Points of clarification about Casual Vs. Competitive that everyone needs to read(WOP)

[NES n00b]

It's kind of sad how people assume that those that don't go to tourneys have no chance against those that do. It's a horrible generalization.

It might be a generalization, but it is a fairly accurate one. If I could consistently 3 stock people who go to their small little mall tournies, what chance do people who don't even go to those tournies have?

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Knowing advanced techniques is one thing.
Applying advanced techniques is a whole different ballpark.

Seriously, just because "casual smashers use advanced techniques" does not mean they are capable of taking down competitive players. This is where traveling (or living next to a pro) comes into play.

 

[NintendoWarrior]

You're just not getting it. Lemme define it for you all, since Mookie and 5150 stopped posting a while ago, probably due to fatal injuries from too many facepalmes.

Competitive Smasher:

A player that has at least minimal tournament attendance. Knows about advanced techniques, and can use them effectively. Has experience playing other competitive Smashers.

Casual Smasher:

A player that is most likely confined to an area that has little chance for social Smashing and tournaments. May or may not know about advanced techniques. Most likely cannot utilize them effectively if placed in a match with an experienced competetive, because their best practice with them is either 1) Watching videos of advanced techniques being used, 2) Using said techniques on computer players, or 3) Using said techniques on other casuals of similar skill levels.

I still think the wrong words are being used. Just because you don't have tourney experience doesn't mean you aren't competitive. A new word needs to be used beside these 2.

 

[flyinfilipino]

You're just not getting it. Lemme define it for you all, since Mookie and 5150 stopped posting a while ago, probably due to fatal injuries from too many facepalmes.

Competitive Smasher:

A player that has at least minimal tournament attendance. Knows about advanced techniques, and can use them effectively. Has experience playing other competitive Smashers.

Casual Smasher:

A player that is most likely confined to an area that has little chance for social Smashing and tournaments. May or may not know about advanced techniques. Most likely cannot utilize them effectively if placed in a match with an experienced competetive, because their best practice with them is either 1) Watching videos of advanced techniques being used, 2) Using said techniques on computer players, or 3) Using said techniques on other casuals of similar skill levels.

This is probably one of the better definitions I've seen someone post. Partly because it doesn't involve how much either group "sucks".

 

[MookieRah]

Then like how you guys use the word **** around here, maybe you need to pick different words. Because these words are not being used in their correct context.

Semantics, semantics, semantics... It's driving me nuts.

If a casual person plays to win, is that said person not competitive?

I still think the wrong words are being used. Just because you don't have tourney experience doesn't mean you aren't competitive. A new word needs to be used beside these 2.

Depends on the mindset. If the casual person is playing to win based on fictitious rules of honor and negating cheapness then he really isn't trying to win. To truly try to win you'd let go of that stuff and use everything in your power to beat your opponent. This includes being humble, learning stuff, and applying them. This is the process from which a person goes from being casual to being competitive.

So if they did all that, then they would become competitive. By simply saying "I'm trying my best to win" at a single match, but not working hard to really further themselves then they aren't really trying their best.

 

[Nintendude]

I want to add that by tourneys we mean actual good tourneys, promoted and organized on smashboards 99% of the time. Your local gamestore tourney with FFAs or silly rulesets hardly count as tourneys.

 

[Del Money]

Have you read Sirlin's article? Being competitive meaning play with the objective to win is exactly the word to describe the "casual" smasher. What smash competitive people call "competitive" is to play to win without any fictious rules and always striving to be the best (well, at least in some region or something). Playing to win also means playing to improve, too. So the "competitive mindset" comes from a Sirlin article so you might need to read that to get the reference.

So because I'm not striving to be the best, I'm not competitive. That's basically what I've been saying this whole time.

I think that we have a problem here. We're using two different definitions of "suck." Compared to tournament players, very few if any casual players such as myself don't suck. I'm not sure that tournament players are a good basis for comparison, though, because by that definition the large majority of players, even the large majority of people who play consistently, suck. In particular, we just defined "suck" and "casual" equivalently. While valid from a certain point of view, this is both inflammatory and useless. We already have a word for casual players. It's "casual."

You could reserve the term for people who really are bad, and by bad I mean really bad. "Suck" has pretty strong connotations, so I'm not sure that using it too liberally really communicates the normal definition. Congratulations, almost everyone sucks in comparison to you.

By the way, I object to the use of the term noob here, too. A lot of casual players are not noobs; they have been playing on and off for years. They may not be tournament players, but there is a world of difference between the normal casual player and a true noob.

Take note, Hypnotist. Make you'll learn something...

 

[flyinfilipino]

I want to add that by tourneys we mean actual good tourneys, promoted and organized on smashboards 99% of the time. Your local gamestore tourney with FFAs or silly rulesets hardly count as tourneys.

So the only tourneys that exist are one on Smashboards or ones that involve FFAs with all items turned on. What about including 'competitive players' in to that equation, since that makes all the difference?

 

[RDK]

I want to add that by tourneys we mean actual good tourneys, promoted and organized on smashboards 99% of the time. Your local gamestore tourney with FFAs or silly rulesets hardly count as tourneys.

I didn't want to include that because I think it's basically assumed, but, in any case, you're right.

 

[The Hypnotist]

Exactly. But I realize now that the reason for this standstill in the first place is because of The Hypnotist's confusing definition of a casual player. By his definition, I'm a competitive player. So he probably thinks I'm making no sense.

To be honest I think it's possible your playing devil's advo, or you think I'm elitist (which I'm not) but I could be wrong.

How about this for a competitive definition, and I'm just spitballing...

If you can OWN "casual" players consistently and they are very impressed then you are competitive. Casuals being people who never go to tourneys and are unaware of MLG rules, don't use advanced techs in their game, have poor tech skill and often use items.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I still think the wrong words are being used. Just because you don't have tourney experience doesn't mean you aren't competitive. A new word needs to be used beside these 2.

The problem is that you are reading too deeply into the words separately. You need to just see it as one new term: competitive smasher (or casual smasher). Sure, you may feel competitive in your attitude, but you are not a "competitive smasher" until you take that step into a new world where you really know what it means to be truly competitive.

 

[DippnDots]

Anyone who complains about anything in a game as "cheap" needs to go read Sun Tzu's Art of War or Miyamato Musashi's Book of Five Rings

 

[flyinfilipino]

If you can OWN "casual" players consistently and they are very impressed then you are competitive. Casuals being people who never go to tourneys and are unaware of MLG rules, don't use advanced techs in their game, have poor tech skill and often use items.

If we could all agree on this one definition, then we could say that the vast majority of people here on Smashboards are competitive, but there might be people here that obviously want to learn to be competitive, and we can help them, but those that don't are pretty obvious and we should ignore their rude posts and rants, and that this argument is pointless.

 

[Deleted member]

Cewl, glad we settled on something. Thread over? Probably not.

 

[NintendoWarrior]

The problem is that you are reading too deeply into the words separately. You need to just see it as one new term: competitive smasher (or casual smasher). Sure, you may feel competitive in your attitude, but you are not a "competitive smasher" until you take that step into a new world where you really know what it means to be truly competitive.

Don't take this personally, cause you are a cool guy from the posts I've seen from you but I don't agree with these terms on this board. I probably never will. But like I said no hard feelings.

 

[DraginHikari]

Heh some casuals don't get the option due to sheer distance and lack of players.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Based on my own experience as a scrub, I would define "cheap" as any technique that is overwhelmingly powerful and seems to require little effort to execute. It sort of expresses dissatisfaction with the work-result ratio of a given tactic. Link's up-B seems "cheap" at first because it is easy to execute yet strikes hard and fast on both sides.

 

[Del Money]

If we could all agree on this one definition, then we could say that the vast majority of people here on Smashboards are competitive, but there might be people here that obviously want to learn to be competitive, and we can help them, but those that don't are pretty obvious and we should ignore their rude posts and rants, and that this argument is pointless.

Agreed. The devil's advocate is officially done with this argument and outta here. Time to find more controversy on SWF...

 

[flyinfilipino]

Heh some casuals don't get the option due to sheer distance and lack of players.

Then we can't really classify them yet until they get the chance to prove themselves worthy of the definition. But they don't 'suck' just because of that.

 

[NintendoWarrior]

Then we can't really classify them yet until they get the chance to prove themselves worthy of the definition. But they don't 'suck' just because of that.

Another excellent post.

 

[BubbleShield]

wow, still arguing about this? You guys are too much.

 

[Sliq]

@Sliq
I don't know nor do I care what "tl;dr" means, but if it's an insult, I hope you managed to amuse yourself for the whole 2 seconds that it was funny.

tl;dr = too long; didn't read

Whenever you type a wall of text, it is a pain in the *** to read. That is why you hit "enter," and put a little space between each idea. That way, people will actually read it. It shouldn't be a chore to read your post.

Yes, because all casual whine about games they're not good at. All casuals want nothing more in life than to be a pro smash player.

No, all "casuals" (as in casual Smash players, not all casual gamers), on this website complain about EVERYTHING. This is obviously hyperbole, because not EVERY casual player does this, but either the majority does, or those that do stand out so much that it seems like a majority does it.

Yes, generally they ARE better, but there is ALWAYS a chance for someone else to win. Who cares if it's 99/1 odds, that /1 may be all you need. I'm not saying you have the greatest shot at it, but it's there, you just have to work real hard to earn it.

Yeah, just like Lvl. 1 Chrono and Marle can beat Lavos when you go into the wrong teleporter, but it is so unlikely it is practically impossible.

I apologize for misinterpreting your post. Can we derail the stupidity train now?

Holy ****, did someone--ON THE INTERNET--admit to making a mistake!? I don't know what to think or feel right now.

My heart is full of pride and happiness. Kudos to you you gallant prince of the cosmos, you bastion of worldly courage and strength.

And NO ONE is still taking the The Sliq Challenge...what gives?

 

[RDK]

Then we can't really classify them yet until they get the chance to prove themselves worthy of the definition. But they don't 'suck' just because of that.

Uh, yes--yes we can.

Experienced tourney players who effectively use advanced techs > casual players of undiscovered skill with no tourney experience. Always.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Uh, yes--yes we can.

Experienced tourney players who effectively use advanced techs > casual players of undiscovered skill with no tourney experience. Always.

But none of that has anything to with classifying people into 'casual' or 'competitive' categories.

 

[Deleted member]

OOOOO ILL TAKE TEH Sliq challenge. Ive always wanted 100 munyz. I call using kirby!

 

[NintendoWarrior]

Can't all Smash players just get along? In the end we are all head players. Have we've forgotten why we play this game?

 

[RDK]

But none of that has anything to with classifying people into 'casual' or 'competitive' categories.

Using the terms I defined above, yes it does.

Mookie and / or Sliq--do you or do you not think the way I defined the above terms was fair?

 

[flyinfilipino]

Can't all Smash players just get along? In the end we are all head players. Have we've forgotten why we play this game?

No, because we play Smash on a 'competitive' level, as you said, therefore we're all competitive, therefore some of us would like to consider ourselves better than others, therefore we feel the need to classify ourselves into categories, therefore if it must be done to maintain peace and end stupid arguments, then so be it.

@RDK: Oh yeah, you posted your own definitions a while ago. I just so happened to agree with Hypnotist's more. If you could post yours again though, please, because I value your opinion as well.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Can't all Smash players just get along? In the end we are all head players. Have we've forgotten why we play this game?

This is the ultimate goal for many of these discussions, but some just choose not to listen to reason. Their "logic" reigns supreme.

 

[NintendoWarrior]

Why the heck did I type head in there?

 

[Nintendude]

So the only tourneys that exist are one on Smashboards or ones that involve FFAs with all items turned on. What about including 'competitive players' in to that equation, since that makes all the difference?

I never mentioned items and also mentioned tourneys that might just have a silly ruleset (ex: no banned stages). Now you are putting words in my mouth.


And yes, the only good tourneys exist because of smashboards pretty much. That's why this place has been so freaking important for 5+ years and it's why we care about the casuals who are poisoning this place with ignorance and stupidity.

A tournament hoster that doesn't come to smashboards to attract an audience is not going to draw any quality players unless one happens to live right there and wants to come to sweep up and get a free prize.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Why the heck did I type head in there?

You like the word 'head'?

 

[NintendoWarrior]

You like the word 'head'?

I don't know why, maybe because I was thinking about that comment Sakurai said about Meta Knight being all head, lol.

 

[flyinfilipino]

I never mentioned items and also mentioned tourneys that might just have a silly ruleset (ex: no banned stages). Now you are putting words in my mouth.

And yes, the only good tourneys exist because of smashboards pretty much. That's why this place has been so freaking important for 5+ years and it's why we care about the casuals who are poisoning this place with ignorance and stupidity.

A tournament hoster that doesn't come to smashboards to attract an audience is not going to draw any quality players unless one happens to live right there and wants to come to sweep up and get a free prize.

So your saying the only gripe you had with my paraphrasing of your post was that I included items. Well, other people on this thread will just cite items as 'unskillful' anyway, so why not include them?

@NintendoWarrior: So you like Meta Knight's head. Okay!

 

[Deleted member]

If smashers got along, swf would be no fun

 

[MookieRah]

@Red Darkstar Kirby
I saw nothing wrong with your definition. It was nice, well thought out, and is a generally good guideline for what is casual and competitive. The only thing that you failed to mention on the competitive end is the mindset, but that has been covered by myself and NESNoob.

 

[RDK]

@RDK: Oh yeah, you posted your own definitions a while ago. I just so happened to agree with Hypnotist's more. If you could post yours again though, please, because I value your opinion as well.

Do I detect sarcasm, or....?

 

[Nintendude]

So your saying the only gripe you had with my paraphrasing of your post was that I included items. Well, other people on this thread will just cite items as 'unskillful' anyway, so why not include them?

@NintendoWarrior: So you like Meta Knight's head. Okay!

Way to not respond to anything I mentioned, which by the way responded to that question you raised and also hopefully enlightened you.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Do I detect sarcasm, or....?

No! Not sarcasm at all. Why would it be?

@Nintendodude(?): Your original statement was obvious anyway. Why would any competitive environment include FFAs and silly rules?

 

[DraginHikari]

why we care about the casuals who are poisoning this place with ignorance and stupidity.

Heh the funny thing is, the only reason it's poison is because you let it bite at you...

In other words, the stupidity would eventually die if you avoid getting defensive over every thing you disagree with...