Is the Competitive Standpoint of Smash 4 Confusing?

[2ndComing]

Edit: Ok first off, my bad guys, I feel bad because my use of the word "competitive" has confused people since so many people just throw it around nowadays. I am using this post as some type of insight on the viability of the game based on what we have seen, Like what the game's meta MIGHT be based on the evidence and footage we have the build. I am sorry for making that no clear in the beginning.



The title says it all. I am not known for long posts that might tucker out the read and eventually make said reader start skimming but I digress. (yay I finally got to use that word :D wait... did I use it right D: )

When many people bring up the often dreaded repost article:
"Will Smash 4 Be Competitive?"
"Will Smash 4 be more competitive than Brawl/Melee/PM?"
and etc...

Many of us (or almost all KNOW) that Smash 4's competitive crowd will indeed be a thing and more than likely bigger than brawl (at least in the states) because of the removal or tripping, hitstun can no longer be cancelled and other elements like shield stopping from 64 and just an overall fast game feel.

However, I tend to notice that when we as a community delve into the mechanics of Smash 4 through many analysis, many of us have seen problems that could affect the competitive play. Like the aerials on many characters being just absurdly larger than past entries.

....then there are some very nice additions that give the game more depth and possibility for more advanced play. Such as the new "Pivot Cancels" allowing for pivots being able to be cancelled into different attacks. Also recently found that the stopping animation is greatly shortened being able to act of it faster (similar to crouch canceling, this is also was a part of Bowser's advanced play in Brawl, his stopping animation had almost no lag)

There are also videos like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZYVxxHE-5k

- This video shows a very combo heavy oriented character being able to do Project M like stuff such as being able to EASILY combo out of down-throw after 100% (could be character specific but in smash, when is that not the case)

and...then there is stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YNU6pnUgA0

- Don't get me wrong, the Invitational was hype, especially the 1v1s but this shows the problem that plagued Brawl. Defensive play being to good and not being able to follow up from grabs (even at low percents); those problems just plague this build of the game.

Then there is the inbetween: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAayYDWPkms
(Same build but just for the 3ds)

- Great offensive play but it was a bit slow but it still stayed remained very fun to watch (30XX 4evah)


The point I am trying to make/ask you all think if you agree that Smash 4's competitive future seems very conflicting. There are things we like/love and there is stuff that we dislike/hate. Not to mention the game isn't even out yet so some of this stuff could change towards a different side, the game could be filled with stuff like Luigi's Down Throw or it could be filled with stuff like Kirby's Down Throw (see what I did there?)
Do you agree?


(also, please tell me how bad I did on this post. I am not used to making medium/big posts just yet so I am scared if it seems off. Criticism is appreciated)

 

[Rocket Raccoon]

Is water wet?

 

[2ndComing]

Is water wet?

Come on man, you could at least try, I actually thought this post through

Or would you rather me just post another "Will Smash 4 Be Competitive"?

 

[ミスティック Speed]

Is fire hot?

 

[2ndComing]

Well I give up

gonna go jump off cliff now

 

[Shiliski]

Well I give up

gonna go jump off cliff now

Don't jump. Edgehog. It's what pros do. Let the other sucker fall.

I think it's kindof inevitable for the Smash 4 meta to be confusing right now, since we've had such limited experience with it. Once the 3DS version comes out we'll start to be able to actually look at it. Pretty much anything we say right now is empty speculation so I don't really see how it could not be confusing.

 

[BigShad]

Darn it guys, at least get some discussion going on!

In my opinion, I have a feeling that, like all Smash games when they start, the competitiveness of this game is obviously gonna be confusing at first. Yet, as more advanced options are discovered and as time passes by and people get used to the feel of Smash 4, things will start to feel less chaotic.

More than likely, this game's feel itself will be a slight mix of all of the previous titles. At least, I think so.

 

[ferioku]

Darn it guys, at least get some discussion going on!

In my opinion, I have a feeling that, like all Smash games when they start, the competitiveness of this game is obviously gonna be confusing at first. Yet, as more advanced options are discovered and as time passes by and people get used to the feel of Smash 4, things will start to feel less chaotic.

More than likely, this game's feel itself will be a slight mix of all of the previous titles. At least, I think so.

Definitely, it mostly reminds me of 64 to be honest, with little DI and OP grabs. Although it's still very different to all of them in terms of feel.

 

[Renji64]

Good post The future is unkown i'm not getting my hopes up for something amazing I want smash 4 to be my main game but it just seems like a extention of brawl curently. Maybe the final build will make shine more.

 

[Gidy]

Seems like a mix between Brawl and 64 with some of Melee's speed. I like it.

 

[<π]

I think people get confused about the definition of "competitive"

com·pet·i·tive
adjective\kəm-ˈpe-tə-tiv\
: of or relating to a situation in which people or groups are trying to win a contest or be more successful than others : relating to or involving competition

ANYTHING can be competitive. People have rock paper scissors tournaments with MUCH higher turn outs than melee events. At the end of the day it will be about what the community wants. If they want to play the game and be a part of the community created around it... it will happen. If they don't enjoy these aspects... it won't.

 

[Senario]

I think people get confused about the definition of "competitive"


ANYTHING can be competitive. People have rock paper scissors tournaments with MUCH higher turn outs than melee events. At the end of the day it will be about what the community wants. If they want to play the game and be a part of the community created around it... it will happen. If they don't enjoy these aspects... it won't.

Case closed guys! Semantic arguing! Not like it is pointless or anything.

I think it is confusing right now but honestly i am not that optimistic. Sakurai has said time and again that he only sees smash as a party game and his balancing method is only sensible in such a mindset. Really it is up in the air but i prefer to err on the side of caution especially when Meta knight only got the up b change and no glide where the rest of his moves are "the same". He still has a bunch of options for recovery and likely is still really strong for no reason.

 

[<π]

I wasn't arguing though. I was answering his question.

"Do you think Smash 4 will be balanced?"
"Do you think Smash 4 will be like melee or brawl?"
"Will the game be fast?"
"Will the game be deep?"
"Will the game be a party game?"

Those are the questions people are answering, and some of them are great questions, but none of them have anything to do with whether or not Smash 4 can be done competitively. You can make anything a competition so of course the easy answer is yes.

I don't mean to sound condecending, but when you tell someone "I am more competetive than you" it doesn't mean you are better at competing, it means you have more drive to compete. A game can't be "more competetive" than another game. It CAN be faster, or deeper, or more complex, but it is people who decide whether or not they want to compete, not the game.

 

[2ndComing]

I think people get confused about the definition of "competitive"


ANYTHING can be competitive. People have rock paper scissors tournaments with MUCH higher turn outs than melee events. At the end of the day it will be about what the community wants. If they want to play the game and be a part of the community created around it... it will happen. If they don't enjoy these aspects... it won't.

I think you are kinda misjudging the point of the post I guess well said regardless

Also you know what I mean in terms of competitive SIR

 

[DakotaBonez]

Your asking us if we're confused as to whether or not the game will be competitive?
I think it goes without saying that we're all confused about this, well, besides the pessimistic people who want to make harsh judgements before the game is even out.

Elaborate on your meaning of competitive maybe?
I see competitive used to describe games that provide depth that keep a game fresh for years.
For sure the game will have the seemingly infinite depth provided by Smash's unique physics system.
But people also use it to describe games that are entertaining to watch.
The game could not have that many viewers at EVO or whatever.
But I think its a safe bet that Smash4 will be streamed and played competitively within our community for years.

 

[κomıc]

I feel like some people are forgetting the thriving scene Brawl had before PM came into town. Brawl has as much depth as Melee but it isn't the same depth people came to expect.

Smash 4 will inevitably have depth because that's always been the core foundation of the Smash Bros franchise- simple gameplay with amazing depth.

As for the game being competitive.. Well, anything can be considered competitive when you think about it. Even Wii Fit U. People are competing on Miiverse and sharing their results with friends. There's clubs to see who can reach their weight goal the quickest and there's a simple yet fun scoring system implemented in the game. Including the handy step counter.

If Wii Fit U can be played competitively, then pretty much any other game out there can be considered competitive.

Feels weird posting this.

 

[<π]

I think you are kinda misjudging the point of the post I guess well said regardless

Also you know what I mean in terms of competitive SIR

Again I'm not trying to sound mean here but I honestly don't know what you mean. People throw that word around for so many things now-a-days.

If you mean "will this game's competitive community continue to grow after release?" then I have an answer for you:

The game will live or die on how the community perceives it.

With all it flaws I still prefer brawl to melee for example, because it lets me play the way I want to. If I didn't have children and a young marriage I think I would have been working my butt off to get people excited about the game, I would have been trying to build a community around and trying to show people the things that made brawl unique fun and exciting, the things I saw, because that game was amazing! It was the community that wasn't.
When you have people who are passionate enough about something to make sacrifices in order to see it grow... it will grow! For a number of reasons brawl lost that within it's community...

Melee was dead, Brawl killed it! But a passionate few worked their butts off and that ignited fire that still burning!

Its the same reason why rock-paper-scissors tournaments can have larger turn outs than we do. Or why Street fight 4 can sell 1/10th the copies of smash and still have two times the attendants at EVO. It isn't a games mechanics or lack their off that make it a (it pains me to use the word like this) "very competitive" experience. But the community!

 

[2ndComing]

Again I'm not trying to sound mean here but I honestly don't know what you mean. People throw that word around for so many things now-a-days.

If you mean "will this game's competitive community continue to grow after release?" then I have an answer for you:

The game will live or die on how the community perceives it.

With all it flaws I still prefer brawl to melee for example, because it lets me play the way I want to. If I didn't have children and a young marriage I think I would have been working my butt off to get people excited about the game, I would have been trying to build a community around and trying to show people the things that made brawl unique fun and exciting, the things I saw, because that game was amazing! It was the community that wasn't.
When you have people who are passionate enough about something to make sacrifices in order to see it grow... it will grow! For a number of reasons brawl lost that within it's community...

Melee was dead, Brawl killed it! But a passionate few worked their butts off and that ignited fire that still burning!

Its the same reason why rock-paper-scissors tournaments can have larger turn outs than we do. Or why Street fight 4 can sell 1/10th the copies of smash and still have two times the attendants at EVO. It isn't a games mechanics or lack their off that make it a (it pains me to use the word like this) "very competitive" experience. But the community!

You DEFINITELY misunderstand the post and that is my fault, I updated the post so give the top of it a look

But what you said was once again well said

Is it not obvious I am not talking about Smash as a spectator sport? Esports and all that?

 

[Rhubarbo]

TC, forget about a reasonable discussion about Smash 4 pre-release. Half of the people don't know what they're talking about (e.g. it's a mix between Tekken and Halo Reach), half of the people are deluded by hype, and nobody has had enough time to play it.

In my opinion, just having seen videos and played few matches myself, Smash 4 will be a popular game. This time around, even basic hits have satisfying sound effects and visual flair. Smash 4 will also be rejected by the established competitive community. Smash 4 adds no new mechanics on top of Brawl, and as such seems just like a minor upgrade from Brawl. Since Smash 4 does nothing incredible on its own: it's roster isn't extraordinary, it's online functionality doesn't seem groundbreaking, I can't imagine the established competitive community embracing it.

The popularity battle I'm focused on is Project M vs Melee.

 

[<π]

Ahh... okay I gotcha! I didn't get that, no.

Smash as a spectator's sport...

Its important that they understand what is going on, or the rules either from experience or at a glance.
Its important that the spectators feel like anyone can win, that keeps it from getting boring.
Its important that the spectators feel suspense, that keeps them engaged.

I think like with most spectator sports the commentator to bridge the gap and make this information that may be inherent to people who are masters more accessible to even casual players who barely understand complex situations.

I personally don't think you need big combos and flash to be a good spectators sport. You don't have guys throwing a football all over the field. But those big hits! the touchdowns! the interceptions! Big game changing events can be just as exciting. Its all about how you program people to perceive those.

I already know smash 4 will be a great spectators sport, but I think a good ruleset will be very important in getting a large audience. This game sells MILLIONS of copies. If our target is a lot of spectator then we need to figure out what those millions of people are looking for when they buy the game and find out how to have as much of that in the rulesets we create as possible.

 

[Tagxy]

No offense but threads like these are kind of bad because its the same as every other thread like it. And all the posts in here are pretty much the same posts people have made in those threads. You couldve just bumped one of those unless you had something new to add.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Again I'm not trying to sound mean here but I honestly don't know what you mean. People throw that word around for so many things now-a-days.

If you mean "will this game's competitive community continue to grow after release?" then I have an answer for you:

The game will live or die on how the community perceives it.

With all it flaws I still prefer brawl to melee for example, because it lets me play the way I want to. If I didn't have children and a young marriage I think I would have been working my butt off to get people excited about the game, I would have been trying to build a community around and trying to show people the things that made brawl unique fun and exciting, the things I saw, because that game was amazing! It was the community that wasn't.
When you have people who are passionate enough about something to make sacrifices in order to see it grow... it will grow! For a number of reasons brawl lost that within it's community...

Melee was dead, Brawl killed it! But a passionate few worked their butts off and that ignited fire that still burning!

Its the same reason why rock-paper-scissors tournaments can have larger turn outs than we do. Or why Street fight 4 can sell 1/10th the copies of smash and still have two times the attendants at EVO. It isn't a games mechanics or lack their off that make it a (it pains me to use the word like this) "very competitive" experience. But the community!

Bro pound for married smashers trying to be competitive when they can. We live a difficult balancing act, don't we >_<?

 

[HeavyLobster]

What I see as the primary emphasis in Smash 4's development is a deliberate attempt to try to make the game mechanics as balanced as possible for every type of character, and to make every character feel unique(Lucina excepted) with distinct strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes these changes make the game faster, sometimes they make it slower. The idea is to strike a balance so that both offensive characters who were good in Melee and defensive characters who were good in Brawl can be effective, as well as characters and character archetypes that weren't particularly good in either game. As far as game speed, I suspect it will vary greatly depending on the matchup and players involved. Some people won't have a problem with this, but the type of Melee player that groans about Young Link vs. Jigglypuff type matchups might not enjoy the fact that there'll probably be a good number of those kinds of wars of attrition in Smash 4 to go along with some matchups that play much faster.

 

[Malcolm Belmont]

While i don't think it's going to be as competetive as Melee but i do expect it to be better than Brawl. As for the speed..honestly Melee was too fast and i liked the slower speed

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Edit: Ok first off, my bad guys, I feel bad because my use of the word "competitive" has confused people since so many people just throw it around nowadays. I am using this post as some type of insight on the viability of the game based on what we have seen, Like what the game's meta MIGHT be based on the evidence and footage we have the build. I am sorry for making that no clear in the beginning.



The title says it all. I am not known for long posts that might tucker out the read and eventually make said reader start skimming but I digress. (yay I finally got to use that word :D wait... did I use it right D: )

When many people bring up the often dreaded repost article:
"Will Smash 4 Be Competitive?"
"Will Smash 4 be more competitive than Brawl/Melee/PM?"
and etc...

Many of us (or almost all KNOW) that Smash 4's competitive crowd will indeed be a thing and more than likely bigger than brawl (at least in the states) because of the removal or tripping, hitstun can no longer be cancelled and other elements like shield stopping from 64 and just an overall fast game feel.

However, I tend to notice that when we as a community delve into the mechanics of Smash 4 through many analysis, many of us have seen problems that could affect the competitive play. Like the aerials on many characters being just absurdly larger...

Hold it right there, pal.

Which aerials on which characters specifically are you referring to? I'm sorry but just referring to aerial landing lag as some general inherent beast on the coat tail of the entire roster in Smash 4 just doesn't work anymore with people who know any better. You can't just use it for a free shot like everyone else does.

You talk about the "dreaded" repost topics that all mimic each other, yet you go out of your way to essentially make a thread that falls directly in line with them. This topic is no different. It has no chance of being unique. You are asking the same question just worded in a different way with a slightly different implication.

No. It won't be complicated or confusing. It's simple. It will be competitive. There's no confusion. There's no mix-up. From here I recommend maybe posting your thoughts in one of the already rampant threads in existence instead of making a brand mirror topic just to get the spotlight for a moment on yourself.

 

[Backgammon]

I'm gonna leave this thread open for now, because it's to be going in a different in a different direction to the other threads.

From what I can see, it's attempting to predict what the meta will be, rather than just straight out asking the "is it competitively viable" question.

Basically, the only hint I'm getting is that super heavyweights will actually be pretty damn good this time around as opposed to just being fodder.

 

[HeavyLobster]

Case closed guys! Semantic arguing! Not like it is pointless or anything.

I think it is confusing right now but honestly i am not that optimistic. Sakurai has said time and again that he only sees smash as a party game and his balancing method is only sensible in such a mindset. Really it is up in the air but i prefer to err on the side of caution especially when Meta knight only got the up b change and no glide where the rest of his moves are "the same". He still has a bunch of options for recovery and likely is still really strong for no reason.

We have seen zero live footage of Meta Knight, so I'd say it's a bit premature to conclude that he's still broken in Smash 4. Having a ton of recovery options isn't a big deal since MK is light enough to be easily KO'd from the stage and can no longer save himself by momentum cancelling out of hitstun. As long as they get rid of his ridiculous priority and/or add a bit more lag to his moves he'll be fine.

 

[Raijinken]

At this point, I just want the game. I'm playing it regardless.

Though, my hopes are that it will be something like a combination of all three past games. Closeish to Melee's speed, with some of Brawl's physics (I liked the backwards edgegrabs and multidodges), and Smash64's level of grabs being either a "get away from me" button or a kill move, rather than everyone using them as combo starters. Advanced techniques that add depth, yet don't add unnecessary difficulty to playing at a high level would be nice, too. It's got a diverse roster of unique fighters (save the handful of remaining clones/semiclones), and I'll be able to play it at home OR on the go. If worst comes to worst, I can always go back to playing like I used to - purely for fun, and enjoying every minute of it.

I expect it will be competitively enjoyable and, at least hopefully, have a larger viable roster than the past games. Six isn't a hard number to beat.

 

[Frank Weast]

From the examples shown I have no doubt this game will be very fun, but just like how people decided they wanted to play brawl like a camp fest it will depend on how the players develop this metagame

 

[KaZe_DaRKWIND]

I think the SDCC tournament final matches showed that aggressive play can be good too.

 

[Frank Weast]

I think the SDCC tournament final matches showed that aggressive play can be good too.

Let's hope people realize this before everyone tries playing this like brawl

 

[<π]

It makes me so sad when people say brawl is "a camp fest"... go to youtube and type in "brawl finals" do some research for yourselves don't just listen to hearsay... (One way or the other)
Bar the IC match up the game wasn't really campy at all after the first couple months. Especially not at higher levels of play.

Here is the first brawl match that caught my eye when I did that search myself.

Spoiler

Even if there are characters and player who DO want to camp that doesn't mean it can't be exciting. Watching people work to get through that zone is also really cool if the people commentating aren't sitting there whining about it.

SF4, for example, has TON of match ups where the opponents WANT to sit there and camp, spam projectile and build meter so they can camp even better. But to their community that's a completely viable way to win. And it is exciting to watch opponents try to push through a campers zone and put them at a disadvantage.

Again look at top level SF4 how hype the crowds get watching people camp, lol. Too lazy to look it up? I gotchu:

Spoiler

 

[Senario]

It makes me so sad when people say brawl is "a camp fest"... go to youtube and type in "brawl finals" do some research for yourselves don't just listen to hearsay... (One way or the other)
Bar the IC match up the game wasn't really campy at all after the first couple months. Especially not at higher levels of play.

Here is the first brawl match that caught my eye when I did that search myself.

Spoiler

Even if there are characters and player who DO want to camp that doesn't mean it can't be exciting. Watching people work to get through that zone is also really cool if the people commentating aren't sitting there whining about it.

SF4, for example, has TON of match ups where the opponents WANT to sit there and camp, spam projectile and build meter so they can camp even better. But to their community that's a completely viable way to win. And it is exciting to watch opponents try to push through a campers zone and put them at a disadvantage.

Again look at top level SF4 how hype the crowds get watching people camp, lol. Too lazy to look it up? I gotchu:

Spoiler

Except that street fighter is a different game where you really cant run forever. Keeping the enemy at a distance is hard to do because not only is it unviable to keep backing up due to a wall but you cannot go over the opponent due to anti airs. Also if they perfect block projectiles they get nowhere if i remember correctly. I honestly dont like street fighter comparisons because people forget that there are rushdown characters and arguably they are hard to keep way from. Smash bros it is easy to run. You have full double jumps and platforms to help you out with running away and essentially there arent many really effective anti airs that work like a shoryuken. Camping in smash ends up taking a completely different turn in smash especially if there arent characters whose pressure is so good it is hard to camp.

 

[Renji64]

Except that street fighter is a different game where you really cant run forever. Keeping the enemy at a distance is hard to do because not only is it unviable to keep backing up due to a wall but you cannot go over the opponent due to anti airs. Also if they perfect block projectiles they get nowhere if i remember correctly. I honestly dont like street fighter comparisons because people forget that there are rushdown characters and arguably they are hard to keep way from. Smash bros it is easy to run. You have full double jumps and platforms to help you out with running away and essentially there arent many really effective anti airs that work like a shoryuken. Camping in smash ends up taking a completely different turn in smash especially if there arent characters whose pressure is so good it is hard to camp.

Very true.

 

[<π]

I wasn't specifically talking about game mechanics, but the mindset of the observers. Its like when we become a "competitive smashers" we graduate from "Edge hogging is lame!" but never leave the "Camping is lame!" mindset. We are supposed to be playing to win here right? That's what competing is.

IN SF4 keep away characters like dalsim don't need to jump; they just teleport away if they feel to pressured! The camp game is REAL in SF4, but for their community it makes it exciting when people break through those zones and turn it around. And the camper is working to get THEIR advantage back. Again I invite you to look up high level SF4 matches listen to the commentary, their commentators do a good job of helping people who aren't pros understand what is actually happening.

With smash though... camping is lame and that's it. With our community it is "Ug... he is camping can't do anything to beat it... just gotta wait 8 minutes till its over..." (people did and still do the same thing with metaknight too)

That said,If it is easy to run; if that's the optimal strategy, why do so few players employ it well at top level? (Inclusive of all the smash games)

Camping and keep away can be powerful strategies, but hardly unbeatable.There are anti air's in smash too! and even with multiple jumps you eventually have to land. Even with walk offs you can only go so far until you hit a blast zone. There are rush down characters in smash, its obvious in melee. But people don't watch brawl they just hear about it so its easy to be mislead. The best characters with a few exceptions ARE rush down characters in brawl. MK, Diddy, Marth, Olimar. They want to get in because that's where they get their damage and kills. What makes it harder to camp in smash is that damage alone won't win you a set. You eventually have to commit to getting close and taking a stock.

The only brawl characters I can think of that can effectively camp are Wario and... Jiggs, and even they have to land and can get punished within that window.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Except that street fighter is a different game where you really cant run forever. Keeping the enemy at a distance is hard to do because not only is it unviable to keep backing up due to a wall but you cannot go over the opponent due to anti airs. Also if they perfect block projectiles they get nowhere if i remember correctly. I honestly dont like street fighter comparisons because people forget that there are rushdown characters and arguably they are hard to keep way from. Smash bros it is easy to run. You have full double jumps and platforms to help you out with running away and essentially there arent many really effective anti airs that work like a shoryuken. Camping in smash ends up taking a completely different turn in smash especially if there arent characters whose pressure is so good it is hard to camp.

Uhhh,

Sagat
Gouken
Guile
Dhalsim
Chun Li
Vega

all of these play hit and run and some even don't mind the wall behind them. It's not everyone though which is what street fighter does for different playstyles. Heck some of these are actually quite good, if not at times in earlier builds busted, at doing this kind of thing.

 

[HeavyLobster]

Except that street fighter is a different game where you really cant run forever. Keeping the enemy at a distance is hard to do because not only is it unviable to keep backing up due to a wall but you cannot go over the opponent due to anti airs. Also if they perfect block projectiles they get nowhere if i remember correctly. I honestly dont like street fighter comparisons because people forget that there are rushdown characters and arguably they are hard to keep way from. Smash bros it is easy to run. You have full double jumps and platforms to help you out with running away and essentially there arent many really effective anti airs that work like a shoryuken. Camping in smash ends up taking a completely different turn in smash especially if there arent characters whose pressure is so good it is hard to camp.

Camping and running away are two very different things, and it's important to distinguish the two in order to have a meaningful conversation. Camping is a tactic designed to force the opponent to approach and engage you on your terms. It is not an attempt to avoid fighting, and there is absolutely nothing inherently wrong with, for example, Olimar camping with Pikmin in order to force the opponent to approach or use an attack to get rid of Pikmin that leaves them vulnerable. This is every bit as legitimate as using rushdown tactics to get your opponent to make a mistake that exposes them to punishment, and it can be engaging as well.
Running away, on the other hand, is an attempt to deliberately avoid engaging the opponent. It's not really a concern for traditional fighters, as the stages are generally not big enough to allow for this for an extended period of time. In Smash, however, it can be a problem, either due to the stage being large enough to facilitate such a strategy on a consistent basis,(all of the Melee/Brawl stages like this have been banned) or due to some characters being able to retreat to areas where the opponent cannot effectively attack them. Melee's had to ban things like Rising Pound stalling, while Brawl's had to ban the IDC glitch and implement ledgegrab limits, so it's not as if this problem is exclusive to a single game. It's also one that has nothing to do with game speed and is usually just the result of a particular design oversight. Smash 4 actually appears to be doing more to prevent this type of gameplay than any of the previous Smashes by making ledge stalling more punishable than either Brawl or Melee, eliminating gliding, nerfing airdodges, and generally increasing the character cast's baseline ability to go offstage, making it easier to chase flying/floating characters without SD'ing. While I'm still concerned that this will still be an issue in certain Little Mac matchups, there's no evidence that this will be more of a problem in Smash 4 compared to previous games. (Anyone who wants to use the Invitational as a counterexample will have to keep in mind that ZSS only started running away with around 15 seconds left on the clock, and that you can avoid your opponent for that long in any Smash game, even if some of the non-floaty characters in Melee may have to resort to ledgestalling.)

 

[Big-Cat]

The point I am trying to make/ask you all think if you agree that Smash 4's competitive future seems very conflicting. There are things we like/love and there is stuff that we dislike/hate. Not to mention the game isn't even out yet so some of this stuff could change towards a different side, the game could be filled with stuff like Luigi's Down Throw or it could be filled with stuff like Kirby's Down Throw (see what I did there?)
Do you agree?


(also, please tell me how bad I did on this post. I am not used to making medium/big posts just yet so I am scared if it seems off. Criticism is appreciated)

It's really only conflicting because people are using previous games as a standard. The thing is that it's fairly clear you can't play this game like the past ones. The approach has to be very different.

Also, lal campophobia.

 

[Rhubarbo]

The Street Fighter comparison here is ridiculous. Running away in Street Fighter is an art. In Brawl, all you have to do is jump, double jump/glide, air dodge, repeat. The reason "camping" is exciting in Street Fighter is because it requires commendable skill.

 

[<π]

The Street Fighter comparison here is ridiculous. Running away in Street Fighter is an art. In Brawl, all you have to do is jump, double jump/glide, air dodge, repeat. The reason "camping" is exciting in Street Fighter is because it requires commendable skill.

I implore you. Go watch brawl top level play and get me any example of this.

Or better yet play the game against highly skilled opponents. Or just talk with them, ask them questions and learn from the source. Just guessing at what is effective at top level brawl is ridiculous.