Is Brawl Truly less technical?

[Takalth]

Every time a thread discusses the competitive aspects of Brawl, it always has the assumption that Brawl is less technical than Melee. While I will immediately concede that this is a reasonable thing to believe (especially after Gimpy said that it felt less technical), it may be worth reconsidering.

First, we have the L-cancel: Because there is one fewer button press, people call this less technical, but is that really the case? Skilled players will be analyzing and learning exactly what heights and circumstances allow l-canceling of which moves, and people who can start their fast-fall at the last possible moment and still pull off the l-cancel will be far ahead of those who can't. Some L-cancels may require as much timing and finger speed as Samus's double-missile jump, which is a heck of a lot harder than melee l-canceling.

Next, we have the edge-guarding game: Automatic edge-grabbing has persuaded most people here that this has been dumbed down technically, but that's because they're not considering everything. By making safe recovery easier, Sakurai has forced the edge-guarder to take more drastic measures. If it's easy to get past the traditional "stand at the edge and knock them back out" technique, edge guarders will be forced to chase their opponents off the edge more often.
Naturally, a good edge-chaser needs to really study out the exact timing of moves, analyze fall-speeds, and know exactly how many frames of lag his moves have to learn what can be done where and when. The recovering player will have to be equally knowledgeable to know the limits and abilities of evasion or counter-measures.

Third, we have combos. Melee-style combos are harder, but that's because most of them originate from the ground. With aerial lag reduced and characters who are more floaty, I expect to see combos that are just as cool, impressive, and difficult but have to be approached in an entirely different way.

And, of course, this is what I see based off of reading about the experiences of people who only spent a short time playing Brawl. It isn't likely to go down from there, but it could easily go up.

Before I end this, I would like to request that nobody change this to a discussion about how it's mindgames rather than tech skill that define a good player. I'm aware of that, and it's perfectly good discussion fodder, but it's not what this thread is about.

 

[Jumpinjahosafa]

No one can know, because its not out yet.

Also this isn't melee.

Its brawl.

 

[gigasteve]

Yes deal with it. This is BRAWL you're talking about. And search next time, there have been a few very similar to this.

 

[5150]

Every time a thread discusses the competitive aspects of Brawl, it always has the assumption that Brawl is less technical than Melee. While I will immediately concede that this is a reasonable thing to believe (especially after Gimpy said that it felt less technical), it may be worth reconsidering.

First, we have the L-cancel: Because there is one fewer button press, people call this less technical, but is that really the case? Skilled players will be analyzing and learning exactly what heights and circumstances allow l-canceling of which moves, and people who can start their fast-fall at the last possible moment and still pull off the l-cancel will be far ahead of those who can't. Some L-cancels may require as much timing and finger speed as Samus's double-missile jump, which is a heck of a lot harder than melee l-canceling.

Next, we have the edge-guarding game: Automatic edge-grabbing has persuaded most people here that this has been dumbed down technically, but that's because they're not considering everything. By making safe recovery easier, Sakurai has forced the edge-guarder to take more drastic measures. If it's easy to get past the traditional "stand at the edge and knock them back out" technique, edge guarders will be forced to chase their opponents off the edge more often.
Naturally, a good edge-chaser needs to really study out the exact timing of moves, analyze fall-speeds, and know exactly how many frames of lag his moves have to learn what can be done where and when. The recovering player will have to be equally knowledgeable to know the limits and abilities of evasion or counter-measures.

Third, we have combos. Melee-style combos are harder, but that's because most of them originate from the ground. With aerial lag reduced and characters who are more floaty, I expect to see combos that are just as cool, impressive, and difficult but have to be approached in an entirely different way.

And, of course, this is what I see based off of reading about the experiences of people who only spent a short time playing Brawl. It isn't likely to go down from there, but it could easily go up.

Before I end this, I would like to request that nobody change this to a discussion about how it's mindgames rather than tech skill that define a good player. I'm aware of that, and it's perfectly good discussion fodder, but it's not what this thread is about.

this was all a desperate and thoroughly poor attempt to deny that brawl is less technical.

 

[Takalth]

No one can know, because its not out yet.

Also this isn't melee.

Its brawl.

In other words, we should only speculate on subjects that YOU like to speculate on.

Yes deal with it. This is BRAWL you're talking about. And search next time, there have been a few very similar to this.

The problem is that all of those threads is that they actually don't discuss this. They inherently agree that it's less technical and just discuss the ramifications.

this was all a desperate and thoroughly poor attempt to deny that brawl is less technical.

this was a desperate and thoroughly poor attempt at using an insult to cover the lack of a good argument. Pick one of my points and argue it, if you think I'm wrong and want to say so. Otherwise, go post somewhere else.

 

[Lemon Drop]

You know what I would love the see? A comparison between Super Smash Bros. 64 and Brawl.

I get that it isn't Melee, nor 64, but I would like to see how big of a difference it is between the two.

 

[5150]

this was a desperate and thoroughly poor attempt at using an insult to cover the lack of a good argument. Pick one of my points and argue it, if you think I'm wrong and want to say so. Otherwise, go post somewhere else.

actually a scrub must EARN his right to post, which you have not.

 

[Pyroloserkid]

Yes deal with it. This is BRAWL you're talking about. And search next time, there have been a few very similar to this.

Like...2 threads under.

The problem is that all of those threads is that they actually don't discuss this. They inherently agree that it's less technical and just discuss the ramifications.

Even though that is true, you could always post your thoughts in that thread and turn it into a discussion.

We don't need another thread.

 

[Takalth]

actually a scrub must EARN his right to post, which you have not.

Well, you just placed yourself sufficiently far into the realm of elitist idiot that nothing else you say is worthy of any response. I retract my suggestion that you argue one of my points.

Even though that is true, you could always post your thoughts in that thread and turn it into a discussion.

We don't need another thread.

Inserting a long, tangential post into an already running thread usually just gets you ignored, and to properly get my point across, I needed more than a few sentences. With the number of threads that are done on EXACTLY the same topic as other threads, I don't really see the harm in creating one on a SIMILAR topic.

The funny thing is, all I've gotten is people attacking me for making this thread. Had none of them posted, it would be almost dead by now.

 

[jupiter]

Why do people keep posting these treads stupidly w/o remembering that the game isn't out yet.

Less technical? We have new aerial mechanics (air dodge), new ledge-grab mechanics, foot-stool jumps, etc etc etc....additional techniques, along with the elimination of a couple from melee.

WE don't know....stop cluttering the boards with your unnecessary posts!

 

[Gdorfsmash]

We don't knowz till the game comes out!!!!!

 

[00Elf]

We had few dozen people playing it for a few days. HARDLY enough time to uncover any advanced techniques that might be lurking under the surface of Brawl.

Nobody knew about wavedashing before Melee came out, and nobody know what's going to be in Brawl before it comes out. We'll have new techniques to learn and new matchups and characters to master.

 

[A New England Winter]

First off, I actually applaud you and your insight on this particular matter. I think people just said this and that about Brawl's technicality just because the game is missing some of it's older features, and therefor requires a change in their battle plan. The

The real issue is that people are making such claims when the game isn't slated to be out for another 61 days, and most haven't even played the game at E for All. There were changes, to be sure, but the true heart of Melee's technicality is still there (If Gimpy's thread is anything to say about it, anyways...)

Second off...

this was all a desperate and thoroughly poor attempt to deny that brawl is less technical.

Explain your claim. Surely you, the master of explaining stuff, could easily think up a proper explanation as to why, one, this thread is desperate and thoroughly poor, and two, how Brawl is less technical, with citations, arguments to support your claims and for it to be neatly spaced and sorted for our viewing pleasure.

Or you could, you know, not come back, but then you'd've been told off by a f*g like me, now wouldn't you? And of course your ego would never let that happen. Would it?

 

[SirroMinus1]

we had the demo for about 4 days no one can determin if the game is less technical or not yet.

 

[tutter]

Same old stuff, different thread. Get back to me after playing brawl for at least 50 hours.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

actually a scrub must EARN his right to post, which you have not.

Go back to the Roy boards and troll, assclown.

At any rate, Talkath, I'd thought you might wanna take a look at what I posted in another thread. Hopefully it'll add some layers to the conversation.

Let me go through a couple of hypothetical scenarios.

Let's take the inclusion of no flinch frames. This is probably one of the most kick-*** additions to the franchise. Not only does it make heavier characters more viable (yes, even the storied and "sucky" Ike) but it also introduces (after a fashion) turtling. If you're familiar with any other 2-D fighting game other than Smash, then you'd know turtling is a defensive tactic that involves alot of counterattacking---primarily when you're in the middle of getting pummeled by somebody. Turtling can also mean that you're waiting for the other guy to make even the slightest mistake (missed L-cancels, using the wrong attack at the wrong time, whiffs). The latter definition is what is more applicable to Smash. Getting hit, as a general rule of thumb, is not a good idea. Even if you have good DI, it can (potentially) be of little use if your opponent sees where the hell you're going. Counterattacking from that point is tricky because of the predicament: Will I hit the guy as they chase me down? Or will I just keep getting combo'd until I have a better chance?

With no flinch frames, however, counterattacking as you're getting hit becomes a viable tactic. If you can learn what attacks have them and when they are active, you could feasibly eat somebody's F-smash and then immediately send them packing with one of your own. It brings Smash closer to a conventional 2-D fighter where you can get a hit off when you're getting attacked---the only difference here is that you would have to THINK about how to apply your no-flinch attacks and that you have to time it just right. In 2-D fighters like GG, it's a no-brainer to tap a button and get a random hit off to break up a combo. With this, however, you're gonna have to do a little planning ahead. It isn't to say that this is the better tactic out of the two, mind; it's just another avenue to consider. I personally would rather counterattack out of DI-ing.

Another thing I'd like to point out is the change to Brawl's physics, most notably the momentum-based air dodge. What, does the removal of direction-changing suddenly make this part of the game obsolete? **** no. You can do ANYTHING out of an air dodge now. The potential for mindgames here is absolutely amazing.

Tell me your thoughts.

Smooth Criminal

 

[TheJalapeno]

Brawl felt less technical, it just felt like a lot of pressure was lifted from the game. It may be because we were all noobs when we played the demo

 

[Drone 147]

Originally Posted by 5150
actually a scrub must EARN his right to post, which you have not.

Wow.

5150, your arrogance is just sickening.

As far as i'm concerned, this is a board for free speech, so no "earning" of any kind is neccessary to make a post.

Second of all, on top of your ******** elitist attitude toward Takalth, you make no attempt what-so-ever to say anything intelligent at all.

If anyone needs to earn the right to post, it's you.

Grow up a little, stop being a jack@ss, and maybe you'll be able to make an intelligent post.

 

[DragonBlade]

I think its reasonable to conclude that Brawl is simplified because of two reasons right now.

As I explained in http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=129998 , Nintendo wants more new casual players. Why? They make more money. It doesn't matter to them if they make a great game like Melee or not. They get rewarded based on how many games they sell, not how good the game is. You can clearly see Reggie's comments reflecting that idea in that thread. You can also relate this to the general casual focus of the Brawl changes and updates lately. They focus on silly final smashes, items, and stages that don't encourage competitive play (not to mention they bring back the worts competitive stage from Melee) that don't really add depth and won't be used in serious competitive play. I think this verifies the influence of Nintendo's newfound greed (smash will make more money if it caters to the masses instead of the gamers, thats what it comes down to in the end) on the development of Brawl. I feel bad for Sakurai. He is probably being forced to ruin his own game.

Another thing is the results from people who played the demo. While this might not be the best indication of Brawl's depth, it gives a decent idea of it. A few players who played the game may not be able to show the technical level of the game in a few days, but I thinks this is more reasonable to to believe than random people on the internet who think several months from now there will magically be new advanced techs that will save Brawl. Both of them are assumptions, but I think one of them is more reasonable than the other.

 

[Myst007_teh_newb]

Well, wavedashing and L-cancelling were nowhere to be seen in the demo, so wavedashing into and out of combos and overall just linking them together via SHFFLing is impossible now. In Melee, I found that a lot of tech skill relayed on the ability to pull of certain button combinations with ease (i.e. Waveshine, Pillaring, SHFFLs, etc.). Tactics like edge-guarding properly and techniques that require timing (Pivots and the like) belong in a different catagory of tech skill, in my opinion.

In Brawl, a lot of what Melee was composed of is now gone (finger-based tech skills), and we seem to only be left with the timing aspects of tech skill. So, yes, Brawl is less technical now. There aren't any more of the fast-finger tactics in Brawl that made Melee seem so technical.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Valid points all around, DragonBlade. But an assumption is still an assumption, regardless of how fluffy or intricate it may be. What I posted above was merely speculation, not absolution. Unless I'm wrong, you're no better than myself---a guy who wasn't able to show up at E for All to play the demo firsthand.

We'll find out in a couple of months, I suppose.

Smooth Criminal

 

[DragonBlade]

Valid points all around, DragonBlade. But an assumption is still an assumption, regardless of how fluffy or intricate it may be. What I posted above was merely speculation, not absolution. Unless I'm wrong, you're no better than myself---a guy who wasn't able to show up at E for All to play the demo firsthand.

We'll find out in a couple of months, I suppose.

Smooth Criminal

My first point was not an assumption though. It was all based on what happening right now, the kind of games Nintendo is making, and the kind of things their people are saying.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

My first point was not an assumption though. It was all based on what happening right now, the kind of games Nintendo is making, and the kind of things their people are saying.

Oh, no. I didn't mean your first point, DB. I was just talking about Brawl. You're absolutely right about Nintendo's grand scheme---they've made it clear that the Wii's general consumer is going to be everybody and their mother. Exclusivity towards a particular crowd is gradually being phased out by the company. Whether Brawl will be severely hampered by this or not is still (somewhat) up in the air.

Smooth Criminal

 

[I_R_Hungry]

Oh come on, you mean to suggest that brawl's depth will be lessened by the fact that Nintendo wants it to be more accessible? Melee's depth was only great because of some random crap we happened to find, and that's going to be the case in Brawl. Nintendo's grand visions of a world where old grannies play video games has nothing to do with it.

 

[Takalth]

Good comments on the heavy armor, Smooth_Criminal. That was one change that, whoever the main target was, I think will be awesome for competitive players.

As for Dragonblade's comments, I agree that casuals are the primary target audience, but that doesn't mean that competitives aren't considered. I doubt that there are more than a few very rare people who actually enjoy Melee less because of advanced techniques. As long as you make the core gameplay simple, adding cool, complicated things can expand on your audience without any negative influence on your primary target.

 

[orintemple]

Brawl felt less technical, it just felt like a lot of pressure was lifted from the game. It may be because we were all noobs when we played the demo

Exactly, everyone who played Brawl didn't know how to play Brawl. Without the proper 3-4 years to discover all of the advanced stuff there is no telling how we will be playing until then.

 

[GreenKirby]

This casual vs competitive attitude is becoming as bad and as dumb as:

African Americans vs Africans
White Americans vs Europeans
Atlantic Latino countries vs Spainards
Japanese vs Chinese
Catholics vs Protestants
Sunnis vs Shiites

Anyone see where I'm going from this?

 

[NES n00b]

What is with the trolls here acting like this is EXACTLY the same old stuff? lol.

We really don't know. There might be new ATs that take alot of technical skill, there maybe combos that take more skill in spacing/timing or whatever. The problem is we only know Melee. . . . so taking away Melee technical things = making the game less technical at this point until we get more of a feel of the game.

Edit: You might be saying that both are really hardcore players, but have a slight variance. . . . . . . .but in the end, this really has nothing to do with hardcore vs casual. I don't know why this topic is being treated as such.

 

[DragonBlade]

Exactly, everyone who played Brawl didn't know how to play Brawl. Without the proper 3-4 years to discover all of the advanced stuff there is no telling how we will be playing until then.

The problem with that is: we were able to find all those things because the Melee engine was not deliberately scanned for mechanics like that, because Melee was relatively rushed compared to Brawl. If you follow the Melee news from when Melee was announced, gameplay was released, and the game was released, I think you will conclude the same thing.

Brawl on the other hand is getting a lot more time, so the engine will have gotten a lot more attention. It may not even have any things to discover in 3-4 years because it was cleaned thoroughly to prevent unintended use of game mechanics. The fact that they deliberately removed wave dashing, supports this idea.

 

[GreenKirby]

Do you really have any proof that it was DELIBERATELY removed?

Not being rude. Just want claritification.

 

[EDreams]

The fact that they deliberately removed wave dashing, supports this idea.

That's... not a fact at all :|

 

[I_R_Hungry]

The fact that they deliberately removed wave dashing, supports this idea.

No it doesn't, because they only got rid of wavedashing because they decided to change air-dodging entirely.

 

[DraginHikari]

actually a scrub must EARN his right to post, which you have not.

That's crossing the line quite a bit there, you really have no more right to post by your view then anyone else.

@Dragonblade

Okay I'll take it by another perspective...

As I explained in http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=129998 , Nintendo wants more new casual players. Why? They make more money. It doesn't matter to them if they make a great game like Melee or not. They get rewarded based on how many games they sell, not how good the game is.

Welcome to business. Regardless of how much company say about there art, outside the developers it's all about the money. It's just simply Nintendo has chosen to take a different approach on the matter. By the hardcore means, Nintendo has had extremely difficultity trying to directly compete with Microsoft and Sony both since the market has suddenly split in half.

But really, appeal to the casuals hasn't exactly failed Nintendo so far, consider how much money they've made on that side of the spectrum.

You can clearly see Reggie's comments reflecting that idea in that thread. You can also relate this to the general casual focus of the Brawl changes and updates lately. They focus on silly final smashes, items, and stages that don't encourage competitive play (not to mention they bring back the worts competitive stage from Melee) that don't really add depth and won't be used in serious competitive play.

Well here's my question here: What exactly could they update that would really enhances the competitve scene from Melee? What exactly could they talk about since the majority of competitive points are pointed by the competitve players themselves, not the developers. There is hardly ever a time when Nintendo has encouraged competitive play, it is simply not really what they do.

What you may call gimmicy and silly, I find interesting just in the fact that there trying something different.

I think this verifies the influence of Nintendo's newfound greed (smash will make more money if it caters to the masses instead of the gamers, thats what it comes down to in the end) on the development of Brawl. I feel bad for Sakurai. He is probably being forced to ruin his own game.

Smash has always been a simplier fighting game, there no way around it. Even as much as the advance techinques enhance it at the competitive level, it is still easier to pick up and play then the combo-intense of the rest of the fighting genre. It would be pointless to simply cater to one side or another, the thing is, as I've stated before, there aren't alot of the competitive Melee players that need to be convinced to buy their product. Convince casual players both former Melee players and newcomers on Wii would require more convincing.

As far as claim Sakurai is being FORCED, I find that statement a bit awkard. Even as much as we think we know the developer, we really don't know what he's thinking or how things are operating on all level on Nintendo's staff.

Another thing is the results from people who played the demo. While this might not be the best indication of Brawl's depth, it gives a decent idea of it. A few players who played the game may not be able to show the technical level of the game in a few days, but I thinks this is more reasonable to to believe than random people on the internet who think several months from now there will magically be new advanced techs that will save Brawl. Both of them are assumptions, but I think one of them is more reasonable than the other.

Fair enough, but it's more of the point that the advance techinques in Melee weren't discovered right away either is where all that comes from.

 

[DragonBlade]

Do you really have any proof that it was DELIBERATELY removed?

Not being rude. Just want claritification.

Air dodge was changed in a way that prevents wavedashing. Theres really no reason why both the Melee air dodge and the Brawl air dodge could not both be implemented. Example: shield in the air will cause a momentum air dodge with no loss of jump and shield in the air + a direction will cause a directional air dodge with loss of jump. Why didn't such a simple and obvious idea get implemented? The only reason would be that leaving the directional air dodge in would have kept wavedashing, which is complex and goes against Nintendo's new philosophy as stated by Reggie himself (http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=129998).

 

[EDreams]

No, that's not the only reason. "We didn't think of it" is a reason, as silly as it might sound. "We didn't like the old system, period" is a reason that can be unrelated to wavedashing. "We wanted to have the new airdodge more fluid and automatic, without the player needing to control it himself" is also a reason that can be unrelated to wavedashing.

Baseless speculation? Certainly, so is your theory. But there are more possible reasons than just "Oh no, wavedashing!"

 

[GreenKirby]

Well, I'm not saying that you're wrong, but for we know Sakurai was oblivious about W.D. and wanted the new airdodging feature.

Now if Brawl had Melee's airdodging feature down to the bone except when diagonally airdodging down to the floor, you don't move at all, then yeah, it was much more likely he removed it on purpose.

Oh and **** Reggie

 

[DraginHikari]

Air dodge was changed in a way that prevents wavedashing. Theres really no reason why both the Melee air dodge and the Brawl air dodge could not both be implemented. Example: shield in the air will cause a momentum air dodge with no loss of jump and shield in the air + a direction will cause a directional air dodge with loss of jump. Why didn't such a simple and obvious idea get implemented? The only reason would be that leaving the directional air dodge in would have kept wavedashing, which is complex and goes against Nintendo's new philosophy as stated by Reggie himself (http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=129998).

Well one point that has been made by Sakurai to ease controls due to the multipy controller types and functions some time ago.

Also simply assuming that Nintendo is never again going to do something in favor of the competitive is just as much of an assumption as anything else when you think abuot it really. People like Reggie say alot of things at whatever suits them best at the moment.

 

[DragonBlade]

Its just all too big of a coincidence to think that none of it is related. Nintendo starts making simple games for the casual market and is highly successful. Shortly after, Reggie bashes complexity in games. Then, Brawl is being simplified relative to Melee to get more people playing.

@DraginHikari

I realize Nintendo is a business. My point was that the casual market has become so lucrative for them, its effecting their traditional franchises negatively.

Anything that makes the game have more depth and variety without causing imbalance has potential to enhance the competitive scene. I was a actually excited when Sakurai said they were going to improve air combat. I still think this has potential, but it shouldn't be at the cost of removing old mechanics. These changes would have to be pretty amazing to justify taking out what they did. At the very least could be dojo update that acknowledges the changes and justifies them. We've already had more updates than I can count focus on casual players, why not a single one for the rest of the community?

I really don't think smash is simpler than other fighters overall. Its easier to pick up and play, which is good, but its also very deep. Most fighters have a linear damage system were you just knock down HP. In smash, not only do you damage you opponent, you also have to set up a KO. This adds a whole new realm of possibilities that other games don't have, imo, and this is just one example.

 

[DraginHikari]

Its just all too big of a coincidence to think that none of it is related. Nintendo starts making simple games for the casual market and is highly successful. Shortly after, Reggie bashes complexity in games. Then, Brawl is being simplified relative to Melee to get more people playing.

@DraginHikari

I realize Nintendo is a business. My point was that the casual market has become so lucrative for them, its effecting their traditional franchises negatively.

Anything that makes the game have more depth and variety without causing imbalance has potential to enhance the competitive scene. I was a actually excited when Sakurai said they were going to improve air combat. I still think this has potential, but it shouldn't be at the cost of removing old mechanics. These changes would have to be pretty amazing to justify taking out what they did. At the very least could be dojo update that acknowledges the changes and justifies them. We've already had more updates than I can count focus on casual players, why not a single one for the rest of the community?

I really don't think smash is simpler than other fighters overall. Its easier to pick up and play, which is good, but its also very deep. Most fighters have a linear damage system were you just knock down HP. In smash, not only do you damage you opponent, you also have to set up a KO. This adds a whole new realm of possibilities that other games don't have, imo, and this is just one example.

Unfortunely that simplely not how it works. Most developers will not give full reasons other then simple things that sound good for changes when it comes to a similar game they created before. Simply because they really don't want to bring up old points nor do many developers feel that have to justify why they're doing things.

The large problem with getting too involved in particular player discovered mechincs is that to alot outside of the competitive community would make little sense nor do developer tend to count on these kind of things to sell games. Many of these techinques as with most games are usually results of cause-and-effect within the physics system of the game. Most of the time these tend to be afterthoughts. Discovered by players at a later time.

The reason I refer to it as simplier is more for the fact that the entire scheme of most fighting games are button intense comboing and directional patterns, which with my own coornation problems, I simply cannot pull off. Yet, I can play Smash decently and even figured out a few of the techinques commonly mentioned without nearly as much trouble.

 

[Ban Heim]

No, that's not the only reason. "We didn't think of it" is a reason, as silly as it might sound. "We didn't like the old system, period" is a reason that can be unrelated to wavedashing. "We wanted to have the new airdodge more fluid and automatic, without the player needing to control it himself" is also a reason that can be unrelated to wavedashing.

Baseless speculation? Certainly, so is your theory. But there are more possible reasons than just "Oh no, wavedashing!"

I'm pretty sure DragonBlade is right about the WD. I've thought the same thing myself ever since I learned about the new airdodge mechanics.

"We didn't think of it" - A large team of creative game developers working for one of the most innovative companies couldn't think of it but a random DragonBlade could? Be a bit more realistic. That's highly unlikely. I mean, they made it so if you hit L on the ground you shield, but if you hit L + a direction, you roll. There's not much difference between the two.

"We didn't like the old system" - Why? There was nothing wrong with it. It wasn't broken, it wasn't easy to abuse, and it just made the game more unpredictable and fun in general.

"We wanted a new airdodge without the player needing to control it himself" - A perfect example of dumbing the game down and it's in your own words too. Why would they want to take away player freedom and make it more simple if not to cater to the casual market?

They took away controllable air-dodges simply to eliminate wavedashing quickly. They could have still kept it in though and gotten rid of WDing just by making it so you can't airdodge the split second you jump off the ground. That's what ticks me off the most. WDing is nice and all, but being able to control your momentum with airdodges is much more useful. In an attempt to take WDing out, they ****ed the game out of some depth.