Play Melee!
I agree that at this point the only thing that people should do is play melee, but I don't agree with the simple "adapt and play" thing. Surely anyone who plays a lot of smash could get a good game in under practically any setting, but changing the settings changes the game, and someone who is the best ever under one setting won't be under another. Going back to the SF analogy, John Choi is easily one of the best in the world at Super Turbo and Alpha 2 and 3. But he's not top 10 in 3rd strike, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, CvS2, and so on, even though it's basically just Street Fighter with "extras".
As for the SF analogy, I don't wanna go into detail about the whole thing on this thread. But since you read the "play to win" article, you'd probably understand that at the highest level (one I am not at. there's an extreme mental game that gets played between the contestants, and generally the player with the deeper understanding of the game wins. It's not just about knowing combos and techniques, that's about 50 percent of it. This is why some people never excel, even if they practice way too much.
Also, I must disagree with SSBM not being about combos and memorization. Personally, with Fox, I know about 10 or so reliable combos, and I also know which characters they work on and in general which percentages they work on as well. I can also improvise as well. Memorizing your combos helps you play to your maximum potential, as long as you don't rely on them for everything.
This is especially important with Fox, who moves so fast you need to know what you're going to do next. Obviously, this isn't as important for, say, Bowser or Ganondorf. But it still helps.
As is, I tend to have a "premium moveset" for each character. Fact is, some moves are much better than others for almost every character. As is, though, I think only Fox, Falco, and Samus have a complete set of useful moves on the ground. (By useful I mean constant situations where that move is better than any other in the character's arsenal.)
Finally, I may have dropped the ball with the Super Turbo analogy, but I still think ST is a deeper game than you think it is. In any event, when I played SSB it was all about rolling, throwing, spiking, and using items. You could say the same thing about SSBM, except you take out throwing and add in dodging and smashing. I think that's what a lot of the SF community thinks about SSBM.
I can't remember Recipherus losing a single game except to his brother at the last TG tourney. Correct me if I'm wrong, though. If I'm right, though, that's impressive, as all the games were stock 3.
Finally, I'd like to chime in and say that I love randomness. If I had my way I'd have only moving stages with items on very high. I feel I'm at my best when there's lots and lots of complications going on and you need to move fast. I prefer a very fast-paced high intensity game, which may seem odd if you play me because I generally play defensive. Oh well.
But, as standards go, the only problem with that is that generally people don't agree with items on or off, and team attack on or off. The rest is usually meaningless or subbornness. (Like Cello refusing to move people in the brackets in a single elimination tourney, even if that means two people from California would have to play each other in the first round.)
I agree that at this point the only thing that people should do is play melee, but I don't agree with the simple "adapt and play" thing. Surely anyone who plays a lot of smash could get a good game in under practically any setting, but changing the settings changes the game, and someone who is the best ever under one setting won't be under another. Going back to the SF analogy, John Choi is easily one of the best in the world at Super Turbo and Alpha 2 and 3. But he's not top 10 in 3rd strike, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, CvS2, and so on, even though it's basically just Street Fighter with "extras".
As for the SF analogy, I don't wanna go into detail about the whole thing on this thread. But since you read the "play to win" article, you'd probably understand that at the highest level (one I am not at. there's an extreme mental game that gets played between the contestants, and generally the player with the deeper understanding of the game wins. It's not just about knowing combos and techniques, that's about 50 percent of it. This is why some people never excel, even if they practice way too much.
Also, I must disagree with SSBM not being about combos and memorization. Personally, with Fox, I know about 10 or so reliable combos, and I also know which characters they work on and in general which percentages they work on as well. I can also improvise as well. Memorizing your combos helps you play to your maximum potential, as long as you don't rely on them for everything.
This is especially important with Fox, who moves so fast you need to know what you're going to do next. Obviously, this isn't as important for, say, Bowser or Ganondorf. But it still helps.
As is, I tend to have a "premium moveset" for each character. Fact is, some moves are much better than others for almost every character. As is, though, I think only Fox, Falco, and Samus have a complete set of useful moves on the ground. (By useful I mean constant situations where that move is better than any other in the character's arsenal.)
Finally, I may have dropped the ball with the Super Turbo analogy, but I still think ST is a deeper game than you think it is. In any event, when I played SSB it was all about rolling, throwing, spiking, and using items. You could say the same thing about SSBM, except you take out throwing and add in dodging and smashing. I think that's what a lot of the SF community thinks about SSBM.
I can't remember Recipherus losing a single game except to his brother at the last TG tourney. Correct me if I'm wrong, though. If I'm right, though, that's impressive, as all the games were stock 3.
Finally, I'd like to chime in and say that I love randomness. If I had my way I'd have only moving stages with items on very high. I feel I'm at my best when there's lots and lots of complications going on and you need to move fast. I prefer a very fast-paced high intensity game, which may seem odd if you play me because I generally play defensive. Oh well.
But, as standards go, the only problem with that is that generally people don't agree with items on or off, and team attack on or off. The rest is usually meaningless or subbornness. (Like Cello refusing to move people in the brackets in a single elimination tourney, even if that means two people from California would have to play each other in the first round.)