mangodurban
Smash Journeyman
im glad we ended on laughter, see you later buddy!
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Because the concept only applies to in-game mechanics.And Play 2 Win is ******** anyhow. If I am able to use anything to win, why can't I unplug your controller or distract you.
.... not likely, I think I'm gonna let you simmer down for a while, like, a couple of months before I smash against you. Anger management does wonders.im glad we ended on laughter, see you later buddy!
If chain-grabbing is illegal, don't chain grab. If you can't adapt, that's your problem.I PLAY TO WIN. Let me repeat that. I PLAY TO WIN. That means, if my strategy involves chaining you to death so be it. It'd be no different from pit launching his side b until you were dead or DDD chaining you on a flat stage.
Also, I use other attacks. I can play other characters... you're missing the point and worse, you're a scrub for not realizing that playing to win is what it's all about.
No he's wrong here. If you're a better player you'll win. Yatzee was likely playing with items on in random stages with very low skilled people. If I play a top player 10 times I am going to lost 10 times no matter how lucky I get.K, in my eyes SSBB was not meant to be competitive... Heck niether was the original, its about chossing your fav nintendo character and kicking your friends ***. Here's what I pull out of competitive play strategy=spam, and anyone can beat you just my mashing buttons or quote unquote "getting lucky".
Take a look at this review... http://www.escapistmagazine.com/art.../4845-Zero-Punctuation-Super-Smash-Bros-Brawl. most of it talks about nintendo as a company but there is a brief moment that talks about how studying all aspects of the game will get you no where. I agree with his review.
Argument will not work. Not every tournament/player is talked about.Try to tell him no other tournament organizers have banned it...
Yahtzee is more comedy than an actual review and the review was aimed towards casual players. Basically he is expected to just ***** about games in a humorous manned. By the way I agree with him entirely on Sonic and Snake being unlockable. When you make that big of a deal about it people shouldn't have to play for like five hours before they're unlocked.Yeah, that Yatzee review was full of inaccuracies and hypocrisy. Oh, he likes Condemned, but doesn't like Smash Bros. Yet because I like Smash Bros. (yes, I'm that guy) and I choose to play the game and to improve I'm somehow a fanboy?...
... I mean, what exactly does it take to render you a fanboy? Just enjoying a game? If that's the case then he is a Condemned fanboy, or a Half-Life fanboy etc. etc...
... He states that he doesn't want to play through single player to unlock stuff... Well he doesn't have to does he? For a start, you can play through Subspace with two of you...
... Or, you can unlock the stuff via multi-player...
... But you gotta spend time on the game... Boo Hoo.
Why knock a game when you can't even be bothered to give it a chance?...
... Poor review.
Maybe not. But the real issue I take with this review (because it is a review.. When it's a game he's interested in and he believes is good he doesn't slag it off just because it's what he's paid to do) Is that he couldn't be bothered with it from the start.Yahtzee is more comedy than an actual review and the review was aimed towards casual players. Basically he is expected to just ***** about games in a humorous manned. By the way I agree with him entirely on Sonic and Snake being unlockable. When you make that big of a deal about it people shouldn't have to play for like five hours before they're unlocked.
Resident_Smash_Genius said:I DON'T HAVE TO USE CHAIN GRABS TO WIN. YOU'RE AN IDIOT FOR ASSUMING I HAVE TO. GO AWAY UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A COMPETITIVE SMASH PLAYER.
ALSO LEARN HOW TO USE ENOUGH PUNCTUATION SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
Resident_Smash_Genius said:Calm down, it's just a game.
Irony FTL?Resident_Smash_Genius said:.... not likely, I think I'm gonna let you simmer down for a while, like, a couple of months before I smash against you. Anger management does wonders.
In response to your topic and your post; playing to win isnt dead, it never really existed in smash.-talk-
As I said, the caps lock was for clarity.Irony FTL?
People responded - they must care a little. I also wondered what people thought about the banning. Clearly, everyone seems to be split.OP kind of fails at this one. I'm going to try to avoid judging your Smash skills, but...seriously dude, nobody cares. Tourney hosts get to make the rules, and if you don't like them, either don't play in them, or deal with it. If you are such a good Smasher, then you should still be able to win. Then after you still win even following their rules, then you can start complaining to them and saying,'look I won without that "cheap" technique, maybe it's not so cheap after all.'
IC's grabs have no sexual orientation, therefore it would be in your best interest to not label them as such. I doubt they're "happy" either. -.-Regarding chaingrabs:
IMO, IC infinites are actually pretty gay and I would try to ban them if I ever hosted a tourney, at least until somebody shows me a way to beat them other than "don't get grabbed." Asking somebody to not get grabbed is ridiculous in Brawl. How do you approach anybody or do any moves other than projectiles against ICs now? And don't even try to label me as a guy that's just mad that he can't do the technique; I definitely can do DDD chaingrabs and can do IC infinites with some degree of success. I learned them to see if they really were as good as I had heard, and it turns out that they are.
It would be in your best interest not to open that subject.IC's grabs have no sexual orientation, therefore it would be in your best interest to not label them as such. I doubt they're "happy" either. -.-
You seem to get shot alot.Wow... Just wow... Well i guess all the pros are off playing melee.*shot*
No really, just give it some time and more decent people will come... Many of the decent and good players are still whinning about there being no wave dashing and L-canceling...
Kind of off topic-
I remember once when i had a good internet connection i ko'ed some Ike by using dash throws with Sonic... Its too bad brawl has such a bad online system... I just love the fact that i can't hear those people whine...
hey look, he posts in green, he must be important.In response to your topic and your post; playing to win isnt dead, it never really existed in smash.
People have ALWAYS, ALWAYS griped about what wins in smash. Is it dumb? Heck yes it's dumb.
People just do not know what all is out there in everything. Especially new people who only understand what they and their friends do at their house.
_
So to answer your question again.
Playing to win never existed in smash, too many people complain about it.
Why how did you know?hey look, he posts in green, he must be important.
Again he's meant as comedy and you probably shouldn't take him seriously as a reviewer.Maybe not. But the real issue I take with this review (because it is a review.. When it's a game he's interested in and he believes is good he doesn't slag it off just because it's what he's paid to do) Is that he couldn't be bothered with it from the start.
He had one evening to play the game...
... And as he obviously hadn't played Melee (he didn't know who Marth was), so is that any amount of time to do an actual fair review? I bet he spent more than 10 hours on Condemned 2. How can anyone pick up Smash Bros. from scratch and expect to be competent at the game in one drunken Vodka fuelled evening?
Basically he insulted the whole fighting game community by insinuating that they are all fanboys...
He insults anyone that wishes to spend any amount of time trying to improve at any kind of game...
... Which I'm sure includes himself.
If I was interested in say, tennis. Would I be classed as a supposed fanboy because I trained to be a better tennis player? Or I sought out better tennis players as competition and a means to improve my game?...
... Basically it boils down to this...
... If you so much as enjoy a game, and wish to become good at it you are a fanboy.
God, whatever happened to just being a plain old fan?
So there are two types of gamers now are there...
Casuals and fanboys.
I just think with this one and a few others, that Yahtzee was being an arrogant, ignorant hypocritical bell-end...
... And he wasn't funny this time.
When Yahtzee makes a review, he's basically either trying to convince you to get the game or avoid it, just like any other reviewer in the world. He presents it in a unique way, but he's still no different from say... IGN reviews in his overall goal.Again he's meant as comedy and you probably shouldn't take him seriously as a reviewer.
Personally, I'm more upset over the fact he didn't bash it the same way he did Halo 3. I can understand if he doesn't care for the game.He probably would've been funnier if it was a game you didn't like alot. But I enjoyed his bashing of Halo 3 so I can't really complain when one of my favorite games gets it.
Yes, because those two topics are completely transitive.If casuals can deal with giving up items, then you can deal with giving up chain grabbing.
I PLAY TO WIN. Let me repeat that. I PLAY TO WIN. That means, if my strategy involves chaining you to death so be it. It'd be no different from pit launching his side b until you were dead or DDD chaining you on a flat stage.
Also, I use other attacks. I can play other characters... you're missing the point and worse, you're a scrub for not realizing that playing to win is what it's all about.
The theme of this discussion is reliance on a single aspect of the gameplay in order to win. If I'm a casual player who can usually win if I get possession of the Star Rod (because I'm very good with the Star Rod for some odd reason), I still need to learn to give it up in order to fight competitively.Yes, because those two topics are completely transitive.
Yes, because the reliance on a completely random event happening is comparable to the reliance on ability and skill.The theme of this discussion is reliance on a single aspect of the gameplay in order to win. If I'm a casual player who can usually win if I get possession of the Star Rod (because I'm very good with the Star Rod for some odd reason), I still need to learn to give it up in order to fight competitively.
A similar principle applies here (I'm not saying the situation is exactly the same).