sadly i'm the only arcadian that made it back from the noob killerYEA jason, comment on my post
-jkun
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
sadly i'm the only arcadian that made it back from the noob killerYEA jason, comment on my post
a tournament can be fun for its own sake, not necessarily as a stepping stone to improvement
as in, we have smashfests for fun for its own sake.We have smashfests for that.
they're not the same thing; I really don't see how I'm not "following your logic" here, it looks like there's no logic to follow. so I'm gonna go ahead and give you the big middle finger on this one.how are a smashfest and a tournament the same thing
and yes, competitive gaming is about fun, wtf is wrong with you
guess we can't have bowling or movies then, since we already have smashfestsas in, we have smashfests for fun for its own sake.
thinking there's no logic is the exact same thing as not following the logicthey're not the same thing; I really don't see how I'm not "following your logic" here, it looks like there's no logic to follow. so I'm gonna go ahead and give you the big middle finger on this one.
who are you to say what people want to get out of competitive gaming? and even more so, how can you possibly say what things are "more "fun""?For the icicle mountain example, I was trying to say that competitive gaming isn't about "maximizing the amount of fun" you can have. Realistically, it's about winning and improvement, putting in hard work and achieving your goals. And for the people who are willing to put the time into it, these things are more "fun" (ultimately, more rewarding) than d!cking around with a party game. Saying "green shells and icicle mountain isn't fun wtf" is besides the point, because if it was just about fun there wouldn't be winners and losers.
yes, and you can have close, meaningful games if you just did round robin money matches instead. i don't see how it follows that since you can have fun in a regular tournament, having a different format is suddenly not funThe thrill of competitive gaming doesn't come from the prospect of winning money--you can still get that feeling from beating someone who ***** you last time. If I went to genesis and beat lucky, even though we BOTH would have realistically no shot of winning, I'd still be ecstatic! You could argue that nobody except mango has a shot of winning a tournament in socal, but that doesn't mean that "nothing is on the line." Beating someone who's better than you, or someone you lost to last time, is important because it shows your own improvement; you don't always have to compete to be #1 in your state, or even best on your block, you can still have close, meaningful sets with someone for 3rd or 4th or even 13th place.
don't drop "you"s on me; everyone plays the game for different reasons. good for brendan that he can take pride in smaller achievements; many who have become a big part of the community think the same way, including both you and i. however, the fact that 20 people play for the same reason doesn't suggest that 20 other people are doing it wrongDriving back from the chatsworth tournament with Brendan the other day, he was really excited that he was beating wha? and nasty nate in seriouslies, because he had previously lost to both of those players. Wha and Leon tied for last, and Nasty Nate got 13th. But there was still enough room for him to be prideful of his achievements, even among the worst people of the tournament. This is what really counts in competition--playing for yourself, playing for your own improvement, playing because you love the game.
I'm just going to address the bolded thing, because that's the crux of your "argument"Giving everybody the "chance to win" when it really doesn't exist only fosters a results-oriented attitude. People will go to this because they think they have a shot at money, not because they have the desire to improve and the right mindset towards competition. When marthpwnzer loses to smoke2jointz in losers semifinals (or whatever), you can bet he's gonna john about it and get angry. You have to accept the fact that people will beat you, and you have to learn from it, and you have to start liking it before you can get any better. Anything else is just unrealistic.
the sirlin is stong in this oneas in, we have smashfests for fun for its own sake.
they're not the same thing; I really don't see how I'm not "following your logic" here, it looks like there's no logic to follow. so I'm gonna go ahead and give you the big middle finger on this one.
For the icicle mountain example, I was trying to say that competitive gaming isn't about "maximizing the amount of fun" you can have. Realistically, it's about winning and improvement, putting in hard work and achieving your goals. And for the people who are willing to put the time into it, these things are more "fun" (ultimately, more rewarding) than d!cking around with a party game. Saying "green shells and icicle mountain isn't fun wtf" is besides the point, because if it was just about fun there wouldn't be winners and losers.
The thrill of competitive gaming doesn't come from the prospect of winning money--you can still get that feeling from beating someone who ***** you last time. If I went to genesis and beat lucky, even though we BOTH would have realistically no shot of winning, I'd still be ecstatic! You could argue that nobody except mango has a shot of winning a tournament in socal, but that doesn't mean that "nothing is on the line." Beating someone who's better than you, or someone you lost to last time, is important because it shows your own improvement; you don't always have to compete to be #1 in your state, or even best on your block, you can still have close, meaningful sets with someone for 3rd or 4th or even 13th place.
Driving back from the chatsworth tournament with Brendan the other day, he was really excited that he was beating wha? and nasty nate in seriouslies, because he had previously lost to both of those players. Wha and Leon tied for last, and Nasty Nate got 13th. But there was still enough room for him to be prideful of his achievements, even among the worst people of the tournament. This is what really counts in competition--playing for yourself, playing for your own improvement, playing because you love the game.
Giving everybody the "chance to win" when it really doesn't exist only fosters a results-oriented attitude. People will go to this because they think they have a shot at money, not because they have the desire to improve and the right mindset towards competition. When marthpwnzer loses to smoke2jointz in losers semifinals (or whatever), you can bet he's gonna john about it and get angry. You have to accept the fact that people will beat you, and you have to learn from it, and you have to start liking it before you can get any better. Anything else is just unrealistic.
dave don't let ****in unranked spartans take advantage here****in arcadians only
we all know whos arcadian and who aint
don't be ***s guys
I was just making the point that when you drop "you", you are making an assumption that your audience thinks like you, which i felt was the overall fallacy behind your perspective (i even agreed in the next sentence or two that i personally do in fact largely think the same way as you do). I don't usually grammar police in real arguments"You" is just because I'm grammatically lazy, of course you know that. I could go back and replace every instance with "one." Also, I'm not really arguing, because I feel that logical nitpicking and walls of text would just clutter the thread and intimidate everybody.
i'll agree that running arcadian-only tournaments in the stead of real tournaments is bad for the community, but as a one-shot thing, why not? Especially when it's not replacing an existing event, but just appearing as a new event itself? (afaik this isn't replacing a normal socal tournament, but i don't know the scene that well so i could be wrong)I acknowledge that not everybody shares this mindset, although it would be ideal for a stable community IMO, but that running arcadian-only tournaments is detrimental to the health of the community.
oh hipeople that think its a dumb idea: joe
people that dont think its dumb: EVERYONE ELSE
look brian I can do it too!especially if they're LAME ideas
![]()
let's play soonthe sirlin is stong in this one
on another note
new melty blood got leaked:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HHT1B6VX
I didn't know you weren't a fan of "free money." I would expect you to be able to win the tournament, but apparently this isn't worth your time?The reason I'm not going is BECAUSE it's an Arcadian tournament.
Despite not going to any tournaments after Genesis, I've been practicing a good amount on my free time and I want to see how well I'd fair against ALL of Socal.