My original fears of Nintendo balancing Smash are coming true.

[|RK|]

I really like the chess analogy that someone gave earlier. Some of you - and I suppose this is especially directed at the people who are heavily into Project M and Melee - believe that a ****-ton of technical options make a fighting game fun. That's perfectly fine, it's really a "to each their own" sort of thing. But having gotten into physical competitions, I have a different perspective. Where I first saw a "lack of options," I can now see a series of styles and techniques, all stemming from the basics. With Smash, as with chess, you don't necessarily need a crazy amount of technical stuff. You have some 50+ characters with varying styles of play, some with totally unique mechanics, like a KO meter (Little Mac), management of MP (Robin), Aura (Lucario) and some with simpler differences, like ranged vs rushdown.

You already have a ridiculous amount of options that come from the game being played vanilla. That's not to say that some ATs don't spice things up - they certainly do - but the game is no less deep without them. The issue here seems to stem from the belief that a huge quantity of techniques makes the game deeper. Sometimes quantity correlates with deepness, but it's not necessarily the cause. I've learned how simple things like changing the speed, spacing or timing of a particular action can lead to wildly varying effects. You have a wide variety of stages to take advantage of, too.

What I'm trying to say in this overly long post is that Smash in its most basic form still has a lot of options. It's depth doesn't necessarily come from those options, but when you use them and why. Calling Smash 4 less deep because of a lack of ATs is ridiculous to me. But that's just my opinion.

 

[deepseadiva]

The issue here seems to stem from the belief that a huge quantity of techniques makes the game deeper.

Thank you.

 

[Luco]

I certainly take that on board, though I must say, I am fond of a few ATs giving certain characters even more defining characteristics, especially in a game with clones (and where traditionally several of these 'clones' have been removed in the past to the dismay of many fans).

It can be a complex issue and I don't have the brainpower right now to really dive into it fully; but I will say that whilst I see the value in many different characters fighting at a fundamental level, I also enjoy equally the abilty for characters to have quirky and cool ATs that can really give them an edge.

It's probably because I was a rather flashy Brawl Lucas player who loved zap jumps, wave-bouncing to magnet pulls, Z-air cancelling, Dtilt locks (those were actually very useful!), reverse PK Fires and so on.

EDIT: So in all my thoughts on the patch are mixed. For the most part I enjoy the changes, but I am sad to see a few ATs go that would've just been nice to have been there. For me if it's not overly game-breaking then I would be inclined to let it slide and just keep it there as a potential option.

 

[FireBall Stars]

A lot of the changes to the game seem to be entirely design based. It seems that the dev team has a very clear view on how the game's balance should be and they had envisioned it without the ATs that were taken out.

The biggest reason behind their removal might be exactly following the plans that are viable inside the financial plans. If they get rid of things that are heavily game changing that they didn't plan balance around it is just easier to balance the game, it is one less unknown factor to worry about.

The dev team was gathered especifically to make smash 4, they can't stay working on it for years like other in-house fighting game teams. So I'd imagine that they would go for the easier route and try to balance the game the most as they can in the smallest amount of time possible. It's possible that we'll see 3 or 4 more balances patches throughout the next year, or maybe none until more exploits are discovered.

 

[DarkDeity15]

I used to think that toss canceling being removed wasn't a big deal. After reading a few posts and threads though, I'm genuinely afraid for other existing ATs. Even DACUS, a tech from Brawl, is gone. Something needs to be done about this before Nintendo wipes the game clean of ATs. We need to let Nintendo know that ATs give more options and are not a bad thing, glitch or not, and should think about it on a competitive level on whether or not they should remove them, and how they would react. ATs for a fact make the game deeper, more interesting and even more fun to watch on a high level. Don't defend Nintendo's decisions just because ATs aren't your thing, because that's how I and many countless others enjoy the game.

I can't imagine playing a Smash game with no ATs. It'd be like playing a Zelda game without weapons. It's alienating and bland especially with the design of the gameplay thus far. I just feel so threatened. Think about how others feel and not just about yourselves. One solution to this, however, would be to give more options manually such as bringing back dash dancing.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

So, I'm not really seeing how our creativity is limited by bug fixing. A lot of times bugs and other non-obvious mechanics just limit gameplay; the post above talks about ATs and old Lucas, but I just think about one AT involving Lucas and that's grab release which mostly pushed the Lucas metagame to "don't pick Lucas".

Even less raw exploitive stuff tended to narrow possibilities. Like think about what the Peach landing lag cancel meant. Taking the big assumption nothing super exploitive would have ever been found out of it (seems unlikely; she probably would have been able to do something really dumb and get a free fsmash or even a long loop), it just limits her metagame. General Peach play is about using your aerials dynamically with SH, FH, float, and every kind of air control and general spacing/timing mix-up you can imagine while juggling turnips in so many different patterns. Peach is a well designed dynamic and interesting character like that, and you constantly do have to get creative to succeed with her. With the cancel though, her options are pretty dominated. It's just patently the most rewarding thing you could do so instead of weighing the pros and cons of all these other options you just keep going to the same well of this one whenever possible. It makes the game more dull, and you actually end up having fewer opportunities to play creatively since creative play becomes a synonym for sub-optimal play in these circumstances. There are other reasons these sorts of dynamics are bad, but what stands out to me is that this main point that they're allegedly good actually seems to point to their biggest flaw.

 

[Eji1700]

When a developer decides that a game should ONLY be played in the way THEY THINK it should be played, it essentially makes releasing the game to the public a moot point. I mean whats the point in giving people the illusion of "freedom" and "individual playstyles" if youre going to nerf for the purpose of removing options, rather than for balance? Most of the changes were not balance patches. The few that are are the nerf to Hydro Pump's pushbox and Luma's increased spawn time (AHAHAHAH). Aside from that most nerfs are, like I said, detrimental, because they aim to remove options from one party in a way that doesnt open up more options to another party that was in need of them.

Nerfing Hydro Pump opened up the very vital option of recovery to various characters, in the sense that things like Super Dedede Jump and Balloon Trip are basically struck out due to being guaranteed stock losses against Hydro Pump. You were put in a fundamentally broken disadvantage in that situation.

Meanwhile removing shadow sneak cancelled aerials did NOT open up any significant (amount) of options for any character. There were definitely ways to handily deal with them. They did not unbalance any situations. This change was not a balance change, it was a "play how we want you to play" change.

Changing hydrant to no longer be a reliable projectile option for Pac-Man did NOT open up any significant (amount) of options for any character. There were definitely ways to handily deal with it It did not unbalance any situations. This change was not a balance change, it was a "play how we want you to play" change.

Changing multihit aerials to longer drag opponents with them did NOT open up any significant (amount) of options for any character. There were definitely ways to handily deal with them. They did not unbalance any situations. This change was not a balance change, it was a "play how we want you to play" change.

This sort of mentality on the developers' side is honestly just saddening and I'm appalled that so many of you seem to be perfectly fine with basically being told how you should enjoy and how you should play a game.

I agree with basically all of this, however, the smash community has this awkward as hell fascination with AT's because of Melee.

I'd gladly get rid of L canceling in melee and just have ****ing faster landing lag, and I don't think desiging games with awkward glitches as "features" is good for the game.

That said, for the above, I don't mind some of the changes(sneak/multihits mainly) but that said I do wish they'd done something to make the characters slightly more aggressive, rather than straight up nerf them. Hell i'd probably trade every tech in this ****ing game for better shield stun, slightly worse rolls, slightly longer hitstun, and less landing lag.

 

[Cherubas]

I 100% disagree with the original post. Knowing techniques and combos and stuff is great and all but things that are flat-out unintentional glitches are not "advanced techniques". Greninja's shadow sneak poppycock needed the axe. If nothing else got nerfed about him at least that one thing HAD to go.

 

[RanserSSF4]

i'm a bit hit or miss about this:

- On one hand, i give nintendo credit for balancing the game and I do like some of changes they made that i think were necessary (yoshi teleport, wectoring, ike buffs, and rosalina nerfs).

- But on the other, i thought some changes were questionable and some felt unnecessary (Greninja Upsmash lag and bomb cancelling gone).

To me, the removal of AT's that some characters had will hurt them more than it hurts the game. For some characters, such as greninja, they can still be fun to play and still be solid in the metagame, but because their best AT is gone, it will limit them a little more.

Again, i do give nintendo major credit for at least balancing the game, but as much as i love them, they SHOULD release patch notes.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I 100% disagree with the original post. Knowing techniques and combos and stuff is great and all but things that are flat-out unintentional glitches are not "advanced techniques". Greninja's shadow sneak poppycock needed the axe. If nothing else got nerfed about him at least that one thing HAD to go.

I disagree. Shadow Sneak cancel was a legitimate follow up considering that the move had so much lag if you whiffed that you can get punished, that and you could create some intuitive follow ups with it. Considering how risky shadow sneak is alone removing the cancel has made the move less useful on too of the move not receiving some compensation.

 

[EOE]

If they didn't remove certain things from Peach she would have still had a 0-death on a lot of the cast.

That's not healthy no matter ow unlikely I thought it was for her to pull that off.

The changes made to Peach don't affect her ability to perform her 0-death. I'm not sure where this idea came from.
Just wanted to clarify because I noticed this mentioned as an official change in another thread.

--

On the topic of removing advanced techniques from the game, it's going to be very subjective when looking at each individual case.

I look at Lag-cancelling and Rush-cancelling as examples. Lag-cancelling opened up a number of options and gave us potential for longer combos and faster game-play. Rush-cancelling gave Mega Man the option to escape combos. Although it may be easy for us to decide which of these 'glitches' should be patched out (I know it's subjective), should we really expect Nintendo to have the same idea? If it falls under the category of 'glitch', Nintendo will patch it out.

Also remember that casual players are their largest demographic. Things like this will continue to happen because Nintendo continues to think that these minor glitches are somehow making casual play less enjoyable and not adding depth to the game.

I think it's also important to acknowledge how these patches will occasionally remove something that we all want gone. A few nerfs, buffs and bug fixes have been implemented where the vast majority of players saw them as necessary. It's not all bad. =)

 

[Dissent]

Oh look it's DOL-GALE-0-01 all over again.

There are going to be balance/seemingly pointless changes to any game (Fighters ESPECIALLY), regardless of if you play it competitively or not. Hell, we do it to ourselves. Look at the banned glitches, characters (RIP Unity Barfset), stages and more, all by the community.

 

[Luco]

So, I'm not really seeing how our creativity is limited by bug fixing. A lot of times bugs and other non-obvious mechanics just limit gameplay; the post above talks about ATs and old Lucas, but I just think about one AT involving Lucas and that's grab release which mostly pushed the Lucas metagame to "don't pick Lucas".

Even less raw exploitive stuff tended to narrow possibilities. Like think about what the Peach landing lag cancel meant. Taking the big assumption nothing super exploitive would have ever been found out of it (seems unlikely; she probably would have been able to do something really dumb and get a free fsmash or even a long loop), it just limits her metagame. General Peach play is about using your aerials dynamically with SH, FH, float, and every kind of air control and general spacing/timing mix-up you can imagine while juggling turnips in so many different patterns. Peach is a well designed dynamic and interesting character like that, and you constantly do have to get creative to succeed with her. With the cancel though, her options are pretty dominated. It's just patently the most rewarding thing you could do so instead of weighing the pros and cons of all these other options you just keep going to the same well of this one whenever possible. It makes the game more dull, and you actually end up having fewer opportunities to play creatively since creative play becomes a synonym for sub-optimal play in these circumstances. There are other reasons these sorts of dynamics are bad, but what stands out to me is that this main point that they're allegedly good actually seems to point to their biggest flaw.

Well you could've at least addressed the part of my post where I said "As long as it's not game-breaking..."

Of course ATs that ruin other characters and shut down options are a bad thing, but I would like to point out that most of the ATs surrounding Lucas weren't guaranteed 'you should do this' stuff. Zap jump was good for recovery but there were times where recovering low was better to prevent juggling. Reverse PK Fires were often desired, that's true, but in some cases it was better not to reverse them to keep up pressure, say, if the person was off-stage and you were still on. Dtilt locks were a nice kill option but if read they could be avoided and you could be punished.

Most of Lucas' ATs weren't 'do or die'; all they did was add options. Greninja's tech was easily punishable and was just an option for him.

It's rare that ATs make or break characters. When they do, I'm usually pretty happy for them to be patched out. But if it does nothing but gives that character more potential options, then I don't see why it's so bad. :/

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

@ EOE My mistake on that front. I still think at some degree it's an issue. my guess is looking at how her nair affects people on the ground is an issue in itself, though now with stale affecting it, it's gonna be not as punishing if she lands this on someone.

That said, I'm not against them removing techs that will specifically be degenerative or do something that is clearly not intended and the development team now has to account for that tech being apart of their power budget. What a lot of people don't realize is that fighting games, with techs or not, are based on the balance the developer make to make sure the cast is as balanced as possible.

When a tech is introduced like shadow sneak, you are offering an option that skews what the character can do in that situation and changing the game possibly at large what is possible. Creative? maybe, skews balance and now you have to design the move knowing it could do that? Yes.

DACUS in turn I've seen arguments that unless you make it universal, it's really polarizing and putting power budget off balance as a result. It would have been awesome if Ganon could have used DACUS to tech chase someone who teched his Side B for a secured kill after they rolled away, but that is giving an option to him he hasn't intended to have so now he has more power in that situation and limits what you can do elsewhere.

If they choose to remove a tech that wasn't intended I'm ok with it, because it's not part of the budget of their balance team to look at and care for.

Pivoting is part of the game very deliberately, custom moves each have a form of budget balanced mixedly but still overall offer options and is a part of the balance.

"A developer has no right to tell me how to play the game"

No they do to a degree when they are trying to balance and make the game fair. A lot of these techs people wanna hold can some with a lot of problems down the road.

I like DACUS, but characters are clearly not balanced or designed to use or deal with these options. If they choose to remove them on that front, I support it.

Chubbyzard got nerfed while being far below average.

Two things,

One, he's about mid tier, a lot of people are underrating him to large degrees and only really 180 when he actually wins something, which he has been in some areas actually.

The move by far did more damage than it should have and outclassed both of his other side B options as a result. Now there is a reason to use the others with a 4% drop off in damage while not gutting it with the utility it does provide.

I wasn't using it myself but the move by far when it would have caught on would have been a "no contest use this" special move. Now Flare Blitz can stand out more and the power Falre Blitz, while still the worst of them imo, has something it can do.

He wasn't higher than mid at most, but that move really was far better than it should have been. Should it have been a main focus? Probs not, but if he every showed up to any degree, that move would have been something that would have been looked at down the road.

-Zard main.

 

[Homelessvagrant]

I'm not sure how to deal about this issue honestly. I mean I love the satisfaction of being able to perform some of these cool yet ridiculous maneuvers, however I can understand the reason for them being taken out and in some cases happy about it. I just hope these patches don't become a common trend and become less and less game changing as the game evolves.

I'm not concerned about the loss of quirkiness in this last patch though. With the Wii U version now about to be released, playing the 3DS version has been more like playing an early access version of the game.

 

[otter]

So are there glitches that were pressent in SF IV still present in USF IV? I honestly do not know. Just curious.

They know better than to refer to a healthy technique as a glitch. If they didn't, combos would have never existed.

I really like the chess analogy that someone gave earlier. Some of you - and I suppose this is especially directed at the people who are heavily into Project M and Melee - believe that a ****-ton of technical options make a fighting game fun. That's perfectly fine, it's really a "to each their own" sort of thing. But having gotten into physical competitions, I have a different perspective. Where I first saw a "lack of options," I can now see a series of styles and techniques, all stemming from the basics. With Smash, as with chess, you don't necessarily need a crazy amount of technical stuff. You have some 50+ characters with varying styles of play, some with totally unique mechanics, like a KO meter (Little Mac), management of MP (Robin), Aura (Lucario) and some with simpler differences, like ranged vs rushdown.

it's easy to make that analogy when you have the version of chess that has been perfected after hundreds of years. Imagine if you were stuck with the original version because every time a master made a new opening or strategy, it was banned. The game would not be very interesting.

Also, the examples you mentioned such as counting MP or watching the KO meter are just not interesting enough for experienced players. Smash was great for having a low skill floor and high skill ceiling.

 

[Lichi]

While I appreciate that Nintendo patches the game and also does not fear giving significant buffs/debuffs to certain characters, I see this patch and can't help but have mixed feelings about it. Erasing glitches is mandatory, especially if they are unbalancing the game. But, as @Indigo Jeans mentioned, 'fixing' stuff at the cost of player's options that were not unbalanced does not give anyone benefits or an enhanced gaming experience. I cannot see a reason behind this other than developers forcing their view of the game onto their customers.
I think some of the changes in the current patch alienate the desire of game creators programming a game for their customers and not themselves. And I think that a very big chunk of any Smash's customers are those who would like to see ATs remaining in the game (or even more added), because they are part of the 'competitive' scene. They don't need to be tournament contestants themselves or even be as good as those, and still want a game that offers you more advanced options. This includes me. I never mastered Melee, I can barely SHFFL or wavedash consistently, but I enjoy chasing that dream that I could someday. I want to believe that there is more to the game I love than that what is printed in the manual, I want to see tournament matches that make my jaw drop when players pull off incredible moves. Everyone of my local friends thinks that way, though none of us would ever take a stock off of a player in a real tournament.
But this patch has this "conserve status quo" feeling to it, and the status quo does not leave that much room for imagination. I still like the game, and I do not want it to be Melee 2.0, but I fear that Sakurai wants to force the 'It is a party game for the whole family' on me by cutting away parts of the game that made it more interesting.

In an imaginary, utopian world Nintendo would realize that it (Nintendo) was made a thing (in electronic gaming) by people who poured their life into the games they played and kept them alive for ages. While the Wii was a huge hit by adressing the widest range of casual customers possible, this market it now firmly in the grip of mobile gaming, especially on smartphones. So making games for people who like to push games to their boundaries, expanding and dissecting them would be reasonable again. And this means that games should be allowed to evolve past their creator's original intentions.
Sorry for getting carried away.

 

[Kage Me]

When a developer decides that a game should ONLY be played in the way THEY THINK it should be played, it essentially makes releasing the game to the public a moot point. I mean whats the point in giving people the illusion of "freedom" and "individual playstyles" if youre going to nerf for the purpose of removing options, rather than for balance? Most of the changes were not balance patches. The few that are are the nerf to Hydro Pump's pushbox and Luma's increased spawn time (AHAHAHAH). Aside from that most nerfs are, like I said, detrimental, because they aim to remove options from one party in a way that doesnt open up more options to another party that was in need of them.

Having more options ≠ having more meaningful choices. The change to Pac-Man's down special is a great example. Pac-Man always had a reliable, quick and safe way to turn the hydrant into a projectile, so b-air was almost never the wrong thing to use. By removing that option, Pac-Man is given a meaningful choice to make: he can't just drop the hydrant and send it flying whenever he wants anymore.

Remember that choices with an obviously correct option aren't really choices.

This sort of mentality on the developers' side is honestly just saddening and I'm appalled that so many of you seem to be perfectly fine with basically being told how you should enjoy and how you should play a game.

The whole point of a game is that there are rules and constraints for the players to work within. The developers aren't telling us how to play and enjoy the game: they're just updating the constraints. "Greninja now has to commit if he uses his d-air. Have fun figuring out when and where to use it."

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

They know better than to refer to a healthy technique as a glitch. If they didn't, combos would have never existed.



it's easy to make that analogy when you have the version of chess that has been perfected after hundreds of years. Imagine if you were stuck with the original version because every time a master made a new opening or strategy, it was banned. The game would not be very interesting.

Also, the examples you mentioned such as counting MP or watching the KO meter are just not interesting enough for experienced players. Smash was great for having a low skill floor and high skill ceiling.

The difference is that chess is made for all of those openings and decisions, from the start you know exactly what it is and where it will go.

Combos might have started there, but I doubt in early iterations it worked as well as it does now and that is because they went in to redesign it from the get go to be like this. Mechanics found in old Street Fighter versions, tech unintentional, might not even show up in future games because in the end skewed the balance and power budget of that character.

DACUS is a cool mechanic, but the game and the mechanic are not designed for Smash 4. Otherwise you need to redesign the entire cast minus twelve so they can use it to some degree or just make it exclusive just cause. And if you do that, then you need to add something to others to make up for that power you handed out.

While I appreciate that Nintendo patches the game and also does not fear giving significant buffs/debuffs to certain characters, I see this patch and can't help but have mixed feelings about it. Erasing glitches is mandatory, especially if they are unbalancing the game. But, as @Indigo Jeans mentioned, 'fixing' stuff at the cost of player's options that were not unbalanced does not give anyone benefits or an enhanced gaming experience. I cannot see a reason behind this other than developers forcing their view of the game onto their customers.
I think some of the changes in the current patch alienate the desire of game creators programming a game for their customers and not themselves. And I think that a very big chunk of any Smash's customers are those who would like to see ATs remaining in the game (or even more added), because they are part of the 'competitive' scene. They don't need to be tournament contestants themselves or even be as good as those, and still want a game that offers you more advanced options. This includes me. I never mastered Melee, I can barely SHFFL or wavedash consistently, but I enjoy chasing that dream that I could someday. I want to believe that there is more to the game I love than that what is printed in the manual, I want to see tournament matches that make my jaw drop when players pull off incredible moves. Everyone of my local friends thinks that way, though none of us would ever take a stock off of a player in a real tournament.
But this patch has this "conserve status quo" feeling to it, and the status quo does not leave that much room for imagination. I still like the game, and I do not want it to be Melee 2.0, but I fear that Sakurai wants to force the 'It is a party game for the whole family' on me by cutting away parts of the game that made it more interesting.

In an imaginary, utopian world Nintendo would realize that it (Nintendo) was made a thing (in electronic gaming) by people who poured their life into the games they played and kept them alive for ages. While the Wii was a huge hit by adressing the widest range of casual customers possible, this market it now firmly in the grip of mobile gaming, especially on smartphones. So making games for people who like to push games to their boundaries, expanding and dissecting them would be reasonable again. And this means that games should be allowed to evolve past their creator's original intentions.
Sorry for getting carried away.

He's not saying you can't play the game with some imagination.

He's taking things out that aren't either working properly or will cause problems down the road/a mess to try and make work for everyone, DACUS in his case.

The special move canceling lag stuff all needed to be axed since it was causing problems with balance or letting people get out of hitstun for free.

 

[StarshipGroove]

I was thinking "the usual posters that worship the ground Sakurai walks on will defend the removal of DACUS, the removal of any other interesting technique or strategy, and plentiful nerfs" lo and behold, here it is, the usual guys working hard to damage control.

"want to have fun your way? you can't. sorry, no more synched Dacusing with somebody on For Fun."

That said... many glitches that were detrimental to the game got fixed. And some character got some well deserved buffs. So there are pros and cons to Nintendo's newfound love for patching stuff.

 

[Prawn]

Nintendo patching stuff is stupid. They are going to buff/nerf based on the casual fan base instead of the competitive community. So anybody who plays this game competitively and is happy about them patching things is stupid, or a scrub. Changes are pouring in and most of them are stupid. That being said I'm still going to play but the OP makes good points.


Edit: and this argument that "if you need ATs and glitches to win then that's your problem!". Yes, because no competitive game ever when played at a high level consists of several exploits/glitches/techniques that weren't envisioned by creators. Why is anyone happy about catering to bad players? Because you're a bad player? Wouldn't you be inspired to get better instead of waiting for nintendo to patch your game so you can be less bad?

And people saying that complaining about the glitches being removed is johning. No. You complaining about losing to some tech you can easily look up on smashboards is johning.

So now every cool AT that's found is probably gonna be patched. So if anyone finds anything just keep it a secret I guess. That's great for competitive growth, now you all won't even be able to look up and understand the techs that are beating you.

Oh well.

 

[SuaveChaser]

If you want a broken game that will never be fixed...

I'm glad they are fixing the game to how they (the creators) meant for it to be played.

I see where you are coming from, I just disagree.

This would apply to all other smash games that don't have patch support.

 

[IzE]

http://www.sirlin.net/posts/podcast-sirlin-on-game-design

"Here's the first episode of my new podcast. In this episode, I discuss the concept of Cocaine Logic—the fallacy that "helps the player win" means "good to exist in the game design". I also discuss randomness in games and how to make games that are more resistant to be being solved."

Some insight to design decisions and why removal of such "tech" is healthy.

 

[Prawn]

I was so excited to get the wiiu version and spending days looking for ATs but now what's the point? They'll be patched anyway

 

[SmashBro99]

This would apply to all other smash games that don't have patch support.

Yup true, that was used as an example because, let's be honest...all the games have some ATs/glitches but Melee is king in that regard lol.

 

[SuaveChaser]

Yup true, that was used as an example because, let's be honest...all the games have some ATs/glitches but Melee is king in that regard lol.

Did you play brawl at all? it had it's fair share alot of stuff that people think are glitches in melee are intentional.

 

[SmashBro99]

Did you play brawl at all? it had it's fair share alot of stuff that people think are glitches in melee are intentional.

Of course I did.

 

[Cyre]

A big difference between this fighting game and others that likely results in some of these issues is that the competitive community makes up a larger portion of the other fight games audiences. It's a niche and the Smash series takes that and wants to bring it to a bigger audience, hence the simpler control scheme inputs compared to traditional fighters. They don't want this weird **** in the game because they want anyone to be able to pick up the game and not be blindsided by techniques that goes against the principles of the game. They want a lower barrier to entry because they are targeting a wider audience.

How could having hidden little techs like item toss cancel for example effect low level entry. The game already brings in a huge audience, due to having a wonderfully cute aesthetic and simple control scheme. But why remove techs when they give your game some depth and longevity. I'm starting to see why in melee people tend to describe fighting as a freestyle dance. You have your character which has its base attacks, but you can end up doing a whole lot more to fight the way you want. Having techs or ats gives a lot more freedom and adds a lot more viability to ANY character.

Also, I'm hearing a lot of people saying that nintendo or sakurai w/e is just taking this stuff out to make the game be the way they wanted it. Bug-free, simple. Why should we put all of our trust in nintendo. These are the guys who put tripping in brawl. They left iceclimbers infinite combo in brawl. How hard would it be to look at that past mistake and remove and replace it with some proper followups for IC. Don't get me started on the Meta(knight).

Tldr; They should embrace this stuff, because it will keep this game alive a lot longer and will make their invitationals a lot more fun to spectate.

 

[popsofctown]

Nintendo patching stuff is stupid. They are going to buff/nerf based on the casual fan base instead of the competitive community. So anybody who plays this game competitively and is happy about them patching things is stupid, or a scrub. Changes are pouring in and most of them are stupid. That being said I'm still going to play but the OP makes good points.


Edit: and this argument that "if you need ATs and glitches to win then that's your problem!". Yes, because no competitive game ever when played at a high level consists of several exploits/glitches/techniques that weren't envisioned by creators. Why is anyone happy about catering to bad players? Because you're a bad player? Wouldn't you be inspired to get better instead of waiting for nintendo to patch your game so you can be less bad?

And people saying that complaining about the glitches being removed is johning. No. You complaining about losing to some tech you can easily look up on smashboards is johning.

So now every cool AT that's found is probably gonna be patched. So if anyone finds anything just keep it a secret I guess. That's great for competitive growth, now you all won't even be able to look up and understand the techs that are beating you.

Oh well.

I'm pretty sure I'm not a scrub so I guess I'm stupid :D

 

[Newt Floss]

The less ATs the better.

 

[Crescent_Sun]

Ya'll know ATs can be without exploits right? It literally just means advanced techniques, which can all be based off of combinations of moves the character already has. You can still come up with plenty of ****.

I've seen this same argument cycle of "Bugs that make ATs create depth, more competitive!" vs "No, ATs actually make singular obvious and superior options, less depth!" happen in so many threads I'm having trouble telling them apart. Barely anyone seems willing to change their mind on this.

 

[Thinkaman]

I wrote an article a few years ago that is applicable:

http://www.fantasystrike.com/forums/index.php?threads/everybody-hates-balance.3514/

 

[BestTeaMaker]

I wrote an article a few years ago that is applicable:

http://www.fantasystrike.com/forums/index.php?threads/everybody-hates-balance.3514/

I have to ask. Did you create the Chocolate Pi forums?

 

[SmashBro99]

Nintendo patching stuff is stupid. They are going to buff/nerf based on the casual fan base instead of the competitive community. So anybody who plays this game competitively and is happy about them patching things is stupid, or a scrub.

^Thinking "competitive" players make the majority of Smash fans / matter to Nintendo. They are probably the majority on this forum, sure. But that's not everyone who plays these games, why can't people understand this? lol

They are only supporting tournaments at the moment to hype the game, do you think they really care about the competitive scene?

 

[LunarWingCloud]

Here's an idea.

How about we just enjoy the game?

I think this is an AT we all should keep in mind.

 

[Prawn]

^Thinking "competitive" players make the majority of Smash fans / matter to Nintendo. They are probably the majority on this forum, sure. But that's not everyone who plays these games, why can't people understand this? lol

They are only supporting tournaments at the moment to hype the game, do you think they really care about the competitive scene?

I didn't say they were the majority or even claim nintendo cared. So i have no idea why you quoted my post

 

[Prawn]

Here's an idea.

How about we just enjoy the game?

I think this is an AT we all should keep in mind.

Okay guys get off smashboards and just enjoy the game. No sense talking about anything ever


Edit: lots of people really think taking DACUS out is good? And the implications of them taking a specific advanced technique are good? They're just gonna strip any cool thing that's technically a glitch or exploit of the physics system. Leaving us with a competitive game with options that are 100% made and intended by NINTENDO

****ing NINTENDO


Not capcom. Not any type of company that has ever made a competitive game. A kids game company. The only things that made brawl and melee cool were the techs and rulesets applied by our grass roots movement. Now they are going to take it all and were going to play the exact way they want us to? The company that put random tripping in a game?


Y'all are ignorant.

 

[SmashBro99]

I didn't say they were the majority or even claim nintendo cared. So i have no idea why you quoted my post

You just sounded like competitive players' wants should have priority over what casual players would like, wanted to make sure you knew you were wrong on that is all.

 

[Prawn]

You just sounded like competitive players' wants should have priority over what casual players would like, wanted to make sure you knew you were wrong on that is all.

I said "they are going to patch based on casual players" so we are agreeing on this point. Meaning any patches will most likely be bad/be neutral in a competitive environment. Because people who think little Mac is OP and that d3s gordos are god tier are the people who influence decisions.

 

[Crescent_Sun]

If you're resorting to the "we can't trust nintendo because they make kids games" argument I don't know what to tell you. They've obviously learned and are doing different things now. I'm not saying to blindly trust them but don't completely discredit them, they are still full of very good game designers who are only getting better.