How old is the demo really? (also a case for optimism)

[RascalTheCharizard]

Stop talking about Brawl like it's terrifying or something :/

No-one is terrified of Brawl. They're terrified of Smash 4 not differing enough from Brawl.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

No-one is terrified of Brawl. They're terrified of Smash 4 not differing enough from Brawl.

Seems pretty different to me already.

 

[Renji64]

Seems pretty different to me already.

It doesn't to me.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

It doesn't to me.

Well, that's game guys. I see one thing, he sees another. I have my opinions and he has his. We agree to disagree and move on with our lives. We'll reconvene when the final product launches.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

Seems pretty different to me already.

Of course it's different. The key word in my post was "enough". Still, it doesn't worry me. Smash 4 looks to have fixed my biggest gripes with Brawl. The only worries I have left either are just hopefuls, or things that can't be accurately gauged before release (like game balance).

 

[HeavyLobster]

The most interesting thing about the game so far is how little Melee influence there is. This game has a lot of things from Brawl, a decent number of things that are new/can't be pigeonholed into a specific game, and a few Smash 64 elements(higher KB on throws, reduced impact of DI), but hardly anything seems to be distinctly Melee-based. It almost seems as though Sakurai is deliberately trying to differentiate this game from Melee in particular. This isn't necessarily a bad thing mind you, as if executed properly could enable both scenes to thrive while providing distinct experiences. It's worth noting that Sakurai did say that he felt Melee was the game that felt sharpest in the series, and is a designer that always tries to outdo himself. I think he acknowledges, either consciously or unconsciously, that Melee is the bar he has to clear, and is taking the approach of trying to advance the series by taking it in a different direction rather than trying to out-Melee Melee. I don't know if it's the right approach to take, but I certainly hope it works out.

 

[LoboRundas]

I will just say, I like how in the Brawl demo you could charge Smash attacks with the C-Stick and in the final game you couldn't. Gives me hope for this time to be the same.

 

[SirGalvan]

The one thing I noticed the most was that Rosalina needs her final smash buffed which was the one final smash that has the most critiques imo

 

[HeavyLobster]

The one thing I noticed the most was that Rosalina needs her final smash buffed which was the one final smash that has the most critiques imo

Rosalina's similarities to Ice Climbers apparently extend to having bad Final Smashes. That thing is basically Iceberg 2.0.

 

[Hentai_Kittie]

Rosalina's similarities to Ice Climbers apparently extend to having bad Final Smashes. That thing is basically Iceberg 2.0.

Eh, i'd call it iceberg 0.5. Even the iceberg has far more utility the that thing..... even though it's pretty....

 

[ImaClubYou]

and everyone needs to stop complaining about Aerial lag. It's realistic. If you use move the is designed in the air close to the ground, it would look improper for them not to react as so. This isn't street fighter.

I'm not looking for a realistic game. I'm looking for Smash Bros. It's a fighting game. Excessive landing lag is a PROBLEM.

Also, realistic? Smash Bros? Idk, man.

 

[Gidy]

I wonder if we will have a public showing of SSB4 using one of the more recent builds. I know Nintendo doesn't want to explicitly talk about mechanics (talking about landing lag would just bore and dissuade new players) but showing off some changes would certainly lessen the anxiety on our end. Then we can spend more time readying our bodies and contributing to the SSB4 hype train.

It will probably be at Gamestop midnight event lol.

Also, what's wrong with complaints toward the game? People act like it's a call to the devil when any negativity is directed toward Smash 4

 

[ferioku]

It will probably be at Gamestop midnight event lol.

Also, what's wrong with complaints toward the game? People act like it's a call to the devil when any negativity is directed toward Smash 4

It's not that, it's the moron's who repeatedly call this game brawl, when it clearly isn't. Not only are they trying to start flame wars but they clearly know that this game is not Brawl 2.0, Smash 4 is it's own thing. I'm fine with criticism towards the game, but people who excessively say that the game will be bad when they haven't even played it are clearly being prejudice when they haven't even played the official game, they even ignore the fact that it's an early build and the Nintendo Employees have said COUNTLESS times that the build everyone was playing is VERY different to the final build for example Bill and that staff from E3.

I'm not saying that the game will be competitive or offensive based, all I'm saying is stop being prejudice, because that's leading you no where and makes you look like you just want the game to be bad in the first place. They never even say that they think the game will turn out bad, they already know how the game is going to play out and are 100% certain that it's going to turn out crap and not enjoyable, I find it extremely funny to be honest and some but not all the casuals think that the game doesn't need any changes at all and is fine the way it is, which IMHO is also wrong. It's not like you actually have to buy the game people! No one is forcing anyone to play it, just don't ruin it for everyone else who want to enjoy the game.

 

[Noiblade]

It's not that, it's the moron's who repeatedly call this game brawl, when it clearly isn't. Not only are they trying to start flame wars but they clearly know that this game is not Brawl 2.0, Smash 4 is it's own thing. I'm fine with criticism towards the game, but people who excessively say that the game will be bad when they haven't even played it are clearly being prejudice when they haven't even played the official game, they even ignore the fact that it's an early build and the Nintendo Employees have said COUNTLESS times that the build everyone was playing is VERY different to the final build for example Bill and that staff from E3.

I'm not saying that the game will be competitive or offensive based, all I'm saying is stop being prejudice, because that's leading you no where and makes you look like you just want the game to be bad in the first place. They never even say that they think the game will turn out bad, they already know how the game is going to play out and are 100% certain that it's going to turn out crap and not enjoyable, I find it extremely funny to be honest and some but not all the casuals think that the game doesn't need any changes at all and is fine the way it is, which IMHO is also wrong. It's not like you actually have to buy the game people! No one is forcing anyone to play it, just don't ruin it for everyone else who want to enjoy the game.

/Thread?

 

[DevaAshera]

In my opinion, people need to adapt to change and not keep expecting Melee 2.0 with each new Super Smash Bros. game.
Most of the complaints I've seen can be summed up as 'Its not enough like Melee'.

It would be boring if all the games were the same. Even Street Fighter changes up its style in some ways each new game.

People are should just learn the new intricacies and leave their comfort zone, whether they realize that is the main problem or not.

 

[HeavyLobster]

I wonder if we will have a public showing of SSB4 using one of the more recent builds. I know Nintendo doesn't want to explicitly talk about mechanics (talking about landing lag would just bore and dissuade new players) but showing off some changes would certainly lessen the anxiety on our end. Then we can spend more time readying our bodies and contributing to the SSB4 hype train.

We should be able to get plenty of footage of the final build once the game actually comes out in Japan. Unfortunately, that's still 6 weeks away.

 

[Big-Cat]

Smash 4 has seen a lot of criticism recently. Criticism that I agree with, and worry about. Aerial lag is ridiculous, it's hard to move how you want to, and defense is powerful as hell. To me, someone who wants smash4 to be amazing, these criticism are quite deflating, and worrisome.

Here's a novel concept: Stop playing Smash 4 like it's previous Smash games.

 

[DraginHikari]

Hm, I'm beginning to think this community does a better job of tearing itself apart then Sakurai could ever dream of doing. Multiple topics, similar themes to 2008. Not particularly liking where this is going in general.

 

[Renji64]

If someone wants elements fromt he sharpest entry in the series=bad.
if someone is fine with slow pace standing around ballon fighter mechanics=good.

 

[Nintymat]

A lot of people who play smash, competitively and non-competitively, don't play other fighters. This is a problem when people debate about whether or not the new smash will be 'competitive' or 'for the hardcore'.

It means you get 10 million posts saying "BUT SMASH 4 IS IT'S OWWWNN GAEEMMM" and a further 10 million saying the opposite. It's mostly due to the Smash community simply not knowing what makes a FIGHTING game competitive, regardless of whether it's Smash or not. So let me lay it out really quick and really dirty for you. This is my opinion, as a very passionate Street Fighter, Marvel and Smash player who has played in tournaments and who follows the FGC scene. Take it as you will:

Things that make a Fighting Game have a higher chance of being played on a grand-scale competitive level:

(DISCLAIMER: When I say 'competitive' i'm talking about EVO and MLG and other major events. I Understand Smash 4 will be played at Apex regardless of how the game is)

Smash already has a lot of the ground work. I'm not going to write about 'install-base', 'accessibility', 'ease of viewing' because Melee being at Evo proves that the fundamentals of smash make a good fighter. Im talking about the details of what makes a good fighter.

#1 Pace of the gameNo-one likes a slow-ass fighter. It's not good to watch, simply. Defensive play will always have it's place in fighters, but too much reward for defensive play is almost always a bad thing. People don't want to watch people camp, and they don't want to watch time-outs. This goes for almost all sport not just 'e-sports'. Will Smash 4 favor defensive play? I very much hope the final of the E3 invitational is not a thing to come, as that was not pretty to watch.

#2 Depth of the gameRock-Paper-Scissors will never be held infront of 10,000 screaming fans. Because it's an extremely simple game, with not much depth. Luck plays a big part, it's impossible to predict, it's very shallow. Melee is renowned because of how much there is to learn, and how much there was to discover. Advanced Techniques are interesting, and make fighting interesting. Smash 4 will need advanced techniques, hopefully some will be discovered. This DOESN'T mean wavedashing, L-cancelling, per se, just good movement options, good cancelling options which give the game a level of depth. Furthermore, the LESS left to luck or RNG the better. There is nothing worse than a fighter which adds random, unpredictable elements. Fighting games should be Player 1 vs Player 2, Skill vs Skill, with little room for the game to turn the battle one way or another. (ie tripping)

#3 FLASH AND HYPEPeople like to watch flashy combos. Fact. They are a great spectacle and attract people to the action. It's really as simple as that. All the most popular fighters have a combo system of some kind for this very reason. Smash 4 needs combos. I will go as far as saying - if you can't make a combo video for your fighter, your fighter won't be on the main stage at EVO. Sorry, but it's true.

#4 BalanceThe game has to be balanced as best as it can. In a roster of 30+ not every character will be tournament-viable, but there needs to be a good selection of options. Metaknight cannot happen again. And if it does, will there be balance patches? Which brings me on to my next point...

#5 Continued SupportIf there are bugs after the games release, will there be patches? Will characters be tweaked? A good fighter has a good developer that reacts to community feedback and tweaks the game accordingly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion, Smash 4 needs what made Melee a popular competitive fighter.

It needs advanced techniques. NOT wave-dashing and L-cancelling specifically, but SOMETHING.
It needs combos. Maybe not as hard to pull off, but the game needs a solid combo game.
It needs to be fast paced. Maybe not as fast as Melee but certainly quicker than Brawl.
It needs to REWARD PLAYERS FOR OFFENSIVE PLAY. No-one likes time outs or campers who get rewarded for negative play.

 

[Renji64]

A lot of people who play smash, competitively and non-competitively, don't play other fighters. This is a problem when people debate about whether or not the new smash will be 'competitive' or 'for the hardcore'.

It means you get 10 million posts saying "BUT SMASH 4 IS IT'S OWWWNN GAEEMMM" and a further 10 million saying the opposite. It's mostly due to the Smash community simply not knowing what makes a FIGHTING game competitive, regardless of whether it's Smash or not. So let me lay it out really quick and really dirty for you. This is my opinion, as a very passionate Street Fighter, Marvel and Smash player who has played in tournaments and who follows the FGC scene. Take it as you will:

Things that make a Fighting Game have a higher chance of being played on a grand-scale competitive level:

(DISCLAIMER: When I say 'competitive' i'm talking about EVO and MLG and other major events. I Understand Smash 4 will be played at Apex regardless of how the game is)

Smash already has a lot of the ground work. I'm not going to write about 'install-base', 'accessibility', 'ease of viewing' because Melee being at Evo proves that the fundamentals of smash make a good fighter. Im talking about the details of what makes a good fighter.

#1 Pace of the gameNo-one likes a slow-*** fighter. It's not good to watch, simply. Defensive play will always have it's place in fighters, but too much reward for defensive play is almost always a bad thing. People don't want to watch people camp, and they don't want to watch time-outs. This goes for almost all sport not just 'e-sports'. Will Smash 4 favor defensive play? I very much hope the final of the E3 invitational is not a thing to come, as that was not pretty to watch.

#2 Depth of the gameRock-Paper-Scissors will never be held infront of 10,000 screaming fans. Because it's an extremely simple game, with not much depth. Luck plays a big part, it's impossible to predict, it's very shallow. Melee is renowned because of how much there is to learn, and how much there was to discover. Advanced Techniques are interesting, and make fighting interesting. Smash 4 will need advanced techniques, hopefully some will be discovered. This DOESN'T mean wavedashing, L-cancelling, per se, just good movement options, good cancelling options which give the game a level of depth. Furthermore, the LESS left to luck or RNG the better. There is nothing worse than a fighter which adds random, unpredictable elements. Fighting games should be Player 1 vs Player 2, Skill vs Skill, with little room for the game to turn the battle one way or another. (ie tripping)

#3 FLASH AND HYPEPeople like to watch flashy combos. Fact. They are a great spectacle and attract people to the action. It's really as simple as that. All the most popular fighters have a combo system of some kind for this very reason. Smash 4 needs combos. I will go as far as saying - if you can't make a combo video for your fighter, your fighter won't be on the main stage at EVO. Sorry, but it's true.

#4 BalanceThe game has to be balanced as best as it can. In a roster of 30+ not every character will be tournament-viable, but there needs to be a good selection of options. Metaknight cannot happen again. And if it does, will there be balance patches? Which brings me on to my next point...

#5 Continued SupportIf there are bugs after the games release, will there be patches? Will characters be tweaked? A good fighter has a good developer that reacts to community feedback and tweaks the game accordingly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion, Smash 4 needs what made Melee a popular competitive fighter.

It needs advanced techniques. NOT wave-dashing and L-cancelling specifically, but SOMETHING.
It needs combos. Maybe not as hard to pull off, but the game needs a solid combo game.
It needs to be fast paced. Maybe not as fast as Melee but certainly quicker than Brawl.
It needs to REWARD PLAYERS FOR OFFENSIVE PLAY. No-one likes time outs or campers who get rewarded for negative play.

Great post.

 

[DevaAshera]

@ Nintymat Yeah, you're correct in just about everything I could tell.
While I may have more fun playing Brawl then Melee (Project M is my main fav though), competitive Melee (or Project M) is definitely more fun to watch for all the crazy crap they can pull off in that game.

Honestly, my main hope here is that something like Project M will end up being possible with Super Smash Bros. for Wii U like it was for Super Smash Bros. Brawl..and by that I mean modding that can be done without modding the system..since I honestly don't feel that Super Smash Bros. 4 will be what the main competitive scene will want and never would have had a chance to be, even if those who play more for fun, such as myself, will enjoy it quite a bit.

 

[ferioku]

A lot of people who play smash, competitively and non-competitively, don't play other fighters. This is a problem when people debate about whether or not the new smash will be 'competitive' or 'for the hardcore'.

It means you get 10 million posts saying "BUT SMASH 4 IS IT'S OWWWNN GAEEMMM" and a further 10 million saying the opposite. It's mostly due to the Smash community simply not knowing what makes a FIGHTING game competitive, regardless of whether it's Smash or not. So let me lay it out really quick and really dirty for you. This is my opinion, as a very passionate Street Fighter, Marvel and Smash player who has played in tournaments and who follows the FGC scene. Take it as you will:

Things that make a Fighting Game have a higher chance of being played on a grand-scale competitive level:

(DISCLAIMER: When I say 'competitive' i'm talking about EVO and MLG and other major events. I Understand Smash 4 will be played at Apex regardless of how the game is)

Smash already has a lot of the ground work. I'm not going to write about 'install-base', 'accessibility', 'ease of viewing' because Melee being at Evo proves that the fundamentals of smash make a good fighter. Im talking about the details of what makes a good fighter.

#1 Pace of the gameNo-one likes a slow-*** fighter. It's not good to watch, simply. Defensive play will always have it's place in fighters, but too much reward for defensive play is almost always a bad thing. People don't want to watch people camp, and they don't want to watch time-outs. This goes for almost all sport not just 'e-sports'. Will Smash 4 favor defensive play? I very much hope the final of the E3 invitational is not a thing to come, as that was not pretty to watch.

#2 Depth of the gameRock-Paper-Scissors will never be held infront of 10,000 screaming fans. Because it's an extremely simple game, with not much depth. Luck plays a big part, it's impossible to predict, it's very shallow. Melee is renowned because of how much there is to learn, and how much there was to discover. Advanced Techniques are interesting, and make fighting interesting. Smash 4 will need advanced techniques, hopefully some will be discovered. This DOESN'T mean wavedashing, L-cancelling, per se, just good movement options, good cancelling options which give the game a level of depth. Furthermore, the LESS left to luck or RNG the better. There is nothing worse than a fighter which adds random, unpredictable elements. Fighting games should be Player 1 vs Player 2, Skill vs Skill, with little room for the game to turn the battle one way or another. (ie tripping)

#3 FLASH AND HYPEPeople like to watch flashy combos. Fact. They are a great spectacle and attract people to the action. It's really as simple as that. All the most popular fighters have a combo system of some kind for this very reason. Smash 4 needs combos. I will go as far as saying - if you can't make a combo video for your fighter, your fighter won't be on the main stage at EVO. Sorry, but it's true.

#4 BalanceThe game has to be balanced as best as it can. In a roster of 30+ not every character will be tournament-viable, but there needs to be a good selection of options. Metaknight cannot happen again. And if it does, will there be balance patches? Which brings me on to my next point...

#5 Continued SupportIf there are bugs after the games release, will there be patches? Will characters be tweaked? A good fighter has a good developer that reacts to community feedback and tweaks the game accordingly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion, Smash 4 needs what made Melee a popular competitive fighter.

It needs advanced techniques. NOT wave-dashing and L-cancelling specifically, but SOMETHING.
It needs combos. Maybe not as hard to pull off, but the game needs a solid combo game.
It needs to be fast paced. Maybe not as fast as Melee but certainly quicker than Brawl.
It needs to REWARD PLAYERS FOR OFFENSIVE PLAY. No-one likes time outs or campers who get rewarded for negative play.

Thats not the point people are trying to bring, primarily smash is a party game, of course it's a fighting game, but it's still a party game.

Second of all, of course we all want this game to have its fair chance in competitive play, but what I complain about is people calling this game brawl 2.0 repeatedly when it hasn't even released. They downgrade it and either say its the worst smash yet competitively or it's sucks overall. Of course it's its own game because it's obviously not brawl, its a different game with newer features. It's like asking someone to build a rocket that flies to the moon, and the prototype couldn't fly to the moon because it was half done. Wait a minute, of course it wouldn't, because it hasn't finished being worked on, It's common sense! Had enough of prejudice hypocrites, because a lot of people say the game will turn out crap and buy it anyway -_-.

Overall, i'll have to agree that we do need these changes to be made, and I hope Sakurai takes our word for it...

 

[Bladeviper]

A lot of people who play smash, competitively and non-competitively, don't play other fighters. This is a problem when people debate about whether or not the new smash will be 'competitive' or 'for the hardcore'.

It means you get 10 million posts saying "BUT SMASH 4 IS IT'S OWWWNN GAEEMMM" and a further 10 million saying the opposite. It's mostly due to the Smash community simply not knowing what makes a FIGHTING game competitive, regardless of whether it's Smash or not. So let me lay it out really quick and really dirty for you. This is my opinion, as a very passionate Street Fighter, Marvel and Smash player who has played in tournaments and who follows the FGC scene. Take it as you will:

Things that make a Fighting Game have a higher chance of being played on a grand-scale competitive level:

(DISCLAIMER: When I say 'competitive' i'm talking about EVO and MLG and other major events. I Understand Smash 4 will be played at Apex regardless of how the game is)

Smash already has a lot of the ground work. I'm not going to write about 'install-base', 'accessibility', 'ease of viewing' because Melee being at Evo proves that the fundamentals of smash make a good fighter. Im talking about the details of what makes a good fighter.

#1 Pace of the gameNo-one likes a slow-*** fighter. It's not good to watch, simply. Defensive play will always have it's place in fighters, but too much reward for defensive play is almost always a bad thing. People don't want to watch people camp, and they don't want to watch time-outs. This goes for almost all sport not just 'e-sports'. Will Smash 4 favor defensive play? I very much hope the final of the E3 invitational is not a thing to come, as that was not pretty to watch.

#2 Depth of the gameRock-Paper-Scissors will never be held infront of 10,000 screaming fans. Because it's an extremely simple game, with not much depth. Luck plays a big part, it's impossible to predict, it's very shallow. Melee is renowned because of how much there is to learn, and how much there was to discover. Advanced Techniques are interesting, and make fighting interesting. Smash 4 will need advanced techniques, hopefully some will be discovered. This DOESN'T mean wavedashing, L-cancelling, per se, just good movement options, good cancelling options which give the game a level of depth. Furthermore, the LESS left to luck or RNG the better. There is nothing worse than a fighter which adds random, unpredictable elements. Fighting games should be Player 1 vs Player 2, Skill vs Skill, with little room for the game to turn the battle one way or another. (ie tripping)

#3 FLASH AND HYPEPeople like to watch flashy combos. Fact. They are a great spectacle and attract people to the action. It's really as simple as that. All the most popular fighters have a combo system of some kind for this very reason. Smash 4 needs combos. I will go as far as saying - if you can't make a combo video for your fighter, your fighter won't be on the main stage at EVO. Sorry, but it's true.

#4 BalanceThe game has to be balanced as best as it can. In a roster of 30+ not every character will be tournament-viable, but there needs to be a good selection of options. Metaknight cannot happen again. And if it does, will there be balance patches? Which brings me on to my next point...

#5 Continued SupportIf there are bugs after the games release, will there be patches? Will characters be tweaked? A good fighter has a good developer that reacts to community feedback and tweaks the game accordingly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion, Smash 4 needs what made Melee a popular competitive fighter.

It needs advanced techniques. NOT wave-dashing and L-cancelling specifically, but SOMETHING.
It needs combos. Maybe not as hard to pull off, but the game needs a solid combo game.
It needs to be fast paced. Maybe not as fast as Melee but certainly quicker than Brawl.
It needs to REWARD PLAYERS FOR OFFENSIVE PLAY. No-one likes time outs or campers who get rewarded for negative play.

1. while the finals at e3 were campy the finals at sdcc were not so it will depend on the meta evolves
2. While i can not say on how many at's the game will have, one has been found in the demo so far and who knows what we will find in the full game
3. There are combos, there are already some videos of combos some of the characters, sheik being one of them, can do all we need to do is find the rest
4. Balance should be a lot better over all since bamco is helping out with it
5. I can't comment on this since this is the first time nintendo has had a system that can update games but i hope they do

 

[HeavyLobster]

if someone is fine with slow pace standing around ballon fighter mechanics=good.

I take it you're not a fan of Villager's Up-B?

 

[Pazzo.]

Hm, I'm beginning to think this community does a better job of tearing itself apart then Sakurai could ever dream of doing. Multiple topics, similar themes to 2008. Not particularly liking where this is going in general.

That's humanity for you...

I'm going to hate it if we get another Melee VS. Brawl.

 

[Gameboi834]

Fun fact: This game is not Melee. This game is not Brawl. Unless you're directly comparing things between Sm4sh and M/B, you're off topic. This is not whether or not Sm4sh wants to live with Melee or Brawl over the weekend, this is Sm4sh living on its own.

Now then. I do think that Nintendo will look at maybe the top 3 concerns from people concerning the demo and will address them in development. I also think that the game is not going to be nearly as bad as people think it's going to be. Why do I say this? Because I can ****ing drop kick Mega Man in the face as Bowser. And no amount of landing lag or tripping is going to change how awesome that is.

 

[Renji64]

I take it you're not a fan of Villager's Up-B?

lmao maining him out of the newcomer cast lol.

 

[Johnknight1]

Why are people so mad about criticism=???

Constructive criticism with the hope of improving the game is good.

The criticism of the fairly big amount of aerial moves (without lagless landing), running being a commitment greater than marriage, the lack of Smash DI, and DI being less than there is in Smash 64 are all legitimate criticism.

When did wanting things to be better via people providing their opinions for how it could be better become a bad thing=???

It's a Smash 4 Boards things I suppose.

 

[DraginHikari]

Why are people so mad about criticism=???

Constructive criticism with the hope of improving the game is good.

The criticism of the fairly big amount of aerial moves (without lagless landing), running being a commitment greater than marriage, the lack of Smash DI, and DI being less than there is in Smash 64 are all legitimate criticism.

When did wanting things to be better via people providing their opinions for how it could be better become a bad thing=???

It's a Smash 4 Boards things I suppose.

In particular, I'm not against criticism, it's more that I think many people are just tired of it being non-stop. There are legitimate and interesting posts I have seen in this situation but they're being buried by people simply looking to pick fights or prove their right about a given situation. It makes the criticism uninteresting and frustrating.

 

[JoeInky]

Why are people so mad about criticism=???

Constructive criticism with the hope of improving the game is good.

The criticism of the fairly big amount of aerial moves (without lagless landing), running being a commitment greater than marriage, the lack of Smash DI, and DI being less than there is in Smash 64 are all legitimate criticism.

When did wanting things to be better via people providing their opinions for how it could be better become a bad thing=???

It's a Smash 4 Boards things I suppose.

Because people are obsessed with this nebulous concept known as "change".

Those suggestions, whilst they may make the game better, are making the game more like previous games in the series and, apparently, that's a bad thing.

The detractors to criticism should actually try arguing against the validity of the points themselves rather than how different they are, there's only like 10% of them who actually do this currently.

People should also realise that "change" and "improvement" are not mutually inclusive, you can improve through change, but change doesn't necessarily imply improvement.

Constantly saying "just let smash 4 be it's own thing!" means nothing if 'it's own thing' ends up being worse than other games in the series.

And it's not as if two games in the same series can ever truly be "their own thing", because they will always share a lot of the fundamentals, it's a moot point.

 

[DevaAshera]

You can say that, but each game is also its 'own thing'.
For an example, lets look to another Fighting Game series, Street Fighter. All of the entries are part of the same series, but they are also all their own thing. Some people prefer Street Fighter II, some people prefer Street Fighter III, some Street Fighter Alpha, and some Street Fighter IV..and then of those you have people who prefer different Expansions from each series.
All of them are great games, just like the Super Smash Bros. series, but each have their good points and bad points, but what those are will be different depend on who you ask.

From what I played of the Demo, Super Smash Bros. for Wii U is shaping up to be my favorite entry in the series.

 

[HeavyLobster]

One thing I've noticed is that Sakurai seems to almost be taking a Brawl Minus approach in terms of balancing the offstage game, in the sense that he seems to be making both recoveries and spikes(Hard Knuckle, Thunder now spiking) stronger, though obviously not to the extent Minus did. Brawl took some steps in this direction by allowing characters to stray further offstage and forcing them to do so in order to get gimps, but most characters' edgeguarding tools still felt rather tame. (with the obvious exception of MK) Smash 4 keeps Brawl's strong recoveries, though it seems to be balancing them across the board better, and also appears to be introducing more and more powerful spikes and other offstage finishers. (like Bowser's B-air) Hopefully once people learn to edgeguard effectively in Smash we'll see a more exciting offstage game. I tend to doubt that it'll be quite as exciting as Melee's offstage game, though that's mostly because I find high-level Melee edgeguarding to be the most exciting thing in competitive Smash, but it should be exciting in its own right.

 

[ferioku]

Why are people so mad about criticism=???

Constructive criticism with the hope of improving the game is good.

The criticism of the fairly big amount of aerial moves (without lagless landing), running being a commitment greater than marriage, the lack of Smash DI, and DI being less than there is in Smash 64 are all legitimate criticism.

When did wanting things to be better via people providing their opinions for how it could be better become a bad thing=???

It's a Smash 4 Boards things I suppose.

Criticism is fine, moaning about how crap Sm4sh will turn out or calling it Brawl 2.0 is not.

 

[Johnknight1]

Criticism is fine, moaning about how crap Sm4sh will turn out or calling it Brawl 2.0 is not.

The moaning about how bad the final game is right now stupid. I'll give you that.

I saw some of it after the Hungrybox/Zero Invitational Final. I responded to this by saying "Zero and Hungrybox's styles don't mesh. They're often the least exciting and overtly safe players in ANY GAME THEY PLAY!!!" For those 2 to have a memorable match, there generally needs to be an aggressor facing their defensive styles, especially Zero, regardless of the Smash game.

I don't why a game demo fresh out of the box that we know nothing about would be any different.

===

However, people wanting 64 2.0, Melee 2.0, Brawl 2.0, Marvel vs. Capcom 2 2.0, or heck, PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale 2 is fine by me. If they like those games enough, there's nothing wrong IMO with them asking for another game like it.

I might not agree with those opinions (although I would like a 64, Melee, and Brawl physics/copycat mode; that'd be dope!), but you have a right to that opinion. Personally, I don't criticize people for those opinions.

Sadly, those people often aren't afforded to a right to those opinions without being crapped on here. I think when people jump on those people it CLEARLY crosses a line that should never be crossed.

This happens and happens without punishment because it's a Smash 4 Boards thing. Apparently if you don't want what I want, you're an anti-Christ Hitler Mii supporter.

At least the Melee and Brawl Boards only have Melee vs. Brawl. Here on the Smash 4 Boards we have Fans of Past Smash Games vs. Blind Haters who probably won't even play Smash 4.

 

[pickle962]

The demo build used dates as far as at least before the Nintendo Direct we had in April of this year. If it dates back EVEN FARTHER than that, I would not be surprised and with comments being dropped by Nintendo Treehouse about [X] being better in a later build that we the public did not get to see nor play or Bill Trinen talking about stuff he can't do in the same build E3 had that was used in the recent SDCC event sounds to me like the final version of Sm4sh will be something special.

Oh Nintendo now able to patch games they release these days should come in handy if enough of us complain about say....BOWSER being actually too good on launch day for example.

 

[Crimnonin]

The demo build used dates as far as at least before the Nintendo Direct we had in April of this year. If it dates back EVEN FARTHER than that, I would not be surprised and with comments being dropped by Nintendo Treehouse about [X] being better in a later build that we the public did not get to see nor play or Bill Trinen talking about stuff he can't do in the same build E3 had that was used in the recent SDCC event sounds to me like the final version of Sm4sh will be something special.

Oh Nintendo now able to patch games they release these days should come in handy if enough of us complain about say....BOWSER being actually too good on launch day for example.

Someone on Smash Reddit posted a remastered youtube version of the full SDCC tournament. He fixed the audio too. Hopefully links are allowed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mWOb4FZvoU

I'd like to ask people who watched the whole tournament to find the moment where Bill Trinen said this. Please provide a time stamp if possible. A lot of people on these forums would probably benefit from hearing that.

EDIT: The video seems to only cover the tournament itself and not the time when Bill was playing the game on the Wii U version, so it might not be in the video. My apologies.

 

[Noiblade]

I thought you guys may find this.... Interesting.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

I'm fine with constructive criticism. A lot of what I'm seeing is not constructive. It's paranoia. It's ignorance. It's kneejerking at an early build without all options enabled. But even at this point constructive criticism is pointless as it will not change the actual mechanics of the game. The game is out in 6 weeks. Critiquing will change nothing.

 

[Rich Homie Quan]

I thought you guys may find this.... Interesting.

Doesn't he work for Nintendo? I don't see how this is important.