First, calm down. This isn't one of -*THOSE*- threads.
Second, let me just get out of the way that I am a major critic of those *ahem* people of lesser intelligence who cry about wanting items in Melee. I would be the first to take up arms in the art of debate against these people. Why do we not play with items? Simple:
- Balance without items is significantly better than balance with items. Items make the good characters better and the bad characters worse, since the same factors that determine that determine how easily they can get items. Falco, Shiek, and Marth become ridiculous and Fox becomes a demi-god, while Bowser is outsped everywhere and Pichu is killed at 20%. We looked at these two balances, and the decision as to which one was better was very obvious.
- Luck added from items is too significant. Some luck is ok, else we would ban G&W and Peach. However, while I would argue that the advantage of many items is not significant enough to skew a match (since the opponent should also be able to gain one later), it's obvious that many items provide a massive enough advantage/disadvantage to effectively decide the match. Heart/Tomato, Star/Cloak, Bom-ombs, certain Pokemon, all of these are very obvious picks in general; then you have character specific pairings to worry about. Finally come the exploding containers, which sealed the deal.
Does anyone see where I'm going with this?
We are not yet for certain that the elements that cause us to not play with items today will be in the game of tomorrow. We know virtually nothing about the balance, and in fact we will know little until months after the game's release. However, it sounds likely that heavy (and slow) characters have a significant shot at being dominant characters. It is entirely possible that the character balance in Brawl is better with items than without, just as the opposite was true in the past games.
Meanwhile, luck can easily be reduced to a level that the community finds acceptable. (Once again, most of us like a small amount of luck that can average out over the course of a game.) Item switch should still be there, and a hypothetical pokemon or AT switch would make those very viable candidates. Explosive containers are apparently marked which is a huge step forward; if they can be disabled entirely, that would demand that items be considered. If we can decide what stages to play on, we are more than capable of deciding upon an item list if need be.
...and same thing for the smash ball. We may prefer the balance with the smash ball, or we may not. My point is that it is very possible that the former could be true.
The underlying idea is, just because Melee was vastly inferior with items does not immediately mean Brawl will be. I am just hoping that instead of being immediately dismissed, items be given the same fair trial they had for the past two games. The verdict is ultimately up to the community.
Second, let me just get out of the way that I am a major critic of those *ahem* people of lesser intelligence who cry about wanting items in Melee. I would be the first to take up arms in the art of debate against these people. Why do we not play with items? Simple:
- Balance without items is significantly better than balance with items. Items make the good characters better and the bad characters worse, since the same factors that determine that determine how easily they can get items. Falco, Shiek, and Marth become ridiculous and Fox becomes a demi-god, while Bowser is outsped everywhere and Pichu is killed at 20%. We looked at these two balances, and the decision as to which one was better was very obvious.
- Luck added from items is too significant. Some luck is ok, else we would ban G&W and Peach. However, while I would argue that the advantage of many items is not significant enough to skew a match (since the opponent should also be able to gain one later), it's obvious that many items provide a massive enough advantage/disadvantage to effectively decide the match. Heart/Tomato, Star/Cloak, Bom-ombs, certain Pokemon, all of these are very obvious picks in general; then you have character specific pairings to worry about. Finally come the exploding containers, which sealed the deal.
Does anyone see where I'm going with this?
We are not yet for certain that the elements that cause us to not play with items today will be in the game of tomorrow. We know virtually nothing about the balance, and in fact we will know little until months after the game's release. However, it sounds likely that heavy (and slow) characters have a significant shot at being dominant characters. It is entirely possible that the character balance in Brawl is better with items than without, just as the opposite was true in the past games.
Meanwhile, luck can easily be reduced to a level that the community finds acceptable. (Once again, most of us like a small amount of luck that can average out over the course of a game.) Item switch should still be there, and a hypothetical pokemon or AT switch would make those very viable candidates. Explosive containers are apparently marked which is a huge step forward; if they can be disabled entirely, that would demand that items be considered. If we can decide what stages to play on, we are more than capable of deciding upon an item list if need be.
...and same thing for the smash ball. We may prefer the balance with the smash ball, or we may not. My point is that it is very possible that the former could be true.
The underlying idea is, just because Melee was vastly inferior with items does not immediately mean Brawl will be. I am just hoping that instead of being immediately dismissed, items be given the same fair trial they had for the past two games. The verdict is ultimately up to the community.
