Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Ah, so what you're saying is that the difference between a glitch and an exploit is how widely it's accepted within the tournament scene?
There is no error of code involved.
Lol, you said shine...
Well if you ask me theres skill involved with both items and not. Sure luck is involved with items but luck can be negated as well with plenty of skill, at least that's how I see it. Someone grabs a hammer, happen to be using Marth?; down b to easily counter their hammer, well, that's just one example.
There's as much error involved in WDing as there is involved in the black hole glitch, but the error doesn't reside in the actual code, that's true, but how the code was implemented, where as the black hole glitch is caused mostly from inconsistencies between Smash physics and real world physics.
hahaha, yes!
Which is why it isn't a glitch. The code doesn't **** up in any way, the physics allows it, the game is kept intact and there are no visual or audible problems, there are no input errors, and etc. With the black hole glitch, the IC's freeze glitch, and many other strange glitches is that the game obviously has problems in code. That is a glitch. Wavedashing was merely unintentional, but is fully functional within the code with no errors. It could be an "error" that the coders did not forsee, but that doesn't make it an error in code, aka a glitch.
Once again, no. It is not a glitch that you could reach the little island, but it would be a glitch if the land was still meant to be landed on anyway no matter how unaccessible.
Alright. You can ignore the example I gave above. As long as we can ALL stop discussing the semantics now. After 2 days it's gotten old. I didn't think it would last this long, especially since it doesn't actually matter.
The skill doesn't NEGATE the luck, the luck still exist, therefore it is illogical to compete with items competitively, in terms of deciding which play has the most skill.
It's like I said at the start, dude. Wavedashing has a very extremely high chance of not being in Brawl after all.
True wavedashing is already out based on the demo. You can still waveland though.
Don't know about you but I myself play to win, even with items on. I just see it as a factor of who can get to the item the fastest with skill and who can use that said item best with skill. For example me and my buds hardly ever use the bat normally like a beam sword, since throwing it at someone attempting to get back on the stage, or is on the stage to begin with knocks them pretty far as it is. So to me, yeah, I can say for myself I play competitively even with items on.
But it takes less skill to use most items rather than just characters, plus playing with items makes Fox even more unfair.
So what would you say if you lost because the following items spawned right next to your opponent:
If Bowser got the bomb, due to his speed, if I was Bowser, I'd just throw it away due to Fox's reflector. As for Fox getting it, heck, try your best to avoid what may come. I'll cite an example in which a bob omb I had just gotten had set a pal of mine into a defensive mode with Falco. I ran to him as if to throw it but I short hopped, threw it into the air before getting to him, wave dashed downwards towards him into a grab, before back throwing him with Pichu as the bomb came down and hit him on his way up. That all entire was entire a mixing of luck and skill on my part, this is what I mean by playing competitively with items.
I would say "lame", but still consider it fair. Out of the items you said spawned near me, I would try and use the fire flower due to the reach it gives, it being a bit more than that of the home run bat, dash dance to dash to short hop to fire breathing, that is assuming my opponent decides to keep one of the item, as for the starman...run, plain and simple.
Sure it does, at least to me. Like one would require sufficient amount of skill to avoid a dash dancing short hopping foward smash throwing Marth, while still trying to get in a hit on them, so would it require a certain amount of skill to deal with what the game throws at you when your opponent gets a certain item. This is why I find it very easy to foward smash 9 year olds with the home-run bat and not so much my usual match ups, yanno? That is of course, not to say one would require more skill than the other, the both just require skill to survive in both scenarios that's all. Kind of like life giving you lemons, make lemonade
You were holding a bomb and then L-canceled your JUMP? Do you know what L-cancelling is?
Somehow this statement DOES NOT support your argument by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, none of your posts really have.
It seems your argument is null, as you have arrived at a paradox.
That's what just irks me so much about the casuals. The rest of us know that the simple fact is we are right and they are wrong, but arguing with them is like arguing with a brick wall.
Very elitist presumptuous behavior from you as I would expect. If you had thought just a little more about it you would have seen that I meant my landing after the jump was l canceled, perhaps it was also my fault for not specifying correctly, but it is also your fault for assumingYou were holding a bomb and then L-canceled your JUMP? Do you know what L-cancelling is?
Sorry for being 30 pages late, but I hope someone else caught this. He didn't waste any time proving how clueless he is.
And you fail to state how it does not support my argument at all, you just said it doesn't and disregarded me, frankly annoying behavior on your part. One little defacing of your ever so scared terms and suddenly 2 people not previously seen by me and others are jumping down my throat, and you people wonder what exactly fuels the whiny noob elitist casual hatred for you, tch. This whole "We are IT, we are infallible and you will always be wrong, NO MATTER what" mentality.
Then it's usually best to let it go as I mentioned in my first post on this subject nearly 20 pages ago...
Hey! Your post has given me a great idea, Buzz!
Do I even need to spell it out for you, kid? You don't even know what L-canceling is. Countless people have illustrated many of the following points:Oh said:
In that particular instance he demonstrated that he doesn't actually know what the technique IS in the first place.
I caught it too, buddy. This hilarious contradiction, in fact, nullifies the 'casual player' argument for all that may advocate it in the future.You were holding a bomb and then L-canceled your JUMP? Do you know what L-cancelling is?
Sorry for being 30 pages late, but I hope someone else caught this. He didn't waste any time proving how clueless he is.
There was also that whole dash-dance into a dash short-hop fire flower thing. Seriously what kind of knowledgeable person would actually throw that into an argument. It doesn't really mean anything since it's so out of context.
He has been doing that this whole thread.
You're just digging yourself into a deeper hole and you don't even realize it.
Once again, I was tired when I wrote the post, you can look back at my previous posts and you'll see, I already have corrected myself when I said I l canceled the landing lag.
No, I'm not.
You're just digging yourself into a deeper hole and you don't even realize it.
Try it out, you might be able to pull it off if you're good enough.
Once again, read my posts.
