Melee and ssb4.

[fogbadge]

Nintendo bought the studio that made Xenosaga, and that company went on to make Xenoblade. I'm not sure if that makes Xenoblade 1st- or 2nd-party, but I believe that Xenosaga and Xenogears are probably 2nd-party.

from what ive read monolith is a first party nintendo company witch would make xenoblade a first party game, and i think namco own the rights to xenosaga so i believe it's 3rd party

 

[traffic.]

Nintendo producing a competitive game that holds a scene was the fluke shot, Melee doesn't even need to speak for itself thanks to its players.

 

[El Duderino]

Still rambling on about this casual vs hardcore nonsense are we? There's 2 types of smash players on this website, the competitive and the less competitive inclined that still enjoy competing with their friends, just on different terms.

I hate to break to all you casual champions here, but no one arguing over a game like this on an internet forum is a casual gamer. You're just gamers like the rest of us, only falsely interpreting the PR expanded audience talk as speaking directly to you.

 

[Pichu4SSB4]

I hate to break to all you casual champions here, but no one arguing over a game like this on an internet forum is a casual gamer. You're just gamers like the rest of us, only falsely interpreting the PR expanded audience talk as speaking directly to you.

THANK. YOU.

I really hate when people keep talking down to the players who use more of their time around the game's depth. Them even being in an argument about it makes them just as guilty.

 

[Dingding123]

I really hate when people keep talking down to the players who use more of their time around the game's depth. Them even being in an argument about it makes them just as guilty.

barlw players talk down to mele palyers
wat

 

[Kink-Link5]

Still rambling on about this casual vs hardcore nonsense are we? There's 2 types of smash players on this website, the competitive and the less competitive inclined that still enjoy competing with their friends, just on different terms.

I hate to break to all you casual champions here, but no one arguing over a game like this on an internet forum is a casual gamer. You're just gamers like the rest of us, only falsely interpreting the PR expanded audience talk as speaking directly to you.

Thank you for articulating this point. This is what I've been saying less directly, so I'm glad this is made clear now.

 

[El Duderino]

The real sad thing is while we are still bickering over what the intended audience is, Nintendo has already moved past the pointless debate, embracing more competitive and skillful play in something as universal as a Mario platformer. It completely contradicts many of the wild claims in this thread about Nintendo, in particular what their current outlook is and what it may mean for SSB4.

 

[Vkrm]

In what way are they making Mario more skillful and competitive. Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious. This discussion seem to be two groups arguing over what smash SHOULD be, not what it already is. You look at much depth melee has, and it becomes really hard to dismiss the established metagame as a fluke, as some would put it.

 

[RomanceDawn]

In what way are they making Mario more skillful and competitive. Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious. This discussion seem to be two groups arguing over what smash SHOULD be, not what it already is. You look at much depth melee has, and it becomes really hard to dismiss the established metagame as a fluke, as some would put it.

Coin rush and boost modes. It's all about high scores in 3 stages with one life and competing against a friends record.

Monolith Soft is 1st party. Xenoblade has nothing to do with Xenogears and Xenosaga. Nintendo higher ups wanted to call it Xenoblade as the spiritual successor to those titles.

 

[Pichu4SSB4]

barlw players talk down to mele palyers
wat

I've had that personal experience, yes. ◡‿◡

 

[El Duderino]

In what way are they making Mario more skillful and competitive.

According to Nintendo's PR, the co-op boost rush and challenge modes require additional skill and strategy. Also they are embracing speed runs and want you to become a "super player"... their phrase not mine. That sure doesn't sound like a company hell bent on non-competitive surface deep gaming, especially when all this applies to their flagship franchise.

Basically, Nintendo finally figured out for the past six years they have been polarizing their audience in an attempt to expand it. The new WiiU Nintendo agenda seems to be bridging that gap and rewarding players that transverse between the two. I can't imagine SSB4 will be the exception and go backwards to Brawl's specific goals.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

What really kills me is how anti-competitive players tend to source search for information on the internet that validates their absurd opinions, which is essentially, scrapping the bottom of the barrel for information. Pro-competitive players are guilty of this too, but unlike the ladder they tend to feel superior to the players who want a more fulfilling game for some awful reason. I'm not saying you shouldn't defend your points, but the information presented by knowledgeable members of the community tend to defeat the simple ridicule mad against us. Maybe it's just the human condition to believe that two different entities/objects/ideas cannot coo-exist.

As previously stated, we have enough data to see that Nintendo is starting to realize what it's consumer really wants. In the past 5 years we have seen Nintendo's targeted demographic emphasize more on appealing to fans who want more difficulty and veterans of Nintendo's games. This doesn't mean that every game is going to be absurdly challenging, but there will be a greater quantity of them. Nintendo is more than capable of making first party software for the sake of a quick sale; as they are capable of making games that provide a challange, so making the Wii U with accessible features and generic controller design was the best way to have both audiences have something to work with.

 

[DTR]

why do these people keep saying melee was too hard for casuals?? excluding diagonals, some special moves in sf require 11 inputs. guess how many moves in melee/brawl use? 1-3. Honestly, watching the tutorial vid that somebody complained about is an easy enough way to teach beginners the basic concepts and they can get right into learning the simple fighter. if you play with one character then switch to another, guess what? all of the inputs are the same. every single character.

Ill skip the 64 part but when I first played melee I didnt know about wavedashing or l-cancelling or any of that crap. i used roy and thought he was awesome and there wasnt a person i knew who didnt like the game. you guys keep merging the casual and competitive scenes which in most cases doesnt happen. i was totally unaware of the competitive scene until i delved in myself and my friends got into it. typically competitive kids play with competitive kids and casuals play with casuals. thats part of what makes a deep smash game so cool. its simple and easy to play and difficult to master. you do not NEED to learn crazy **** to have fun.

Basically brawl and melee are the same thing to casual player and i know all kids of people who prefer one to the other. In terms of competitive play, brawl just doesnt have the depth that melee has. the only people a deeper smash game (zomg melee 2.0 stfu) would affect are the competitive players who dont want to learn anything deeper than brawl. and im pretty sure some brawl kids want to do a little more, right?

 

[Vkrm]

True. Melee did the "easy to learn, hard to master" biz way better in my opinion. What would you say to people who argue that by adding technical depth you create barriers for the casuals, (nintendo's target audience) and hamper their experience?

 

[Kink-Link5]

What specials possibly require 11 inputs? The only moves I can think of in any fighter are like, KoF Pretzel, which is a super, not a special move.

It isn't the number or complexity of inputs but the timing in executing them that anyone has problems with in Smash. The game is accessible and that has never been a problem, but the tech ceiling is quite large. Some complex things in Smash look a lot less complex if you jsut think about number of inputs, but the precision in them is large. Shine Bair? Literally just Down+B, Backward, Up, C-stick bair. 5 inputs. In execution though there is a lot of room for error in both timing and input. RBR's/Wavebouncing, same thing, you just do a reverse neutral B (Back, B) and then a B-Reversal (Back relative to where you face now) 3 inputs, with a huge margin of error to accidentally use a side B or miss the window to B-reversal.

The simplicity of Smash's inputs actually causes a bit of input error since a lot of simple things are similar in input due to the analog nature of the game.

Not that that's a bad thing, games shouldn't be easy to reach high level in, but to say Smash has easy inputs ignores a lot of the game's mechanics.

 

[Vkrm]

Sf input are easier then melee's I think. Sf4 is for sure, the short cuts, plus like a century to buffer reversals. If you compare them side by side, a SRK is more difficult than side b, but because smash has a faster pace you need to combine a bunch of inputs.

 

[DTR]

True. Melee did the "easy to learn, hard to master" biz way better in my opinion. What would you say to people who argue that by adding technical depth you create barriers for the casuals, (nintendo's target audience) and hamper their experience?

if they dont know about the hardcore competitive scene they never even have to worry about that barrier? that is what im trying to argue. if you are only playing casually in the first place and will move on to the next game anyway, what do barriers even matter even if everyone knew about them? the biggest barrier, in my opinion, is the one that brawl creates in trying to seperate the goods from the greats because after getting so far, the ONLY way to get any better is by tournament experience because it isnt hard to learn everything. how do you make yourself better in a game with not much depth?

What specials possibly require 11 inputs? The only moves I can think of in any fighter are like, KoF Pretzel, which is a super, not a special move.

technically one of zangiefs specials is 16 inputs (720+triple punch). im not sure what it would be with shotcuts because i only played sf4 a little and wasnt into grapplers but i doubt its anywhere under 10

 

[Kink-Link5]

I guess Spin attack in Zelda has 9 inputs then.

720 + 3 punches is 5 inputs. One for each circle, one for each punch. Or one for all three punches if you set an input to do that.

Isn't 421 or something a 360 shortcut?

 

[DTR]

oh i figured that since in training mode it shows each individual arrow they each count as inputs? dont know too much about traditional fighters but still. my point is you need to do a lot of stuff for moves in traditional fighters and a direction and a button in ssb. its extremely casual as a fighter in terms of beginner level play

 

[Kink-Link5]

Moves have 1 input

Command Normals have 2 inputs

Special Moves tend to have 2 inputs

EX Moves tend to have 3 inputs

Super Moves tend to have 3-6 input depending on the type of game and how supers are done

Level 3 Supers/whatever else they call them in their given game tend to have more complex and character specific inputs

And Instant Kills tend to have really silly inputs


Except BlazBlue where everything has like 3 inputs max.


And again, not everything is a direction+button in Smash. You use Marth, so even a simple special move has like 5 inputs to reach. 6B~B~B~2B just to do a rapid stab.

 

[Vkrm]

I've considered myself a fairly technical player when it comes to fighters. Smash was the first game where I had to sit down and practice to clean up my inputs... Getting the feeling that it's stupid to discuss traditional fighting games on SWF, everybody here is bound to be biased. I want to go back to what I was talking about earlier. @DTR it's silly to think that casuals don't know about the advanced techs in melee. Somebody must have complained. Why did sakurai remove them for if not for the casuals? I honestly everyone who CAN l cancel understands it's importance would never want it removed. I think the blames falls on the semi competitives for the removal of the at's in brawl. The guys who switched mains for the sake of winning, but didn't bother to learn the strats and techs that make smash deep. We also have them to blame for that stupid, "no items, fox only, final destination" bull that was popular a few years back. They did a bad job of representing the tourney scene, and that's what gave rise to the anti competitive sentiment.

 

[DTR]

i can bet somewhere over 95% of people who have enjoyed melee still dont know what wavedashing or l cancelling are. its a really popular game. sure there are those semi-competitive people who find crap out just to beat their friends and thats probably where the complaining came in but the majority of people who play and think they are good are still spamming forward b on fox and up b on link and their primary form of movement is roll dodging

 

[Kink-Link5]

I can't even tell if you're for or against Melee's design, DTR. You only have a Brawl character icon so it's hard to say.

 

[DTR]

100% for melees design. sure some (maybe more idk) casual players might like brawl more but its probably only because its newer. when only melee was out it was a game that everybody loved and nobody hated.

obvious statement that everyone agrees with: i am in favor of a game with more depth than the last one. not asking for wavedashing and l cancelling like half the people assume about melee players, we all just want dpeth. hit stun would be an awesome start if anything

 

[Vkrm]

What's up with the stigma for wanting wavedashing and l canceling. No one has ever made a convincing case for removing em. People who where bad at melee didn't benefit from it. It didn't really achieve anything.

 

[Big-Cat]

I'd be fine with wavedashing so long as the animation for it is specifically made for it. To some people, you can really see that the wavedash in Melee was a physics exploit and not a "built-in" mechanic because of this.

For L-Canceling, well, what is ultimately the strategical difference between cutting the landing lag on aerials in the frame data or making it a manual input to do so?

 

[DTR]

id love wavedashing and l cancelling. its not a stigma to say that i cant expect it. wavedashing was an unintended side effect of a physics engine. i have no idea why l cancelling was there in the first place but its awesome

 

[Vkrm]

Is it weird for me to think wavedashing was intentional? Like I can't be the only one who thinks that. Let me point out that in smash 64 fox had to land cancel his shine, he could pseudo waveshine fools in that game. They removed it melee....well not removed, they replaced it with traditional wavedashing. I think they intended for people who play fox to wd in the way that it's used now.

 

[Shadow Huan]

if you're suggesting that they meant for Fox to be an unstoppable offensive god tier character then i'd say you're reaching.

being able to JC shines and wavedash out of it = free shield pressure and free damage, assuming you don't mess up.

but rather than taking out wavedashing, i'd take away the ability to JC shines.

not that i would want wavedashing back, 64 was fine without it.

l cancelling should have never been taken out tho. way to make brawl ganondorf totally useless, even in casual play

 

[Vkrm]

Yep, im suggesting HAL must of had some idea of how the metagame would develop. Although I think we agree that they didnt know how much better they made the spacies comparatively. Is it strange to think that they wanted fox and falco to be the best? Look at how trashy Roy is, and pichu. Pichu is so bad, it must have been deliberate. I doubt they ever even thought smash would have a tourney scene so I see why balancing wasnt a main focus. Disagree about wave dashing. Wave dashing opens up so many mobility options, so many ways to combo or mind game. To honest though, I've spent way more time with melee then smash64. It's possible that not having WD is better for the game in some ways......But I doubt it.

 

[Vkrm]

For L-Canceling, well, what is ultimately the strategical difference between cutting the landing lag on aerials in the frame data or making it a manual input to do so?

Not sure what you mean. Are saying that lcancel should be removes because not canceling has no benefits therefore no mixup when if you should or shouldn't l cancel ? The depth l cancel adds isn't based on IF you should l cancel or not. It's based on if you CAN l cancel. You should ALWAYS l cancel, there isn't a single situation that you shouldn't. That being said, not every attack that can be l canceled is canceled. Why's that? It's freaking hard sometimes. Auto canceling is better than none, buy not by a lot. I think making it cancel on it's own or having generally safer air moves makes the game kinda auto piloty.

 

[JOE!]

Well you dont play much melee, of that im certain. The depth l cancel adds isn't based on IF you should l cancel or not. It's based on if you CAN l cancel. You should ALWAYS l cancel, there isn't a single situation that you shouldn't. That being said, not every attack that can be l canceled is canceled. Why's that? It's freaking hard sometimes.

That right there is the argument: where is the strategy/depth of something you -always- want to do? Depth would mean if there were situations where you wouldn't want to Lcancel, for example.

 

[Vkrm]

That right there is the argument: where is the strategy/depth of something you -always- want to do? Depth would mean if there were situations where you wouldn't want to Lcancel, for example.

I edited the post you quoted because it was mean spirited and didnt explain what I meant it too, on top of me misinterpreting kuma's post. Maybe it makes more sense now so have a look. Its not if you SHOULD lcancel. Its about if you are ABLE. The thing about l canceling is that it takes skill to do. It's not physically demanding, but you do need to know fall speed and hitlag. to make use of it. If I were to compare it to brawl let's say marth's forward air is 100% safe on shield when fresh. He can just spam it because theres little risk, he doesnt have to make it safe by canceling. Because you can potentially fudge up an cancel it really contributes to the mindgames because you can force somebody to miss a cancel with spotdodge or dashdance. I'm doing a bad job of explaining it. What do you mean by depth exactly? Not all forms of depth contribute to the rock paper scissors formula in games. Maybe Brawl has made you weak son, in my day technical skill and precision also contributed to a games level of depth.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I'd be fine with wavedashing so long as the animation for it is specifically made for it. To some people, you can really see that the wavedash in Melee was a physics exploit and not a "built-in" mechanic because of this.

For L-Canceling, well, what is ultimately the strategical difference between cutting the landing lag on aerials in the frame data or making it a manual input to do so?

On-Hit, On-Shield, and On-Whiff affect L-cancel's timing window pretty dramatically. There's rarely a reason to not L-Cancel, but at the same time, there's rarely a reason to not Power Shield or Wall Tech. Just like L-Canceling though, these have varying execution windows, so they require an attentive eye and aren't purely muscle memory.

 

[JOE!]

Difference being that you can L-cancel on demand, and the other two are relatively situational compared to just how often you'll be L-canceling in a match. Essentially, the point against it is that while yes it requires skill, said skill is really arbitrary since there's only like 2-3 situations where you wouldn't L-cancel, with he other 2 examples Kink posted both having viable alternatives (don't get hit lol, and the other is stage-dependant). While I personally don't really mind either way, I sit in the camp that something so universal as L-canceling should either be automatic or less polarizing. Kinda like how you can short hop, shff, and full hop, with each option having it's pros/cons. I feel there should be something more than Land or land with 1/2 lag with no drawback other than remembering to do it *shrug*.

 

[Vkrm]

It's not as simple as remembering to do it. It can be hella tricky. Shield tilt, spot dodge, power shielding, and crouch canceling can change the timing. I intended to cancel all of my Air attacks, but probably manage to cancel 90% of them.

 

[JOE!]

If only 10% of the time you aren't able to do it due to an outside force (the opponent's shield/dodge/whatever), and you -always- want to do it, why not make it so that aerials cancel like that normally?

That's really my only peeve for L-canceling as it exists right now, it's polarizing and an arbitrary skill barrier. Now, if L-cancels say... changed the move so that it lands faster but you lose on say, a landing hitbox like with Pika's Dair in exchange? That could be interesting, as long as aerials weren't super laggy while landing in the first place.

 

[Vkrm]

I lose stock on account of that 10 percent. I deserve to for making that mistake. It's so weird that you suggest there be reward for someone missing a cancel. There isn't a strategical reason to mistime a punish is there? Same concept.

 

[Big-Cat]

On-Hit, On-Shield, and On-Whiff affect L-cancel's timing window pretty dramatically. There's rarely a reason to not L-Cancel, but at the same time, there's rarely a reason to not Power Shield or Wall Tech. Just like L-Canceling though, these have varying execution windows, so they require an attentive eye and aren't purely muscle memory.

Then shouldn't that be addressed by implementing other valid options or make it where if the opponent guesses you do those things that they can punish you for it?

I understand the execution argument, but I honestly don't think it means much in the long run. That being said, I can easily see forcing a person to think it's time to perfect shield is a legitimate tactic since shields, for whatever reason, have recovery on them.

Overall, execution and strategy should go hand in hand, not one becoming more important that the other.

 

[Vkrm]

Thats how it is in melee. If you anticipate a fair followed by an attempted l cancel you side step or dashdance out of the way.