• 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!

Is the brawl style of gameplay really that bad?

umegames

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
54
I'm fine with it being like brawl. As a fighting game fan, i understand unlike most, that the devs set the standards, not the fans. When they transitioned from melee to brawl. thats how they wanted the game to play, and your challenge is to be good in that system.
I.E. if you play sports, and say you play for the Cincinnati Bengals (my home town) there offensive system is going to be different than the New York Giants. It's not the teams job to cater to how you want to play the sport, YOU have to learn to achieve and excel.
Lets even look at the street fighter series. obviously street fighter 2 is vastly different than 3, be it because of the speed, the set of combos, ex moves and parrying. But then comes along street fighter 4, which isn't as fast, doesn't have parrying and isn't (at least IMO, as combo driven.
 

Iron Jawbone

Servant of Malroth
Joined
Oct 11, 2004
Messages
80
I've lurked around these parts for freakin' forever, and this is the first thread in freakin' YEARS that had a handful of people who really knew what they were talking about in terms of moving on. Yes, there are problems with the past games, and there will be problems with the new game. In the end, these are pretty much just amount to quirks and flavor (Except tripping, nobody wants that). We love this game so much that a group of people not only made one, not two, but multiple variations and fixes to these CONSOLE games. SSB64 is gone. Melee is gone. If history repeats itself, Brawl will be gone. In it's place, a new Smash Bros game unlike the last.

Bottom line, here's to the new Smash Bros...warts and all.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
1,255
Location
Oklahoma City
Brawl is bad, but it doesn't have to turn into Melee or even 64 to be good.

Not because it's not Melee, but because it actually prevents momentum of any kind. For example, very few saw the trailer for Mega Man and said "Oh dude, I hope I can stand across the map and throw buster shots all day". No, they want to play Mega Man and possibly bust a few heads too. Maybe some did though. Maybe a few people like the run and gun aspect of Brawl. Defensive play isn't bad, but if to the exclusion of offense entirely? Very much so.
Point: Preventing a certain style of play is bad in any fighting game. Different characters suiting many different styles is the entire point, else we'd all be playing fighters with 1 character.

It shouldn't be a matter of offense vs. defense or casuals vs. hardcore. The great thing about Melee and 64 were that all levels of play could enjoy them. The barrier of entry was so low, but the curve was gradual and went on forever. If you just wanted to play casually, nothing stopped you. If you wanted to advance, nothing stopped you either. The depth was there, and those games possess metagames still growing to this day. That's what you need in a Smash game. An all-inclusive smash-up with enough nostalgia to hit us like a tazer to the spine. Say what you want, Brawl wasn't exactly "inclusive" to all parties involved, even compared to Melee and 64 (which stumbled a little in the same areas).

It's worthy of note that Brawl was quite rushed, so maybe many problems simply weren't worked out due to the time constraints. Or maybe Sakurai is a mustache twirler with a hate-on for competitive Smash. Only time tells, I guess.

So, other things:

-Anyone notice we haven't seen a match with items on? The one that Sakurai himself played even had them off, and was played on Battlefield. Real men use items? Strange for someone deemed so "anti-competitive".

-CPUs in those videos are wiggling out of tumble. In Brawl, they air dodged pretty much without fail, no? I think I caught a Brawl-style air dodge in one of the videos as well, but not out of tumble. It also seems as if they're intentionally AVOIDING showing air dodges, seeing as I saw a grand total of one or two so far. Seems odd. Perhaps you just can't AD directly out of tumble like in Melee? That seemed to work well for Brawl+ for a few seconds. Given, Brawl+ had ridiculous amounts of hitstun; way more than Melee.

-Melee didn't have a whole lot more hit-stun than Brawl. The problem for combos at least were mostly related to being able to dodge out of tumble, fall-speed, ground speed, laggy aerials and lack of momentum transfer from ground-to-air. Also, piss-easy SDI. We don't need wicked hit-stun for combos, we just need a player put into tumble to be put solidly in the defensive position with guaranteed or nearly guaranteed follow-ups. This is still possible without cloning Melee, though I'm gun-shy with them screwing around with the Smash formula after Brawl.

-Anyone see a character jump from an edge quickly? I've seen a few edge grabs, but there's always a significant pause before they move again. Return of Brawl's sticky-edges? I hope not.

-Spot dodges seem to last for years again. Don't entirely have a problem with them being better than Melee, but Brawl's were a little extreme.

-Shield-stun. Haven't seen much on it, but this is arguably more important than the hit-stun for offensive momentum.
 

ZIngaZ

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
25
Location
Washington
Ok so why are people arguing that trying to make a game with a smaller gap between pros and casual players a good thing. No game will have any depth if just anybody can read the manual, play for 10 minutes and basically be a pro at that game. A game needs to have depth which usually requires time and effort put into practicing and getting tech skill down which is why I think melee has such a large appeal to most people over brawl. Quite honestly while I would love for WDing to make a come back I would be okay with a slightly slower paced game as long as it bring depth back into it. Basically as long as combos and a large level of tech skill are involved I'd be happy even if they throw tech skill at us in an entirely new way.
 

Amazing Ampharos

Balanced Brawl Designer
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
4,582
Location
Kansas City, MO
I'd like to throw out that, as a person who played in a lot of Brawl tournaments, I never saw any sort of small skill gaps. I decimated bad players frequently and was decimated by very good players all the same. I know it was a pretty small club at the very top; I remember for a very long time Mew2King and Ally kept going back and forth with no one else really able to touch them. Eventually some others started getting wins on them, and I didn't really follow where it went from there, but I've always figured that what I saw and experienced proved the existence of tons of skill gaps pretty decisively.

This is also an academic point. Smash 4 will be what smash 4 will be, and we'll just have to deal with it regardless. It may be like Brawl, or it may be something very different by the time we see everything. In that way, we don't really have to worry what any of us feel about Brawl because it's not a matter that affects anything with the future of this game.
 

kakx

Smash Cadet
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
56
Location
Irvine, CA
Then go play Super Turbo.

"HURR THEN GO PLAY SUPER TURBO"

God, grow up. Just because other Smashers and myself point out certain aspects that we enjoyed in the previous Smash games doesn't meant we should "GO PLAY SUPER TURBO OR STREETFIGHTHURRHDERP." Yes, we want definite combos of the game; No, not all of us want to play those type of 'side-scrolling' fighters. We did not say Brawl is bad in anyway, we just have a different preference in how the game should be built and made. lol...
 

GamerGuy09

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
3,090
Location
Iowa
Switch FC
SW-3742-4712-6319
I'm still confused.....Was I the only one who thought the new smash bros looked way faster than Brawl?
 

VhatDeHel

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
141
I'm still confused.....Was I the only one who thought the new smash bros looked way faster than Brawl?
Nah, it looks faster to me, mainly when they fast fall, but what mainly concerns me is just that it seems like characters get hit too far away to have any sort of combos. Obviously this is subject to change, but yeah. Also I'm just worried about stuff I didn't really like from Brawl possibly staying in, like the magnetic edges and stuff.
 

kikaru

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
890
Location
Some small and insignificant country town, WA.
3DS FC
0705-2807-1422
What is Super Smash? For me it's a party brawler where you pick Nintendo characters (and a few third party characters) and try to beat the living hell out of other characters. It's an incredibly goofy game in which hilarity can ensue in just about every match. This I feel is the point of Super Smash, a game where you and up to three other players can simply have fun.

To address the main point, Is the brawl style of gameplay really that bad? And my answer would be no, but the big flaw was the tripping mechanic. Transitioning over from Melee to Brawl my friends and I were still able to have just as much fun if not more due to the added content. It all depends on what's more fun for you whether it be playing for fun or playing competitively.
 

Strong Badam

Super Elite
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
26,545
I don't have fun playing Brawl. I have yet to meet a single Smash fan that didn't have fun playing Melee. I don't have a particularly good time playing Smash 64 either. It takes a very big problem that Brawl has to the extreme by not allowing players to interact for prolonged periods of time, and hides it with the guise of "omg comboz and tech skill!!!" that people seem to believe is why Melee players enjoy the game, which isn't true for most of the good players.
 

Yitsul

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
294
Location
San Diego
NNID
Yitsul
3DS FC
2105-8677-5210
Switch FC
5599 8083 2114
yeah, no random match-ups in classic mode and all star mode, and there should be classic adventure mode AND story mode
 

M15t3R E

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
3,061
Location
Hangin' with Thor
I don't have fun playing Brawl. I have yet to meet a single Smash fan that didn't have fun playing Melee. I don't have a particularly good time playing Smash 64 either. It takes a very big problem that Brawl has to the extreme by not allowing players to interact for prolonged periods of time, and hides it with the guise of "omg comboz and tech skill!!!" that people seem to believe is why Melee players enjoy the game, which isn't true for most of the good players.
I can't believe you'd say this in defense of Brawl. Like, what? This doesn't defend the game at all. It's similar to saying, "ya u can combo with fox's utilt over and over again, brawl haz combossss!" Or, "u can do a 5 hit combo IF the other person doesn't DI at all!"

It's completely fair criticism to say one of Brawl's flaws is the lack of combos. There is no denying it, it is a fact that it lacks combos. Is it the #1 thing for a comp. game? No, but it's what makes a game enjoyable both as a player and as a spectator. It attracts people to the game, it gets people EXCITED.


You're devaluing something that actually helps the game.
-----
Brawl Pika has more combos than Melee Pika.
Also, check out Peach's uair combo AT.
I have far less fun playing Melee than playing Brawl and 64. Some people here clearly appreciate being able to punish your opponent for one small mistake with a 50% damage dealing combo. That is Melee. Your objection perplexes me, Revven. Am I to understand that SDI'ing correctly and reacting appropriately and moreover predicting your opponent's movements are not competitive aspects that can be commended in Brawl? Brawl employs a different skill set. It forces you to use mindgames and be more defensive, just as you SHOULD be in a fighting game. It's more realistic in that sense. When you learn to be aggressive and defensive both at once, that is true skill. And I've noticed it's only Melee players who complain about Brawl being campy. I don't know what game you're all watching, but Brawl is faster than other fighting games besides Melee and top players in it are always aggressive. The aspects of Brawl require you to be a smart player with a great reaction time- moving your fingers quickly will only get you so far. Brawl is very competitive, but in different ways than Melee.
 

kackamee

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 26, 2007
Messages
3,133
Location
Charlotte NC :)
NNID
SlushCream
3DS FC
3480-3017-1332
Brawl is an amazing game and it makes me sad when people say it's terrible. Casually more then competitively, however even competitively brawl was fairly well balanced and had a lot of character variety in tournament play.
The gameplay might've been slower and more defensive, but those aren't necessarily bad things.
I personally have more fun playing Brawl than Melee, but I do have more fun watching Melee then Brawl.
I don't think the "Brawl" style of gameplay is bad in the slightest, I just think slight tweaks to make it faster (which seems to be happening from the videos we've seen) and maybe a bit more combo intensive would make the balance between Brawl and Melee for SSB4 very enjoyable.

Although I would like it if SSB4 introduced a new style of gameplay just like Melee and Brawl did individually.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,266
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
"HURR THEN GO PLAY SUPER TURBO"

God, grow up. Just because other Smashers and myself point out certain aspects that we enjoyed in the previous Smash games doesn't meant we should "GO PLAY SUPER TURBO OR STREETFIGHTHURRHDERP." Yes, we want definite combos of the game; No, not all of us want to play those type of 'side-scrolling' fighters. We did not say Brawl is bad in anyway, we just have a different preference in how the game should be built and made. lol...

That's exactly what you said though. You were directly responding to a thread called "is it really that bad" by "yes because it lacks combos."

The Smash community has always tried to make their game more like traditional fighters in the belief that this was how they would get the game to be "competitive." You need only look to what happened when Evo tried to have items for the first Brawl tournament with items on since there was no data to suggest they were ban-worthy because there was no data at all yet. Our entire ruleset is often very blatant trying to turn Smash into a side scroling fighter in a lot of ways.

The game doesn't need combos. All it needs is the ability to punish mistakes with enough damage and positioning advantage after the punish. There's no reason we should have to adopt another game's system to do that.
For the record I'm indifferent towards weather Smash 4 will or will not have them (though I still think DI during combos is some mighty bull**** and needs to be removed if combos are a big part of the system).
 

1MachGO

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
807
Though you can argue a personal opinion, I do think it is easier to objectively claim that Melee had superior gameplay to Brawl compared to the other way around.

Simply put, Melee facilitates competitive and casual gameplay equally. Brawl does place restrictions on the competitive fanbase. Sakurai intentionally changing aspects of the game to shrink the skill gap is a fact.
 

MuraRengan

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
1,510
Location
New Orleans
Lol, there's so many people here who don't know what they're talking about. Everybody go back to page 1 and read Kal's post. That's all that needs to be said here.
 

Vkrm

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
1,194
Location
Las Vegas
Am I the only one who finds this exciting? The amount of pressure the two put on each other is mind blowing. It's a battle of attrition, that shows the importance of superior positioning, and lets everybody see just how varied melee's metagame is. Definitely in the top 10 best sets of all time.
 

Vkrm

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
1,194
Location
Las Vegas
It's not my favorite thing about marvel but ill still watch it. I actually watch a lot brawl too, even though i consider it a major step back. The commentary is best thing about competitive brawl imo.
 

MikeHaggarTHAKJB

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
3,186
Location
Göteborg, Sweden
Freedom of control/movement would be great, as long as it does not take a bunch of ridiculous inputs....... I love techs, I enjoy dacusing in brawl, but looking at a compromise for the WHOLE community, including casual, it would be better off removed and they should find an easier alternative, or make wavedashing easier, and the manual and/or game should tell people about it. look at the old n64 Zelda games...... how will those EVER be beaten/topped? The glitches literally give an infinite amount of replay value, and they require tech skill, and it makes an easy game harder. It also allows the game to be more competitive, for speedruns and such, but my point is, this does not compromise all the players in smash.
wow youre a total ******. buhuhuhu i cant press buttons fast ;( kill yourself
 

GaretHax

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
464
wow youre a total ******. buhuhuhu i cant press buttons fast ;( kill yourself
I seem to recall a thread made specifically to whine about other people's choice of character main. Kill yourself? Or at least try to be relevant-intelligent-respectful, you could just stop trolling or acting like you are 12 I guess..
 

VhatDeHel

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
141
@ VhatDeHel

I don't think you'll have to worry to much about the edges. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQD1yJinzeQ If you go to 4:36 you can clearly see that Mario caped in front of the edge but he didn't grab it which he WOULD have done in Brawl.

Yeah, I realized that and hope so, but if you look at 5:34 in the same video in slow motion, Mario starts his up B and still grabs the ledge, so that may show that it may still be possible to sweet spot in the middle of an Up B.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,266
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
Though you can argue a personal opinion, I do think it is easier to objectively claim that Melee had superior gameplay to Brawl compared to the other way around.

Simply put, Melee facilitates competitive and casual gameplay equally. Brawl does place restrictions on the competitive fanbase. Sakurai intentionally changing aspects of the game to shrink the skill gap is a fact.
So did Mike Z when making Skullgirls, and when it comes to technical skill almost no one touches that man in terms of what he performs on stage.
No one agrees with having a high tech skill barrier or even cap. If you enjoy it that's fine, but understand you enjoy it for CASUAL reasons.
 

MikeHaggarTHAKJB

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
3,186
Location
Göteborg, Sweden
I seem to recall a thread made specifically to whine about other people's choice of character main. Kill yourself? Or at least try to be relevant-intelligent-respectful, you could just stop trolling or acting like you are 12 I guess..
yes that was the point of my thread, congratulations on your thick skull
 

1MachGO

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
807
So did Mike Z when making Skullgirls, and when it comes to technical skill almost no one touches that man in terms of what he performs on stage.
No one agrees with having a high tech skill barrier or even cap. If you enjoy it that's fine, but understand you enjoy it for CASUAL reasons.
I am not sure I understand what your post proves... nor do I know what you mean when you say casual reasons.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,266
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
I don't think you understand what casual means when used in the context of competitive play.

Casual is anything involving fun whatsoever. It's anything outside of decision making and risk reward and all that comes with.

Having an action be technically difficult, while you might find fun, in no way adds in anyway to the decision making process of players UNLESS you get to the point that a player might think "I could attempt this but it might drop" at which point your game suffers from inconsistency, and you've sacrificed competitive value for fun.

Enough has been said numerous times over and over on this subject and I've got a lot I want to get done today. There are numerous design articles from numerous developers and top level players who all itterate that the game shouldn't be about pressing the right button at the right time, but making the right decision at the right time and the closer we get to that the better for the game in a competitive scene.
 

M15t3R E

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
3,061
Location
Hangin' with Thor
Though you can argue a personal opinion, I do think it is easier to objectively claim that Melee had superior gameplay to Brawl compared to the other way around.
This might shock you, but that's not an objective statement. That's your opinion.
Simply put, Melee facilitates competitive and casual gameplay equally. Brawl does place restrictions on the competitive fanbase. Sakurai intentionally changing aspects of the game to shrink the skill gap is a fact.
What matters is not Sakurai's intentions but the results. Did he succeed in doing that? Some would say yes, but I would say no. You can read my above post for a more thorough explanation on this. It seems to be that to succeed in Brawl, you need to be intelligent. To succeed in Melee, you just need muscle memory.
 

MrZero

Smash Cadet
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
41
Location
Woodstock, Georgia
It seems to be that to succeed in Brawl, you need to be intelligent. To succeed in Melee, you just need muscle memory.
You actually need to be intelligent in both to succeed. And muscle memory is still fairly important in Brawl; for example, the DACUS, without muscle memory, would've been too tedious to use as often as it is now.
 

M15t3R E

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
3,061
Location
Hangin' with Thor
You actually need to be intelligent in both to succeed. And muscle memory is still fairly important in Brawl; for example, the DACUS, without muscle memory, would've been too tedious to use as often as it is now.
That's but one example. Melee is much more about muscle memory, and if you can combo well you need less good reads on an opponent to take a stock off of them. In Brawl, you'll need far more good reads on an opponent to take off one stock. That's a big reason why Brawl is slower, like a game of chess, other than the slower physics.
 

otter

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
616
Location
Ohio
I get that, but I prefer a defensive focus. Obviously some tweaks have to be made to balance things a bit from Brawl, but I much prefer a defensive game.

Of course even in a game with combos, things can get quite campy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVMl9FMX1kQ

Marvel is my main game, and I am more a defensive player too, so I understand where you're coming from. The problem is that true "camping" or "zoning" should be a way to gradually hurt your opponent from afar in order to make them desperate to get into close range, so that when you do have to fight them, they are in a weakened state. This is what you are seeing in that Marvel video. It should also be noted that these are really the only two notable players in the pro circuit that "camp" as a main strategy. Marvel is a close range game and not just because of combos.

In Brawl, you're not camping because its your optimal range, you're camping because whoever attacks first is at a disadvantage. The optimal way to play the game is to pick Metaknight, tap your opponent once, and then ledgehog for 7 minutes. There is no debate about this. You could argue for days about the "Best" way to play Melee, and that should be the goal.
 

MuraRengan

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
1,510
Location
New Orleans
You need higher levels of muscle memory and intelligence to succeed in Melee than in brawl. Anyone who thinks melee is not an mentally challenging game has clearly never played it at an above average level. The most common barroer for an upcoming melee player is learning to view the game as more than just a technical circus. That's why super technical foxes and falcos still get beat by puffs and sheiks. Go watch djNintendo 3-stock unknown's fox twice in tournament with bowser and explain to me how it's all about muscle memory.
 

Black Mantis

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
5,683
Location
Writing my own road...................
In Brawl, you're not camping because its your optimal range, you're camping because whoever attacks first is at a disadvantage. The optimal way to play the game is to pick Metaknight, tap your opponent once, and then ledgehog for 7 minutes. There is no debate about this. You could argue for days about the "Best" way to play Melee, and that should be the goal.

 

MrZero

Smash Cadet
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
41
Location
Woodstock, Georgia
That's but one example. Melee is much more about muscle memory, and if you can combo well you need less good reads on an opponent to take a stock off of them. In Brawl, you'll need far more good reads on an opponent to take off one stock. That's a big reason why Brawl is slower, like a game of chess, other than the slower physics.
No, I agree. I just think you're making it too black and white where it's not entirely necessary.

And Black Mantis, I love your Kenshiro theme.
 
Top Bottom