Post Apex 2015 thoughts

[Ticker]

Just so we can get over and done with that possibility, though, how about I amend my hypothetical rule? /quote]

Off the top of my head, there's no easy way to ban run-away if he's getting pokes in. That's the issue with the run-away rule. The 30 second one would always work for direct stalling, but besides that I honestly don't know. It's something people are just going to have to find a reliable counter to.

 

[Ticker]

The best matches were some of the pools, top whatever came before 8, and m2k vs zero. Unfourtantley most of those matches don't really demonstrate the best competitive way to play.

 

[Wilyen]

Except the majority of smash 4 matches aren't aggressive. I have never seen a top 8 game of smash 4 consistently finish in under 2 mins. Additionally, it's easier to time out with less time. 2 stocks doesn't change that. If I have a stock lead or percentage lead and i see 3 min on the clock, it is more feasible to continue playing run away while racking up damage for 3 mins rather than 5 min or 54 min.

did you watch apex pools on team spooky, or just top six? have you watched any smash 4 tourney's before apex?

 

[Ticker]

did you watch apex pools on team spooky, or just top six? have you watched any smash 4 tourney's before apex?

Yes. I've watched some Tourney Locator and S@x streams. Sure when the game was new we saw more aggresive play. It's more fun for people to play this way and nobody really knows how the game will play in the long run. However, as Apex top 8 and smash 4's mechanics in general show that in the long run, defensive play will the best option. I'm not talking about sitting in shield and running away, but the passive aggresive style of play. It's simply better to not approach. It's better to try and bait an approach than approaching yourself.

 

[Morbi]

I enjoyed watching Melee more myself. Smash 4 Top 8 wasn't nearly as enjoyable as it could have been, and for a wide variety of reasons (quite a few of which weren't even gameplay-related). It wasn't a proper display of what the game is offensively capable of outside of a few matches, and it was frustrating to watch because of that. Seriously, half the time people were playing like it was Brawl.

We need to take measures to ensure that kind of stuff doesn't happen in the future.

What kind of practical measures could anyone take to ensure that smashers do not implement a certain play-style?

 

[Ggjeed]

Several thoughts:
1) Difference between melee and smash. Personally this is the most exposure I've had to the high competitive side of both games at the same time so I was able to really "feel" the difference. In melee you can die at any %. The combos can string longer and result in much quicker deaths. THis means players are fighting for their lives IMMEDIATELY and that stocks are lost faster. Makes sense to have 4 stock there as an "oops fair fair dair just killed me moment" happens more often. Smash 4 makes it harder to die. Several characters (like shiek or fox) struggle to really find that killing blow (fox less so, but I still feel it's true) So, players don't feel like they are in danger until 150+%. That's true even considering strong killers like ness or olimar using proper picmin. So it's a battle of attrition, wracking up the percent, knowing a killing blow won't be for awhile. Therefore, a single stock is an entire battle with some resolution (so we only need 2 stock, you can comeback in 2 stock just fine). I don't think that means that sm4sh is "slower", I saw several shieks be super aggressive and keep the pressure up as well as sonics and foxes not letting up. Of course, Diddy was aggressively looking for combos and Zero was just straight up don't care hit with fair. BUT, other playstyles were viable, as we saw with Olimar. The camp/grind characters are also good this game which means there's variety (even if it means campy games). I wasn't really as frustrated with watching the annoying picmin tear m2k apart as I was just awed at the stamina of Debuz being able to keep his distance (i get impatient and try to go in with campy characters which is bad). The only problem I had was with delphino because certain areas had NO action, ppl just waited for next stage change and then began the fight again.

2) I LOVE melee, played it growing up, love the high skill, love the hype and speed. I LOVE sm4sh, it's a beautiful game where so many characters feel like they have a fighting chance. It seems like melee and sm4sh share a balance where even the #1 character isn't unbeatable by other characters (olimar beat diddy, marth's et al beating foxes) I fell off during brawl era but am so glad to be back with sm4sh and even dug up my old melee disc with all the hype. The games are different but I enjoy watching both.

3) I love the community (for all sm4sh games). Even with the inner fighting between SOME small group of members hating on the games they don't main, smash people had a MAJOR win with a tournament that was preceded by HUGE scandal, then began with the threat of being cancelled due to venue and sat. and sunday STILL had SO MUCH EXCITEMENT. I'm still watching past broadcasts to catch everything I missed. The chillen/leffen/mango story was dramatic and amazing and set this year up for super villain leffen to really shine and usa good guys to have a guy they love to hate. (I say this as an american with much respect watching leffen play...he is a cocky douche, but it's great) Chillen and mango were gracious in defeat as well (that game 3 of leffen v mango was the hypest). I enjoyed most of the casters and the crowd and overall (being only part of the actual competitve community aka smashboards and watching vids/streams since sm4sh release) it's hella fun.

4) As for sm4sh characters. I was sad nakat didn't make top 8, and was hoping to see more of his ness (and more ness in general). I love the top 8 diversity and agree with sky that zero didn't win because diddy, but because he played well with diddy. I truly hope the sm4sh meta continues to evolve and people do experiment and remember that even big thousand dollar tournies shouldn't be taken too seriously. Go to win, but be creative at it, too!

TL;DR: I'm so hyped about smash (melee and wii u) for this year!

 

[◥θ┴θ◤ | JJ]

Yes. I've watched some Tourney Locator and S@x streams. Sure when the game was new we saw more aggresive play. It's more fun for people to play this way and nobody really knows how the game will play in the long run. However, as Apex top 8 and smash 4's mechanics in general show that in the long run, defensive play will the best option. I'm not talking about sitting in shield and running away, but the passive aggresive style of play. It's simply better to not approach. It's better to try and bait an approach than approaching yourself.

I've always found Smash 4 to be a game that's best to mix-and-match the two. Obviously I can't say this with 100% accuracy, since it's still brand-new, but it feels to me like a game that's best played with a constant switching between approaches & baits and knowing when to do which. Conceptually, this even makes sense, given that many things in Smash 4 are a mid-way between Melee & Brawl.

Melee is largely about approaches with baits taking a backseat, and Brawl is largely about baits with approaches taking a backseat, hence their playstyles sitting on the extreme ends of offensive & defensive. I view Smash 4's meta as one that's about balancing the two, even if it looks like baits are more favorable overall (like a 60/40 thing). I think the main cause of that, though, is the ability to air dodge out of tumbling, which is a change that I don't think should have happened, as it limits combo potential. It's nothing close to being able to act out of hitstun like in Brawl, as that completely & utterly destroyed combo potential, but it's still a negative factor to offensive play.

We'll see how it all goes from here, though, I suppose. We've got a very long road ahead of us. Anything can happen.

Also, you should watch Rush Hour Smash & shadownng Smash 4 tournaments. I generally find more hype out of them than I do Tourney Locator & VGBootCamp's.

What kind of practical measures could anyone take to ensure that smashers do not implement a certain play-style?

Well, I was mostly referring to the other stuff, XD. You know, the best 3/5, the coaching in-between matches, the stupid ruleset, etc..

We can, as a community, stop playing Smash 4 like it's Brawl, though, and start playing it like it's supposed to be played. I know it's difficult to tell exactly what that is at the moment, but we're never going to learn if we keep playing the game like something it's not. I think, in general, the best way to go about this would be to stop relying so much on baits and learn how to execute proper approaches. They're plausible in this game, as are combos, so we need to start taking advantage of them rather than squandering them.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I think the main cause of that, though, is the ability to air dodge out of tumbling, which is a change that I don't think should have happened, as it limits combo potential. It's nothing close to being able to act out of hitstun like in Brawl, as that completely & utterly destroyed combo potential, but it's still a negative factor to offensive play.

A thought: is it even accurate to call it hitstun given that you could act out of it at all? I thought hitstun was defined as the period where you couldn't do anything after being hit.

 

[infomon]

A thought: is it even accurate to call it hitstun given that you could act out of it at all? I thought hitstun was defined as the period where you couldn't do anything after being hit.

Well, in Brawl, it's hitstun for some time. Then it transitions into hitstun-but-you-can-airdodge, and quickly afterwards it's hitstun-but-you-can-airdodge-or-aerial-attack. Eventually the stun wears off.

There's nothing else to call it but hitstun. It's "true hitstun" for a while, then it indiscernibly becomes not-quite-hitstun-but-with-specific-limited-options. *shrug* It's sort of like how we call combos in Melee combos even though the opponent does have the ability to DI, which makes them less "true combos" than traditional fighting games where button inputs can be 100% guaranteed regardless of any action of the opponent.

 

[Timbers]

Smash 4 Top 8 wasn't nearly as enjoyable as it could have been, and for a wide variety of reasons (quite a few of which weren't even gameplay-related). It wasn't a proper display of what the game is offensively capable of outside of a few matches, and it was frustrating to watch because of that. Seriously, half the time people were playing like it was Brawl.

How do you know what makes a "proper display" of the game's capabilities? Top 8 all won money playing this game, outplacing almost a thousand other competitors. Just because it makes for poor spectating does not mean it's the wrong way to play. Blame Nintendo for pumping out another slow-paced installment. Don't hate the player, hate the game etc etc.

 

[◥θ┴θ◤ | JJ]

How do you know what makes a "proper display" of the game's capabilities? Top 8 all won money playing this game, outplacing almost a thousand other competitors. Just because it makes for poor spectating does not mean it's the wrong way to play. Blame Nintendo for pumping out another slow-paced installment. Don't hate the player, hate the game etc etc.

Because I've seen this game played at a much faster pace, both outside of Apex and during it.

 

[Timbers]

Because I've seen this game played at a much faster pace

This does not mean it's optimal. Just because someone is pushing buttons doesn't mean they're playing the game optimally.

Apex and during it.

and clearly it was not nearly as effective as the playstyles dictated in the Top 8.

 

[◥θ┴θ◤ | JJ]

This does not mean it's optimal. Just because someone is pushing buttons doesn't mean they're playing the game optimally.

and clearly it was not nearly as effective as the playstyles dictated in the Top 8.

Even during the Top 8 there were fast matches, namely M2K vs. ZeRo, which was probably the best match in the entire Smash 4 tournament (especially with the crowd shouting "HOO HAH"). The reason Top 8 had numerous defensive matches was because numerous defensive characters were in it.

In case you didn't realize, not every character is fit for offensive play, and two of them are seen rather frequently in tournaments, they being Rosaluma & Sonic. Another defensive character, Pac-Man, was in Top 8, as well, and all three of these characters met. Matches between these characters are slow because of the way they're designed, not because the game feeds off of defensive play.

However, with lots of money on the line, I think most matches did move slower than they normally would have. It's understandable with the game being so early in its lifetime, but it didn't provide the best display of the kind of play this game allows, and when sitting next to Melee, regardless of whether or not its meta 13+ years old, it didn't provide the levels of hype we were hoping for. I'm hoping by the time EVO rolls around that this will change.

 

[Timbers]

Even during the Top 8 there were fast matches, namely M2K vs. ZeRo, which was probably the best match in the entire Smash 4 tournament (especially with the crowd shouting "HOO HAH"). The reason Top 8 had numerous defensive matches was because numerous defensive characters were in it.

In case you didn't realize, not every character is fit for offensive play, and two of them are seen rather frequently in tournaments, they being Rosaluma & Sonic. Another defensive character, Pac-Man, was in Top 8, as well, and all three of these characters met. Matches between these characters are slow because of the way they're designed, not because the game feeds off of defensive play.

I'm so confused now, because one second you're claiming that people should stop playing this game like "it's Brawl" and play a more offensive game, and the next second you're saying that this Top 8 should NOT have been played offensively because the characters used "were not fit for offensive play." You keep mentioning that you're confident this game can be played offensively because you watch players at local tournaments play aggressively, but I doubt they play and win against the players in this Top 8.

I mean, we did have two Diddy's and two Sheik's in top 8, and these are probably the two characters that can get the most mileage out of an offensive playstyle...so I'm not sure where you're going with this. I don't think a Sm4sh Top 8 could be any more offensive. Were you just hoping for Top 8 to be only Sheik and Diddy?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

and clearly it was not nearly as effective as the playstyles dictated in the Top 8.

I don't think anyone could give this as a definite answer for this being the cause and you're jumping the gun for assuming such. Given the age if the game I would say it's quite possible for other factors to contribute.

Yes they clearly were better than the rest of the players, but how and why they did being they were campier is not at all what I would call accurate unless you could show such.

 

[Timbers]

I don't think anyone could give this as a definite answer for this being the cause and you're jumping the gun for assuming such. Given the age if the game I would say it's quite possible for other factors to contribute.

Yes they clearly were better than the rest of the players, but how and why they did being they were campier is not at all what I would call accurate unless you could show such.

Maybe quoted out of context? I was only commenting on how several matches in pools being played at a "much faster pace" does not mean that these matches were proof and "proper display" of how Sm4sh should be played.

If top level players are opting for playstyles that do not coincide with a "much faster pace" that were happening in some pool matches, then I don't believe it's a wild assumption to think that they may be on the right track. If I see top player X pulling off some interesting mixups with character A, and mid-level player Y is choosing a different flow of mixups, then I'd be inclined to believe that (at least during the current meta of this scenario) top player X has a firmer grasp on how character A should be played. Saying that top player X's mixups are a superior option than mid-level player Y's based on results may not be a definite answer, but it's a safe bet that top player X's mixups reaped more benefits.

But of course the game is new and things will likely change. I'm addressing things only based on what we've been able to witness so far, but there is no hint of evidence that the game should be played at a "much faster pace."

 

[Fox Hater]

But Smash 4 only has 2 stocks while Melee has 4...

That is correct 2 stock vs 4 and it took almost the same time. Also one was very hype and entertaining while the other was boring and you could hear D1 and Sky struggling to create some hype for stream while the stream chat was begging for melee and to remove smash 4 from the stream. Also most of the matches from Melee were close matches and went to the last game and a reset from brackets. Smash 4 top 8 matches were not all close. Finally Melee played top 10 not top 8, Amsa vs Sfat wasnt a top 8 match.

Now i hope i dont get a warning it seems nintendo is runinng smash boards now and if someone points the truth you get banned...

Im only stating facts, not hating. I congrat that 600 people supported the game at apex and signed up for the tournament

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Maybe quoted out of context? I was only commenting on how several matches in pools being played at a "much faster pace" does not mean that these matches were proof and "proper display" of how Sm4sh should be played.

If top level players are opting for playstyles that do not coincide with a "much faster pace" that were happening in some pool matches, then I don't believe it's a wild assumption to think that they may be on the right track. If I see top player X pulling off some interesting mixups with character A, and mid-level player Y is choosing a different flow of mixups, then I'd be inclined to believe that (at least during the current meta of this scenario) top player X has a firmer grasp on how character A should be played. Saying that top player X's mixups are a superior option than mid-level player Y's based on results may not be a definite answer, but it's a safe bet that top player X's mixups reaped more benefits.

But of course the game is new and things will likely change. I'm addressing things only based on what we've been able to witness so far, but there is no hint of evidence that the game should be played at a "much faster pace."

That's not out of context it's clear what you meant and what you were implying.

This is how they played and what we know so far but we have no clue on match-ups, with or without customs, player experience which was on of the biggest things people noticed with even in the top 8.

Most campy/slow it got was Pacman v Rosalina, which if people had even a slight grasp of the characters. Should have seen a bit coming somewhat.

 

[Modular Zeal]

I'm just gonna say this.. can we all agree that after that tournament Armada is probably the best Fox player? Sure he lost to PPMD but the fact that he can just break it out against Mango, Leffen, and PPMD and either win or put up an amazing fight blew me away.

 

[Timbers]

This is how they played and what we know so far but we have no clue on match-ups, with or without customs, player experience which was on of the biggest things people noticed with even in the top 8.

Most campy/slow it got was Pacman v Rosalina, which if people had even a slight grasp of the characters. Should have seen a bit coming somewhat.

Is it wrong to base impressions on the current development of the metagame? There's no reason to believe that going HAM is the optimal way to play Sm4sh solely because it's more appealing to spectators, and I was in disagreement with someone who felt otherwise. I feel like it's safe to trust the top level playstyles that belong to smashers who are playing this game for a living and not trying to please an audience or bump ratings for the Smash franchise. That's all I was getting at.

All we can do is speak about the game in its current state. If we're to always hold our tongues in (unlikely) anticipation of custom movesets or new gamebreaking ATs or, hell, who knows, maybe even equipment, then there's no reason to talk about competitive Smash at all.

I think everyone saw Pac/RosaLuma timeouts coming (if Twitch chat was any indication) but it still made for unimpressive entertainment, hence general contempt for their set. Players shouldn't be getting flack for their playstyles though as both characters are just innately passive.

 

[Smog Frog]

pacman to me is actually more a character that sets up traps from midrange, because pacs cqc is too good for him to be a pure zoner.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Is it wrong to base impressions on the current development of the metagame? There's no reason to believe that going HAM is the optimal way to play Sm4sh solely because it's more appealing to spectators, and I was in disagreement with someone who felt otherwise. I feel like it's safe to trust the top level playstyles that belong to smashers who are playing this game for a living and not trying to please an audience or bump ratings for the Smash franchise. That's all I was getting at.

All we can do is speak about the game in its current state. If we're to always hold our tongues in (unlikely) anticipation of custom movesets or new gamebreaking ATs or, hell, who knows, maybe even equipment, then there's no reason to talk about competitive Smash at all.

I think everyone saw Pac/RosaLuma timeouts coming (if Twitch chat was any indication) but it still made for unimpressive entertainment, hence general contempt for their set. Players shouldn't be getting flack for their playstyles though as both characters are just innately passive.

I would for the future. Brawl and Melee didn't stay the same. Why should we expect the same here?

Customs are completely valid for the future. A lot of places and even some APEX staff where pretty much I. Favor of it til the set-up time was brought up even with a 3DS.

I agree that top players aren't trying to please an audience but I wouldn't take this tournament as an absolute given the age and the clear lack of idea on what to do on some matchup a while many were learning then as they went.

 

[Nobie]

Is it wrong to base impressions on the current development of the metagame? There's no reason to believe that going HAM is the optimal way to play Sm4sh solely because it's more appealing to spectators, and I was in disagreement with someone who felt otherwise. I feel like it's safe to trust the top level playstyles that belong to smashers who are playing this game for a living and not trying to please an audience or bump ratings for the Smash franchise. That's all I was getting at.

All we can do is speak about the game in its current state. If we're to always hold our tongues in (unlikely) anticipation of custom movesets or new gamebreaking ATs or, hell, who knows, maybe even equipment, then there's no reason to talk about competitive Smash at all.

I think everyone saw Pac/RosaLuma timeouts coming (if Twitch chat was any indication) but it still made for unimpressive entertainment, hence general contempt for their set. Players shouldn't be getting flack for their playstyles though as both characters are just innately passive.

It's a mistake to believe that a game can only really change with the discovery of "advanced techniques" or with sweeping changes such as custom movesets, unless your actual intent is you want the game to change in a very specific way. Knowledge, experience, and familiarity are such important factors that the game will inevitably change whether we want it to or not. It's all but inevitable, and the only question is in what direction it might change.

Related to that, I've seen an incorrect sentiment that existed back in Brawl, with Smash 4, and even games like Pokemon and Starcraft 2, which is that, because there are more people participating in a competitive environment compared to when a predecessor had come out, players should be able to figure out almost entirely the inner workings of a game much more quickly. While this is true to an extent, in the sense that more people working on something will yield faster results, there really is no substitute for TIME. You can have the deepest theoretical knowledge and the sharpest analytical mind, and still not be able to grasp what a game will become, because the process of actually playing and going through years and years of learning will always be a factor.

Also, going ham is not the optimal choice in a lot of different games, and I don't think it's inherently a fault of Smash 4 if the game doesn't turn out that way. I was listening to Ultrachen yesterday, and they mentioned really enjoying watching Smash 4 at Apex, especially Abadango vs. Dabuz, because of the emphasis on positioning. See their further thoughts here.

And even if people find a way to play much more aggressively, in some cases it'd be kind of difficult to tell the difference between aggression and defense anyway. What does an aggressive Olimar do? Run around and throw Pikmin. What does a defensive Olimar do? Run around and throw Pikmin.

 

[Mazdamaxsti]

An I the only ones who think customs should just have a separate tournaments? Good players know about when certain smashes and moves KO and how to avoid other moves, and to punish. With 9x more moves with customs, it's just a game of no punishes and it is now Rock Paper Scissors.

For example, Lucario's custom counters. Lucario uses the one that makes it longer, so the opponent punishes when he practiced, but he gets hit by the counter-attack.

Also, some customs are OP. Game and watch has one that is only 1 and 9, and though it isn't 50/50, you have a higher chance of a 1 hit KO, if you don't spam it to make it stale.

I agree that customs make some bad characters better, but that really doesn't matter considering this is the most balanced smash to date!

In conclusion, customs are fun and great, but should be a separate tourney from regular. If a place has weeklies, every 2nd week could be customs. This could make everyone happy.

 

[HeavyLobster]

Of course "going HAM" isn't the optimal way to play, and never has been in Smash outside of a few poorly balanced characters capable of overwhelming the defensive options of most of the meta.(Melee spacies, Brawl MK) Most of the characters considered among the best(Diddy, Sheik, Sonic, Pika) have the tools to either play campy or aggressively and optimal play will likely be some mix of the two. People also aren't killing as early as they should because they frequently are not incorporating move staleness into their calculations(very relevant for both Sheik and Diddy), and no one's really mastered Smash 4 edgeguarding yet.

 

[Froggy]

When watching the Smash 4 top 8 it never occurred to me that anyone could have found it boring. I loved every minute of it. I imagine anyone who actually enjoys the game and plays it on a regular like I do had a blast watching it and I bet most of the haters in this thread are melee fan boys who enjoy watching spacies shine combo each other.

And to touch on that point for a little bit, I used to be the biggest melee fan but lately it has bored the hell out of me, not just because I've seen it for nearly 13 years but also because lately it become over saturated with spacies dominating and in like 70% of the matches. It just sucks to watch Axe out play Leffen or Sfat for 90% of the match and then watching him to lose to a Wave Shine up smash, or jab to upsmahh, or up throw up air or whatever other brain dead kill combo fox has. It used be the xase that good spacy players would love to other non top-tier character like half of the time and that was the best thing about melee, watching David defeat Goliath but now with 20XX spacies are winning upwards of 85% of their matches and shutting out low-tiers to an incredible extent, just go watch the recent do you fox with it tournament to see an optimal representation of degeneration of Melee's metagame.

Now on to the whiners in this thread themselves. I bet their problem isn't even Smash 4 so much as they enjoy technical game play as opposed to smart game play, they prefer combos over actual intelligence. They are the type who enjoy watching Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 over Ultra Street Fighter 4 despite the fact that UVMC3 is just an imbecilic brain dead button pushers game. I am the opposite, while I'm not going to sit here and claim to enjoy watching Guile dittos, my favorite player to watch in Street Fighter is Louffy, not because of how patient he plays but because of how smart he plays . He defeats his opponents by out smarting then not by out button pressing them, which is something that happens in Melee far more common than in Smash 4. So as long as these people(Like Ticker and whoever else kept bitchig) remain brain dead combo lovers there will be no appealing to them.

As for the quality of the matches themselves I liked the character representation, I'm disappointed a Diddy won the tournament. Granted its the best Diddy in the world and there was only one other Diddy in top 8 I really wanted to see another character win the tournament. I would have loved to see Nietono vs Zero, had Nietono play the way he did before Top 8 I think he may have beaten him. I also believe that Dabuz would have fared much better against Zero had he went Rosalina instead of Olimnar, the reason he kept losing to M2k is because he kept getting spiked primarily due to his aggressive edge guards off stage, had he toned that down then I think he had a fair shot against him, not to mention Dabuz and Rosalina are much better suited to shut out an aggressive Diddy than they are patient player like M2k. I personally play Pacman and was so disheartened when I saw on the tier list that he is low tier, I never believed that and I really wanted someone at Apex to vindicate than and they did. The current tier list is a bunch of crap imo, it will change radically as the game moves on. But also understand top 8 doesn't suffice as a representative sample of Smash 4's metagame because there is none at moment, top 8 could very easily have been radically different with a lot of different playstyles and match ups, I'm very excited to see how Evo will differ from Apex in this regard.

As for the rules of the tourney itself I think 3 out of 5 is definitely necessary if you're doing 2 stocks, hell the match before losers quarters should have been of 5 as well. Personally however instead of having 3 out of 5, a fine alternative is to have 3 stock matches in 2 out of 3 instead, if only a little a bit I prefer this alternative because it justifies have a longer timer which matches less likely to time out(I was heartbroken watching Dabuz time out Abadango) even if the matches still time out an 8 minute time out victory is more deserving and requires more skill and consistency than a 6 time out victory does and I think that should always be taken into consideration. For the first major I'm happy that no custom moves were using. As a for glory player myself I don't have much experience with custom moves(as I imagine was the case with at least a fair amount of the attendees) myself. I feel like it as a needless level of complexity to the game, of course the their side to the argument is that it adds depth to the matchups which is never a bad thing in and of itself. I'd be fine if some major tournaments were custom moves on(even Evo) but that should not be nationwide default for tournaments imo.

As regard to the campy matchups I was fine with it. I'm not a brain dead button pushing combo loving idiot so I actually found he Diddy dittos to be the most boring of the matches. My favorite match was probably Nietono vs Mr R, such an amazing display of striking a balance between patience and aggression, precise spacing and split second decisions is something you don't get to see much in smash games anymore and it was great. I have no problem with the campiness (its been over exaggerating in this thread) and we must remember that had this top 8 played out again we would have likely seen a very different top 8(especially coming from losers). So can't wait to see the next major international, sucks tha we have to wait till Evo to see something again on this scale.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

An I the only ones who think customs should just have a separate tournaments? Good players know about when certain smashes and moves KO and how to avoid other moves, and to punish. With 9x more moves with customs, it's just a game of no punishes and Rock Paper Scissors.

For example, Lucario's custom counters. Lucario uses the one that makes it longer, so the opponent punishes when he practiced, but he gets hit by the counter-attack.

Also, some customs are OP. Game and watch has one that is only 1 and 9, and though it isn't 50/50, you have a higher chance of a 1 hit KO, if you don't spam it to make it stale.

I agree that customs make some bad characters better, but that really doesn't matter considering this is the most balanced smash to date!

In conclusion, customs are fun and great, but should be a separate tourney from regular. If a place has weeklies, every 2nd week could be customs. This could make everyone happy.

Extreme Judge (the "1 or 9" one) is 25% weaker than default Judge and cannot kill Mario from his starting position on FD at 0%, but normal Judge can in the same situation if it gets a 9. It's also weighted so that the 9 comes up about 25% of the time instead of 50% like one may expect. Honestly, even though I don't think any custom move is OP, much less ban-worthy, I'd look at moves like Timber Counter before even thinking about Extreme Judge. G&W players prefer Chain Judge anyway.

And honestly, I don't think customs are as RPS as it seems. Most characters have one or two optimal sets that are best for the majority of matchups, there are relatively few cases where changing a move is actually worth it for the matchup. The ones that are tend to be reflectors, absorbers, etc. against characters without any applicable moves to use it on.

 

[BestTeaMaker]

It's a mistake to believe that a game can only really change with the discovery of "advanced techniques" or with sweeping changes such as custom movesets, unless your actual intent is you want the game to change in a very specific way. Knowledge, experience, and familiarity are such important factors that the game will inevitably change whether we want it to or not. It's all but inevitable, and the only question is in what direction it might change.

Related to that, I've seen an incorrect sentiment that existed back in Brawl, with Smash 4, and even games like Pokemon and Starcraft 2, which is that, because there are more people participating in a competitive environment compared to when a predecessor had come out, players should be able to figure out almost entirely the inner workings of a game much more quickly. While this is true to an extent, in the sense that more people working on something will yield faster results, there really is no substitute for TIME. You can have the deepest theoretical knowledge and the sharpest analytical mind, and still not be able to grasp what a game will become, because the process of actually playing and going through years and years of learning will always be a factor.

Also, going ham is not the optimal choice in a lot of different games, and I don't think it's inherently a fault of Smash 4 if the game doesn't turn out that way. I was listening to Ultrachen yesterday, and they mentioned really enjoying watching Smash 4 at Apex, especially Abadango vs. Dabuz, because of the emphasis on positioning. See their further thoughts here.

And even if people find a way to play much more aggressively, in some cases it'd be kind of difficult to tell the difference between aggression and defense anyway. What does an aggressive Olimar do? Run around and throw Pikmin. What does a defensive Olimar do? Run around and throw Pikmin.

I think it's interesting how you pointed out Ultrachen's views on Smash 4, about how he actually loves that there is a bigger emphasis on the neutral game in Smash 4 and others aspects of 4. There was a post on Reddit from Greward, a Mega Man/Mii Brawler from Europe who expressed his distaste for the Smash scene in the US when he was at Apex, especially with how little people actually understood the Smash meta.

I feel that people who have had years and years of playing Smash, and any other fighting game out there, have an understanding not only of what is a really good play, but what is also respectable. Simply put, the people who are loudly voicing their distaste for the games and blindly cheering for Melee are those who don't understand either game.

 

[Oobz]

I was watching Smash 4 stream all day saturday and there were a TON of epic matches, especially with Luigi. Everyone hating on it only saw the top 8 Rosalina vs Pacman match and never cared to watch any other games.

 

[KeithTheGeek]

Are there any VODs for the Pac/Rosa match up? I missed a few of the top 8 sets, and I'd like to see this one in particular.

I rather enjoyed quite a few of the matches I did see though. Even though he didn't get into top 8, Badada (a Shulk/Mega Man player) was a particular delight to see in action. Of the top 8, I loved watching 6WX's Sonic. And M2K's/ZeRo's Diddy ditto was a fun watch.

It's rather unfortunate so many people are quick to disrespect Smash 4. There was a lot of hate thrown in the general direction of Smash 4, its players, and Nintendo, when there were a number of different reasons the top 8s for both games ran so late. Plus I just sorta feel like even the people who understand Smash didn't want to take the time to get a good grasp on how this new game works before writing it off. If anything ends up killing Smash 4, it's going to be the apathy/hate it gets from people who either don't understand or don't even try to understand it.

 

[Ggjeed]

I think we should just ignore sm4sh haters. They wanna disrespect, let them. At this point those who held a grudge against sm4sh that could be brought around have been and now it's just haters/trolls. Just don't respond and enjoy smash.

 

[elmike]

Overall impression: Disappointing.

Love playing smash 4, and i havent played melee like in 5 years.... And still, i enjoyed more watching melee games than smash 4 (that was really unexpected and to some extent, displeasing)

Some weeks ago i thought: "Wow, Japan only plays in omega stages, how boring".
But this is MUCH worse. Smashville like 85% of the time, another 13% battlefield, and the rest 2% in halberd and delfino...


We need to do something ASAP about the "defensive, poor variety" game we are having.

The solution is obvious and simple (IMO):
3 stocks, customs specials ON, smashville allowed only once per set.

(i'm aware this wont solve all the "problems" in this game, but this will definitely help)

 

[ninrok]

Also, going ham is not the optimal choice in a lot of different games, and I don't think it's inherently a fault of Smash 4 if the game doesn't turn out that way. I was listening to Ultrachen yesterday, and they mentioned really enjoying watching Smash 4 at Apex, especially Abadango vs. Dabuz, because of the emphasis on positioning. See their further thoughts here.

1:18:38 of that is pretty hilarious. Their laughter is kinda; like "you poor, poor thing... oh if only you knew".

I've always enjoyed their show. I need to watch it more often.

Anyways, overall I agree with them here.

 

[DunnoBro]

Overall impression: Disappointing.

Love playing smash 4, and i havent played melee like in 5 years.... And still, i enjoyed more watching melee games than smash 4 (that was really unexpected and to some extent, displeasing)

Some weeks ago i thought: "Wow, Japan only plays in omega stages, how boring".
But this is MUCH worse. Smashville like 85% of the time, another 13% battlefield, and the rest 2% in halberd and delfino...


We need to do something ASAP about the "defensive, poor variety" game we are having.

The solution is obvious and simple (IMO):
3 stocks, customs specials ON, smashville allowed only once per set.

(i'm aware this wont solve all the "problems" in this game, but this will definitely help)

Smashville once per set is ridiculous lol

If you want more stage variety then join @Budget Player Cadet_ to get more legal starters.

 

[MapleWooD]

I was happy to see only, I think, 2 Diddy Kong's in Top 8. Just goes to show that the game is still young and that other picks work just as well.

 

[thehard]

I think it's interesting how you pointed out Ultrachen's views on Smash 4, about how he actually loves that there is a bigger emphasis on the neutral game in Smash 4 and others aspects of 4. There was a post on Reddit from Greward, a Mega Man/Mii Brawler from Europe who expressed his distaste for the Smash scene in the US when he was at Apex, especially with how little people actually understood the Smash meta.

I feel that people who have had years and years of playing Smash, and any other fighting game out there, have an understanding not only of what is a really good play, but what is also respectable. Simply put, the people who are loudly voicing their distaste for the games and blindly cheering for Melee are those who don't understand either game.

Wow, I really like that reddit post (and yours).

I don't think it's at all wrong to say much of the hype generated from Melee at APEX was because of the "Established Personality vs Established Personality" aspect. I know people who follow Smash drama but don't play the games.

There are subtler but equally as meaningful aspects of Smash Bros a lot of people need to start understanding. I guess you can't force them to enjoy it, but they are missing out. I've watched stocks disappear in Melee and felt nothing, because the gameplay leading up to it was unsatisfying, no matter if it was crazy rushdown combos or not.

Anyway, I loved Smash 4's Top 8.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Wow, I really like that reddit post (and yours).

I don't think it's at all wrong to say much of the hype generated from Melee at APEX was because of the "Established Personality vs Established Personality" aspect. I know people who follow Smash drama but don't play the games.

There are subtler but equally as meaningful aspects of Smash Bros a lot of people need to start understanding. I guess you can't force them to enjoy it, but they are missing out. I've watched stocks disappear in Melee and felt nothing, because the gameplay leading up to it was unsatisfying, no matter if it was crazy rushdown combos or not.

Anyway, I loved Smash 4's Top 8.

I wonder...if you took footage of the more hype matches, scrubbed the audio and blacked out the bits with player names and cams, would it still be hype?

 

[◥θ┴θ◤ | JJ]

Smashville once per set is ridiculous lol

No items
Diddy only
Smashville

 

[ninrok]

I don't think it's at all wrong to say much of the hype generated from Melee at APEX was because of the "Established Personality vs Established Personality" aspect. I know people who follow Smash drama but don't play the games.

IMHO, that's really what establishes the hype of any game or a set. The personalities.

I mean sure, yes, the game is nice big part of it. But if the two people on stage are known rivals or big names in the scene or one is a known jerk* or whatever storyline is behind it, that's what people are going to really latch on to.

It should never outshine the game, but having that helps it tremendously.

 

[Timbers]

I would for the future. Brawl and Melee didn't stay the same. Why should we expect the same here?

Customs are completely valid for the future. A lot of places and even some APEX staff where pretty much I. Favor of it til the set-up time was brought up even with a 3DS.

I agree that top players aren't trying to please an audience but I wouldn't take this tournament as an absolute given the age and the clear lack of idea on what to do on some matchup a while many were learning then as they went.

But, no where did I say that the game has already plateau'd. What I did say was, given the current circumstances/metagame/lifespan of the game, the top players chose a more conservative playstyle. And due to this, it was a safe bet (for me, at least) to believe that they were fleshing out these characters' playstyles in the correct direction. It could be the wrong direction, but there's no reason to believe that currently, and what I was initially focused on were those that were saying that this direction is indefinitely the wrong direction, and there's an absolutely correct direction leading to a "fast-paced playstyle."

Customs are a viable option, I just haven't seen anyone talk seriously about introducing them into the competitive scene. This thread isn't really the place to talk about it though, and I haven't followed the competitive talk of customs so I'll remain quiet on the matter.

It's a mistake to believe that a game can only really change with the discovery of "advanced techniques" or with sweeping changes such as custom movesets, unless your actual intent is you want the game to change in a very specific way. Knowledge, experience, and familiarity are such important factors that the game will inevitably change whether we want it to or not. It's all but inevitable, and the only question is in what direction it might change.

I guess throwing around the word "change" can mean different levels of severity, so I apologize for not being more specific. I used "change" in the sense that our current impressions of characters or gameplay would be invalidated due to this new "change." A young game is obviously malleable and will develop and expand, I'm just of the belief that we already have built a small foundation that we can build from. My issues earlier in this thread were with those that were under the belief that this small foundation we have developed needs to be shattered and must be rebuilt with something new ("stop playing the game this way, the game must be played in another way").