Item Legality Poll

[mimgrim]

Walks off and hazards with no warning. Judged.

Some of those hazards may in fact have a warning, just that Sakurai didn't show it off.

We also don't know the nature of this game yet. Will their be CGs like there were in Brawl? Will Shine work like it did in Melee?

Too soon to judge yo.

 

[smashbro29]

Some of those hazards may in fact have a warning, just that Sakurai didn't show it off.

We also don't know the nature of this game yet. Will their be CGs like there were in Brawl? Will Shine work like it did in Melee?

Too soon to judge yo.

I think stages follow the same rules in every smash game.

 

[PreacherDudeRox]

I LOVE items. They make matches so much fun.

But honestly, I just don't think they belong in competitive play.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Names, proof I can look at.

You can look at the WHOBO ISP Doubles Event for some names if you'd like. I wish I could list more, but the problem with players hiding that they enjoy it for fear of persecution thing makes it hard.

You're ignoring the more apt comparison, traditional fighting games. But fine.

I was just looking at games that have randomness yet are still quite competitive.

That's enough for me, I'm not a FD only kinda guy. I like the stages that give a fair warning and then do something that isn't that big of a deal because it's more interesting but a one sided advantage at random? I don't know man.

I know it's not for everyone. But as the idea of my other examples were trying to show it does take skill to use your luck as best as possible while mitigating your opponent's luck. Plus good stage control gives you the best shot at getting an item, a skill you need to be good without items.

Walks off (stages) Judged.

Things like that aren't a problem with items as well! They tend to buff lower tier characters, have unique ATs, and are a part of how Sakurai balances the game (he may not do a perfect job, but the ways items can really help things is amazing, MK wouldn't be as dominate in Brawl with items and they could even help against Ice Climbers too for example).

I do get though 100% that even that touch of randomness might ruin it for you and I respect your opinion. You probably wouldn't touch an ISP event unless entry was free and maybe not even then. But ISP in Brawl was getting follwers and going places before it looks like Jack's life just got too busy for him to keep it moving. Plus, if something like this on the 3DS could lead more players into other events with no items on for the Wii U, why not take the extra players?

Let's face it, tons of new players are too intimidated to go to a tournament as play there is so alien from their own. Or the alien nature of the play itself just isn't their thing. A middle ground, a stepping stone into tournament play might be what they need to see how much fun this is and become Smashers for life. Plus, there have been rumors Nintendo actually might want to sponsor some Sm4sh events (some people from MLG have made very interesting comments), having a format Sakurai might even be more accepting of isn't a bad idea.

But if it's just the WiiU one but on a handheld (which for the record is a good thing) why the hell does it matter?

For one, I'm not buying a Wii U. I have zero interest in getting a console just for smash, and I bet a lot of 3DS owners are in the same boat or even just can't afford a console and already have a 3DS. These people wont be playing on Wii U and need a place to play.

Next, I'm going to enjoy my Swiss tournaments (with probably a top cut to double elim) where I get to play way more games then your console events even if you have pools. It's friendly to the people who pay for the experience or players trying to improve who go there KNOWING they wont get first prize. Without them, tournaments are really small, sponsors don't put cash in, and prize pools are much smaller which hurts everyone. Check out the mountains of Apex complaints this year, not being able to provide for those players loses tons of people (I've seen a good hundred people at least claiming they wont go to Apex ever again it was such a bad time, OW.) 3DS has that potential for faster events that don't drag on till midnight and are more fun for everyone.

And we have Swiss brackets! I already said that right? Well with Swiss brackets you can work like Go tournaments and actually have prize levels at varying levels! No your mid level and low level players actually have a shot at going home with something and some street cred! It doesn't have to be as much as grand prize 1st place, but even an entrance fee payed back is serious motivation.

(For people worried about risking lots of money on items, spreading out prizes more like this helps too btw.)

Oh, and we may have the craziest advantage EVER. Online play being legitimate. We're going to have a bit of lag having to hook up wireless for all matches, maybe not tons but we will. I bet about as much lag as good connection internet play. We may be the first fighting game where online practice is 100% legitimate and transferable to tournament play. No players will be totally left behind even if they have tiny local communities this way, how awesome!

That's why it really matters. It's not just Wii U but smaller, it can do things the Wii U can't even dream of.

 

[mimgrim]

Oh, and we may have the craziest advantage EVER. Online play being legitimate. We're going to have a bit of lag having to hook up wireless for all matches, maybe not tons but we will. I bet about as much lag as good connection internet play. We may be the first fighting game where online practice is 100% legitimate and transferable to tournament play. No players will be totally left behind even if they have tiny local communities this way, how awesome!

That's why it really matters. It's not just Wii U but smaller, it can do things the Wii U can't even dream of.

Except for those who don't have compatible or reliable WiFi for their 3DS and other things. Like me currently. :/

 

[LiteralGrill]

Except for those who don't have compatible or reliable WiFi for their 3DS and other things. Like me currently. :/

It's true it's still not PERFECT but it's a valuable tool. Better then ONLY online ala PSAS at least.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I'm kinda sad this thread died out, item discussion in the 3DSA social group has been good, mayhaps I should breach the topic with MUCH more detail on the wii U boards...

 

[Thirdkoopa]

my answer is a mix of both

ban most items from the getgo, but I'd view into some that can be taken viably. We have to view this first: Why do we ban items? and apply that question to every item.

If the trouble becomes not worth it, ban all the things.

 

[LiteralGrill]

my answer is a mix of both

ban most items from the getgo, but I'd view into some that can be taken viably. We have to view this first: Why do we ban items? and apply that question to every item.

If the trouble becomes not worth it, ban all the things.

If ISP proved anything, doing what you just suggested was not THAT difficult.

 

[Thirdkoopa]

If ISP proved anything, doing what you just suggested was not THAT difficult.

Well then, I'm welcome to still trying them. Each game is fresh, after-all.

#prayforsmokeball

 

[SmasherP83]

I'm kinda sad this thread died out, item discussion in the 3DSA social group has been good, mayhaps I should breach the topic with MUCH more detail on the wii U boards...

I think everyone left because items in competitive playing is still a "no no" to everyone

 

[popsofctown]

I refuse to vote until the poll says "Ban items, Peach, Dedede, and GW immediately" vs. "Test items, Peach, Dedede, and GW".

I'd like to throw Lucario in there since Sakurai said he's amping up Mauria Kart effect even more, but those are the three characters that absolutely should be considered in a similar fashion to be consistent.

 

[Lukingordex]

All itens are going to be banned no matter if they are tested or not, deal with it.

 

[LiteralGrill]

All itens are going to be banned no matter if they are tested or not, deal with it.

That kind of attitude does nothing to aid the growth of our community at all, blatantly dismissing something for so reason when just like in Brawl we'll have a huge new influx of players again who may be asking for items just isn't smart.

 

[Lukingordex]

I'm not trying to be rude, but it's the truth, it's very unlikely that an item will be competitively viable in any smash game.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I'm not trying to be rude, but it's the truth, it's very unlikely that an item will be competitively viable in any smash game.

Actually, they already ARE. Random does not equal noncompetitive. Plus you have things like ISP where they tested items just like stages in order to determine legality.

 

[link2702]

Unless the random factor of them can be changed/eliminated, they have no place in the game competitively.

If nintendo gave us some way so that the item was on a timer that hovered over the stage for a bit before it dropped(think, the item having a "ghost image" of itself that moves across the stage in a pattern somewhat like the smash ball, after its time runs out, it drops over the place it was hovering.) I'd say go for it.

But the randomness factor of them just doesn't belong in a competitive fighting game environment.

 

[BaPr]

So, items are banned because of randomness, but Mr. G&W's hammer isn't?

 

[LiteralGrill]

So, items are banned because of randomness, but Mr. G&W's hammer isn't?

The hammer is something done consciously by the player, whereas items can spawn at random points with no player influence. The G&W/Peach argument has been done before, it doesn't really work.

However it DOES show that randomness can still work within competition.

 

[BaPr]

I understand that it is done on purpose, but it still has a random effect. I'm not saying we should also ban G&W, but I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to take items away because of randomness, but keep something else even though it is random. The only item I really want though is the Smash Ball.

 

[mimgrim]

I understand that it is done on purpose, but it still has a random effect. I'm not saying we should also ban G&W, but I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to take items away because of randomness, but keep something else even though it is random. The only item I really want though is the Smash Ball.

Because the randomness between the two are implemented differently.

Randomness in and of itself isn't inherently bad. It's how it is implemented, what the game it is in is like, and how much it centralizes the game that can make it bad. The randomness of items are arguably worse the the hammer of GnW becuase you have no control where or what will spawn, your playing a fighting games where randomness needs to e somewhat strict to a degree, and items end up centralizing the game around themselves while the hammer of GnW doesn't really have any of those problems.

 

[DMG]

Quick question:

What ISP event are you talking about? You said something about WHOBO, but I can only remember the first WHOBO running ISP. If that's the event you are talking about, then I'd like to personally dispute your claim that most people secretly liked ISP.


I was at WHOBO. IIRC, we only did Doubles ISP and not Singles due to how long the tournament was running, and 1 V 1 ISP was not going to start until Sunday. In fact, I think Doubles ISP was literally the first event going on for the entire tournament. I teamed up with a good Buddy of mine (We got third place, team name "We abuse the Homeless")


We played a lot of strong teams, and only lost to the people who got 1st and 2nd. M2K and Inui won the event. Lee Martin + his partner (I want to say UTD Zac but I may be wrong) got second.


I know that ISP has probably been refined and tweaked a lot over the years, but on that day when we played, people did not enjoy the rules. The item list was obviously tweaked to turn off some of the more obnoxious items, however there was one exception that was probably the most unpopular idea they had. Smashballs were legal, HOWEVER each team was limited to one. I don't recall if it was one Smashball per game, or per set, but there was a limit in place. Items were put on Medium I believe, and Smashballs spawned a bit. It was a big enough deal, that in our match vs Mikehaze and his partner, we had already reached the Smashball limit and were required to not obstruct them from obtaining a Final Smash. That's right: we actually had to move to the other side of the stage and wait for Mike to smack it enough times to break open.


Later on in the day, in losers bracket about to play for 3rd place, the other team came up to us and asked if we would be fine with turning items completely off to do regular doubles instead. They arguably lost to a weaker team due to items, and they did not seem inclined to have a repeat of bad luck. Our side agreed to this, and we played on livestream without items. It was a bit ironic, because the team we chose to fight them was Diddy + Peach, and we ended up throwing a lot of stuff regardless when they went Double MK. After that match, we found out later that other teams had agreed to matches with no items near the top 8ish spots in bracket.


In the end, no "bad" team got a top 5 placing due to lucky items or whatever. However, I will say that the response from the players we met in bracket, and from talking to people afterwards, was not very positive. Not many people were looking to prove a point or enter for bragging rights on how they did in ISP. It was viewed as a more minor side event for fun, despite how intense some of the matches got later on. The top complaints or gripes were over Smashballs: not many people wanted them on, or saw them as not contributing towards something skillful. A few went further, and said the Smashball limit was basically proof that the item was too much if you were required to further limit how often players got/used it.


Things might have been different if Smashballs were not included at all, but I can honestly say the inclusion of them was a huge mistake and turned a LOT of people off to the idea of items. ISP was seen as arbitrary on what items got in vs what items did not, and Smashballs helped none in that regard. Maybe you were at the event, and heard differently from players around you. I got to personally talk with some of the best players in the country before/during/after the event, and I don't think their opinion was changed in a positive way towards items or ISP. I'm not sure who you are speaking for, or if you were personally there, but I was there and disagree with the premise that everyone liked ISP/items but didn't have the guts to advocate for it due to public pressure. It was basically an open secret that people didn't like items. Still is lol (unfair stigma or not, it's obvious)

 

[LiteralGrill]

Smashballs

Just to cut the part on that one short, yeah Smashballs were not a good idea. They are the items that a "bunch of people want" b ut really are bad, ESPECIALLY that rule, that was just stupid I agree. but to talk more...

Things might have been different if Smashballs were not included at all, but I can honestly say the inclusion of them was a huge mistake and turned a LOT of people off to the idea of items. ISP was seen as arbitrary on what items got in vs what items did not, and Smashballs helped none in that regard. Maybe you were at the event, and heard differently from players around you. I got to personally talk with some of the best players in the country before/during/after the event, and I don't think their opinion was changed in a positive way towards items or ISP. I'm not sure who you are speaking for, or if you were personally there, but I was there and disagree with the premise that everyone liked ISP/items but didn't have the guts to advocate for it due to public pressure. It was basically an open secret that people didn't like items. Still is lol (unfair stigma or not, it's obvious)

It's not just people at that particular event. I can honestly say (and unfortunately wish I could be more specific) I've heard random whispers from people who honestly do like items or think banning them so soon in Brawl was a mistake. I wish I had lots of quotes or something, that'd be impressive but sadly people aren't running out to say it. Mostly someone telling someone kinda things, which sucks as you can't present it as proof. :/

I had heard from some people that they really did enjoy that event, and in a conversation with Xyro he mentioned remembering some people had a blast with it, obviously that wasn't the case for everyone, so I'm glad to hear your experience, it means a lot truly hearing from the other side I knew not of..

I guess with this opportunity to pick your brains, minus the smashball snafu, what might have been better? What was really wrong with it minus the randomness that people would complain about normally?

 

[DMG]

Well it depends on what you view to be "wrong". There might not be that much "wrong" with restricting items to very low, and have only minor stuff like food/Mr Saturn/etc. The question is whether it's an improvement or not. Most people don't see items (in any shape or form) to be good for competition because at the end of the day, you have an incredibly flawed delivery system for those items. The traditional argument for items is that they add skill, or test different skills that should be included in competitive play. The best counter argument to that however, is that the game so heavily tarnishes the possible benefits of having items on (due to the poor implementation), it's inevitably not worth trying to salvage.


The question with items will always be about how they are introduced into gameplay. There are usually enough "tame" or "fair" items out there in existence, to try and decide "Ok hammers are obviously off, but x item is ok!". However, if "x" item spawns in unfair + randomized ways, that heavily detracts from the value of the skill you're trying to promote in the first place with that item. If you want to demonstrate who is better with Beam Swords, or who can dodge x item better, or any other skill, you'd want those skills to be tested in a fair, healthy environment right? The item spawning system is inherently too random to provide that fair or healthy environment.


With a better Item system, it's quite possible for Smash to one day have items. If items run on reliable timers, reliable spawn spots, or any other number of measures taken to reduce "chaos" (for a lack of a better word), then it's quite possible to see them in competitive play. What we have dealt with in Smash so far though, are very poor systems and that's the thing holding them back.

 

[gnosis]

The thing I don't like about items is that it rewards you for doing what you were already supposed to be doing. Control the stage = control item spawn points = get and abuse items. But controlling the stage is the point of the game already. Items are like unnecessary additional fluff, they guy who was winning suddenly just gets to win more.

I could see a system where it creates predictable points of tension, so it becomes less 'items could spawn throughout the stage at any time, so just control the stage in general, which is already good and now you get unneeded bonuses for doing it' and more 'control this particular part of the stage at this particular moment'.

It could help break stalemates in certain matchups and just be a nice little note, a little mini-climax, in the rhythm of the match. It's really hard to talk about tension-release dynamics in music/games/movies/etc. without sounding sexual...

I also have an idea for a smash-like game where you start with the same basic toolkit and evolve as the match goes on by battling for resources that spawn on the map (kinda something like quake only abilities instead of weapon spawn points). Something like that is a direction where I could see items actually developing the game in a worthwhile way, rather than now where they feel more disruptive than expansive.

 

[Xcano]

The problem with items is that they do not allow complete fairness. If both players were automatically given, say, a Home Run Bat, that would be fair, but the game doesn't operate that way.

 

[stan423321]

The problem with items is that they do not allow complete fairness. If both players were automatically given, say, a Home Run Bat, that would be fair, but the game doesn't operate that way.

See, players are given one set of platforms and nobody says that everybody should get their own.

The thing I don't like about items is that it rewards you for doing what you were already supposed to be doing. Control the stage = control item spawn points = get and abuse items. But controlling the stage is the point of the game already. Items are like unnecessary additional fluff, they guy who was winning suddenly just gets to win more.

Well yes, if one acquires total domination of the stage, items go anti-rubber-bandy. However, if this is not the case (say, player 1 controls roughly 60% of the stage and player 2 controls roughly 40% of the stage), items aren't additional fluff. They mean each player gets a random moveset upgrade of sorts, and their opponent must consider that in their strategy.

I could see a system where it creates predictable points of tension, so it becomes less 'items could spawn throughout the stage at any time, so just control the stage in general, which is already good and now you get unneeded bonuses for doing it' and more 'control this particular part of the stage at this particular moment'.

I'm repeating this again, but well, this seems to need repeating actually. Smash 64 partially works like this. You can't pick up most items in mid-air, and they bounce after entering the stage. This means that you know about sword ending up roughly in place X roughly two seconds before being able to pick it up. If one wanted to check could competitive Smash work with items, this is the best place to start.

 

[RelaxAlax]

Look, I'm an advocate for giving everything a shot. So here's my rationale.

3DS will from the getgo have a bigger user base playing the game. Don't believe me? You do remember that Smash 4 is on the NINTENDO WII U correct? Now this is just a good induction, but by the end of this year their sales won't skyrocket (If they did I'd be over the moon though!).

The funny situation is that competitive games on handhelds are a much smaller niche than consoles. I don't like playing 3DS games just because I feel so out of the game when it's so small (I should get an XL, but this is MY opinon, so don't get ruffled). EDIT) I looked at the thread below this one -.- . There are more than just Pokemon, which gives me hope and happy to know I was wrong. ORIGINAL) And the only competitive game played on it is Pokemon X and Y (please, if there are more, call me out). This situation will garner a bigger user base made up of more casuals. This is a situation the smash community hasn't really experienced before.

Of course, the pros will flock to a console game. I'm not doubting the existence of a competitive 3DS community, and I for one predict Smash 3DS will start a new community of handheld tournaments far greater than what we have now. But in the beggining, it's not going to be a pro centered community and will be riddled with casuals.

What can this do for the item argument? Well, it gives let's us experiment something we won't do on the Wii U.

Items are a tricky argument. Many vote against it for it's randomness and the play styles that are a product of their inclusion. Then there's the crowd that wants to give it an honest chance and redefine what a competitive smash could be. Most just say ban them for ease without digging much deeper into the thought. Ofcourse I have no answer for what is 'right' but what I can say is I don't care if we tested items in every smash game already - this is not the other smash games. We should test them out and see what the can offer, whether it can help or hinder the community.

I often hear this thought that adding items ruin competitive smash. As, Items + Competitive = Not Satisfactory for the community. Since when were those two separate things? It's a big part of 'Smash Brothers' and taking them out creates this 'Pseudo-Smash Brothers' that many unfortunately believe is the norm. If it's part of the GAME then I think it shouldn't be ejected with no thought.

My philosophy. Pick a good, well-tested item list. If it ends up only being a small list, judge whether it's indeed worth having over No-Items. If it's extensive, allow some counter picking when players start - get a system for that .

(i.e. Bowser vs. Little Mac - Bowser bans Bunny Hoods and Ray Gun to stop Mac from easier recoveries and easily getting him stuck in Ray Guns blasts. Mac bans the Hammer and Homerun Bat to make sure he isn't launched of stage early.)

People tend to forget that you CAN indeed fight strategically with items on. Sure there are missaps with randomness, but to say it's the cause of it when you lose is ignorant. It was your fault you lost, not the items.

And this doesn't mean competitive no items cannot thrive. Why does that have to mean that to so many people? Both can exist can't they?
It would indeed create a new genre of smash bros to say the least. But it would be interesting to try. I just think exiling items to banned immediately is nonsense. Just because it's random , doesn't mean it can't be played. It's just whether this way of play is fun and competitive. If none of us have played Smash 4, how do we know this isn't the case?

My vote - obviously test it. I'd give it a shot, just like how I will no doubt play competitive.

 

[SSBBDaisy]

This is horse ****. Items are part of the game and fun. WTF

 

[thesage]

Unless the spawn system for items is radically different from the past ssb games, I don't see how they could ever be legal. Most people don't want them on in tournament sets. We already have superior alternative versions for side events (low tiers, crews, doubles, 3 other smash games) as well as the new smash game being on two different systems.

At least the brawl item debate only lasted for a little bit after the game's release and the smash 4 item debate is nowhere near as hot as brawl's.

 

[Jackson]

3DS could still be competitive. Not as much as Wii U, but don't write it off.

 

[[TSON]]

The only thing I would even consider being legal is food and even then I'm not convinced it would add anything meaningful unless planking still exists. Like others have said, the delivery/spawn system and item lifespan are just too randomly polarizing. If I grab x battering item and don't drop it I have a big advantage over my opponent for the rest of the match. I say we save our conservatism for stage bans, and not waste it on item discussion. These always end with the same outcome, and the fact that Sakurai himself banned items in For Glory Mode means he's obviously not going to make any groundbreaking changes to make them competitively viable this time around.

 

[popsofctown]

After Greninja's Nintendo Direct, I think that items as a standard way of playing 3DS or concurrent way of playing 3DS is not something worth supporting or investigating. For glory mode is going to suggest a de facto standard of itemless play. Players with a competitive attitude that have not entered the scene yet will be playing For Glory mode, because although item play can be competitive with a ruleset like the thing Jack Kieser did and whatnot, full anarchy is intolerable for anyone who has even a remotely competitive attitude towards the game. Pushing for an item standard pushes away from the natural de facto standard of itemless play and will splinter the community, rather than consolidate.

If you still really want to set up some honey to attract newbies, I would recommend that energy be directed towards Smash Run side tournaments rather than a ruleset that no new player this side of Mario Party 9 will be accustomed to. I really do think Smash Run side tournaments would be a good idea, though, and probably have a more positive impact than the current side tournies we run called "doubles", which are more difficult to practice for.
And of course, Smash Run could use a certain item list, or even the defaults. A mode that lets you grind Sonic up to Bunny Hood speed is probably minimally affected by random item spawns, even the defaults are probably more competitive than For Fun online play, which is going to be so uncompetitive that if a player prefers For Fun mode that is an indicator they should be dissuaded from competitive smash and stick to the things they enjoy.

 

[Stueyman2099]

The only way items are going to work in a tournament scenario is if they spawn at set locations at set intervals. Remove either of those 2, and you have a random aspect, and that just destroys competitive gameplay.

 

[Smash G]

I love playing both competitive games and for fun games. I love items. They're fun as poop. But in competitive games? Nah, they won't likely ever be unbanned. It just adds too much of an element of chance.

 

[Logsmash]

Look, I'm an advocate for giving everything a shot. So here's my rationale.

3DS will from the getgo have a bigger user base playing the game. Don't believe me? You do remember that Smash 4 is on the NINTENDO WII U correct? Now this is just a good induction, but by the end of this year their sales won't skyrocket (If they did I'd be over the moon though!).

The funny situation is that competitive games on handhelds are a much smaller niche than consoles. I don't like playing 3DS games just because I feel so out of the game when it's so small (I should get an XL, but this is MY opinon, so don't get ruffled). EDIT) I looked at the thread below this one -.- . There are more than just Pokemon, which gives me hope and happy to know I was wrong. ORIGINAL) And the only competitive game played on it is Pokemon X and Y (please, if there are more, call me out). This situation will garner a bigger user base made up of more casuals. This is a situation the smash community hasn't really experienced before.

Of course, the pros will flock to a console game. I'm not doubting the existence of a competitive 3DS community, and I for one predict Smash 3DS will start a new community of handheld tournaments far greater than what we have now. But in the beggining, it's not going to be a pro centered community and will be riddled with casuals.

What can this do for the item argument? Well, it gives let's us experiment something we won't do on the Wii U.

Items are a tricky argument. Many vote against it for it's randomness and the play styles that are a product of their inclusion. Then there's the crowd that wants to give it an honest chance and redefine what a competitive smash could be. Most just say ban them for ease without digging much deeper into the thought. Ofcourse I have no answer for what is 'right' but what I can say is I don't care if we tested items in every smash game already - this is not the other smash games. We should test them out and see what the can offer, whether it can help or hinder the community.

I often hear this thought that adding items ruin competitive smash. As, Items + Competitive = Not Satisfactory for the community. Since when were those two separate things? It's a big part of 'Smash Brothers' and taking them out creates this 'Pseudo-Smash Brothers' that many unfortunately believe is the norm. If it's part of the GAME then I think it shouldn't be ejected with no thought.

My philosophy. Pick a good, well-tested item list. If it ends up only being a small list, judge whether it's indeed worth having over No-Items. If it's extensive, allow some counter picking when players start - get a system for that .

(i.e. Bowser vs. Little Mac - Bowser bans Bunny Hoods and Ray Gun to stop Mac from easier recoveries and easily getting him stuck in Ray Guns blasts. Mac bans the Hammer and Homerun Bat to make sure he isn't launched of stage early.)

People tend to forget that you CAN indeed fight strategically with items on. Sure there are missaps with randomness, but to say it's the cause of it when you lose is ignorant. It was your fault you lost, not the items.

And this doesn't mean competitive no items cannot thrive. Why does that have to mean that to so many people? Both can exist can't they?
It would indeed create a new genre of smash bros to say the least. But it would be interesting to try. I just think exiling items to banned immediately is nonsense. Just because it's random , doesn't mean it can't be played. It's just whether this way of play is fun and competitive. If none of us have played Smash 4, how do we know this isn't the case?

My vote - obviously test it. I'd give it a shot, just like how I will no doubt play competitive.

You're awfully open-minded for someone talking about competitive Smash. It is.... different....

But in all seriousness, unfortunately items will probably not have a place in competitive Smash since, as stated above many times, it's just too random. I mean, come on, like you're going to test a player's skill by not only their mastery of X fighter, but also their ability to adapt their fighting strategy to a random situation. That's just silly.... right?

 

[SSS]

The reason why things like GW hammer are allowed is because the player is choosing to take the risk. If he determines the risk is worth it, that's up to him. If it ends up working out, great! If not, sucks for him. Either way he decided to take the risk. It's like going out for a sketchy edgeguard that won't work if the opponent recovers a certain way, but if they recover a different way then you get the kill (but if you fail you end up getting edgehogged). You decide to take the risk.

 

[smashbro29]

What's great is Sakurai more or less said items weren't used by serious players.

So much so he made a mode with no items.

I think when even Sakurai admits items are fun but ultimately bull**** you're on the wrong side of things.

 

[Masterphailure]

We've had items off for many years in competitive Smash, I don't they'll be on for this one as well.

Perhaps people can throw items on tournaments, but for the most part I think items will be banned.

 

[Goten21]

Honestly, I think items on multi-platformed stages is a must. FD: no, except for maybe a few items, like the fire bar or guns.
Skill is actually involved when it comes to using, getting and evading items in multi-platformed stages. Not only that, but it would add a new perspective of choosing characters. Bowser, a character that isn't fast nor can evade easily, would be a bad choice, e.g.