[Official SSB4 Discussion] --- Nintendo announces 2 new Smash games!

[Tomato]

I'd say I only go for about half of them. I know I shouldn't bother, since more times than not the person won't even come back, but eh, whatever. They posted something, so they may as well get a reply.

Yeah, I don't think a lot of them are necessary. Just spitballing some potential ones. I really & realistically want Bomberman, Geno, Tails, Little Mac, & Poo more than any of them.

 

[SmashChu]

BTW, I found this looking thought the Namco board
Here

People think I'm crazy for saying that removing the third party characters isn't a bad thing. The people here are telling of what happens when they become over done. It worked for Brawl, but you have to ask if it will work for 4 or 5 and on.

 

[Ievan_Polkka]

@Tomato: Not a bad list, if you cut all the 3rd party characters on it but 1. Most of the other characters are not bad choices, but it just has too many 3rd party characters.

@PF9: I sure hope that doesn't happen for any non-event mode. I like to be able to experiment with tons of different potentially good teams. I'd be very disappointed if there were some short list of the best teams because they were the ones with the best chemistry, and the rest attacked each other sometimes or had some big disadvantage like that, plus it'd be a waste of programming time. It'd be good for event mode only.

@Kuma: I got an avatar.

 

[Vyzor]

so, this probably has been discussed before but, who thinks half-clones like Ganondorf/Falco/Toon Link etc. should all get their own moves? Example: Toon Link having no bombs/arrows or Falco having no Lasers and a different side B/Up-B

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

I have no problem with his enthusiam, it's a minor annoyance that he responds to these come and go posts that more often than not have the same requests and such. I suppose we're all guilty of this though.

Well, there's a difference between seeing this thread as the Smash equivalent of a mall Santa and seeing it as a think tank of sorts.

Ideas/predictions/etc. are fair game for criticism, pure wishlists should be honored. Try to justify stuff with logic and bias simultaneously like this guy did though and you're basically asking for someone to call you out. If not Pieman, any of the other regulars. Good on them if they're making people feel welcome (and the dude's still here, so good job).

BTW, I found this looking thought the Namco board
Here

People think I'm crazy for saying that removing the third party characters isn't a bad thing. The people here are telling of what happens when they become over done. It worked for Brawl, but you have to ask if it will work for 4 or 5 and on.

Soul Calibur isn't specifically designed as a crossover game. Also most of the guests fit for crap in the setting and it seems like they're getting more focus than the actual series characters.

Keep in mind that a good chunk of the fans don't know or care about all the 3rd party jazz. It's not like anyone's considering N.W.A or Doc Brown. Your average fan isn't aware that Mega Man doesn't belong to Nintendo.

 

[MKOwnage]

Ive got some ideas for some pretty awesome stages. But I want to hear some others what do you guys have?

 

[Arcadenik]

Have you heard about the whole "Ash's Pikachu" Event going on in japan? Anime is being connected with games. Meowth anyone?

If anything, that event would be solely focused on Ash's Pikachu, like all other events always do... focus on the Legendary Pokemon or special versions of Pikachu/Pichu.

Don't give me false hope for Meowth even though I'd love for a Team Rocket's Meowth event.

I'll get an avatar eventually. Don't worry.

EDIT: There, I got an avatar. Happy now?

 

[Pieman0920]

Bleh, I just wrote up about a bunch of my stage ideas for MKOwnage, but then I got logged out or something while writing it, so the reply didn't work. Anyways, sorry for not putting in descriptions for these, but...Spaceship Mario, Bowser's Castle, Kingdom III, a Paper Mario stage, Krem Quay, Red Canyon, and Sauria were all things I wrote up about...but they are gone now.

Oh well, I'll try again later.

 

[Nintenden]

Did anyone see E3? On it, several developers said that they'd be happy in making a SSB3DS. Does this mean we're getting SSB to go?

 

[BBQTV]

only time will tell

 

[SmashChu]

Soul Calibur isn't specifically designed as a crossover game. Also most of the guests fit for crap in the setting and it seems like they're getting more focus than the actual series characters.

Keep in mind that a good chunk of the fans don't know or care about all the 3rd party jazz. It's not like anyone's considering N.W.A or Doc Brown. Your average fan isn't aware that Mega Man doesn't belong to Nintendo.

That's only works if you consider fans are ignorant. Fans of the series would know who owns and produces it (it says it on the box).

One thing I wanted people to notice how how they mention "it was cool at first, but now it's overdone." It the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility at work. It's great now, but as more third party characters are added, the benefit is less and less. Snake was excited. Sonic was because EVERYONE wanted Sonic. But what about Megaman. Not as many people want him. He'll be cool, but less so. Simon? Less again. Bomberman? Defiantly not as exciting as the last on. A final fantasy character? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. The point is that even if the characters are cool, that the excitement will dwindle. It's ok in Brawl as it was never done before, but it will show in future games.

The thing I would be worried about is if this becomes a crutch for the series. Smash is running out of Nintendo characters that would create excitement. Outside of new series, there isn't much left. Third parties are a temporary cure as people would be more likely to get excited over Megaman than, say, Mona. In order to advance, Smash needs to keep the fun. It needs to focus on something different. Expand the game to new users.

so, this probably has been discussed before but, who thinks half-clones like Ganondorf/Falco/Toon Link etc. should all get their own moves? Example: Toon Link having no bombs/arrows or Falco having no Lasers and a different side B/Up-B

Uhhhh. I like their movesets now. I don't see a reason to change them.

 

[Shorts]

@Toise, I think Soul Caliber has had at least one guest character for almost all of their games. Characters like, Darth Vader, Yoda, Cronos, Spawn, Link, Heihachi, and even Llyod Irving. But i havent seen sould caliber charcters ever cross over into other games. Asides from a few games like Namco x Capcom. I would love to see Cassandra, or Nightmare in smash. But i dont see it happening unfortunetly.

And Im pretty sure, two companies meeting at some sort of halfway point is different than one character from one company only being repped by a stage, AT and e few trophies is different.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Did anyone see E3? On it, several developers said that they'd be happy in making a SSB3DS. Does this mean we're getting SSB to go?

Do you have a source because I don't recall anything like this being said on gonintendo, kotaku, ign, gamespot, nintendoeverything, 1up, or joystiq because something like that would have been top news for some of them. Regardless, I doubt Sakurai's going to let go of Smash Bros anytime soon especially when you consider how close him and Iwata have gotten since 2005. Also, I doubt developers outside of Nintendo would be given the reigns to the SSB4 especially when you consider how big of a franchise it is to Nintendo.

 

[ElPanandero]

Uhhhh. I like their movesets now. I don't see a reason to change them.

Agreed. 10clonesFTW

 

[Nintenden]

Do you have a source because I don't recall anything like this being said on gonintendo, kotaku, ign, gamespot, nintendoeverything, 1up, or joystiq because something like that would have been top news for some of them. Regardless, I doubt Sakurai's going to let go of Smash Bros anytime soon especially when you consider how close him and Iwata have gotten since 2005. Also, I doubt developers outside of Nintendo would be given the reigns to the SSB4 especially when you consider how big of a franchise it is to Nintendo.

I think it was on the E3 Iwata Asks with Miyamoto on the 3DS. That and the trailer gave me another hint. All E3.

 

[Big-Cat]

If you are playing with friends, and stall, they will call you a huge f*ggot and stop playing with you. In the end, Meta-Knight loses. Of course, stalling will not work with a Pitfall or a Hot Head.

How does Meta Knight lose in your scenario? You're the one stalling. And why are you running off to using items as defense? If anything, that's telling me that taking out something that's easily removable will screw up the game.

Here is the thing though, if you were making Smash, what would you balance? Would it be 1v1, or 4vs. You know way more people play 4vs and it is the hallmark of the game.

I think you're giving the 4vs mode too much credit. Sure, this is one of the things that sets Super Smash Bros. aside from other fighters out there, but the hallmark feature to me is that your playable characters are famous Nintendo characters (and then some).

As for why it would NOT be 4vs, as I've said in the past, four players in any match will bring about too many inconsistencies before you say X is balanced or whatever and you can't say there are because it seems that way on paper. In a fight between Mario, Link, Samus, and Pikachu, Link and Samus could team up on Mario or Pikachu or something else. In a one on one match, there are only two characters present and they can only fight each other with only each other to screw each other up; no one else.

Would you still put 1v1 first. The reason 1v1 doesn't get balanced is because only a few people play it, and most people aren't that serious about it. 1v1 is really a Smashboards thing and most people play up to the number of players they have.

Is it really that small? Are you just pulling numbers out of nowhere and expect me to believe them? Evidence talks, vato, and I want it.

They also play with more stages and some items so they tend to change up the balance anyway and can make it a lot more even for all characters (as everyone can shoot a Super Scoop or swing a Beam Sword). So, why care that much if 1v1 with no items on Final Destination is perfectly balanced and all characters can be used at the biggest Smash tourneys?

With that in mind, everyone has the same boost if you add an item in. You take out the items, you get the characters down to what they are by default. You then see how messed up some characters are.

As for why Final Destination being a popular choice, as I said before, nothing gets in the way. If people want to see who is better, this is a good choice for determining that, along with any other stage without hazards.

But let me illustrate this point.
Sound familiar?

Doesn't this contradict the idea you and Malstrom oh so adore that the customer is always right? Now, before you bring up the article on him talking about not listening to the wrong types of customers, tell me who the customers that are always right are.

 

[Arcadenik]

Smashchu, we don't need to resort to adding third-party characters. Remember, the focus is on Nintendo characters... so yes, we may be running low on Nintendo characters that would generate much hype so the next logical step is to add Nintendo's obscure characters from retro and niche franchises in addition to the secondary characters from major franchises. Eventually, Nintendo will have to start making new games for these retro and niche franchises and eventually these retro and niche franchises will start getting new characters in their games who could be considered for future Smash games.

Or they could make themed Smash spin-off games like a Smash game with nothing but Mario characters and another Smash game with nothing but Zelda characters and another Smash game with nothing but Pokemon characters and so on...

Or they could make another themed Smash spin-off games focused on third-party companies like Nintendo vs. Capcom (please don't focus entirely on Street Fighter like Marvel vs. Capcom games did), Nintendo vs. Sega (please don't focus on Sonic like Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing did), Nintendo vs. Konami, Nintendo vs. Square Enix, etc. Of course, not everyone from Brawl would be in these games...

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

That's only works if you consider fans are ignorant. Fans of the series would know who owns and produces it (it says it on the box).

The average fan could care less about ownership rights and whatnot, especially if you assume they make a distinction between something like Konami or Sega vs. HAL or IS (or better yet, if you assume that they actually REMEMBER the name Capcom from the title screen or anywhere else).

At any rate the main point is that there wouldn't be any 3rd party characters that are completely out of place the way that Soul Calibur's guests are now. Some of these guys like Mega Man and Simon might as well be honorary Nintendo characters given their histories.

One thing I wanted people to notice how how they mention "it was cool at first, but now it's overdone." It the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility at work. It's great now, but as more third party characters are added, the benefit is less and less. Snake was excited. Sonic was because EVERYONE wanted Sonic. But what about Megaman. Not as many people want him. He'll be cool, but less so. Simon? Less again. Bomberman? Defiantly not as exciting as the last on. A final fantasy character? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. The point is that even if the characters are cool, that the excitement will dwindle. It's ok in Brawl as it was never done before, but it will show in future games.

It would show if Nintendo did things like Namco.

Anyway:

1. Smash is a crossover game, "guests" fit the basic nature of crossovers. Soul Calibur isn't, and it's getting to the point where people are perceiving the guests as more prominent than the actual cast. I'd be worried too if someone thought Fire Emblem was an Indiana Jones game or something.

2. Characters (including 3rd party characters) aren't added primarily for mass hype value. That concept goes against everything we've seen in all three Smash games so I can't understand how you came to think that.

3. This bit:

In order to advance, Smash needs to keep the fun. It needs to focus on something different. Expand the game to new users.

Are you implying that 3rd party characters are the beginning of a downward trend towards an overall less appealing game?


And am I the only person bothered by Arc having an avatar?

 

[Waterbook313]

Here is my roster:

Mario:
Mario
Luigi
Peach
Bowser
Paper Mario

Zelda:
Link
Zelda
Ganandorf
Toon Link
Vatti

Yoshi:
Yoshi
Baby Mario and Baby Luigi

Starfox:
Fox
Falco
Wolf

DonkeyKong:
Donkey Kong
Diddy Kong
King K. Rool
Donkey Kong Jr.

Metroid:
Samus
Ridley

Pokemon:
Pikachu
JigglyPuff
Lucario
Pokemon Trainer
5th Gen Rep

Fire Emblem:
Marth
Ike
New FE character

Kirby:
Kirby
MetaKnight
King DeDeDe

Lonely Franchises:
Wario(wario ware)
Olimar(pikmin)
Captain Falcon(f-zero)
Kenshuke Kimachi(1080 snowboarding)
Chibi Robo(chibi robo)
Animal Crosser (animal crosser)
Captain Rainbow (captain rainbow)
Lip (panel de pon)

Retro:
Pit(kid icarus)
Ice Climbers(ice climber)
Mr. Game and Watch(game and watch)
R.O.B(r.o.b)
Mr. Stevenson(gumshoe)
Sheriff(sheriff) 1979 arcade game
Lil Mac(punch out!)

3rd Party
Sonic(sonic the heagehog)
Snake(metal gear solid)
Megaman(megaman)
Bomberman(bomberman)

 

[abra-ca-awesome]

Yes, yes, new boy, wot wot, all that nonsense. I'm quite the lurker to this thread (sorry!), but the conversations you guys have about the mechanics and possibilities of the game series I love really helped convince me to join the discussion! So, SSB4! I'll refrain from falling into the "I'll post my roster business" kick unless asked, and instead pose three questions to everyone here: 1. Should the next Smash Bros. be more balanced or more tier-related as in previous installments? 2. Would a shift in either direction dilute a particular aspect of play (competitive/casual)? 3. What SINGLE first-party character do you dream of seeing in the Smash series, no matter how ridiculous? Feel free to answer any at your own choosing, and thanks for makin' a "Smash Rookie" like myself feel welcome!

 

[Shorts]

Soul Caliber is not new to third parties. At all. Like, they have third party characters from Nintendo, video games, comics, movies.

 

[BBQTV]

what do you mean tier related?

 

[Big-Cat]

1. Should the next Smash Bros. be more balanced or more tier-related as in previous installments?

Balanced. Even if the game was very well balanced, tiers would still exist. The thing with the games currently being "tier-related", is that they're not balanced very well. In some games, a bottom tier, can go against a top tier and come out. It's not easy, but it's possible.

2. Would a shift in either direction dilute a particular aspect of play (competitive/casual)?

I don't think it'd affect the "casual" players at all, meaning they don't lose anything from it. The competitive will benefit from it though, no doubt.

3. What SINGLE first-party character do you dream of seeing in the Smash series, no matter how ridiculous? Feel free to answer any at your own choosing, and thanks for makin' a "Smash Rookie" like myself feel welcome!

Tom Nook

 

[BBQTV]

What SINGLE first-party character do you dream of seeing in the Smash series, no matter how ridiculous? Feel free to answer any at your own choosing, and thanks for makin' a "Smash Rookie" like myself feel welcome!

ok fist go ahead and put that roster, second paper mario and ashley

 

[SmashChu]

How does Meta Knight lose in your scenario? You're the one stalling. And why are you running off to using items as defense? If anything, that's telling me that taking out something that's easily removable will screw up the game.

If Meta-Knight is stalling, and your friend ups and quits, did you really win? Now you aren't playing Smash anymore.

Also, items are as much a part of the game as anything else. So they will play some role in the game and naturally the game's balance will start to erode.

My theory is that tournament play is imbalanced because the tournament players remove so much as to create a bottle neck. Fox's trophy said he was good at 1v1, so naturally, when you remove 2 players, Fox over powers others.

I think you're giving the 4vs mode too much credit. Sure, this is one of the things that sets Super Smash Bros. aside from other fighters out there, but the hallmark feature to me is that your playable characters are famous Nintendo characters (and then some).

Smash's hallmark is 4 player fighting. If it didn't have 4 player fighting, it may be closer to something like Marvel vs Capcom (and we all know how well those games do).

What is "Super Smash Bros."?
It's a brawling, battling, action-packed video game that features a varied roster of characters for four-player simultaneous melees!
Not how 4 players is something to mention.

As for why it would NOT be 4vs, as I've said in the past, four players in any match will bring about too many inconsistencies before you say X is balanced or whatever and you can't say there are because it seems that way on paper. In a fight between Mario, Link, Samus, and Pikachu, Link and Samus could team up on Mario or Pikachu or something else. In a one on one match, there are only two characters present and they can only fight each other with only each other to screw each other up; no one else.

So just because you think they can't balance 4vs means they don't make it a focus?

Is it really that small? Are you just pulling numbers out of nowhere and expect me to believe them? Evidence talks, vato, and I want it.

Think about it. Who complains the most about balance. the tournament players. Who namely players 1v1 without items. Tournament players. So you hear that kind of talk outside of Smashboards? Only if they are from Smashboards to begin with.

Another point. Go online. Have items off. See how many matches you have with no items. Online for items works in that it randomly chooses one player's item set. If you never see items, it's because everyone else has them on.

With that in mind, everyone has the same boost if you add an item in. You take out the items, you get the characters down to what they are by default. You then see how messed up some characters are.

Seeing as how items are an integral part of the game, yes, that will happen.

As for why Final Destination being a popular choice, as I said before, nothing gets in the way. If people want to see who is better, this is a good choice for determining that, along with any other stage without hazards.

That's fine, but it will effect balance.

The thing is Kuma, the reason you can't see the forest for the trees is because your frame of mind is too focused on 1v1. Most fighting games are 1v1. So you can understand balance in that context. But you can't see the new context because you try to apply the old one. Think of it as putting a square peg in a round hole.

The balance seems to be done based on how well the characters preforms overall and how they preform with a lot of people. Let's take Fox. Fox is designed as a character who does best when he fights one character. So, naturally, his goal should be to get one player alone. But, he can't just rely on that one strategy. So, he has to have some of his moves help his in brawls or for attacking multiple people. He's also light, making getting in brawls a problem for him. So, he can work in a 4vs environment. When you make it 1v1 and remove a lot of stuff, he no longer has this weakness. So, he out preforms a lot of characters. Meta-Knight is similar. He's very fast, but lacks a good defense. With multiple people, you run the risk of being smashed out. You'll get hit eventually. So, Meta-Knight has to watch his back. But what about his really strong moves like his down smash or his Tornado. Well, being in a 4vs, he needs something to help him out. The tornado and down smash fit this role. This is why he can over power in 1v1 as that weakness is gone. Typically, fast characters win in 1v1, or characters who get their attacks out fast (like Snake).

My other thinking is it's a mix of general balance. Ike is really strong, so he attacks slow. Things like that.

Lastly, the one thing I have noticed is that there is a refusal of the tier list among Smash players. A lot of people don't believe the tiers even exist. It's not because they are ignorant, but because they are playing in a different world. Try telling people Zelda is one of the weakest characters in the game and see how they look at you. Try the same for Ike and Lucas.

Doesn't this contradict the idea you and Malstrom oh so adore that the customer is always right? Now, before you bring up the article on him talking about not listening to the wrong types of customers, tell me who the customers that are always right are.

[/QUOTE]
You're trying to hard to define the customers. What you are doing is segmentation, which isn't healthy in this day and age. Segmentation is splitting up customers into finely defined groups.

You have to think of customers more broadly. You make a game to fill a need that consumers have. So you design the game around the need. In Smash, it was likely the need for a multiplayer game, and the context is that of a fighting game. The need is for a game that is multiplayer and is very easy to learn. "Fighting," is a mean to an ends. Kart racing could also fit this bill.

I want to take you though that post and show you want he is getting at because it's a point I've been trying to make.

Once they begin to digest the sequel, they start making suggestions to the company to “fix the game”. The game company ignores them because they want to sell as many copies as they can. The ‘experts’ are shocked that the game company is ignoring THEM. After all, they see themselves as the supreme experts of the game. They literally expect the game company to give a snappy salute and say, “Sir! Yes sir!” and begin redoing the game toward the ‘experts’ wishes.

The point is these fixes would not appeal to a larger mass of buyers. They appeal to the small group of experts. I've said that buy making the game for the experts that you make the game too hard for beginners and make it harder for them to have fun. I've used Street Fighter to explain that. He's using Starcraft 2.

The true cause for the rage is best illustrated in this delightful metaphor. A fish feels good when it is the big fish in the pond. The fish thought he was the ‘big fish’ in the pond because of his intelligence, skill, mastery, and whatever else. The humiliating truth is that the ‘big fish’ is big only because the pond shrank. Once the pond gets larger, the ‘big fish’ suddenly becomes a small fish and just like all the other fish.

In other words, most normal people left Starcraft 1 a while ago to play other games or do other things with their life. It is normal and proper that they do so. The people who remained playing began imagining themselves as ‘so awesome’. They thought they were ‘so awesome’ based of whatever characteristic about themselves they admire. But now that the masses are returning for when Starcraft 2 launches, the so-called ‘Starcraft 1′ experts are discovering that they were big fish only because the pond was small. Now that the pond has grown, their status has shrank.

The same is true in Smash. The experts are small fish. The competitive players are small fist. Mew2King is a small fish. They naturally focus on the whole pond rather than a fish or two.

Let me use another example. Remember when Super Smash Brothers Brawl came out? The same phenomenon occurred. The ‘expert’ Melee players were unhappy despite their supreme anticipation.

Self explanitory.

Behind every ‘rage’, there is a quiet hiss which mouths that the ‘community’/ ‘fans’, e.g. the “hardcore, experts”, are the true source to the game’s “greatness”. “HELLO BLIZZARD! KNOW THAT IT IS THE FANS AND COMMUNITY THAT MAKE THE GAME WORK! HELLO! HELLO!” Apparently, Blizzard doesn’t make the game work at all. In their view, the Blizzard developer should wake up, load up Team Liquid on their web browser, study the ‘posts’ with extreme intensity, make certain ‘posts’ as company wide memos (no, not making this up. Team Liquid actually believes this should occur…), and when the SC 2 beta was beginning some people there thought game companies would come and pay Team Liquid to ‘test their games’ (hahahahahahaha).

Sounds like Smashboards huh?

More humorous to me is how they place the picture of the lead designer of Starcraft 2, Dustin Browder, on a dart board. I am not speaking metaphorically. Some of them actually do place his picture on a dartboard! The kiddies there all think they know how to make a better game than Blizzard. They are mad at Browder who revealed the Starcraft 2 creation process was ‘to make an interesting unit first’ and then try to find a role for that unit. The Team Liquid people think this is all wrong. Since Team Liquid who has designed more best selling games than Blizzard, it is right and proper they tell that awful Dustin Browder how it is done.


“You know what a game company should do?” says a reader. “They should throw millions of dollars at these ‘experts’ and have them make a video game.” This has occurred before. The game, made by ‘expert players’, was ‘Master of Orion 3′ which completely destroyed the fine Master of Orion series. This is why I say if you think you know how to make a game, try making one and putting it out there. The marketplace will humble you real quickly.

Actually, I would say Street Fighter is another good example.

The big picture is that the experts are not a representation of the population. They are a small minority. Blizzard is focusing on the greater mass. They are making it fun, which they know will make the game fun for everyone else. Everyone does not what a game that they can learn inside and out only to throw $10 at a tournament and likely lose. They want to play the game for fun.

 

[abra-ca-awesome]

@ BBQTV

what do you mean tier related?

ok fist go ahead and put that roster, second paper mario and ashley

By tier-related, I am referring to what Mr. Kuma said, which is an imbalance of a roster that is used in competitve play to a player's advantage. Tier-related rosters, as he also said, do not have to be completely unplayable because of this balance, but my question was directed at whether any of you felt this lack of balance should be fixed in a future installments. Hurrah for Paper Mario! I completely think he could work, so long as they didn't Toon-Link-inize him for easier production. What does your ideal Paper Mario do move-wise (hammer, Sooper-Dooper-Size FS, etc.)? And hoo boy, okay, I'll do that roster for you at the bottom of the post.


@ Kuma

I don't think it'd affect the "casual" players at all, meaning they don't lose anything from it. The competitive will benefit from it though, no doubt.

So, when you say balancing, are you thinking more of a tweak to the character's gameplay (I see you've mentioned Balanced Brawl before, something like that) or a tweak to the gameplay as a whole (physics, etc.)? Or a combination of the two? Or neither...? Too many options!

EDIT: OOO, and Tom Nook! Animal Crossing! Never played but I always like to see anthropomorphic tanuki fighting! I've heard it said that AC wasn't a viable platform off of which to base a fighting game character; I never agreed with that (Mr. G&W?) but am curious how you would give Mr. Nook some teeth, so to speak?

@SmashChu
So when you propose 4-player balancing, which I assume you are, how exactly does that differentiate from 1v1 balancing? Not necessarily on an individual character-by-character basis, I'm just trying to comprehend the general idea of what either kind of balancing would do for a future Smash. My basic knowledge of mechanics tells me Melee is faster, Brawl is slower, and some characters are better than others against my rather competitive friends What does your 4-player proposition entail?

Personally, I feel that the overall experience should attempt to cater to both the competitive and the casual, rather than being simply "faster-paced" or "L-cancelling-returned", but I enjoy hearing about what different tweaks would do for the gameplay. And okay, fine, have my roster! Sheesh


Mario (Alt: Dr. Mario)
Peach
Bowser
Wario
Toad
Luigi
Paper Mario? (no idea how to make him unclone-y, hence my question to BBQTV above)
Yoshi
DK
Diddy Kong
King K. Rool
Pikachu (Alt: Pichu?) (I'm not 100% sure about the viability of putting Pichu as an alt. for Pika, and while I would prefer the freed up space in the roster, I know the argument has come and passed here, so I'll refrain from doing anything definite with him)
Pokemon Trainer (Alt: Girl)
Jigglypuff
Zoroark/ 5th Gen Rep (There's a lot of promising new Pokemon out there for the pickin', and I think there will be plenty of talent to choose from by the time this Smash hits the stands)
Mewtwo (Alt: Lucario) (I love both characters, but not quite enough to give them two spaces. I think their movesets and movements could easily be consolidated and tweaked to allow one to be the alt of the other)
Kirby (No Epic Yarn makeover, for now)
King Dedede
Meta Knight
Fox
Falco
Wolf (tweaked considerably to less resemble Fox)
Link (Toon alt, perhaps? Currently I know that wouldn't work because of their different weights, but I'm not a huuuuge fan of clones, so I'm continually trying to find different solutions. Hm, either Toon Alt. or Toon Link as a separate but unique entry)
Zelda/Sheik
Ganondorf (with sword(s) or trident)
Vaati (a relevant addition to the villains, a little more moveset potential than Tingle, and could easily be refitted for a 3D fighting excursion a la Pit; this guy was a toss-up though between himsef and Tingle)
Marth (Alt: Roy)
Ike
Caeda/ New FE Series rep
Captain Falcon
Samurai Goroh
Samus
Ridley
Ness (Alt: Lucas) (I don't think it would be hard to change bat textures/retain PK Flash between characters, and I don't think Lucas deserves his own spot next to a new EB character with a unique moveset)
Claus
Mr. Game and Watch
Captain Olimar
Ice Climbers
Pit
Palutena (E3 trailer = EPICNESS)
Little Mac
Ray MK III
Stafy
R.O.B.
Saki/Isa
Issac/Matthew (whoever that new GS3 guy is)
Sukapon
Third Parties
Simon Belmont
Sonic
Mega Man
Snake

 

[Big-Cat]

If Meta-Knight is stalling, and your friend ups and quits, did you really win? Now you aren't playing Smash anymore.

So does that mean that if you are being someone big time in an online match and they ragequit as a results, does that mean that the character you're playing as loses?

Also, items are as much a part of the game as anything else. So they will play some role in the game and naturally the game's balance will start to erode.

My theory is that tournament play is imbalanced because the tournament players remove so much as to create a bottle neck. Fox's trophy said he was good at 1v1, so naturally, when you remove 2 players, Fox over powers others.

To an extent, you're correct. By removing and adding things, you're altering the balance of the game (see the C-Stick and BlazBlue's Easy Specials).

Smash's hallmark is 4 player fighting. If it didn't have 4 player fighting, it may be closer to something like Marvel vs Capcom (and we all know how well those games do).

It still wouldn't be close to MvC. As for how those games do, sales can only you tell you so much about the quality of a game. Does McDonald's make the best food in the world?

Think about it. Who complains the most about balance. the tournament players. Who namely players 1v1 without items. Tournament players. So you hear that kind of talk outside of Smashboards? Only if they are from Smashboards to begin with.

I know you go to other forums and you know that this is not true.

Another point. Go online. Have items off. See how many matches you have with no items. Online for items works in that it randomly chooses one player's item set. If you never see items, it's because everyone else has them on.

And so what? Online play is not the only representation available for "casual" players. There are some, such as myself, that simply don't like playing with items especially in Brawl seeing as so many of them are broken.

The balance seems to be done based on how well the characters preforms overall and how they preform with a lot of people. Let's take Fox. Fox is designed as a character who does best when he fights one character. So, naturally, his goal should be to get one player alone. But, he can't just rely on that one strategy. So, he has to have some of his moves help his in brawls or for attacking multiple people. He's also light, making getting in brawls a problem for him. So, he can work in a 4vs environment. When you make it 1v1 and remove a lot of stuff, he no longer has this weakness. So, he out preforms a lot of characters. Meta-Knight is similar. He's very fast, but lacks a good defense. With multiple people, you run the risk of being smashed out. You'll get hit eventually. So, Meta-Knight has to watch his back. But what about his really strong moves like his down smash or his Tornado. Well, being in a 4vs, he needs something to help him out. The tornado and down smash fit this role. This is why he can over power in 1v1 as that weakness is gone. Typically, fast characters win in 1v1, or characters who get their attacks out fast (like Snake).

You're going off of theory. You need proof to see that these characters are fine.

My other thinking is it's a mix of general balance. Ike is really strong, so he attacks slow. Things like that.

Ever heard of a glass cannon?

Lastly, the one thing I have noticed is that there is a refusal of the tier list among Smash players. A lot of people don't believe the tiers even exist. It's not because they are ignorant, but because they are playing in a different world. Try telling people Zelda is one of the weakest characters in the game and see how they look at you. Try the same for Ike and Lucas.

Those people have no idea about the workings of the game overall. It's like me saying that X character sucks, but in reality has something that makes quite good. Anyway, tiers have and always will exist. Even in 4 player matches.

The point is these fixes would not appeal to a larger mass of buyers. They appeal to the small group of experts. I've said that buy making the game for the experts that you make the game too hard for beginners and make it harder for them to have fun. I've used Street Fighter to explain that. He's using Starcraft 2.

You're both right and wrong here. Some fixes can make things more complicated (such as adding debateably unnecessary barriers such as L-Cancenling), but some can also help the game big time be it to simplify overly complex concepts. You got to take a gamble sometimes on whether you should listen to them. It's like deciding whether or not to invest in stock. One person may say to invest in X, but Y might be the better choice; you don't know since you can only go off of limited leads.

In other words, most normal people left Starcraft 1 a while ago to play other games or do other things with their life. It is normal and proper that they do so. The people who remained playing began imagining themselves as ‘so awesome’. They thought they were ‘so awesome’ based of whatever characteristic about themselves they admire. But now that the masses are returning for when Starcraft 2 launches, the so-called ‘Starcraft 1′ experts are discovering that they were big fish only because the pond was small. Now that the pond has grown, their status has shrank.[/I]

All that's happened is that the playing field has been reset to a degree. If those Starcraft 1 players can still work with just the fundamentals, they are still better than the newer players. Think of it as reclaiming dominance, as this is what M2K and Daigo have managed to accomplish.

The big picture is that the experts are not a representation of the population. They are a small minority. Blizzard is focusing on the greater mass. They are making it fun, which they know will make the game fun for everyone else. Everyone does not what a game that they can learn inside and out only to throw $10 at a tournament and likely lose. They want to play the game for fun.

So basically appeal to the lowest common denominator? Has that ever been really successful?

@ Kuma


So, when you say balancing, are you thinking more of a tweak to the character's gameplay (I see you've mentioned Balanced Brawl before, something like that) or a tweak to the gameplay as a whole (physics, etc.)? Or a combination of the two? Or neither...? Too many options!

EDIT: OOO, and Tom Nook! Animal Crossing! Never played but I always like to see anthropomorphic tanuki fighting! I've heard it said that AC wasn't a viable platform off of which to base a fighting game character; I never agreed with that (Mr. G&W?) but am curious how you would give Mr. Nook some teeth, so to speak?

A combination of the two since the physics and such will more than likely be readjusted. With that, you have to adjust the characters to the new system.

As for Mr. Nook,

Up B: Fish Hook - Uses the fishing rod to grab his apron and launch him in the air at an angle as a human (well, tanuki) projectile.
Down B: Pitfall - Digs a pitfall into the ground. The victim is let out upon first hit (like a shield break), and has a shorter time to get out unlike the item version.
Side B: Net - Swings horizontally and spins. This is used as a poke for front and back, but this can absorb projectiles and return them.
B: Leaf Drop - Drops a leaf that will poof into a random furniture (damage, hitboxes, and such are kept constant). If on the ground, he will throw them straight ahead. If in the air, they will drop. Does not spike.

 

[BBQTV]

i think paper mario can use his hammer, he would be like game and watch because he is 2d. he wouldn't be holding his hammer a the time, he would only take it out when he is attacking. as for specials im still thinking about that

 

[Shorts]

Paper Mario and all his Un-cloney Glory

Paper mario has a bunch of items/weapons/friends/techniques that original mario doesnt have.

Items/Weapons.

Hammer: Paper mario uses the hammer, in most if not all of the games he is in.
Super Jump Shoes: Could be a poweful attack where mario jumps up quickly, pauses iin mid-air for a second, then drops down hard.
Dizzy Attack Badge: Mario does that twirl move, and it does minimal damgaes but leaves the fighter dazed for a small amount of time.
zap tap badge: Temporarily makes PM electrified, so if you physically hit him, it hurts you. (Minimal damage)
I could go on, but I cant find a list of Items and what they do :/

Friends
If chosen, you could take Paper Mario to a more PT type of character, he can call friends to help in battle.
Lady Bow: Could use her ability to make mario disappear. making him temporarily untouchable (but not able to attack) LAdy Bow could instead use her "outta sight" technique or even her slaping one.
Goombella: She ccould use hed bonk, or use tattle, and somehow give mario a little info on the character hes fighting. Ex: "Thats JigglyPuff, I hear they are filled with nothing but air" Hinting her easy ability to be thrown.
Yoshi: He could use baby yoshi as a partner, Making use of his stampede technique, which regular yoshi does not have.
Ms. Mows: She could use love slap. or kiss theif, which could take an enemies item.
Admiral Bobbery: Hes a bomb, he has a whole bunch of different exploding type moves.

Paper Mario could definitely be a clone. But, it wouldnt be hard (At all) to make him his own character.

 

[Mowrt620]

Just kinda throwing this out there, erm....Smash is already technically balanced, I mean yeah some characters could have some alterations, but in reality, I can use Lucas (a low tier character) and beat 3 level 9 Meta knights. I don't think balancing characters is Smash's biggest concern right now...that is if those lazy people are even making SSB4....sigh

 

[Big-Cat]

Just kinda throwing this out there, erm....Smash is already technically balanced, I mean yeah some characters could have some alterations, but in reality, I can use Lucas (a low tier character) and beat 3 level 9 Meta knights. I don't think balancing characters is Smash's biggest concern right now...that is if those lazy people are even making SSB4....sigh

Beating three level nine Meta Knights means nothing, no matter what character you use. CPUs can be outsmarted quite easily. They also don't do stuff that actual players will do.

 

[BBQTV]

ohm gee i can beat a level 9 cpu too! guess that makes me da bess smasher evar

 

[abra-ca-awesome]

@ BBQ and Shortie

Great ideas! I can definitely see a unique moveset there. So many possibiilities... oh, and Shortie! http://shrines.rpgclassics.com/n64/papermario/badges.shtml
I believe the items are on this site too. Just goes to show you how much stuff paper plumbers apparently have at their disposal

@ Kuma

Sheesh, after researching Animal Crossing, I am able to appreciate your moveset quite a bit better (I saw Leaf -> Furniture and it took me several minutes to comprehend) Very nice, though! I think any character who can offer such a fun and quirky moveset should be taken seriously (ahem, Sakurai...)

@Mowrt620

I must agree for a moment with the others for a brief moment. I think there's a huge difference in how a human controls a Smash character and how AI does so, so I don't necessarily agree with your reasoning. Though I would want to know what you think could be done to the series other than character balance?

 

[Latias]

lets discuss how lots of moves are similar. ex. zelda dsmash capt falcon dsmashh

 

[BBQTV]

dont you mean falcon and ganon?

 

[ElPanandero]

@Latias

It's impossible to make 15 unique moves for 30+ characters, those similar moves are fine.

@Abra
1 & 2 I agree with Kuma
3- The Black Knight from Fire Emblem.

 

[Big-Cat]

I missed this earlier.

Personally, I feel that the overall experience should attempt to cater to both the competitive and the casual, rather than being simply "faster-paced" or "L-cancelling-returned", but I enjoy hearing about what different tweaks would do for the gameplay. And okay, fine, have my roster! Sheesh

Pretty much this would be ideal. Melee managed to succeed in this, but Brawl didn't for whatever reason.

Oh, and I hope to God that L-Canceling never rears its ugly head in SSB ever again. Faster-paced gameplay needs to return though.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Just kinda throwing this out there, erm....Smash is already technically balanced, I mean yeah some characters could have some alterations, but in reality, I can use Lucas (a low tier character) and beat 3 level 9 Meta knights. I don't think balancing characters is Smash's biggest concern right now...that is if those lazy people are even making SSB4....sigh

Word to the wise: bragging about beating the CPU = tons of ridicule on this forum. CPUs are programmed to respond according to the player's actions and they will usually respond the same way each time a certain action is performed regarding of what character you're playing as. With that being said, the CPU doesn't form strategies, doesn't change it's playstyle to suit who it's playing, and it doesn't learn. In short, playing the CPU is not like playing a person.

I also don't think the developers should be called "lazy." SORA's currently working on Kid Icarus: Uprising and Nintendo pretty much has a game for nearly all its major franchises in the works right now. You could say that they're a little busy at the moment. Keep in mind that Brawl was only released about 2 1/2 years ago and the gap between Melee's completion and the offical start of Brawl's development was a little less than 4 years. Also keep in mind that Sakurai said that Smash was a once per generation game and it's estimated that Nintendo won't even show it's next console for at least another two years.

I do agree with you on the fact that balancing the characters isn't the biggest issue because for a game like Smash, it's virtually impossible when what characters are good and bad vary largely from whether items are being used and how many players are playing. You can't completely balance the game for either the casual or competitive scene because they go by different standards of what's fair and what isn't.

 

[SmashChu]

The average fan could care less about ownership rights and whatnot, especially if you assume they make a distinction between something like Konami or Sega vs. HAL or IS (or better yet, if you assume that they actually REMEMBER the name Capcom from the title screen or anywhere else).

Again, you're assuming fans are ignorant. They know who owns their favorite series. They also know Smash is a Nintendo all star game. It only takes a trip to Wikipedia or the realization that ~94% of the characters are from Nintendo properties, most of which are obvious.

And consumers do make decisions based on brand, typically if they know the brand makes good games (like Nintendo) or if they make bad ones. They do this between series as well, and, of course, on the individual game.

At any rate the main point is that there wouldn't be any 3rd party characters that are completely out of place the way that Soul Calibur's guests are now. Some of these guys like Mega Man and Simon might as well be honorary Nintendo characters given their histories.

Well, we don't know that. The characters in SC2 were excepted, but there has been some backlash over new ones. The point of the post was to show that it is possible for people to become jaded by guest characters.

I'll get to this more later.

It would show if Nintendo did things like Namco.

Fair enough. Although, Snake and Sonic are on the box. Or, is that not what you are getting at?

Anyway:

1. Smash is a crossover game, "guests" fit the basic nature of crossovers. Soul Calibur isn't, and it's getting to the point where people are perceiving the guests as more prominent than the actual cast. I'd be worried too if someone thought Fire Emblem was an Indiana Jones game or something.

2. Characters (including 3rd party characters) aren't added primarily for mass hype value. That concept goes against everything we've seen in all three Smash games so I can't understand how you came to think that.

3. This bit:

Are you implying that 3rd party characters are the beginning of a downward trend towards an overall less appealing game?

1)True, but again, there has only been one game with guest characters and everyone knows that Smash is a Nintendo fighting game. Snake was exciting because he wasn't a Nintendo character. The same would be true if it were Megaman or Sonic.

2)The point I was making is that they could be. In the very first game, all the characters were exciting because we could fight with characters like Mario and Pikachu all in one game. Melee was exciting because it added other popular characters from well known Nintendo series like Mario and Pokemon. Brawl, if you exclude the third party characters, has a lot less exciting characters. Sure, there is Wario, Pokemon Trainer and Diddy Kong, but a lot of them aren't as exciting as Bowser, Mewtwo or even Zelda. The characters get less and less important and recognizable. The next game will lack exciting characters save for Ridley and new series entries.

This is where third parties may become a problem. Snake created a lot of excitement as did Sonic. So, the third parties can become an easy fix to this problem. To keep excitement, you can add a character from outside the Nintendo sphere. Add Megaman.

The problem with that is that third party characters will become boring. The Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility will hold true. Consider you are eating an ice cream cone 9and you love ice cream). It was really good. You have another. You like it, but not as much as the first. Then you have another. And another. Eventually, you get sick and do not want any more ice cream. That is no different then are Soul caliber friends disliking guest characters. You may say "It's because of Star Wars." That may be true, but notice how they are not talking about Kratos, a character who does fit into the Soul Caliber world.

After Megaman, there is no one who will generate a lot of excitement, or not any more than any new series would do. Most people aren't excited to see Simon, or Bomberman or even an older Final fantasy character. This is the start to "they will become boring." Eventually, the cost of adding another will out weight the benefits.

3)Third party characters will become the downward fall, but only because of the philosophy behind them, not them themselves. Adding third party characters requires a lot of time and legal resources. It may also keep production back as you have to wait to even start the character, lest all that time is wasted if they say no. You may also require that the partner company and your company are in agreement. There may even be royalties involved.

So, why add a third party character when you could add one from Nintendo which would be easier to get? It's because they can generate excitement. You you would take the extra resources to add the character. For Snake, it was OK as they could generate consensus easily. It was only the first and Kojima (from what I know) has a lot of pull on the character. Sonic was OK was EVERYONE wanted Sonic. Not adding him would be worse then doing it. The problem is when you keep sacrificing resources for this. If you keep piling on outside characters, then the resources outweighs the benefit. It would be trying to generate excitement from who's in it rather then what's in it. This would be like making a Sonic game with Mario in it rather than trying to make a good Sonic game. Rather than try to make the game more accessible or adding more fun content or expand the multiplayer, they put most of their effort into putting characters in it. I think part of the despise from SC fans over guest characters is that they becoming the focus over making a good game or, in the cause of a game like Soul Caliber, expanding the world of the game.

Again, my points were that third party characters can be a problem as their cost will outweigh their benefit, and it can hurt the design philosophy if the focus becomes on generating excitement based on who is in the game rather then what the game is.

So, yeah, maybe I went a little overboard there.

 

[Big-Cat]

Again, you're assuming fans are ignorant. They know who owns their favorite series. They also know Smash is a Nintendo all star game. It only takes a trip to Wikipedia or the realization that ~94% of the characters are from Nintendo properties, most of which are obvious.

You do this quite a bit yourself in your arguments. Anyway, you'd be surprise how ignorant people are on things you'd think would be common knowledge. We've all seen people make bizarre requests like Naruto and (no offense, Shortie) Lady Gaga that could never happen.

And consumers do make decisions based on brand, typically if they know the brand makes good games (like Nintendo) or if they make bad ones. They do this between series as well, and, of course, on the individual game.

Can't argue with this one.

The problem with that is that third party characters will become boring. The Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility will hold true. Consider you are eating an ice cream cone 9and you love ice cream). It was really good. You have another. You like it, but not as much as the first. Then you have another. And another. Eventually, you get sick and do not want any more ice cream. That is no different then are Soul caliber friends disliking guest characters. You may say "It's because of Star Wars." That may be true, but notice how they are not talking about Kratos, a character who does fit into the Soul Caliber world.

I don't think you need to use business terms such as those. You could just say that effect of something isn't as great as the first time.

Rather than try to make the game more accessible or adding more fun content or expand the multiplayer, they put most of their effort into putting characters in it. I think part of the despise from SC fans over guest characters is that they becoming the focus over making a good game or, in the cause of a game like Soul Caliber, expanding the world of the game.

I thought the guest characters weren't canon in the SC games.

Again, my points were that third party characters can be a problem as their cost will outweigh their benefit, and it can hurt the design philosophy if the focus becomes on generating excitement based on who is in the game rather then what the game is.

This is what I felt happened to Brawl. Sure, we got lots of content, but the gameplay is quite glitchy and there are things that would amaze anyone as to how the QA missed them such as the loading time for characters (mods have shown this is fixable) and strange attack properties like Snake's unusually large hitboxes. There was more of a focus on the "epic" single player story mode, a bunch of trophies and stickers (to get more characters in) than anything else really.