene by storm.

 

[TheGoldMan]

I love Brawl, but I'm ditching it when Smash Wii U releases. lol

 

[황미영]

I believe Brawl will die. Because Smash 4 is pretty much Brawl 2.0 There would be no point in playing Brawl again after it comes out. Only way Brawl would live is if Smash 4 drastically different from the rest of the Smash games in a bad way.

 

[LarsINTJ]

Considering there's still active communities for retro games like Ultima, it seems pretty unlikely for reasonably popular games to immediately 'die out' due to technically superior sequel. Heck, every gamer has that one (or many) beloved childhood series which they will consistently revisit for the sake of nostalgia. For me it's Kirby and Donkey Kong Country.

That being said, yes, Brawl will eventually die out along with everything else at some point in the future.

 

[Life]

Ban MK, bring back banned stages up to at least Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise so ICs aren't overpowering. Suddenly the game is fine. One stock wouldn't hurt either.

I do think it'll reach 64 status no matter what though.

 

[TOGOpuff]

I don't think 1 stock brawl should be a main event. I think that if we really want to keep brawl alive we have to do more and talk less. And i'm included. As far as i was concerned there were no brawl tourneys around my area. I was a complainer saying brawl was dead because of it's meta and because mk/ics were too overpowered compared to other characters. Then i had a insight i should stop complaining and start to try and change things. Brawl tournaments are slowly happening again. I'll be hosting tournaments next month and set. Brawl only tournaments. Expecting a lot of casuals that might hop in just for fun but it's a start. I'm looking for starting a video game club on my college and try to gather more smash players.

Basically, if you love brawl and want to keep it alive: do the hard part. Be one of the reasons it's still alive.

 

[LEGOfan12]

I'm unsure if a similar thread has been made before (not counting Toronto Joe's State of Brawl info thread), but I wanted to open up a discussion about this. Brawl was my first Smash. I've always loved the game, and as such, I do not want to see it go. Many Smashers are saying that Brawl is dead. They say if Project M (no hate on it, I enjoy it too) hasn't already killed it, Smash 4 will deal the death blow to Brawl. Personally, I think it doesn't have to be. In this thread, I want to discuss with all of the other Brawl fans about what we as a community can do to keep our game alive. Here are some ideas:

1. One Stock Ruleset. Aside from the campy Grand Finals, I think we can agree that this worked well at GOML. Watching the games at home, it was great to see Melee players like Mango playing Brawl and a substantial crowd watching the matches. This Ruleset is more dynamic than the three stock rules and allows for less time for the difference between top tier characters and mid tiers become evident. It's more exciting. I really liked what I saw at GOML with the One stock Ruleset and I think its usage in future Brawl tournaments will be beneficial.

2. Ban MK and possibly ICs. I don't mean to offend anyone. But I do think this has been a long time coming. Meta Knight's superiority over the rest of the cast has been increasingly evident as he wins so many tournaments. It's tiring seeing Top 8s full of Meta Knights. I think the metagame would be more diverse and interesting with his absence. Now, Ice Climbers. Before I say anything about them, I want everyone to understand this: I have the utmost respect for Ice Climbers players. The technical skill needed to pull off their chaingrab is not to be understated. That said, I don't think they are healthy for the game. As mentioned above, at the GOML grand finals, MK vs ICs was not fun to watch. It's very campy and it can easily lead to time, which makes Brawl look bad. I understand that you do what you have to do to win, but again, it makes Brawl look bad. With the banning of these characters, or at least MK, the metagame would be more diverse and interesting to watch.

Those are two potential options. Again, I really did not mean to offend any MK or IC players. In fact, I respect you. I just think the change would be healthy for Brawl. Now, everybody, what are YOUR opinions? What can we do as a community to save Brawl's life?

I don't think it will "die". I think it'll just hit Smash 64 status.

 

[Jackson]

I think it won't "die". I think it'll hit Smash 64 status.

Seems possible. You mean like a side event at some tournaments?

 

[LancerStaff]

I believe Brawl will continue on at a SSB64 level, but not without major ruleset changes. Thankfully, the Brawl community will be much more open to change with a trimmed playerbase.

If you love Brawl and wish for it to continue, you will have to make changes fast. The remaining playerbase must come to quick decisions before the old rules become dominant again.

 

[LEGOfan12]

Seems possible. You mean like a side event at some tournaments?

Yeah, kinda like that.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I disagree with a few of the posters here. Brawl will not reach SSB64 levels, mainly because Brawl's players are so far from being masters of the game, even the best players.

REmember: SSB64 is kind of like Chess: the game is effectively "solved", for all intents and purposes. At the highest levels of play, every player knows the optimal moves all the time. Every character, and every matchup, is "solved" in the sense that, if both players play at an optimal level with no execution errors, there is an optimal set of choices in every situation, and we know all of those choices. Because we know so much about that game, matches come down not necessarily just to matchup knowledge, but mostly to technical skill and the ability to play against the other player. SSB64 matches are player v player in a way not even Melee is, nad because of this, SSB64 play revolves around learning your opponent's mind, which only comes with spending time against that person.

Brawl, on the other hand, is nowhere near that. It isn't solved any more than Melee is. In fact, so many characters are just outright ignored in Brawl that we'd have to (at the current rate) play the game at our current level of community engagement for at least 15-20 more YEARS before we could even come close to claiming we "solved" the game. Because there's so much left, most people will simply ignore it and move on. The only people playing will be those very passionate about the game itself, but even those players probably won't work on solving Brawl's under- to never-used characters. So, eventually, even they will stop caring after all of their matches end up being exactly alike. And, without an infusion of new players, the competitive community will consist of a handful of players, hardly a living community at that point.

Brawl will DEFINITELY die out. Not much we can do about it anymore.

 

[LEGOfan12]

I disagree with a few of the posters here. Brawl will not reach SSB64 levels, mainly because Brawl's players are so far from being masters of the game, even the best players.

REmember: SSB64 is kind of like Chess: the game is effectively "solved", for all intents and purposes. At the highest levels of play, every player knows the optimal moves all the time. Every character, and every matchup, is "solved" in the sense that, if both players play at an optimal level with no execution errors, there is an optimal set of choices in every situation, and we know all of those choices. Because we know so much about that game, matches come down not necessarily just to matchup knowledge, but mostly to technical skill and the ability to play against the other player. SSB64 matches are player v player in a way not even Melee is, nad because of this, SSB64 play revolves around learning your opponent's mind, which only comes with spending time against that person.

Brawl, on the other hand, is nowhere near that. It isn't solved any more than Melee is. In fact, so many characters are just outright ignored in Brawl that we'd have to (at the current rate) play the game at our current level of community engagement for at least 15-20 more YEARS before we could even come close to claiming we "solved" the game. Because there's so much left, most people will simply ignore it and move on. The only people playing will be those very passionate about the game itself, but even those players probably won't work on solving Brawl's under- to never-used characters. So, eventually, even they will stop caring after all of their matches end up being exactly alike. And, without an infusion of new players, the competitive community will consist of a handful of players, hardly a living community at that point.

Brawl will DEFINITELY die out. Not much we can do about it anymore.

There is already a full matchup chart of every character in Brawl, there is already a handful of techniques in Brawl, the game has been pretty solved for a while. I'm not seeing your point.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Full matchup charts do not equal solved games. There are full matchup charts in USF4, and it's barely been out yet; I doubt you want to argue that game is "solved". For those of us who aren't quite up on ludic philosophy, a "solved" game is a game in which players know, before the game starts and with 100% accuracy, the optimal actions to be taken in ANY situation. Tic Tac Toe is a solved game because of this: http://xkcd.com/832/ . If you cannot make a chart like that and be willing to put your life on the line for its accuracy, then the game isn't solved.

SSB64 is solved in this way, Melee is very close to being solved in this way, but it isn't quite yet, mainly because Amsa Brawl... is nowhere near this far along.

My point is that there's a grey area where a game isn't quite popular enough to drive people to work towards solving it, but not so solved that the existing player base is spurred on towards finishing the puzzle. Brawl falls in the grey area, and all games in that grey area are doomed to fail.

 

[LEGOfan12]

Full matchup charts do not equal solved games. There are full matchup charts in USF4, and it's barely been out yet; I doubt you want to argue that game is "solved". For those of us who aren't quite up on ludic philosophy, a "solved" game is a game in which players know, before the game starts and with 100% accuracy, the optimal actions to be taken in ANY situation. Tic Tac Toe is a solved game because of this: http://xkcd.com/832/ . If you cannot make a chart like that and be willing to put your life on the line for its accuracy, then the game isn't solved.

SSB64 is solved in this way, Melee is very close to being solved in this way, but it isn't quite yet, mainly because Amsa Brawl... is nowhere near this far along.

My point is that there's a grey area where a game isn't quite popular enough to drive people to work towards solving it, but not so solved that the existing player base is spurred on towards finishing the puzzle. Brawl falls in the grey area, and all games in that grey area are doomed to fail.

Okay, that does make sense.

 

[TOGOpuff]

While i cannot ignore Jack Kieser 's point I can't draw a real line between he being really accurate on his statements, therefore "solving" the question whether brawl will or will not be saved. On my point of view although he shouts to a problem that i consider real and threatening i don't think it has potential to only be the reason of brawl's destruction. On the clear opposite, actually, i believe that his statements are true enough that they should re energize brawl's community into it again. Claiming something i believe myself : there's still so much to dig in this game. In last few years all we've been doing is declare his death and sadly 'moving on' when there's so much untouched and undiscovered. Main reason being we are not dedicating enough. And there's where i fail to completely agree with JK. I consider indeed the form we are treating brawl now as a threat to it's survival as a competitive scenario, but the reasons behind that are mainly based on whether we're letting ourselves believe the game is dead. It's strange and rather funny how brawl community overall just accepted the statement that the game has nothing to offer anymore and should be forgotten and this phenomena has increased a bit at a time since PM was released. In my point of view we are being cowards at some point. Maybe melee hate finally got to our nerves and we don't want to be 'bulied' so we just join the big crowd instead, maybe we envy their bigger communities, maybe we are just too lazy to create something out of the ground. Whatever the reason is brawl community isn't trying hard enough and this is a phenomenon happening worldwide. We are just quitting. Slowly giving up on our forces. Slowly giving up to the beliefe this game can move on with time if some of us stay dedicated to it... I keep thinking there's hope. It shrinks everyday but it rests alive in the hearts of those who keep playing with their friends dedicating themselves, organizing and attending to tournaments, be them local or online. As i always state in threads like these, the only think that can keep a game alive is it's community. SSB64 struggled for years before it reaches the point it has reached nowadays and we look to them as if that place should drop down from the heavens to us. Thatwon't happen not even slightly. The question shouldn't be if brawl would live or die. The game was never alive. The real question is wheter we, as a community, want to dedicate ourselves enough to keep it living, and that my friends, that is up to us.

 

[Thor]

Honestly, I would be very very happy to see it reach 64 status - by that I mean that I think it won't even be that popular... however, being the optimist, I voted "No" because I think some people will still play the game, even if it's a much smaller scale.

Even as the guy with the Brawl mods [tons of people who prefer Brawl to Melee love Brawl- a ton, and our Melee people will somewhat grudgingly play PM if the guy with the Gamecube has work or whatever] on our little summer college program, I still love popping in Brawl and playing my mains in competitive matches, or just sandbagging with MK in free-for-alls (by this I mean I pick either the cstick or the B button and try to only use that for the duration of the match - and it often works better than it should XD) [or sandbagging with other characters, but it's not just spammy silliness made possible by very predictable or non-existent dodging]. However, I don't think the future of Brawl is bright, and I can unfortunately see it becoming the smallest of the 4 games.

But I hope it stays bigger than Smash 64 (unless Smash 64 explodes, at which point keeping on-par with them would be fine by me) - I love the game, even if tripping into an ICs grab is irritating, and I don't want to give up playing it with others - I just hope I find people who feel the same way, because I've only found like one or two other people like that, with no guarantee we'll still be near enough to play a few years down the road...

 

[Taco Emperor]

One thing to be said to the people who think SSB4 will be the death blow to Brawl is that there's a small issue with SSB4: It's for the WiiU, which very few people have at the moment, so when the game comes out, it won't sell as quickly as Brawl did when it came out. This could lead to a smaller SSB4 community as follows: People with the game will immediately practice a whole lot at it, and get on a whole different level from anyone who might have bought the console and the game if the competitive scene was less developed when they bought the console. In summary, the low sales of WiiUs will create a more exclusive competitive scene, discouraging new players from joining the Smash community.
On the other end, many people own the Wii (no Us required) and many of those people own Brawl. What I think will happen is that the best of the best will abandon Brawl for SSB4, leaving the competitive scene more open to new players. If a few people are devoted enough to keep this game alive competitively, the people who have the game but don't play competitively might see fit to join in.
In conclusion, I thin Brawl will definitely get smaller. But if everyone who loves Brawl steps forward, and makes tournaments more accessible (for instance, more small tournaments and lower admission and venue fees), new ranks of casual players will rise and join us in playing the game we love.

The real question is wheter we, as a community, want to dedicate ourselves enough to keep it living, and that my friends, that is up to us

 

[JohannFKNFaust]

No Smash game will ever die out. I think they're all amazing, although I have no idea what campy is supposed to mean... I'm pretty sure there will still be Project M tournaments and I'm pretty sure people will still play Brawl every once i a while. Maybe not a lot, but sometimes. I also know banning and would be a bad move in this game as everything is suppose to be evened out... even though is admittedly the strongest apparently.

 

[Thor]

I also know banning and would be a bad move in this game as everything is suppose to be evened out... even though is admittedly the strongest apparently.

People who say ban MK/ICs mean that they believe MK and ICs should be banned from SSBB, not the new one - they're not making a pre-emptive ban.

On a side note, I think character bans will be off-limits for awhile for the new game, barring something that is utterly game-breaking and completely trivializes the rest of the cast, if that tactic can't be banned (An example would be if Sheik's Melee NTSC dthrow returned, but worked on everyone, could not be DI'd at all until 200%, could be done in place, and true-combo'd to sweetspot usmash - while this would likely NEVER get past even Sakurai's sometimes substandard balancing (he missed IC infinites both times), it would be enough to ban Sheik or at least Sheik dthrow CGs rather quickly).

 

[JohannFKNFaust]

People who say ban MK/ICs mean that they believe MK and ICs should be banned from SSBB, not the new one - they're not making a pre-emptive ban.

On a side note, I think character bans will be off-limits for awhile for the new game, barring something that is utterly game-breaking and completely trivializes the rest of the cast, if that tactic can't be banned (An example would be if Sheik's Melee NTSC dthrow returned, but worked on everyone, could not be DI'd at all until 200%, could be done in place, and true-combo'd to sweetspot usmash - while this would likely NEVER get past even Sakurai's sometimes substandard balancing (he missed IC infinites both times), it would be enough to ban Sheik or at least Sheik dthrow CGs rather quickly).

Yeah, I get what your saying. I just feel like people claiming character's should be banned in SSB4 at the point we're at now is ridiculous... and I have seen people who do indeed already want to see characters banned instead f waiting to see how truly balanced out the game is. I have faith that they did a good job in balancing, but we shall see. And about banning MK and IC in Brawl, I can understand MK... but IC? Their not that good so to be ban materiel I don't think, when I first saw the topic creators opinion of that I was just like, "... What?!"

 

[TOGOpuff]

Yeah, I get what your saying. I just feel like people claiming character's should be banned in SSB4 at the point we're at now is ridiculous... and I have seen people who do indeed already want to see characters banned instead f waiting to see how truly balanced out the game is. I have faith that they did a good job in balancing, but we shall see. And about banning MK and IC in Brawl, I can understand MK... but IC? Their not that good so to be ban materiel I don't think, when I first saw the topic creators opinion of that I was just like, "... What?!"

people will always blatter about anything. Complaining is some people motto. They see 300~500 frames of a character on a video and they think they know it all. Just don't inflate those commentaries since all they want is troll. And if not they just have no idea what a character is banned upon.

IC's ban is as controversial as it could be (also is MK imo). But i was one of the people to question a ban of those character in a close past. All in all they are in a higher tier than any other brawl character, MK is way easier to realize than IC's, but given the proper training they can be as deadly as the first one. Therefore i claim that given the proper attention any character can become a potential threat, as soon as the player itself becomes a threat. Thing is MK and IC (specially MK) are a threat on theirselves so they don't demand that much skill from the player (SPECIALLY MK). In all they are what some people would call 'cheap'. But you pick any competitive character and you give them enough attention and work on your mu and MK and ICs stop being a threat on themselves, downgrading to a place of commons where they have to rely on the players capability to be a threat himself. All in all, the discussion is on whether it is 'cheap' or not to have a character you can rely on when you're not playing your best or not. I don't consider this ban worth nowadays but i used to. So it's basically where you're putting your effort on : getting better at playing or at complaining.

 

[JohannFKNFaust]

people will always blatter about anything. Complaining is some people motto. They see 300~500 frames of a character on a video and they think they know it all. Just don't inflate those commentaries since all they want is troll. And if not they just have no idea what a character is banned upon.

IC's ban is as controversial as it could be (also is MK imo). But i was one of the people to question a ban of those character in a close past. All in all they are in a higher tier than any other brawl character, MK is way easier to realize than IC's, but given the proper training they can be as deadly as the first one. Therefore i claim that given the proper attention any character can become a potential threat, as soon as the player itself becomes a threat. Thing is MK and IC (specially MK) are a threat on theirselves so they don't demand that much skill from the player (SPECIALLY MK). In all they are what some people would call 'cheap'. But you pick any competitive character and you give them enough attention and work on your mu and MK and ICs stop being a threat on themselves, downgrading to a place of commons where they have to rely on the players capability to be a threat himself. All in all, the discussion is on whether it is 'cheap' or not to have a character you can rely on when you're not playing your best or not. I don't consider this ban worth nowadays but i used to. So it's basically where you're putting your effort on : getting better at playing or at complaining.

You're right, just seems like all people can do is complain about every little thing in this game and it's not even out yet. I do see some positivity on it, but I see much more negativity. What's the point of waiting for it if your going to complain about every little detail. I believe they're doing the best they can on both versions, especially the 3DS version, catering to the people who don't have a Wii U but still have a 3DS. Most recently the Wiley Castle 3DS version, I think 3DS owners might have felt a little left out thinking their might not be any real stage bosses on the 3DS (no one quite knowing what the Dark Emperor does quite yet) and when they saw a Wiley Castle for 3DS it wasn't filler, it was reassurance the 3DS version will have everything the Wii U version has to as much as they can put into it.

So wait, Ice Climbers really is banned? I had no idea, I thought it was just Meta Knight. Neither I nor anyone I know could get very good with Ice Climbers, I got close but I didn't find them all too interesting of fighters, not my type a fighters anyway (fast and nimble, i.e. Shiek, Zero Suit Samus and a couple others) never thought they were OP enough to be banned though, strange. My Shiek game is pretty deadly, I've trained her up for years, my Shiek Amiibo is going to be pretty scary I believe. But I don't just stick to her, I find it interesting to change up the character every once in a while, I'm even good with Peach and people down talk her so much, and I always kick my competitive friends asses with her then they scream, "You can't use a character that uses items!" (, turnip) as their excuse for them not wanting me to play as her, then they pick somebody like Link ( bombs) in the next round... I usually come after them with my Shiek or ZS Samus and they hate that too but they can't say much about that because they don't really produce items (well... ZS Samus technically does, but I don't use her Final Smash ever, it's super underwhelming and I'm no good with default Samus) and they aren't illegal competitively.

 

[SmashWolf]

Smash 64 is an entirely different game. Smash 4 is a rehash of Brawl's engine and resources made into something hopefully better. If Smash 4 is even remotely competitively viable, it'll likely replace Brawl, since it's pretty much just a better version of Brawl.

If Brawl does get side events, they'll be quite pointless. It would be like watching a slower Smash 4 all over again.

 

[Thor]

Smash 64 is an entirely different game. Smash 4 is a rehash of Brawl's engine and resources made into something hopefully better. If Smash 4 is even remotely competitively viable, it'll likely replace Brawl, since it's pretty much just a better version of Brawl.

If Brawl does get side events, they'll be quite pointless. It would be like watching a slower Smash 4 all over again.

It's hard for me to argue with Chuck Norris the SmashWolf...

But no momentum cancelling, and apparently no DACUS! And no Snake either... [some of these might be considered weakfish arguments (mainly the first one), but they are differences people like for various reasons]. Also no transforming character, and no Squirtle (As of now) [who does matter a bit in one-stock Brawls].

There are still differences, and who knows? Smash 4 might have some features people really don't like - we don't know.

But you put my fears into words perfectly, I'll say that much.

 

[TOGOpuff]

i really think you are over reacting a lot on this smash4 x brawl thing. The are some mechanics we already know are different and will make these games be what they always were meant to be : 2 different games. The biggest change already is the ledge game with the invincibility and grabbing priority which will change a lot of the defensive game giving characters that had terrible recovery (like c. falcon) more chance to live.
Brawl will keep being brawl and it's growth / death shouldn't be determined by other title of the series. It feels like we are looking for a excuse to let brawl die every time i hear something about how smash4 will rip our community to pieces and i just can't believe people haven't recognized it yet. As I have been saying, brawl will live as far as brawl community keeps it alive. It's not better nor worse than any other smash game, it's just different from the rest. I think what we have to do is stop being such a crying scene and start praising our game. It's pretty sad that our forums are dead, that we don't have a lot of tourneys going on (online and offline). It's sad that our threads are always "will this game die" "how to save this game"... we should start building more confidence, moving our asses to organize some tournaments of our own, getting our friends to play this game... As i said a couple times already there was no brawl scenario where i am from. I was the only brawl player and now we have a regular 20~30 players on locals. Not something really big but noticeable. None of them are thinking about quitting brawl for smash4, but to add the new game to the "games i play" list. Smash4 should be treated as a new game to add to our rooster and not as a game to be feared. Once again i repeat we should start looking to ourselves and blame ourselves because we're not fighting enough to keep brawl alive. This is all there is to it. We have to stop listening to the hate, raise our heads and show that there are still people who love brawl and will play it no matter what.

 

[Thor]

I don't want it to tear the community up, don't get me wrong - I'll still play Brawl after Smash 4 comes out (it's just one more Smash game I get to enjoy). But if a bunch of people DO just view Smash 4 as "Better Brawl", they may drop Brawl entirely, which will reduce the size of the game... so the fear is a lack of dedication to Brawl, and I know that while I like the game enough to want to support it, I don't know how many others do... and the number doesn't seem that large... I'll try anyway, but I haven't found anyone besides at my summer college thing that prefers Brawl to Melee, and that includes complete casuals who don't even know how to grab... and they're not interested in getting more into Brawl.

 

[Ghostbone]

Brawl will get played every once in a while at locals, and probably still have a singles event at every APEX/equivalent sized multi-game national.

It's not going to have a massive playerbase that continues to push the metagame further like Melee does, it doesn't even have that now, and Smash4 isn't even out yet.