Namco Bandai: What's your opinion?

[El Duderino]

The whole "this isn't Melee 2.0" argument is soo damn stale. It's beating a dead horse that's been repeatedly dug up for the past 5 years. Let the poor thing rest in peace.

Besides, the process of trying to be anti-Melee was the root of many of Brawl's poor design decisions. It's a distraction that scarred the game as little was done to jump the series forward mechanically speaking like 64 to Melee. Calling Brawl "2.0" anything would be generous. It exists as the developers cut/remake/remix of the series that for many here lost sight of what made the prior great. Like George Lucas' Star Wars tweaks, Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes, or Blade Runner's crappy narrative cut.

In the end, there are good qualities to Melee that can be expanded on to create a new experience. If they want to craft the best Smash experience yet re-evaluating what made Melee such a fan favorite would be a good place to start. That's why this Namco deal could be so important, they will be less inclined to look at some of the changes made for Brawl with rose colored glasses.

 

[Big-Cat]

^ This board needs a like button.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Or a user rating system.

Like oh man this guy has 300 + ratings and 311 - ones. It must be leffen.

 

[ItsSilverLPs]

I really don't know. The only Namco Bandai game I played was Digimon World DS (a great game actually), a RPG, so, I really can't say.

 

[M.K]

Mario Kart Arcade GP/2 were great games. I had the chance to play them during a Caribbean cruise in the ship's arcade. They had great tracks.
The Naruto Ultimate Ninja games are well done as well.
Mario Super Sluggers was decent if you enjoyed baseball.
The Katamari Damacy games are great fun and truly an art.

Namco Bandai is a good choice for Smash 4 development. There are alot of ****tier choices that could have been made. EA?

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

It's too bad that the Mario Kart Arcade titles are a rare sight in the United States.

Anyway, I did play Digimon Rumble Arena 2 years ago, which seemed to have some similarities to the Super Smash Bros. series. Of course, the game heavily lacked a team battle feature.

 

[Johnknight1]

I think when Sakurai said Melee was the best and "smoothest" smash bros. game after what at least seems like a majority of smash fans agree, that makes Melee really the game to "build off." Actually, I think Sakurai is trying to do that. I think a largely ignored problem with Brawl is they tried to lower the leaning curve with artificial methods in order to make the game different yet equally as deep as Melee while trying to reinvent the wheel.

That task is hard enough, but with one man in charged of balancing it, and a rookie fighting game staff in Game Arts (who, according to Sakurai, spent 75% of the time on the single-player), sounds like an impossible task from the start that was doomed to fail.

Sakurai, Game Arts, and co. were trying to make the game easier to get better at than Melee, yet as deep as Melee, yet competitively completely the opposite and completely different from Melee at the same time (the latter of which took away from the "progress" of Smash 64 and Melee and went backwards).

Just think about this: One man was basically in charge of balancing and finalizing all of that. I don't know about you guys, but that sounds insane.

It's no wonder Game Arts might not be involved again, Sakurai sounds more in control, by getting a new outside developer, putting power in the hands of people he trusts, and focusing on what he does best: game design and concepts. With HAL Laboratories in Smash 64 and Melee, Sakurai had a chemistry with them that allowed him to seamlessly "do his thing" while everyone else "did there thing," which created many quality games. I think Sakurai has that kind of chemistry with Namco, which is a positive for everyone involved and everyone who loves smash bros.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I think when Sakurai said Melee was the best and "smoothest" smash bros. game after what at least seems like a majority of smash fans agree, that makes Melee really the game to "build off." Actually, I think Sakurai is trying to do that. I think a largely ignored problem with Brawl is they tried to lower the leaning curve with artificial methods in order to make the game different yet equally as deep as Melee while trying to reinvent the wheel..

That is a very interesting view point considering nothing Sakurai has said supports it.

He has stated outright that no future game in the series will ever reach the level of finesse Melee had, and has also explicitly stated that he wants to make the next game comparable to nor Melee nor Brawl, nor Smash 64 nor anything else he has done before.

 

[Johnknight1]

Correction: Sakurai said he wants the game to be unlike Smash 64, Melee, and Brawl, which is implying he doesn't want a "Smash 64 2.0", "Melee 2.0," or "Brawl 2.0." However, that doesn't mean he can't draw influence from each game and take stuff from each game.

And truly, if you look at each of those games, they are all completely different games, with all kinds of different mechanics, techniques, physics, and what not, but nearly identical button commands and simplicity (that is easy to learn, but hard to master).

Allow me to quote Sakurai (via a 1UP interview on Melee you can find here):

"I had created Smash Bros. to be my response to how hardcore-exclusive the fighting game genre had become over the years," Sakurai said. "But why did I target it so squarely toward people well-versed in videogames, then? That's why I tried to aim for more of a happy medium with Brawl's play balance. There are three Smash Bros. games out now, but even if I ever had a chance at another one, I doubt we'll ever see one that's as geared toward hardcore gamers as Melee was. Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult."

Accessibility has always been a watchword in Sakurai's design style, and there's little doubt he learned a lot from the Melee development experience. "If we want new people from this generation of gamers to come in," he concluded, "then we need it accessible, simple, and playable by anyone. You can't let yourself get preoccupied with nothing but gameplay and balance details. That's where the core of the Smash Bros. concept lies, not on doggedly keeping the game the way it was before.

I think most of my points (and yours) hold up in that quote. Sakurai doesn't want a sequel that just feels like more content, and he doesn't want a game with as steep as a learning curve as Melee. However, that doesn't mean the game can't/won't be deep like Melee. Sakurai probably won't put as much work (20 hours a day, 6 days a week) as he did with Melee, but that doesn't mean we can't get a game as competitively, casually, and systematically engaging as Melee is. However, it would do all this in an entirely different way.

 

[lordvaati]

It's like an episode of Cheaters or something.

 

[Wario Bros.]

It's like an episode of Cheaters or something.

I doubt this means no Namco Bandai characters for Sm4sh. Plus, I don't know why but I don't think Heihachi would've been a good choice for Smash anyways (as well as he hasn't been on many Nintendo systems to boot).

 

[The Good Doctor]

I doubt this means no Namco Bandai characters for Sm4sh. Plus, I don't know why but I don't think Heihachi would've been a good choice for Smash anyways (as well as he hasn't been on many Nintendo systems to boot).

you misunderstood his post.

 

[Jockmaster]

My whole problem wroth Sakurai's anti Melee point of view is that Melee didn't alienate casual gamers at all. It had something for everyone. I played that **** when I was nine years old and loved it, then when I'm 19 I find myself still playing it, albeit on a different level.

I'm not asking for a Melee v2, I have P:M for that. I'm asking for a quick, high-flying, EXCITING smash game that has a balanced roster, some depth to it, and loads of pointless unlockable ****.

 

[Big-Cat]

I think the main issue Sakurai sees is that the learning curve was just too high to him.

Instead of taking out advanced techniques, Sakurai and co. should have put the effort in to include tutorial modes to explain to players what to do instead of leaving them with just the controls and a blank map.

 

[Omni]

I just want Pikachu's b-air from N64; what an amazing move.

 

[volbound1700]

I was a casual that picked up Melee and I didn't consider the learning curve to be bad at all. I mean once you learn how to recover well, you can play Smash with anybody. Certain characters took a long time to master (Pichu for example, who I thought was a terrible character).

 

[Linkshot]

I was a casual that picked up Melee and I didn't consider the learning curve to be bad at all. I mean once you learn how to recover well, you can play Smash with anybody.

High-level players will continuously crush you. The potential for skill gap in Melee is HUGE. The potential for skill gap in Brawl is very small.

In Melee, if you're playing somebody on a skill tier above you (wavedashing and L-Cancelling properly, for example), you will not take a stock off him.
In Brawl, if you're playing somebody on a skill tier above you, you will probably get at least one stock off, two if they trip opportunely.

That's what Sakurai wants: Low skill gap so newer players don't feel discouraged when fighting older players.

 

[Jockmaster]

Youre completely wrong. I know plenty of people that know nothing about ATs in Melee that can compete very well with me. I win 99% of the time, but I SHOULD considering the difference in time investment.

Who wants to play a game that is so competitively neutered that any noob can come around and best a seasoned player? That defeats the purpose of ever even becoming familiar with the game. I have NEVER heard of a game that was made better through casualization.

 

[Oasis_S]

I love not being able to jump into a game and wasting 100 hours learning bull**** techniques before I can start playing others and win maybe but probably not. That's what makes a good game right there. It's fun being THAT GUY at a party who takes things way to seriously and wins all the time so no one ever plays with you anymore. Loneliness means victory.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

I was at an anime convention kicking their ***'s as shiek (Melee).

They got pretty pissed off there.

I finally just let them win so I could move onto something else.

(I moved on to kicking everyone's *** at Tekken)

 

[Pyra]

I love not being able to jump into a game and wasting 100 hours learning bull**** techniques before I can start playing others and win maybe but probably not. That's what makes a good game right there. It's fun being THAT GUY at a party who takes things way to seriously and wins all the time so no one ever plays with you anymore. Loneliness means victory.

Stop stealing my thoughts

 

[Blue Warrior]

I love not being able to jump into a game and wasting 100 hours learning bull**** techniques before I can start playing others and win maybe but probably not. That's what makes a good game right there. It's fun being THAT GUY at a party who takes things way to seriously and wins all the time so no one ever plays with you anymore. Loneliness means victory.

items exist for a reason


also, it's much better than a game where all you have to do is play the god tier character and spam three moves the entire time. bonus points if everyone else switches to that character just to compete


also, the purpose of competitive depth is to increase replay value of a game, not neuter it. if you want your friend to have fun, teach him how to play well


also, both melee and brawl are easy to get into. only brawl is easy to master, and already its scene is dying.


also, you must hate chess. how's tic-tac-toe doing for you?


I could probably come up with plenty more responses, but I don't think I need to

 

[Big-Cat]

I love not being able to jump into a game and wasting 100 hours learning bull**** techniques before I can start playing others and win maybe but probably not. That's what makes a good game right there. It's fun being THAT GUY at a party who takes things way to seriously and wins all the time so no one ever plays with you anymore. Loneliness means victory.

No game is deliberately like this. If you're expecting to pick up and play and immediately be able to play like high level players, you need to wake up. You can still enjoy most games at a beginner level.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Youre completely wrong. I know plenty of people that know nothing about ATs in Melee that can compete very well with me. I win 99% of the time, but I SHOULD considering the difference in time investment.

Do you know what that means? They can't compete very well with you. I don't consider myself winning 1% of the time as me competing well.

[COLLAPSE="For you"]

[/COLLAPSE]

Who wants to play a game that is so competitively neutered that any noob can come around and best a seasoned player?

That doesn't happen with Brawl. Ever.

items exist for a reason

Not even close to the point. The point is making the game having an easier learning curve. Adding in items has nothing to do with that. In fact, even in a casual player vs pro player match with items, both are going to gain from the items, just one can use them better and do everything else better as well. The only thing the casual player can hope for is he gets the best items spawned around him and the gap is small enough for him to successfully use them on the opponent to win.

also, it's much better than a game where all you have to do is play the god tier character and spam three moves the entire time. bonus points if everyone else switches to that character just to compete

That's just awful balancing, not the point either.

also, the purpose of competitive depth is to increase replay value of a game, not neuter it. if you want your friend to have fun, teach him how to play well

Now this, this is true Cadet. However, you are mistaken as to how this relates to the topic. Brawl is easier to pick up and do competently, but the skill ceiling does not lower from this. When everyone in the competition is good, what results is that you must be good-er. It is arguably a better strategy, because it is more encouraging for players to try and enter the competitive scene.

Though, when you mention Brawl is dying, it isn't so much as the fact that it is easy to pick up and get good with, the problem is derived from the issues with its fighting system itself. No one at Brawl tournaments are going, "Ugh, I've already mastered this game and can't be beaten!" They're going, "This game is a campy boring piece of poo."

also, you must hate chess. how's tic-tac-toe doing for you?

Hey, don't insult Oasis' intelligence, he has shown people he has a decent dose.

I could probably come up with plenty more responses, but I don't think I need to

I am waiting.

 

[Blue Warrior]

No one is asking for the game's underlying mechanics to be unintuitive or unexplained by the game itself. They just want the mechanics to allow for the player to continuously improve himself. Melee failed at the former when it came to wave dashing, but it provides depth and good skill-indexing in spades.

Brawl has depth, sure. Most of it comes from good reads, positioning, and maybe projectile management depending on which character you're using; the argument is that a much higher skill ceiling could be added to this if a skill-indexed element similar to wave dashing was introduced into the environment.

 

[Pyra]

I don't know. I can picture a fairly decent player going in a random match and getting their *** handed to them every time they try. It's rather discouraging. It's hard to put forth the effort to get better after you take a blow to the self-esteem like that. Not to mention that a lot of "pro" players seem to be ill-tempered at times. The game IS (or looks ) a lot more fun at a competitive level though. I wouldn't know. I'm one notch under mediocre. Hehe.

 

[Blue Warrior]

Feeling like you are getting nothing of value from winning makes a game boring.
Feeling like you are getting nothing of value out of losing makes a game frustrating.
A game succeeds if the player learns from his experience. That's why mechanics need to be intuitive for a good learning curve.

 

[Pyra]

Feeling like you are getting nothing of value from winning makes a game boring.
Feeling like you are getting nothing of value out of losing makes a game frustrating.
A game succeeds if the player learns from his experience. That's why mechanics need to be intuitive for a good learning curve.

Agreed.
It's frustrating when the only option you have to get better is brawling over and over again with people of a skill level around yours until you figure things out.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

All three Smash Brothers games allow the player to continuously improve, no one really reaches that ceiling. Mastering the mentalities, the technical knowledge, and perfecting reaction timing is something that will never be optimum, but they are the goals of a competitive mind.

Though, I can't argue that Brawl couldn't use some added elements to the gameplay, not exactly wavedashing, but something more. Perhaps several things. What Melee added to 64 in that sense is monstrous compared to what Brawl did. Brawl's most flashy addition was the Final Smash, and it was an item that couldn't be put in competitive play.

To reference the topic directly, I feel that Namco Bandai will ensure that we'll get this, all the while Sakurai wanting to keep the game easy to access. I believe we can get both aspects. There was reason to suspect that we won't get that in SSB Next, not until the Nintendo Direct came up and revealed the partnership.

In a word, hype.

Edit: I do enjoy your following post, Blue Warrior. Very true words, quotable even.

 

[Pyra]

Honestly (and possibly sadly), it's a dream of mine to become a smash pro. I'm hopeful for more stuff in Sm4sh that I could eventually master. I think Namco might have that locked in. I don't know.

I think the partnership is a step in the right direction.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I have that dream as well (don't want to jump fresh into any of the current scenes right now, nor could I), try your best! If you put effort into it, I'm sure it can be pretty easy. Especially what with the Miiverse allowing players to connect to other players in the state, and likely a better online with rankings, you don't even need to drive to Smash gatherings to get better or collect friend codes and hope they pose a challenge.

Also, we may get something like the "Fight Lab" in the new upcoming Tekken game. http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/06/a-raptor-a-robot-a-disco-king-and-bruce-lee-step-into-a-ring This will solve the problems Blue Warrior mentioned quite aptly, I'd say.

 

[Jockmaster]

Do you know what that means? They can't compete very well with you. I don't consider myself winning 1% of the time as me competing well.


That doesn't happen with Brawl. Ever.

Well the main difference between them and I was that I knew how to win, I knew how to adapt to their playstyle and pull out a victory. They would just try to reaction alone, not the larger strategy of the match. So they would take two, maybe three stocks off me (respectable for no knowledge of ATs when playing against a player who does use them), then I would win. They would take it to the end COMPETITIVELY, and I would win.

If Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer played one million times, and it went down to the last game of the last set every time in deciding the winner that would be competitive. Even if Federer won every one of those one million matches, they all came down to the line and were competitive.

And I never said Brawl made it so noobs beat pros, but it sounds like that's pretty much what Sakurai and those in favor of casualization are aiming for: a game where anyone can jump in and the skill ceiling is so low it completely neuters the game. Like Mario Party.

owait even people experienced at Mario Party will beat noobs more often than not...

 

[Pyra]

I thought this topic was about Namco Bandai opinions, not "I can beat noobs because I'm more skilled, even IF they try!!!!11!"

 

[Jockmaster]

No we were discussing how NB's take on the game may help sway Sakurai away from his original views of smash, and we were discussing why we felt that Sakurai's view of how smash should be is flawed.

 

[Linkshot]

I wonder if they'll give Link his SCII combo. Those were pretty lol.

 

[Pyra]

No we were discussing how NB's take on the game may help sway Sakurai away from his original views of smash, and we were discussing why we felt that Sakurai's view of how smash should be is flawed.

Fair enough. I must have read all the "they will try and I will win because I trained and they didn't" wrong. If that's the case, then I agree. And I need more sleep.

 

[---]

No we were discussing how NB's take on the game may help sway Sakurai away from his original views of smash, and we were discussing why we felt that Sakurai's view of how smash should be is flawed.

Looking back, nearly a decade on, Sakurai seems proud of Melee overall. "Melee is the sharpest game in the series," he wrote. "It's pretty speedy all around and asks a lot of your coordination skills. Fans of the first Smash Bros. got into it quickly, and it just felt really good to play."

However, he has one particularly deep regret: the game's accessibility level. "I had created Smash Bros. to be my response to how hardcore-exclusive the fighting game genre had become over the years," Sakurai said. "But why did I target it so squarely toward people well-versed in videogames, then? That's why I tried to aim for more of a happy medium with Brawl's play balance. There are three Smash Bros. games out now, but even if I ever had a chance at another one, I doubt we'll ever see one that's as geared toward hardcore gamers as Melee was. Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult."

If anything Namco will get rid of the flaws and perfect Sakurai's view, or to quote someone Strong:

Namco's not going to do anything that isn't what Sakurai tells them to do. Did anyone think they were your friends on the inside trying to overthrow a tyrant.

 

[Jockmaster]

I have seen that quote many times, but all he is really saying is that Melee was the most well-realized game in terms of appealing to casual players and more in-depth players. Sakurai has ALWAYS valued the casual over the dedicated, to the point of pretty much making Brawl to spite many competitive players in a way.

 

[---]

I have seen that quote many times, but all he is really saying is that Melee was the most well-realized game in terms of appealing to casual players and more in-depth players. Sakurai has ALWAYS valued the casual over the dedicated, to the point of pretty much making Brawl to spite many competitive players in a way.

Did you even read it fully? He said that he regrets targeting core gamers with Melee and that the game didn't appeal to the casuel gamer. He's just trying to turn Smash into a game that everyone can enjoy and he feels that Melee (and probably Brawl) didn't do that:

"Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult."

Based on what we know so far (including what we found out today), Namco is there to help perfect the vision that he wasn't able to do to the full extent in Brawl (and possibly add in a Namco character) which resulted in the flaws, such as tripping, that are so often complained about. This is one of those things where you just need to have faith in the man, probably why he keeps comparing Smash 4 to the quality of Uprising.

 

[Blue Warrior]

Post above me nailed it. Sakurai just wants everyone to be able to enjoy Super Smash Brothers. He's not wrong for this, he just went about it the wrong way.