Project M Social Thread

[Xebenkeck]

Umbreon you make good points, but i think the majority of that applies solely to the Brawl newcomers because we haven't seen them in a melee enviroment. Characters like Link will seem more well done because we have seen them in a melee enviroment, and over 10 years of meta game development, we could see and know their inherate weakness's and things they excelled at. I for one think all the melee veterns seem well done and properly tweaked.

It's hard to transplant a new character into a 10 year old metagame, where it's easier to buff melee veterns like link, dk, kirby bcuz the PMBR are trying to preserve thier melee metagames, but make them more competent at them. Metagames that have proven themselves in melee's engine. Where brawl newcomers haven't, so knowing what is annoying/broken/unbalanced is what needs to be tested and applied and tweaked.

I'm not in the PMBR, but i'm sure feedback like that from someone like you is emensly helpful.

 

[Deleted member]

I don't disagree with you. I was talking to Cactuar about the game and he said pretty much the same thing, where the Brawl characters have less depth and try to make up for it with gimmicks, which ultimately fails as a design because those gimmicks are easily overcome and suck because you can overcome them (and thus the entire character), or are very good and you can't interact with (play around, defeat, mindgame) them.

At the point you realize this, you wish Project M was the way it is now but without the gimmicky characters, but then you realize that Melee already exists. The original version of Brawl is almost solely based on non-interactive strategies at a competitive level, and it's a big reason a lot of people dislike that game so much. See: DDD's infinite on DK, jab locks, planking, banana infinites, etc. It's a long list.

Personally I think the best way to make Project M successful is to make every character play like a non-gimmicky melee character, but I think it would make a lot of players angry too for what PM already is. I'm looking at the Lucario players on this one.

I know a lot of older players in pretty much any competitive game will refuse to use gimmick strategies, myself included. I've played 3 games professionally with sponsorships, and it pretty much holds true for any game I've played or seen. All of the Imperial Legion has at some point or another asked me to try one of the Brawl characters, and I know I won't do it. I read once that older players are too "proud" to play to gimmicks, and I'm not sure that's the best word for it but it conveys the idea well enough.

 

[Xebenkeck]

This is why i think Wolf is one of the best looking newcomers right now, he acts like a melee spacie, but with enough differences that aren't "gimmicks" to make him unique. What are your thoughts on Wolf, cause i'd say he is the most melee looking brawl character atm.

 

[Deleted member]

This is why i think Wolf is one of the best looking newcomers right now, he acts like a melee spaci, but with enough differences that aren't "gimmicks". What are your thoughts on Wolf, cause i'd say he is the most melee looking atm.

From what I can tell Wolf is designed really well, but I personally hate him. Not for any design reasons, I actually just hate the character so maybe I'm not the best person to ask.

 

[Jonny Westside]

Here's a crazy idea. Code a tether option on Yoshi! That tongue can latch on to the ledge. He'll have a new recovery option that would enhance his chances of making it back on the stage safely, since he's susceptible to spikes and early gimps

 

[shanus]

i think its always natural to think a foreign change is gimmicky. im sure if falco didnt have JC shine in melee, you would call adding in a JC "gimmicky" as well. gimmick is such an easy word to throw around, but if you keep every character exactly like brawl then good luck having a fun game

 

[JediKnightTemplar]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKA;LSJGA;LPH[SPGIHSGISKJG;LDKAJ;SDLGKAJSGLDKAJ[PIHS
ASHASHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

-DEADDDDDDDDDD-

**** MAN
asdgk;asdgalskdjg
haksldgjas;d
a;klsdjgas

Did you have a stroke while typing that?

 

[Deleted member]

i think its always natural to think a foreign change is gimmicky. im sure if falco didnt have JC shine in melee, you would call adding in a JC "gimmicky" as well. gimmick is such an easy word to throw around, but if you keep every character exactly like brawl then good luck having a fun game

no i try to evaluate things pretty honestly, at least how i see them. like DK's new dash attack is pretty cool and adds a lot of shield dynamic for that character, but it's not a gimmick. you can play with and around it quite well.

ZSS dash-pivot camping side B is a gimmick. she lives and dies by that technique and how well the opponent can play around it. the characters that can't interact with it, well, sucks to be you. the characters that can beat it pretty much steam-roll her. those are the designs you should stay away from.

no offense, but i'd rather you didn't assume my stance or viewpoints. i'll try to explain myself to the best of my ability on my judgments to avoid this.

 

[PEEF!]

Umbreon, we aren't always conscious of the drives behind our decisions. That is what Shanus was pointing out.

 

[Shadic]

no offense, but i'd rather you didn't assume my stance or viewpoints. i'll try to explain myself to the best of my ability on my judgments to avoid this.

I think Shanus's remark was in reply to this:

I know a lot of older players in pretty much any competitive game will refuse to use gimmick strategies, myself included. I've played 3 games professionally with sponsorships, and it pretty much holds true for any game I've played or seen. All of the Imperial Legion has at some point or another asked me to try one of the Brawl characters, and I know I won't do it. I read once that older players are too "proud" to play to gimmicks, and I'm not sure that's the best word for it but it conveys the idea well enough.

Which understandably comes off as close-minded. Especially the bolded part.

 

[Deleted member]

ya i'm not trying to be a jerk. unlike usual, where i am trying to be a jerk.

i also haven't seen like half the cast so i'm not sure how educated my opinions are. the MD/VA guys don't touch them for whatever reason.

 

[Xebenkeck]

Under that definition i can see how Umbreon sees Squirtle as gimmicky. The side B cancels etc. along with the dash sliding, hydro plaining, etc. It''s what squirtle relies on.

That being said I think a few characters have good "gimmicks" like Lucario which I feel will flesh out in the long run. But I agree that it would b best to stray away from giving each Brawl newcomer there own "thing."

I.E. If lucas plays similar to how he does in the demo I think he'll be fine. I think he feels like a cross between Ness and Zelda. And part of the reason I liked him so much in the demo. I will say I like offence up as it was in the demo, It added to his game, but he didn't live and die by it, I don't like the idea of keeping a charge if you hit with it, that is the type of gimmick I feel you guys should stray away from.

Thats just one example that comes to mind.

 

[Shadic]

ya i'm not trying to be a jerk. unlike usual, where i am trying to be a jerk.

It's appreciated.

i also haven't seen like half the cast so i'm not sure how educated my opinions are. the MD/VA guys don't touch them for whatever reason.

And it's refreshing when people acknowledge this. As for Legion-folk, playing more than a handful of characters gets difficult. I barely even play my main (Link) anymore because I try and work on other characters (And Link is fairly stable at the moment.)

 

[drsusredfish]

what is considered a gimmick in smash? The characters most usefull move? I just want to know how to spot a gimmick.

 

[Xebenkeck]

^^^
"ZSS dash-pivot camping side B is a gimmick. she lives and dies by that technique and how well the opponent can play around it. the characters that can't interact with it, well, sucks to be you. the characters that can beat it pretty much steam-roll her."

What Umbreon said and is reffering to in this convo.

And like i said i feel Lucas' offense up staying after hitting falls under this. If he becomes reliant on it, that is not good. I.E. its his only way to get a kill or something

 

[drsusredfish]

thanks i missed that sentence

 

[shanus]

no offense, but i'd rather you didn't assume my stance or viewpoints. i'll try to explain myself to the best of my ability on my judgments to avoid this.

Understandable, I more appreciate the analysis of what you view as a gimmick, rather than the word itself. Saying a bunch of characters riddled with gimmicks provides no real value, and gives no direction on areas to improve. More insight like your highlight of ZSS would definitely be welcome, as really from anyone out here who views or had the opportunity to play.

 

[Deleted member]

I guess as a VERY general rule, the less you can interact with the opponent in some way, the more gimmicky some element of that interaction is. Like Lucario doesn't even play like a melee character, or even a smash character for that matter. If you try to play him like a smash character, you can't and you will do very poorly. That lack of interaction makes him one big gimmick. At least IMO.

Don't get me wrong, PM is a HUGE upgrade from Brawl for obvious reasons. But some characters were done better than others. But you definitely need to do something with the characters and stages that gives players a reason to play your game over the original melee. So far most of the stuff is pretty good.

 

[drsusredfish]

what do you mean by lack of interaction?

 

[Comeback Kid]

I don't see how playing differently ie Lucario is gimmicky at all. And Lucas shouldnt feel too much like Ness.

Yes, he's right that no character should rely on one all-or-nothing move, but that speaks more to the moveset's balance and the type of character ur playing.

The word gimmick all too often means: something I don't like defending against.

 

[Deleted member]

what do you mean by lack of interaction?

This feels like a very hard question to answer but the general inability to impact some outcome. For a very easy example, characters with poor approaches cannot fight Olimar in Brawl. They simply don't have the tools to do it. No amount of player skill is going to negate that disadvantage should the Olimar player choose to abuse it. You have no way to play with or around it as the opposing character.

Brawl is an extremely shallow game in a mechanical sense and the added depth of ability in PM gives you better tools so any example I pull won't be as obvious, but I'm just trying to answer the question in a clear manner. In some micro cases these tend to make bad matches, EX falcon dashddance camping bowser on FD. But the more universally the tactic works in a macro sense, the more it degrades gameplay on the whole.

Like I know Ryoko was trying to get rid of Sheik's downthrow chaingrab because it destroys a good chunk of the cast, so he gave her PAL downthrow. To me this is awful because it also takes away her throw > aerial kill move game at mid-high % that makes her so threatening. I would rather Sheik be able to CG half the cast and admit imbalance or poor matches than have the entire rest of the cast be able to shield camp her at higher % to make her useless. It seems like the lesser evil to have 15 bad matches than 30+. Again maybe not the best example, but just how I look at things.

edit: if sheik's game was entirely dependent on her ability to CG the opponent, I would also consider it a gimmick. Sadly, sheik's downthrow is entirely terrifying regardless of what she does after it so to me it doesn't really fit in with the rest. But I can see what you're getting at.

 

[Comeback Kid]

The word gimmick has no meaning when u speak of Lucario unless you think combos are gimmicks which is a weird thing to say.

In fact Sheik's d-throw pretty much fits into ur definition of a gimmick: an imbalance in design that the character relies on to a fault and if u can't defend against it too bad ur screwed. Ur entire argument is hypocritical in that sense.

 

[Xebenkeck]

OHC(one hit cancel system) is a "gimmick"

@comback kid, right now in P:M if a Lucario player does not use any aspect of the OHC system will Lucario be a competant character? Unlikely he relies on it. If Lucario is forced into a poking game, or projectile war, the OHC system is rendered useless and thus Lucario. This is what we are reffering to when we say "gimmick"

 

[Comeback Kid]

OHC system is a "gimmick"

@ comback kid, right now in P:M if a Lucario player does not use any aspect of the OHC will Lucario be a competant character? Unlikely he relies on it. This is what we are reffering to when we say "gimmick"

Again, are you telling me combos are a gimmick? That a character designed around combos (just like a heavy weight with super armor is designed differently than a fastfaller) is a gimmick? For real?

 

[PEEF!]

Gimmick is the new gay.

 

[Wave-Guiding Hero]

I don't see what's wrong with gimmicks if they're awesome *coughOHCcough*

 

[Xebenkeck]

I already said I think Lucario is a instance where a gimmick can work, meaning i like it, but that doesn't change that it is a character specific gimmick. Peach's float is a gimmick, shiek dthrow, falco shine or lazers, jigglypuff rest are NOT gimmicks.

 

[9Kplus1]

Gimmicks aren't what veteran players have grown accustomed to, or rather, what's kept them clung to this game. Maybe that's the reason behind why certain character-exclusive abilities, such as Squirtle's Shellshifting and Lucario's OHC have had mixed feedback ?_? I wouldn't consider giving "depth" to Brawl characters being gimmicky, however. A gimmick implies that only impractical and / or limited ideas (i.e, unusual) are being used in an innovative manner in order to give a character more of a reason to be used than others, which isn't the case for a fair selection of characters. Zamus, Wolf, and Ike haven't aren't unworkable nor do they heavily rely on their buffs; all of the aforementioned characters simply received a lot more depth than their vBrawl counterparts had. I don't consider Ike's Quick Draw getting the buffs that it did, nor Zamus's hooligan shenanigans as odd and unusual to the Melee feel. They don't detract from or slow down the gameplay much, from what I can see, and offer both characters a wider array of options to mess around with and hopefully develop into various playstyles. There are more examples for characters that can plop comfortably right into Melee's groove, but for the sake of time, I'm just going to address the atypical characters (attributes).

Lucario's OHC system helps Lucario keep up with the undoubtedly and significantly faster pace of the Melee environment, without giving him a stupid-crazy attribute directly comparable to Fox's waveshine Usmash. It readies the upcoming metagame for a notable, but far from overwhelming threat, despite there being a myriad of options that Lucario can choose from. Pit and Squitle have gained a considerable boost in viability as well with their respective side-B's -- another attribute that gives them the ability to compete with the rest of the cast -- along with multiple other changes. If those changes are supposedly gimmicky, then what about the veteran cast getting buffed to compete with top tiers? Bowser:M, by that logic, is a gimmick; any Melee character getting a buff that gives them greater viability should be considered gimmicky as well. If that's the case, why should anyone code or play Project:M when Melee is obviously superior?

Some characters cannot be played like the typical smash characters, granted, but it's not as if they're immutable when played against as if they were just another smash character. Any character that's considered "one big gimmick" can get ***** by typical spacie stuff just as badly as the next character. It's not as if said 'gimmicky' characters won't be able to compete either. They have redeeming factors about them that add quite a bit of depth and creativity to their respective metagames. If a character receives less popularity due to an odd learning curve, then so be it. There's nothing overwhelming about them and every player has the choice of picking them up or not. Also, removing / challenging their key abilities and traits wouldn't completely shut them down -- I'm very sure that if that were the case, the idea behind said ability would be scrapped before the public becomes accustomed to it.

Just tossing stuff out, feel free to attack this theory-filled post

 

[Comeback Kid]

I already said I think Lucario is a instance where a gimmick can work, meaning i like it, but that doesn't change that it is a character specific gimmick. Peach's float is a gimmick, shiek dthrow, falco shine, jigglypuff rest are NOT gimmicks.

See, I don't think "character-specific" was how the other guy meant gimmick at all. He meant moves and character designs he didn't like in Brawl, that often lacked meaningful choices. I think most characters should have character-specific "gimmicks" of some sort if that makes them more unique.

I think of characters like Olimar and Pokemon Trainer to be "gimmicky" because they are concepts that aren't fleshed out enough and so seem like one-trick ponies.

To me one-trick pony = gimmicky.

 

[Wave-Guiding Hero]

Lucario's OHC system helps Lucario keep up with the undoubtedly and significantly faster pace of the Melee environment, without giving him a stupid-crazy attribute directly comparable to Fox's waveshine Usmash. It readies the upcoming metagame for a notable, but far from overwhelming threat, despite there being a myriad of options that Lucario can choose from. Pit and Squitle have gained a considerable boost in viability as well with their respective side-B's -- another attribute that gives them the ability to compete with the rest of the cast -- along with multiple other changes. If those changes are supposedly gimmicky, then what about the veteran cast getting buffed to compete with top tiers? Bowser:M, by that logic, is a gimmick; any Melee character getting a buff that gives them greater viability should be considered gimmicky as well. If that's the case, why should anyone code or play Project:M when Melee is obviously superior?

This. Lucario's attacks were way too slow and deliberate in vBrawl for him to stand any sort of chance in M. I think gimmick is too negative and unclear of a word to just throw around everywhere; while some instances are correct (I agree that Lucario's OHC is a gimmick, as well as his Aura damage scaling in vBrawl) I think simple buffs that make a character more effective shouldn't be called gimmicky. If that was the case, Project M is effectively one big gimmick

 

[Deleted member]

man i LOVE MK in PM. He doesn't rely on any one thing, but he's hard to pin in a way that's fun and engaging. he's super flexible and can switch roles between offense and defense very quickly, but doesn't seem to rely on any one tactic. he's new and kinda gay to fight, but i feel like i can interact with everything he does and it's really engaging for both players. he's also pretty good and you can't sleep on him.

 

[Xebenkeck]

Key word Umbreon just used RELY ON.

This makes a gimmick, again I say Peach's floating is a gimmick, but one that has proven to be a GOOD one.


IC's are a gimmick, IC mains RELY on Nana. Without Nana they are generally screwed.
Olimar is a gimmick He RELIES on pikmen.

The less instances where characters rely on something the better P:M will be.

 

[TeiunBomb]

Gimmick is the new gay.

It sure seems that way, doesn't it?

I don't think that characters having a particular gimmick is an inherently bad thing; it just depends on how it's implements. For example, look at the current incarnation of Guilty Gear XX. Quite a few characters have their own particular gimmicks or niche that they fill, and they aren't any better or worse for it; if anything, it just gives them a difficulty curve before you can master them, but complaining about taking a time to master a character due to their complexity is like calling out Fox or Falco from Melee for being difficult to master. Yes, these characters may not be as straightforward due to their unique subsystem, but as long as they're designed well, and don't rely on one or two moves/attributes to attain victory, what does it matter?

 

[Deleted member]

I don't think gimmicks are necessarily a bad thing, I just know that I don't like them, and veteran players won't like them. If you want to appeal to younger gamers that are okay with shallower gameplay, by all means gimmick it up.

I'm glad you mentioned ICs. I remember when brawl dojo was doing release information and they revealed that ICs were still in it, I knew the game was going to be bad from that moment. There is simply no way for ICs not to be a polarizing character so long as there are still 2 of them. This isn't to say it's for better or for worse, it simply meant that Nintendo was okay with having polarizing characters in the new game. This was well before brawl was released. You can still interact with ICs primary gimmick of Nana by killing her, but ICs live and die by their potency, mostly determined by how threatening they are with 2 of them, or conversely how worthless Popo is alone. The guide I wrote, "Drastic Improvement", in the Featured Topics in the top right corner goes into that detail a little further in the teams section if anyone is interested enough to delve into that.

 

[Xebenkeck]

It sure seems that way, doesn't it?

I don't think that characters having a particular gimmick is an inherently bad thing; it just depends on how it's implements. For example, look at the current incarnation of Guilty Gear XX. Quite a few characters have their own particular gimmicks or niche that they fill, and they aren't any better or worse for it; if anything, it just gives them a difficulty curve before you can master them, but complaining about taking a time to master a character due to their complexity is like calling out Fox or Falco from Melee for being difficult to master. Yes, these characters may not be as straightforward due to their unique subsystem, but as long as they're designed well, and don't rely on one or two moves/attributes to attain victory, what does it matter?

Bolded to further empasize the point. Gimmicks can work, but they cant DEFINE the character. Peach's floating is a gimmick that adds to her, but by no means is she binded by it. She can win without it, she has other options like good grabs, turnip game, good aerials, etc.

IMO IC are a bad gimmick because they can't win without Nana.

Likewise if Lucario can't win without the OHC system then IMO it's a bad gimmick.(which i dont think it is)

EDIT: Umbreon a Ninja

 

[iLink]

OHC I think is more of an extension of his moveset rather then a gimmick. It's like Fox/Falco being able to JC shine. They would arguably not be anywhere near as good if they couldn't JC it.

Brawl's aura system on the other hand... now that was gimmicky

 

[Comeback Kid]

A homogenized cast where everyone has a sex kick, all recoveries are too good, and every character has every tool they need to win is frankly the thing we should all be most worried about. Making everything too good and samey with no weaknesses or uniqueness.

Worrying about "gimmick characters" seems kinda silly when they are such a minority.

 

[Xebenkeck]

We aren't suggesting make every character the same.

We are saying you can't make characters RELY on gimmicks to the point that if that gimmick is overcome by your opponent then the character is screwed. This destroys a characters viablity and balance.

If Nana dies IC are SCREWED
If lucas cant kill without offence up he is SCREWED
If Olimar has no plucked pikmen he is SCREWED
If vlucario has no damage he cant kill then he is SCREWED
IF ZSS pivot side B wall can be breached she is SCREWED
If Lucario can't do more than 10% damage without the OHC then he is SCREWED
If squirtle can't do anything other then sideB set ups he is SCREWED
etc. etc

this is what P:M can't have.

 

[drsusredfish]

so if i understand things correctly in the discussion a gimick is a gimick if it can be taken away and the character wouldn't be viable any more? I see a gimick like this if the move can be taken away and it doesn't realy affect the character then thats a gimmick. gimick = uneeded and rarely used. DDD inhale, peach's toad, mario tornado, maybe pits sheild, and a few others those can be defined as gimmicks to me. Gimmicks to me are very situational almost useless things.

 

[Deleted member]

okay, then i guess the goal is to avoid one-dimensional tactics that are void of interaction? it doesn't really matter what you call it. the less people can "play" your game, the less they're going to want to.

the more i think of it, brawl really is the worst game ever. at least you can win at solitaire. no one really wins in brawl.