Just read the Kotaku interview.....

[the_suicide_fox]

Reading your earlier post, it seemed like you WANTED games to set the bar higher than chess, rather than this just being an unfortunate fact of life. I don't know anymore.

All versus games inherently have chess-like attributes. There is always something tactical in every game you play and the ones that can play 5, 10, 20 moves ahead will come out on top. However, they also inherently have an aspect of physical skill in pressing inputs with proper timing. That's just the nature of video games (at least ones played in real time which Smash is).

If you purposely try to weed out the physical aspects to make the game as close to chess as possible you only end up hurting the game. You might as well as make a board game. Gamers value their ability to manipulate the game to its limits. That's why we get so hype when Diago parries a full super, or when someone gets a sick triple headshot, or when you beat a world record in Forza.

It's not that I want the games to have the bar set higher than chess, it's that I understand the nature of playing against another person in real time requires it. Essentially, the bar is ALREADY higher than chess, so attempting undermine that fact would only ruin the game your are trying to make.

 

[SmashChu]

All versus games inherently have chess-like attributes. There is always something tactical in every game you play and the ones that can play 5, 10, 20 moves ahead will come out on top. However, they also inherently have an aspect of physical skill in pressing inputs with proper timing. That's just the nature of video games (at least ones played in real time which Smash is).

If you purposely try to weed out the physical aspects to make the game as close to chess as possible you only end up hurting the game. You might as well as make a board game. Gamers value their ability to manipulate the game to its limits. That's why we get so hype when Diago parries a full super, or when someone gets a sick triple headshot, or when you beat a world record in Forza.

It's not that I want the games to have the bar set higher than chess, it's that I understand the nature of playing against another person in real time requires it. Essentially, the bar is ALREADY higher than chess, so attempting undermine that fact would only ruin the game your are trying to make.

God you post is dumb. Your trying to compare the physical excursion of sports to video games. No one gets tired playing a video game.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

God you post is dumb. Your trying to compare the physical excursion of sports to video games. No one gets tired playing a video game.

LOL have you ever played a highly competitive match? You do indeed get tired, not phsyically but mentally. It is especially noticeable if you happen to play competitive games with long match times. Halo, for instance, can have 2 teams duking it out for upwards of 2 hours in a best of 5 set. That takes a toll on you, and you can see when someone begins to fall victim to fatigue as they will gradually play worse and worse. Clearly the dumb one here is you.

 

[Conviction]

Someone hasn't been a tournament ever.

Or rather, lasted long enough in a tournament to feel mentally drained.

 

[Orngeblu]

I actually get physically and mentally drained sometimes after I finish playing Project: M. ._.

 

[SmashChu]

LOL have you ever played a highly competitive match? You do indeed get tired, not phsyically but mentally. It is especially noticeable if you happen to play competitive games with long match times. Halo, for instance,ca n have 2 teams duking it out for upwards of 2 hours in a best of 5 set. That takes a toll on you, and you can see when someone begins to fall victim to fatigue as they will gradually play worse and worse. Clearly the dumb one here is you.

No, but I'm smart enough to know that running around a fields for an hour of two with people of peek physical condition is a hell of a lot harder than sitting in an air conditioning room, sitting in front of a TV and pressing buttons. But it's just as hard because I have to use my head.

It's not the same and will never be the same. There is a reason that sports players make millions of dollars while competitive video game players can barely pay the electric bill. It's not in the same league kid. Quite trying to fool yourself.

 

[mimgrim]

No, but I'm smart enough to know that running around a fields for an hour of two with people of peek physical condition is a hell of a lot harder than sitting in an air conditioning room, sitting in front of a TV and pressing buttons. But it's just as hard because I have to use my head.

It's not the same and will never be the same. There is a reason that sports players make millions of dollars while competitive video game players can barely pay the electric bill. It's not in the same league kid. Quite trying to fool yourself.

While professional gamers might not make millions, they can make over a 100k bucks if they are good enough even getting close to 500k. But just like in sports, only the professionals can make that big bucks. Don't believe me? Well heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere you go, http://www.businessinsider.com/the-highest-paid-professional-gamers-2013-7?op=1 http://www.esportsearnings.com/players. So sure they might not be making millions like profesional sports player, but then again sports are a lot more popular and known about. So yea, the pros make a lot more then you give credit for.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

No, but I'm smart enough to know that running around a fields for an hour of two with people of peek physical condition is a hell of a lot harder than sitting in an air conditioning room, sitting in front of a TV and pressing buttons. But it's just as hard because I have to use my head.

It's not the same and will never be the same. There is a reason that sports players make millions of dollars while competitive video game players can barely pay the electric bill. It's not in the same league kid. Quite trying to fool yourself.

Right because competitive videos games have only been around for maybe 15 years, while some major sports circuits have been around for 50+ years. It makes sense they make so much money because of long they have been around to gain the support for that. Plus the players are in an exclusive league and can ASK for more money or walk in some situations. Most of competitive gaming is grassroots, eg. there is no exclusion. Anyone who wants to enter the tournament can play. So if they want to stop playing it means nothing. Oh, and some tops Starcraft players make 6 figures.

Again, you are welcome to play actual competitive games to see how it is. Can I ask you, are you also one that thinks NASCAR is not a sport?

Also I'm probably older than you, kid.

 

[SmashChu]

While professional gamers might not make millions, they can make over a 100k bucks if they are good enough even getting close to 500k. But just like in sports, only the professionals can make that big bucks. Don't believe me? Well heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere you go, http://www.businessinsider.com/the-highest-paid-professional-gamers-2013-7?op=1 http://www.esportsearnings.com/players. So sure they might not be making millions like profesional sports player, but then again sports are a lot more popular and known about. So yea, the pros make a lot more then you give credit for.

500K HMMMM. I don't think so tim.

http://www.esportsearnings.com/players

The highest paid player makes less than 500K.

http://www.rtsguru.com/article/3712/eSports-Minimum-Wage-Gamers.html

The article mentions that if you win a tournament, your making 15 bucks an hour. Not very much at all. For comparison, here is what the average MLB player makes.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries/avgsalaries

 

[mimgrim]

500K HMMMM. I don't think so tim.

http://www.esportsearnings.com/players

The highest paid player makes less than 500K.

http://www.rtsguru.com/article/3712/eSports-Minimum-Wage-Gamers.html

The article mentions that if you win a tournament, your making 15 bucks an hour. Not very much at all. For comparison, here is what the average MLB player makes.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries/avgsalaries

I said close to 500k. L2R. And all I was pointing out was the professional gamers make more then what you gave them credit for. Again L2R.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

Because how much money you make is somehow important right?

 

[Viceversa96]

The thing is that higher execution does not inherently mean more of any actual depth. L-Canceling adds skill execution, but it doesn't add any kind of strategic value as 99% of the time you should do it. Depth has to do with tactics more than anything else. You can have plenty of depth without anything super technical being required.

To give you a good idea of how to combine tactical depth with execution, look at Guilty Gear. All the attack inputs are actually very basic, but the pace of doing things like zoning with Dizzy, doing yoyo mixups with Bridget, deciding to get cards or something else with Jam etc. is what makes Guilty Gear a very execution heavy game. It's a mix of reflexes and fast thinking.

Smash can do that sort of thing without having to do anything stupid like L-Canceling. Have you seen Zelda's Din's Fire in Project M? That's a basic example right there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4s5yB7ZkE watch this and tell me that it doesn't add depth to the game.

The main focus should be finding a great way to please everyone. Not just the one side of the fan base.


Hence why a combination of Brawl and Melee is being done for this game.

After reading this post again and looking at Brawl + and - along with P:M. No it's not a combination of brawl and melee. It's just brawl's stupid engine with no tripping and faster falling speeds. Project M is a true combination of Brawl and Melee because you still have all the advanced techniques from Melee and speedier gameplay. Not only that but you have the good things from brawl that add more to the game like footstooling, AGT, RAR, and a couple others.

 

[Big-Cat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4s5yB7ZkE watch this and tell me that it doesn't add depth to the game.

What is this IT you're talking about? If you're talking about L-Canceling, again, there is VIRTUALLY NO REASON to NOT L-Cancel. There are reasons why you should or shouldn't do a lot of things in the game, but L-Canceling must be attempted every time. This is a random execution barrier with no strategic value.

If you want to talk about things like short hops, fast falls, etc., those have depth to them because it's not always optimal to do those.

 

[mimgrim]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4s5yB7ZkE watch this and tell me that it doesn't add depth to the game.

I presume you are talking about L-cancel. It adds a artificial depth so to speak. Any and all perceived depth in L-cancel happens after it is performed. Which means the depth would would still remain if it was automatic. Ane if you try to argue that something like Short Hop is somehow the same in that you do it after, remember that Short Hopping isn't always optimal which still makes it different from L-cancel.

Building off of that, suicide, you said Powershied was the same thing since you always want to do it. But in this sense Powershielding does differ from L-cancel in this mater. Powershield also offers depth during it's performance since it makes shield stun 0 which means there is a tactical depth to use even if there were't follow up options.

High execution is all fine and dandy but is execution for the sake of execution when it doesn't add any real depth really necessary? Wavedashing is a good example of execution while adding depth. Even DACUS from Brawl is a good example of it. Hell, suicide, you said he messed up that com Ibo by missing a cancel, how often is that cancel use? Is it used in the same manner as L-cancel and as often? Or does it only have i's specific uses? Depending on that the cancel could be different from L-cancel.

 

[7th Heaven]

"In a multiplayer fighting game, only the winner
feels good and the other challengers get no such feeling, then there is
really no joy at all. No matter how people play, I want everyone to be
happy! Is this asking for too much?

I set out to
make sure the game did not over-emphasize the notions of victory and
defeat. I won't go into too much detail, but the game was built so that
if a player is strong in combat, just doing the same thing over and
over again won't guarantee they'll always win over their opponents.
There is a mechanism of accidents occurring, balanced so that the
game's progress and results falter easily. Whether you win or lose, you
enjoy a hearty laugh, and move on to the next round. I think this makes
quite a good game." - sakurai

 

[mimgrim]

Use a different color man, I can't read what you typed. e_e

 

[7th Heaven]

Sakurai is an idiot. I hate nintendo's family friendly bull****. The point of every game is winning. If the game is so friendly and wants everyone to be a winner then why does it say "FAILURE" when you lose? Sakurai is full of ****. So people can win or lose in adventure mode but when it comes to versus mode he doesnt want anyone to win or lose? How does that make any sense?

There is joy in losing in a fighting game because it makes you determined to get better and figure out how to beat your opponent. That's how fighting games work and that's why fighting game communities exist for 10-20 years. Only a baby says "boohoo I lost I never want to play again"

The games names are melee and brawl. If you're in a melee or a brawl do you want EVERYONE to be the winner? Oh yeah let's just have a huge brawl but everyone is the winner so lets wear giant foam armor on an inflatable moon bounce amusement park and trip on purpose before we hit the other guy. **** no if you're in a brawl you want to beat everyone with your bare hands like Donnie yen in ip man. If that's how Sakurai feels he should change the name from "smash brothers: brawl" to "fun siblings: everyone wins"

 

[mimgrim]

Sakurai is an idiot. I hate nintendo's family friendly bull****. The point of every game is winning. If the game is so friendly and wants everyone to be a winner then why does it say "FAILURE" when you lose? Sakurai is full of ****. So people can win or lose in adventure mode but when it comes to versus mode he doesnt want anyone to win or lose? How does that make any sense?

There is joy in losing in a fighting game because it makes you determined to get better and figure out how to beat your opponent. That's how fighting games work and that's why fighting game communities exist for 10-20 years. Only a baby says "boohoo I lost I never want to play again"

The games names are melee and brawl. If you're in a melee or a brawl do you want EVERYONE to be the winner? Oh yeah let's just have a huge brawl but everyone is the winner so lets wear giant foam armor on an inflatable moon bounce amusement park and trip on purpose before we hit the other guy. **** no if you're in a brawl you want to beat everyone with your bare hands like Donnie yen in ip man. If that's how Sakurai feels he should change the name from "smash brothers: brawl" to "fun siblings: everyone wins"

That's better lol.

Anyways, I think you took what he said out of context a bit much. He said he didn't want over-emphasize it to much and wanted everyone to be happy. Not that he doesn't want any winners or losers but that he wants the losers to have fun to and not make them fill bad for losing, which is rather understandable. He just took it a bit to far, like tripping, and I think he realizes this. But still, you took it a bit to much out of context lol.

 

[Big-Cat]

Building off of that, suicide, you said Powershied was the same thing since you always want to do it. But in this sense Powershielding does differ from L-cancel in this mater. Powershield also offers depth during it's performance since it makes shield stun 0 which means there is a tactical depth to use even if there were't follow up options.

There is another thing about Power Shielding that really gives its depth. For the longest time, I never thought of it this way. The real reason why there's depth behind Power Shielding is rhythm. If the opponent is laying pressure on me, I have to predict which move he'll do next. If I guess right, I'll shield at a certain point to get the perfect shield. If I guess wrong, I'm either hit by something faster, or something slower will keep me in pressure.

Sakurai is an idiot. I hate nintendo's family friendly bull****. The point of every game is winning. If the game is so friendly and wants everyone to be a winner then why does it say "FAILURE" when you lose? Sakurai is full of ****. So people can win or lose in adventure mode but when it comes to versus mode he doesnt want anyone to win or lose? How does that make any sense?

There is joy in losing in a fighting game because it makes you determined to get better and figure out how to beat your opponent. That's how fighting games work and that's why fighting game communities exist for 10-20 years. Only a baby says "boohoo I lost I never want to play again"

The games names are melee and brawl. If you're in a melee or a brawl do you want EVERYONE to be the winner? Oh yeah let's just have a huge brawl but everyone is the winner so lets wear giant foam armor on an inflatable moon bounce amusement park and trip on purpose before we hit the other guy. **** no if you're in a brawl you want to beat everyone with your bare hands like Donnie yen in ip man. If that's how Sakurai feels he should change the name from "smash brothers: brawl" to "fun siblings: everyone wins"

I don't think anyone will say with a straight face that Sakurai's ideology there is without flaws.

That being said, I don't think Sakurai is going for an "Everyone wins." design with Smash. Not only would he be contradicting himself with the Smash series, but it's arguably impossible to do such a thing for a multiplayer game. What should be done is be where you can tell why you lost instead of it being due to truly random BS like random tripping or an item spawn. At least then, you don't feel like you got your ass handed to you for no particular reason.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

What is this IT you're talking about? If you're talking about L-Canceling, again, there is VIRTUALLY NO REASON to NOT L-Cancel. There are reasons why you should or shouldn't do a lot of things in the game, but L-Canceling must be attempted every time. This is a random execution barrier with no strategic value.

If you want to talk about things like short hops, fast falls, etc., those have depth to them because it's not always optimal to do those.

Again point out why this is a bad thing? Because at the highest level of the metagame you need execution barriers to differentiate between good players and great players. Just because you should always do something isn't a valid reason to remove it. Again, you always want to powershield, there is always more benefit to doing it than not doing it. There is no tactical advantage to not powershield, the only reason it's not done 100% of the time even at the highest level is because it is significantly harder to do than L-cancelling.

The value in L-canceling comes from the fact that it requires players to execute it properly and consistently. If you mess up one L-cancel you can be punished for it. Without that there is no punishing an execution error because there is no error to punish! Look at the dragon punch motion - if I try to DP and do a fireball or just a normal instead, I get punished for my flawed execution. If DP motion wasn't in the game and I just needed to press a single button there is no room for the other player to punish me because it's impossible for me to mess up.

This whole "it provides no strategic value" argument is very flimsy. It's like you guys don't want to reward players with better tech skill, only strategic skill, when in fact both are necessary for a health competitive atmosphere.

There is another thing about Power Shielding that really gives its depth. For the longest time, I never thought of it this way. The real reason why there's depth behind Power Shielding is rhythm. If the opponent is laying pressure on me, I have to predict which move he'll do next. If I guess right, I'll shield at a certain point to get the perfect shield. If I guess wrong, I'm either hit by something faster, or something slower will keep me in pressure.

In other words you made an execution error, and got punished for it. Hmm... sounds familiar.

 

[mimgrim]

Again point out why this is a bad thing? Because at the highest level of the metagame you need execution barriers to differentiate between good players and great players. Just because you should always do something isn't a valid reason to remove it. Again, you always want to powershield, there is always more benefit to doing it than not doing it. There is no tactical advantage to not powershield, the only reason it's not done 100% of the time even at the highest level is because it is significantly harder to do than L-cancelling.

The value in L-canceling comes from the fact that it requires players to execute it properly and consistently. If you mess up one L-cancel you can be punished for it. Without that there is no punishing an execution error because there is no error to punish! Look at the dragon punch motion - if I try to DP and do a fireball or just a normal instead, I get punished for my flawed execution. If DP motion wasn't in the game and I just needed to press a single button there is no room for the other player to punish me because it's impossible for me to mess up.

This whole "it provides no strategic value" argument is very flimsy. It's like you guys don't want to reward players with better tech skill, only strategic skill, when in fact both are necessary for a health competitive atmosphere.

I'm fine with tech skill. But I'm also not well versed in other fighting games and have no idea if they have mechanics like L-cancel. But is execution for the sake of execution really all that great. You can still have tech skill without L-cancel and plenty of it. Melee has many other techs then L-cancel and many of them are able to fall under tech skill. Even Brawl has a tech skill to it, not as much as Melee, but still. This thread http://smashboards.com/threads/mech...echanics-for-strategy-theory-crafting.341797/ compared L-cancel to other games and none of those games seem to have something like L-cancel. It's an execution for the sake of an execution and that isn't a good idea in my opinion. But that doesn't mean I think tech skill in itself is bad.

 

[Big-Cat]

Again point out why this is a bad thing? Because at the highest level of the metagame you need execution barriers to differentiate between good players and great players. Just because you should always do something isn't a valid reason to remove it. Again, you always want to powershield, there is always more benefit to doing it than not doing it. There is no tactical advantage to not powershield, the only reason it's not done 100% of the time even at the highest level is because it is significantly harder to do than L-cancelling.

No, you don't need execution barriers per se. Ultimately, skill is determined by APPLICATION of techniques, not the fact that you can do them. Just because you do a 0 to death combo in Training Mode does not mean you can win EVO. It's one thing to do it in Training Mode and another when you're both on the last stock and it just takes one combo from either of you to end the match. Besides that, what ultimately wins is fundamentals. You've got lots of good players who, despite not having the greatest execution, make it up with their solid basics.

Timing power shielding is much like blocking highs and lows. Yes, you want to always block, but there are often times when you have to guess either to block high or low. In those situations, there's barely room for reacting, if at all, and you are forced to guess high or low. Thing is, the guesses must be educated guesses, not just coin flip guesses so this is strategic defense. Likewise, Power Shielding means you have to guess whether you're in sync with the opponent's rhythm. If not, the situation can either being hit, thrown, or blocking at a disadvantage.

This whole "it provides no strategic value" argument is very flimsy. It's like you guys don't want to reward players with better tech skill, only strategic skill, when in fact both are necessary for a health competitive atmosphere.

I'm not saying technical skill is not important. The two go hand in hand. Your problem is that you're putting technical skill on too high of a pedestal, especially how you're yammering more about how execution determines skill, but you just said here that strategic skill is necessary.

In other words you made an execution error, and got punished for it. Hmm... sounds familiar.

No, I made the wrong tactical move. Get your facts straight.

@mimgrim
I have not seeing anything like L-Canceling in any fighting game. The closest are things that instantly cancel a move, but at the cost of a good amount of meter. L-Canceling has no cost for performing it.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

I'm fine with tech skill. But I'm also not well versed in other fighting games and have no idea if they have mechanics like L-cancel. But is execution for the sake of execution really all that great. You can still have tech skill without L-cancel and plenty of it. Melee has many other techs then L-cancel and many of them are able to fall under tech skill. Even Brawl has a tech skill to it, not as much as Melee, but still. This thread http://smashboards.com/threads/mech...echanics-for-strategy-theory-crafting.341797/ compared L-cancel to other games and none of those games seem to have something like L-cancel. It's an execution for the sake of an execution and that isn't a good idea in my opinion. But that doesn't mean I think tech skill in itself is bad.

The reason L-cancels are important is because Smash is more of an aerial combat game. Jumping in other fighting games is usually very risky, whereas Smash is pretty safe. Even Melee has people jumping around a LOT. It's basically a fighter crossed with a platformer, and platformers are all about jumping. In Brawl the moves either finish long before you land or simply auto-cancel when you land, thus making aerial combat even more potent. You need L-cancel to bring it down a notch. Like yes, jumping in with this attack is very viable in Smash but in order to follow up you need to cancel your landing; or in order to not be punished on block you need to cancel your landing. But without the need to cancel you are even safer with the aerial approach.

Again, this stuff is more important as you climb up the metagame. L-canceling at low levels will definitely help you succeed more, but if you mess up you are less likely to be punished. But when you get to the top the best players will always performing everything 99.9% of the time flawlessly so you need execution errors in order to get the edge on the opponent.

I'm going to give another Gears of War example. So in Gears you have what are called setups. When a team "sets up" that means that they have players positioned in certain ways to cover all angles of approach. Depending on the map and gametype, some setups are unbreakable. Even if the other team is highly coordinated you will not break the setup just because each player is covering all the others. So you need to put things into the game the purposely BREAK setups. Stuff like frag grenades or boomshot (eg. rocket launcher). If your team has those weapons then you can break setups, and thus the game continues. Otherwise you are essenitally left in a stalemate, a point where neither side is doing anything other than playing defensively. It's not the best example, but I think it would get my point across.

 

[Viceversa96]

What is this IT you're talking about? If you're talking about L-Canceling, again, there is VIRTUALLY NO REASON to NOT L-Cancel. There are reasons why you should or shouldn't do a lot of things in the game, but L-Canceling must be attempted every time. This is a random execution barrier with no strategic value.

If you want to talk about things like short hops, fast falls, etc., those have depth to them because it's not always optimal to do those.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cCetAvpUvA Look at these guys they aren't using L-canceling or playing seriously they are just having casual fun. I don't see them complaining about the game. In fact one of them said @ 11:22 This is so much better compared to Brawl.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

No, you don't need execution barriers per se. Ultimately, skill is determined by APPLICATION of techniques, not the fact that you can do them. Just because you do a 0 to death combo in Training Mode does not mean you can win EVO. It's one thing to do it in Training Mode and another when you're both on the last stock and it just takes one combo from either of you to end the match. Besides that, what ultimately wins is fundamentals. You've got lots of good players who, despite not having the greatest execution, make it up with their solid basics.

Timing power shielding is much like blocking highs and lows. Yes, you want to always block, but there are often times when you have to guess either to block high or low. In those situations, there's barely room for reacting, if at all, and you are forced to guess high or low. Thing is, the guesses must be educated guesses, not just coin flip guesses so this is strategic defense. Likewise, Power Shielding means you have to guess whether you're in sync with the opponent's rhythm. If not, the situation can either being hit, thrown, or blocking at a disadvantage.



I'm not saying technical skill is not important. The two go hand in hand. Your problem is that you're putting technical skill on too high of a pedestal, especially how you're yammering more about how execution determines skill, but you just said here that strategic skill is necessary.


No, I made the wrong tactical move. Get your facts straight.

@mimgrim
I have not seeing anything like L-Canceling in any fighting game. The closest are things that instantly cancel a move, but at the cost of a good amount of meter. L-Canceling has no cost for performing it.

I have seen people that can doing Fox's drillshine PERFECTLY on every character where it works. I have seen players, in person, nearly achieve a world record for HRC and BTT (sometimes when the TV wasn't even working, no lie). But I have never seen pure tech skill like that ever win a tournament. I'm not putting tech skill on a high pedestal, I'm saying execution errors are necessary for opportunities to arise at high level play where players do not mess up tech that often. If there is no tech to mess up, it is significantly harder to punish, especially if everyone's strategical approach is to always play as safe as possible.

You did not make a wrong tactical move. You messed up on a block and not got punished for it. There's no tactical part to blocking, it's just blocking. You're doing it because you had no choice, no option for counter attack, no time to evade said attack, you MUST block. If you executed the block perfectly you would powershield and thus not be punished.

 

[mimgrim]

The reason L-cancels are important is because Smash is more of an aerial combat game. Jumping in other fighting games is usually very risky, whereas Smash is pretty safe. Even Melee has people jumping around a LOT. It's basically a fighter crossed with a platformer, and platformers are all about jumping. In Brawl the moves either finish long before you land or simply auto-cancel when you land, thus making aerial combat even more potent. You need L-cancel to bring it down a notch. Like yes, jumping in with this attack is very viable in Smash but in order to follow up you need to cancel your landing; or in order to not be punished on block you need to cancel your landing. But without the need to cancel you are even safer with the aerial approach.

First I need to point out that you are very wrong about Brawl. Landing lag is still there, just as much as Melee. Which is a big reason why heavy characters are low and mid tiers because of landing lag. It is less noticeable on light characters because they are light. It doesn't auto cancel however. I have no idea where you heard that but it is completely false. Reduce landing lag/make it automatic and the problem is solved all around. Because having exectuion for the sake of having execution is bad. As far as I know even fighting games don't have mechanics that are there just for the sake of having a execution

Again, this stuff is more important as you climb up the metagame. L-canceling at low levels will definitely help you succeed more, but if you mess up you are less likely to be punished. But when you get to the top the best players will always performing everything 99.9% of the time flawlessly so you need execution errors in order to get the edge on the opponent.

Execution errors can happen in other ways then just L-cancel. Perhaps a messed up shot hop, messed up Powershield, messed up wave dash, hell even messed up DI or SDI. L-cancel adds a artificial depth that can easily be replaced if made automatic.

I'm going to give another Gears of War example. So in Gears you have what are called setups. When a team "sets up" that means that they have players positioned in certain ways to cover all angles of approach. Depending on the map and gametype, some setups are unbreakable. Even if the other team is highly coordinated you will not break the setup just because each player is covering all the others. So you need to put things into the game the purposely BREAK setups. Stuff like frag grenades or boomshot (eg. rocket launcher). If your team has those weapons then you can break setups, and thus the game continues. Otherwise you are essenitally left in a stalemate, a point where neither side is doing anything other than playing defensively. It's not the best example, but I think it would get my point across.

Sorry, but I don't think it got your point across. That seems much more then deep then pressing the same button even 5 seconds to reduce lag.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cCetAvpUvA Look at these guys they aren't using L-canceling or playing seriously they are just having casual fun. I don't see them complaining about the game. In fact one of them said @ 11:22 This is so much better compared to Brawl.

Ok you just crossed the line. You can't argue for your side like suicide can and now try to turn this into a Brawl VS Melee when we were just discussing the mechanic known as L-cancel. If you can't come up with a good counter argument don't try to turn it into something else. That's just sad. >_>

 

[JV5Chris]

Let me just say from experience the value of competitive player feedback extends far beyond the whole advanced technique debate.

There is little doubt in my mind Smash 4, as a game, would benefit immensely from earlier hands on play at events such as EVO or Apex. I'm not suggesting it will be a bad game for turning a blind eye here, but it is a lost opportunity to gather some incredibly valuable critiques. There's also no doubt the scene would identify far reaching issues missed by Nintendo's controlled play-testing environment.

I understand some approve of the tournament audience having less say, but the reality is useful feedback can come from anywhere. That definitely includes those with a deep mechanical understanding of each game.

 

[Conviction]

At least in the Georgia scene we care less about your technical output beyond the basics, we really care about your smarts.

 

[SmashChu]

I said close to 500k. L2R. And all I was pointing out was the professional gamers make more then what you gave them credit for. Again L2R.

Can't win an argument? Why, point out minute details. That will make you look smart. I mean, who needs to have actual points in this day and age.

I accept your defeat.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

First I need to point out that you are very wrong about Brawl. Landing lag is still there, just as much as Melee. Which is a big reason why heavy characters are low and mid tiers because of landing lag. It is less noticeable on light characters because they are light. It doesn't auto cancel however. I have no idea where you heard that but it is completely false. Reduce landing lag/make it automatic and the problem is solved all around. Because having exectuion for the sake of having execution is bad. As far as I know even fighting games don't have mechanics that are there just for the sake of having a execution



Execution errors can happen in other ways then just L-cancel. Perhaps a messed up shot hop, messed up Powershield, messed up wave dash, hell even messed up DI or SDI. L-cancel adds a artificial depth that can easily be replaced if made automatic.




Sorry, but I don't think it got your point across. That seems much more then deep then pressing the same button even 5 seconds to reduce lag.




Ok you just crossed the line. You can't argue for your side like suicide can and now try to turn this into a Brawl VS Melee when we were just discussing the mechanic known as L-cancel. If you can't come up with a good counter argument don't try to turn it into something else. That's just sad. >_>

Sorry for taking so long to reply. I literally made my last post and left for Florida to go to an open house for my masters. Great trip, but I couldn't remember my password for SWF and for some reason couldn't retrieve email on my mobile over the weekend. But I'm back now, I don't expect a reply but just wanted to make this point.

The idea behind L-cancel is to present an opportunity for a player to mess up. If we assume that over a given period players will become very good at the game, nearly flawless, and if we also assume that competitive players (or just those REALLY playing to win) will play the safest possible at any given time, then when the game lacks something like L-cancel you end up just making the game much more difficult at the higher levels of the metagame. By difficult, I mean that in order for you to gain the edge over an opponent you need to really work very hard, or even just cross your fingers hoping your opponent will make a tactical error (unlikely if they are playing safe), meaning the opportunity to punish is much smaller. It's still possible, yes, just kind of makes the game grind to a halt. Especially when you consider that a punish in Brawl doesn't have as much of an impact as a punish in Melee. More than likely you would come back at me with something like "well good players punish bad players all the time in Brawl" which is true but instead of one big punish you need to get several little punishes. Again, if you consider that even one punish is difficult enough, many in a row is even more difficult or impossible in high level play. Which again happens but doesn't end with a solid result as much.

The Gears of War example is relevant because the idea is to encourage players to NOT play safe just because it's just a less effective way to win the game. You don't want players to always play safe, because if given the choice they will, so you need ways to encourage them to take risks. With L-cancel you take a risk everytime you throw out an aerial that will not end before you land. The risk at higher levels may be minute, simply because they L-cancel 99.9% of the time perfectly, but given that .1% that's enough to generate risk for the player and thus give more opportunities to punish regardless of whether or not the player is playing safe tactically.

The way I look at it, Brawl basically gave a wall of pain to every character, because your aerial either ends before you land or you auto-cancel on landing. And by auto-cancel I mean that the lag is simply automatically cut in half (or just very short), IIRC that's what is was referred to when Brawl first came. Again I stopped playing 3 months after the game came out so some of the new terms I don't know. I know RAR is like a reverse aerial, and something like that is good but within the context of the rest of Brawl it's like a drop in an empty bucket. But yea, I do know that aerial landing lag is much less than it is in Melee, and that most aerials will end in a short hop. I feel like the aerials are the main forms of attack and approach in the game so you need to put barriers on it so that players need to execute them properly to really take advantage at higher levels.

EDIT: Simply faster speed + longer landing lag after aerials (eg. Melee without L-cancel) would definitely help to make the game better, but you are still left with the same situation, because you don't present the player the chance to avoid the risk. The only choice you really give them is to play safe with less options, which just leads to rather boring/predicatbale gameplay. L-cancel speeds up the game in a way the player can control, and generally if a player is given the chance to move/act faster than another they will because it is a distinct advantage. And it is always better to be playing against your opponent on your terms, it usually results in a win. You then force the other player to take those same risks which just increases what I was talking about with opportunities and punishes.

IDK, it's just in my general experience speeding up or slowing down the speed of the game doesn't make the game play any better, just faster or slower.Putting in mechanics like L-cancel gives us risk/reward situations which is more dynamic than a linear speed change.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

Can't win an argument? Why, point out minute details. That will make you look smart. I mean, who needs to have actual points in this day and age.

I accept your defeat.

At least he addressed you. Still haven't answered my question. Do you consider NASCAR a sport?

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

At least he addressed you. Still haven't answered my question. Do you consider NASCAR a sport?

I wouldn't hold your breath on trying to get an answer from that dude, he truly believes that you are wrong on the merits that you have a different opinion about a subject and throws our more sales figures that a quarterly projection.

By the way SmashChu, there are many Athletes who push themselves to exhaustion playing sports, many of which can be found in your local high schools and colleges, the difference is that those who get payed so much money extends to far more variables than just because of them being athletes. These people are entertainers and a part of the mass media. They have sponsors, contracts, guidelines and deals that must be made to receive their income. I can do drills and fade-away like Kobe all day, doesn't mean i'm going to get millions because it is exhausting. It's because they are in the public eye they make the amount of money they do.

 

[Mono.]

you know i bet sakurai was one of those button-mashing scrubs who got bopped in an arcade in street fighter or some **** numerous times and blamed the game's basic mechanics instead of his ability to play which is why he's so anti-competitive

LOL LOSING ISN'T FUN SO EVERYONE MUST WIN mentality is all kinds of ****ing stupid because in majority of aspects in life, there is a winner and a loser. losing does suck, but it's going to happen if you're not good which should motivate the competitor to git gud. forcing concepts of randomness (tripping lol) that results in the skilled player who honed his abilities in said game losing not only is bull**** to said player and makes him feel like he's wasting his time in gitting gud at something he likes, but gives the lesser skilled player a false sense of accomplishment.

fun is subjective and transient while competition is eternal

like I expect some dumb casual or some dumb tourneyfriend to neglect and/or blaspheme the opposite side of smash that they don't participate in or like that much, not the damn creator of the series itself

 

[mimgrim]

Sorry for taking so long to reply. I literally made my last post and left for Florida to go to an open house for my masters. Great trip, but I couldn't remember my password for SWF and for some reason couldn't retrieve email on my mobile over the weekend. But I'm back now, I don't expect a reply but just wanted to make this point.

The idea behind L-cancel is to present an opportunity for a player to mess up. If we assume that over a given period players will become very good at the game, nearly flawless, and if we also assume that competitive players (or just those REALLY playing to win) will play the safest possible at any given time, then when the game lacks something like L-cancel you end up just making the game much more difficult at the higher levels of the metagame. By difficult, I mean that in order for you to gain the edge over an opponent you need to really work very hard, or even just cross your fingers hoping your opponent will make a tactical error (unlikely if they are playing safe), meaning the opportunity to punish is much smaller. It's still possible, yes, just kind of makes the game grind to a halt. Especially when you consider that a punish in Brawl doesn't have as much of an impact as a punish in Melee. More than likely you would come back at me with something like "well good players punish bad players all the time in Brawl" which is true but instead of one big punish you need to get several little punishes. Again, if you consider that even one punish is difficult enough, many in a row is even more difficult or impossible in high level play. Which again happens but doesn't end with a solid result as much.

I understand what you are getting but the thing I see here is that the opportunity to mess up is in like almost every mechanic or even regular input in Smash. You did X attack when you should have done Y attack, you full jumped when you should of short hopped, you wasted your double jump, your didn't b-reversal correctly, the list goes on and on. You also seem to be contradicting yourself at the more difficult part, is it being more difficult actually better? Isn't having to put more work into supposed to better? Because it ties into the higher skill gap? And actually because of how Brawl works punishing is a lot more important in the meta game then you think, at least now. I understand you haven't played Brawl since 3 months after it's release but try doing some research on it please? I would argue that in Brawl punishing is even more important because of lack of true combos and that the opponent will be playing safe more meaning you really need to take advantage of when your opponent makes a mistake.

The Gears of War example is relevant because the idea is to encourage players to NOT play safe just because it's just a less effective way to win the game. You don't want players to always play safe, because if given the choice they will, so you need ways to encourage them to take risks. With L-cancel you take a risk everytime you throw out an aerial that will not end before you land. The risk at higher levels may be minute, simply because they L-cancel 99.9% of the time perfectly, but given that .1% that's enough to generate risk for the player and thus give more opportunities to punish regardless of whether or not the player is playing safe tactically.

We still come back to the fact that L-cancel is a button press that must be pressed in the correct amount of time simply to reduce lag. That's it. Even though it does generate small risk, the reward is just to high compared to the risk. It basically a small risk high reward scenario. And yes I do believe that is is a small risk because even if you mess it up it usually doesn't guarantee a stock for your opponent.

The way I look at it, Brawl basically gave a wall of pain to every character, because your aerial either ends before you land or you auto-cancel on landing. And by auto-cancel I mean that the lag is simply automatically cut in half (or just very short), IIRC that's what is was referred to when Brawl first came. Again I stopped playing 3 months after the game came out so some of the new terms I don't know. I know RAR is like a reverse aerial, and something like that is good but within the context of the rest of Brawl it's like a drop in an empty bucket. But yea, I do know that aerial landing lag is much less than it is in Melee, and that most aerials will end in a short hop. I feel like the aerials are the main forms of attack and approach in the game so you need to put barriers on it so that players need to execute them properly to really take advantage at higher levels.

Again this isn't really true about Brawl. The lag certainly isn't reduced in half in Brawl automatically. It might be a bit less then in Melee but it is certainly not auto L-canceled. A character like Bowser and Ganondorf have huge landing lag still which is just one of the reason they are low tier. Take a look at the most recent Brawl tier list. One of the reason why the characters on the lower end of the tier list is because of their landing lag which is certainly not halved. While the characters that are higher up, generally lighter character, just naturally have less, which ties into the character imbalance in Brawl but that is a different discussion. Eve without L-cancel there are other barrier of aerials, like whether to jump or shot hop and stuff like that, L-cancel just seems artificial.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

I understand what you are getting but the thing I see here is that the opportunity to mess up is in like almost every mechanic or even regular input in Smash. You did X attack when you should have done Y attack, you full jumped when you should of short hopped, you wasted your double jump, your didn't b-reversal correctly, the list goes on and on. You also seem to be contradicting yourself at the more difficult part, is it being more difficult actually better? Isn't having to put more work into supposed to better? Because it ties into the higher skill gap? And actually because of how Brawl works punishing is a lot more important in the meta game then you think, at least now. I understand you haven't played Brawl since 3 months after it's release but try doing some research on it please? I would argue that in Brawl punishing is even more important because of lack of true combos and that the opponent will be playing safe more meaning you really need to take advantage of when your opponent makes a mistake.

We still come back to the fact that L-cancel is a button press that must be pressed in the correct amount of time simply to reduce lag. That's it. Even though it does generate small risk, the reward is just to high compared to the risk. It basically a small risk high reward scenario. And yes I do believe that is is a small risk because even if you mess it up it usually doesn't guarantee a stock for your opponent.

Again this isn't really true about Brawl. The lag certainly isn't reduced in half in Brawl automatically. It might be a bit less then in Melee but it is certainly not auto L-canceled. A character like Bowser and Ganondorf have huge landing lag still which is just one of the reason they are low tier. Take a look at the most recent Brawl tier list. One of the reason why the characters on the lower end of the tier list is because of their landing lag which is certainly not halved. While the characters that are higher up, generally lighter character, just naturally have less, which ties into the character imbalance in Brawl but that is a different discussion. Eve without L-cancel there are other barrier of aerials, like whether to jump or shot hop and stuff like that, L-cancel just seems artificial.

I didn't contradict myself because I'm talking difficulty specifically in regards to player vs player environments. Player vs game is independent of that. Removing L-cancel makes the game easier to play the game because it is one less thing to worry about, but harder to play the game against another player due to the removal of a execution risk scenario. Essentially by making the game easier you are also making it easier for players to exploit tactics that would have otherwise been balanced. If things such as L-cancel are in place you ensure that there are more opportunities to take advantage of your opponent's weaknesses. Despite experienced players being able to overcome this execution with relative ease, the fact that they CAN mess up presents the other player with a chance to counter in the event of an execution error. You can train yourself to react to these mistakes. The chance for the execution errors you are taking about becomes lower and lower, almost no existent, the higher you climb the metagame. Adding in a few extra steps to that will ensure that there will always be a reasonable chance of error even at higher levels.

Again, I just see aerials in Brawl as being too safe. There isn't a whole lot of punishment involved, usually it comes down to tactical errors, which again can be limited by simply playing safe. It's almost like you put a limit on tactical exploits by imposing certain needs for proper execution. It's why Fox is such a highly regarded character in Melee, his perfect erm.... form .... is flawless and probably unbeatable but the level of execution required to play at that level is godlike, almost literally. It's almost like an infinite skill curve whereby you have an infinite number skill gaps that must be overcome. In Brawl I see it like those skill gaps have been cut back and given a finite limit, which is bad for competitive gaming because it implies that at some given point in the metagame will cease to grow or evolve.

I have watched Brawl tournaments of recent and I'm not impressed, honestly. A lot of what I see I have seen in Melee in terms of mindgames and tactics. The difference is that Melee took it to that next level, where Brawl seems to either be just moving along very slowly or stuck on some plateau. Compare Melee at 5 years to Brawl at 5 years and it feels like Melee was beyond phase of the metagame Brawl is currently in.

Also Ganondorf is a good example of a character with poor tactical options given a boost by a reward for good execution. Fast characters are already fast, and the benefit they get from L-cancel is small. But slow characters really benefit because it usually allows them to take advantage of their power in a tactical way given that they execute it properly. But that tactical advantage can be punished on failed execution. Without that, you sort of remove power attacks as viable tactical options (which a lot of slow characters rely on). You left to playing safe, which is generally done with attacks that come out quickly. Again, it is harder to punish Fox for execution errors than Ganondorf, but it would be even harder if they were fewer execution errors that can be made.

 

[mimgrim]

I didn't contradict myself because I'm talking difficulty specifically in regards to player vs player environments. Player vs game is independent of that. Removing L-cancel makes the game easier to play the game because it is one less thing to worry about, but harder to play the game against another player due to the removal of a execution risk scenario. Essentially by making the game easier you are also making it easier for players to exploit tactics that would have otherwise been balanced. If things such as L-cancel are in place you ensure that there are more opportunities to take advantage of your opponent's weaknesses. Despite experienced players being able to overcome this execution with relative ease, the fact that they CAN mess up presents the other player with a chance to counter in the event of an execution error. You can train yourself to react to these mistakes.

Again, I just see aerials in Brawl as being too safe. There isn't a whole lot of punishment involved, usually it comes down to tactical errors, which again can be limited by simply playing safe. It's almost like you put a limit on tactical exploits by imposing certain needs for proper execution. It's why Fox is such a highly regarded character in Melee, his perfect erm.... form .... is flawless and probably unbeatable but the level of execution required to play at that level is godlike, almost literally. It's almost like an infinite skill curve whereby you have an infinite number skill gaps that must be overcome. In Brawl I see it like those skill gaps have been cut back and given a finite limit, which is bad for competitive gaming because it implies that at some given point in the metagame will cease to grow or evolve.

I have watched Brawl tournaments of recent and I'm not impressed, honestly. A lot of what I see I have seen in Melee in terms of mindgames and tactics. The difference is that Melee took it to that next level, where Brawl seems to either be just moving along very slowly or stuck on some plateau. Compare Melee at 5 years to Brawl at 5 years and it feels like Melee was beyond phase of the metagame Brawl is currently in.

Also Ganondorf is a good example of a character with poor tactical options given a boost by a reward for good execution. Fast characters are already fast, and the benefit they get from L-cancel is small. But slow characters really benefit because it usually allows them to take advantage of their power in a tactical way given that they execute it properly. But that tactical advantage can be punished on failed execution. Without that, you sort of remove power attacks as viable tactical options (which a lot of slow characters rely on). You left to playing safe, which is generally done with attacks that come out quickly. Again, it is harder to punish Fox for execution errors than Ganondorf, but it would be even harder if they were fewer execution errors that can be made.

Mistakes and punishing will remain regardless of L-cancel. IIRC the mistakes that are made in top level play are rarely L-cancel and are usually more along the lines of poor reads and the like with the occasional execution mistake, and not necessarily missing L-cancel (Like M2K VS Armada when M2K messed up ledge stalling with Sheik). They seem to happen more often the L-cancel mistakes to which means there shouldn't be a drastic change in anything.

Even playing safely you make mistakes. In Brawl you have more of an emphasis on punishing because of how safe it is played because you need to take advantage of those mistakes greatly. I'll conces on the skill gaps thing however, Meleehas much more of that. There is no debate there.

That is jsut a matter of taste. Personally I enjoy watching both top level Brawl and Melee play and get impressed by both.

Ganondorf is also a good example of why heavier characters need the landing lag of lighter characters. This can even be said for Melee. Since Melee cuts landing time in half it should in theory make it to where lighter character still land less laggier then a heavy character, and this is how the top tier characters are top because they have less landing lag in general still, L-cancel just gives them less. Of course the halved landing lag still benefits heavy characters greatly and allows them to make it up to mid tier and stand a better chance against the lighter characters, but still. Heavy characters need more love. :L

 

[the_suicide_fox]

Mistakes and punishing will remain regardless of L-cancel. IIRC the mistakes that are made in top level play are rarely L-cancel and are usually more along the lines of poor reads and the like with the occasional execution mistake, and not necessarily missing L-cancel (Like M2K VS Armada when M2K messed up ledge stalling with Sheik). They seem to happen more often the L-cancel mistakes to which means there shouldn't be a drastic change in anything.

Even playing safely you make mistakes. In Brawl you have more of an emphasis on punishing because of how safe it is played because you need to take advantage of those mistakes greatly. I'll conces on the skill gaps thing however, Meleehas much more of that. There is no debate there.

That is jsut a matter of taste. Personally I enjoy watching both top level Brawl and Melee play and get impressed by both.

Ganondorf is also a good example of why heavier characters need the landing lag of lighter characters. This can even be said for Melee. Since Melee cuts landing time in half it should in theory make it to where lighter character still land less laggier then a heavy character, and this is how the top tier characters are top because they have less landing lag in general still, L-cancel just gives them less. Of course the halved landing lag still benefits heavy characters greatly and allows them to make it up to mid tier and stand a better chance against the lighter characters, but still. Heavy characters need more love. :L

It's just my view that advanced tech should be purposely designed into the game. You had told me L-cancel was intentional in both 64 and Melee, so it's just going backwards in Brawl by outright removing it. Again, if the idea was to make the game more accessible to lesser skilled players you could have made it less strict or only allow it to apply to attacks that hit. If I were designing Smash I would try to add more advanced tech, mostly in the form of cancels and movement. It doesn't hurt the lower end of the metagame just ensures the upper end has room to continuously grow.

Again it's not so much that L-cancels are the only opportunity to punish, but that removing it just gives you one less thing that you can punish. It's been part of the game since the beginning and I don't see any real reason to remove it. To me it's just hurting the game in the long run.

 

[mimgrim]

It's just my view that advanced tech should be purposely designed into the game. You had told me L-cancel was intentional in both 64 and Melee, so it's just going backwards in Brawl by outright removing it. Again, if the idea was to make the game more accessible to lesser skilled players you could have made it less strict or only allow it to apply to attacks that hit. If I were designing Smash I would try to add more advanced tech, mostly in the form of cancels and movement. It doesn't hurt the lower end of the metagame just ensures the upper end has room to continuously grow.

Again it's not so much that L-cancels are the only opportunity to punish, but that removing it just gives you one less thing that you can punish. It's been part of the game since the beginning and I don't see any real reason to remove it. To me it's just hurting the game in the long run.

Let me put it like this. If L-cancel did more then just reduce lag I wouldn't have a problem with it, at all. However as it is now it is just an execution for the sake of an execution. If it could be made into something you don't always have to do, had higher risk or could get way with not preforming it 100% perfectly in high level play, and was just more similar to Wavedash or even Powershield in how it used I wouldn't have a problem with it. But as it is currently it is just a execution for the sake of an execution and adds an artificial depth that would remain if landing lag was just reduced to 0 for all characters.

Also I want to properly address auto cancel now that I did some research into it. Auto Cancel I believe is even in Melee and 64 and is very specific when it is activated. It only activates on 1 of two conditions, when the character land at the earliest or latest frame of an aerial. Which means it is very situational for when it activates. So it doesn't help as much as you suggest it does.

 

[the_suicide_fox]

Let me put it like this. If L-cancel did more then just reduce lag I wouldn't have a problem with it, at all. However as it is now it is just an execution for the sake of an execution. If it could be made into something you don't always have to do, had higher risk or could get way with not preforming it 100% perfectly in high level play, and was just more similar to Wavedash or even Powershield in how it used I wouldn't have a problem with it. But as it is currently it is just a execution for the sake of an execution and adds an artificial depth that would remain if landing lag was just reduced to 0 for all characters.

See this is the wrong thinking. You can't allow people to get away with errors at high level play, because they won't mess up that often to begin with. They should need to be as flawless as possible or else you don't present enough opportunities to capitalize. Wavedash and powershield are the same as L-cancel. If you mess up you can be punished. Let's say the top players suddenly started to powershield as easily as they could L-cancel. Well now you have the same "execution for the sake of execution" that you are talking about. There would be no option to not powershield. The only reason you can get away with it is because it's much harder to do as consistently as L-cancel. Wavedash is also execution heavy, but isn't as similar to L-cancel as powershielding just because it is related to movement. So you have 2 options of movement, left or right, but there is no less of a need to execute properly.

I'm not sure what you mean by "more than just reduce lag" because that is a pretty straightforward concept. If you execute it properly it allows you to move faster, and if you move faster you force your opponent to move faster, which in turn creates a higher chance one of you will make an execution error (whether it be L-cancel or something else).

Also reducing landing lag to 0 would probably make those slow/strong characters way too good. Like I said, L-cancel benefits those characters more, because fast characters are already fast so they already create higher chances of execution errors. The ability to follow up after a hit without L-cancel is still pretty good. If a slow/strong character missed one the ability to follow up is usually completely lost.

 

[mimgrim]

See this is the wrong thinking. You can't allow people to get away with errors at high level play, because they won't mess up that often to begin with. They should need to be as flawless as possible or else you don't present enough opportunities to capitalize. Wavedash and powershield are the same as L-cancel. If you mess up you can be punished. Let's say the top players suddenly started to powershield as easily as they could L-cancel. Well now you have the same "execution for the sake of execution" that you are talking about. There would be no option to not powershield. The only reason you can get away with it is because it's much harder to do as consistently as L-cancel. Wavedash is also execution heavy, but isn't as similar to L-cancel as powershielding just because it is related to movement. So you have 2 options of movement, left or right, but there is no less of a need to execute properly.

I'm not sure what you mean by "more than just reduce lag" because that is a pretty straightforward concept. If you execute it properly it allows you to move faster, and if you move faster you force your opponent to move faster, which in turn creates a higher chance one of you will make an execution error (whether it be L-cancel or something else).

Also reducing landing lag to 0 would probably make those slow/strong characters way too good. Like I said, L-cancel benefits those characters more, because fast characters are already fast so they already create higher chances of execution errors. The ability to follow up after a hit without L-cancel is still pretty good. If a slow/strong character missed one the ability to follow up is usually completely lost.

Hrmmmm, after some thinking you have gotten me to change my mind... Sort of anyway. I still don't care for the mechanic all that much as I still find it to be artificial and arbitrary to an extent and I still believe it can be handled better or replaced. But I also realize that there is a certain necessity to it, though not so much as to make the game unsuccessful if it is lacked but it does help the quality some, and that over all it can help to actually balance the game more and it is better to have it then to not have anything like it. I think we have reached a understanding.