Project M Social Thread

[JCaesar]

Playing very conservatively. ******* Smashers generally look down on heavy defensive play, classifying it as an "unmanly" and / or pansy-esque playstyle. I play "homo" usually out of boredom and still get bashed for it; it's a term which Smasher's have grown accustomed to and are thus comfortable using to describe such a playstyle. It's kind of funny how so many Smashers ignore what most fighting games ultimately boil down to -- outplaying the opposition -- and don't see why defensive play isn't reserved only for those who play to win.

I respect playing homo to win. I enjoyed fighting Guru's hyper-campy Pit. But you usually don't play to win. You plank and run away when you're behind in stocks, which is a purely losing strategy. You play to troll and annoy, which works, and is why no one wants to play you.

 

[GHNeko]

"Homo" in smash is generally and commonly defined as the most unappealing, unwatchabe, least spectator-worthy style of play. It's extremely frustrating to play against because it's generally safe, slow, boring, and aggrivating but still effective. It minimizes direct confrontation in favor off distanced intreaction and generally is geared more towards abusing characters and mechanics more than consistently outplaying your opponent.


Is this a good definition everyone can agree on? lol

 

[Slashy]

"Homo" in smash is generally and commonly defined as the most unappealing, unwatchabe, least spectator-worthy style of play. It's extremely frustrating to play against because it's generally safe, slow, boring, and aggrivating but still effective. It minimizes direct confrontation in favor off distanced intreaction and generally is geared more towards abusing characters and mechanics more than consistently outplaying your opponent.


Is this a good definition everyone can agree on? lol

I don't think any strategy is bad if it is effective.

 

[GHNeko]

Did I say it was bad? <_>

 

[Slashy]

It just seems like from the terminology, and description, that it's a frowned upon form of play.

 

[CSDragon]

Frowned upon, but still viable.

 

[Archangel]

What Neko and JC said.

 

[iLink]

Because if you arent playing to win, it usually means you are playing for fun. Dealing with "homo" in a non-serious environment isnt fun.

I'll play against someone playing "homo" in friendlies if they are legitimately trying to win, but if they are just doing it to **** around then its not even fun and I rather spend my time doing something else.

Neko I think that definition applies to most fighting games and not just smash lol.

 

[Handorin]

It just seems like from the terminology, and description, that it's a frowned upon form of play.

Hype
Nothing happening

hmmmmmm
I think I prefer watching hype matches
Not ledge camping

 

[ELI-mination]

It's better to have a game designed so that the best way to win is not to play homo. That doesn't seem easy, let alone very possible.... so it's probably best to strive for a middle ground.

I, for one, find it annoying to fight overly defensive players. Trust me, I've played Gurukid and Leelue plenty of times. However, I sometimes enjoy the challenge of getting past their gay ****.

 

[Slashy]

I mean there are matchups like Pit vs Power Suit Samus or Dedede VS ROB that have the potential to be camp fests due to the characters' movesets and attributes. I mean if you have 2 slow characters with tools designed to prevent approaches, a portion of the match could be just spent reading your opponents potential counters before actually choosing a way to approach.

 

[cannedbread]

I'll play against someone playing "homo" in friendlies if they are legitimately trying to win, but if they are just doing it to **** around then its not even fun and I rather spend my time doing something else.

THIS soooo hard

 

[GHNeko]

Neko I think that definition applies to most fighting games and not just smash lol.

It does. It's all encompassing in fighting games. :V

There is no specific "homo" smash definition because it is a fighting game. Albeit, not a traditional one, but I believe it is a fighting game none-the-less, so "homo" definition wises applies to smash just as much as it doesn in other games.

It's just called different things based on the game. Here, it's "gay". in SF, "turtling", MvC3, "keep away."

It's really all the same lol.

 

[Slashy]

It does. It's all encompassing in fighting games. :V

There is no specific "homo" smash definition because it is a fighting game. Albeit, not a traditional one, but I believe it is a fighting game none-the-less, so "homo" definition wises applies to smash just as much as it doesn in other games.

It's just called different things based on the game. Here, it's "gay". in SF, "turtling", MvC3, "keep away."

It's really all the same lol.

The only game to actually punish turtling was KOF XI, by default the game reads a variety of different variables to determine a victor in the event of a TO rather than combining the health of all 3 team members.

 

[GHNeko]

k.

Kappa .

 

[9Kplus1]

I respect playing homo to win. I enjoyed fighting Guru's hyper-campy Pit. But you usually don't play to win. You plank and run away when you're behind in stocks, which is a purely losing strategy. You play to troll and annoy, which works, and is why no one wants to play you.

Nice job strawmanning my post. That portion of my post wasn't directly related to the point which I was attempting to make. I would've given far more specific examples if I wanted a reply to how I play and its effect on those who I play; however, I will concede in that I didn't give enough information to evade such a reply and will explain my case. I understand that because I aimlessly camp, offline and on-stream, no one is particularly excited to play against me. Have you noticed that I tend fall into strange habits while many others are watching me play? Well, nonsensically playing unnecessarily defensively is one of them. It's something that I've known for a while and therefore don't need a refresher on.

Second; I was not referring to you or anyone who has come to know me outside of SWF with the statement, "Smashers generally look down on heavy defensive play, classifying it as an 'unmanly' and / or pansy-esque playstyle." In case you missed it, "generally" was the keyword there. I would definitely retract my statement if 70% of SWF replied saying the opposite or something different is true for them, but, hey, that hasn't occurred yet. I'm hoping that you didn't take my words to offense, as I already understand (and have grown an indifference for) what people usually think of my camp-ish playstyle; i.e, I'm aware of being regarded, by you and everyone else I've gotten to play against in that manner, as "annoying", "not serious", or anything else which comes close to defining what my drive to play this game is.

Next time, could you read a bit more deeply into my posts instead of skimming on the surface of what I say and picking away at something which obviously wasn't meant to be replied to? You might actually contribute to the ongoing argument

"Homo" in smash is generally and commonly defined as the most unappealing, unwatchabe, least spectator-worthy style of play. It's extremely frustrating to play against because it's generally safe, slow, boring, and aggrivating but still effective. It minimizes direct confrontation in favor off distanced intreaction and generally is geared more towards abusing characters and mechanics more than consistently outplaying your opponent.

A lot of that is heavily opinionated garbage that is unhealthy for any competitive gaming community. Also, such a style of play doesn't exactly mean that one is solely abusing character mechanics or the game's physics. There is far more thought involved in playing "homo" than there is in playing what most people will regard as "approaching".

 

[`dazrin]

I respect playing homo to win. I enjoyed fighting Guru's hyper-campy Pit. But you usually don't play to win. You plank and run away when you're behind in stocks, which is a purely losing strategy. You play to troll and annoy, which works, and is why no one wants to play you.

Shots

Fired.

 

[Sanity's_Theif]

Finally uploaded a ton of new Link matches, started using the F-smash while holding a bomb trick, awesome mind-games, and is Fox just too heavy or is Link's up-smash still messed up?

Link(Me) Vs Fox(Temp)
http://youtu.be/uDenwAVm_BM
http://youtu.be/388nuPV9ZJE
http://youtu.be/BqQRJlp0JH8
http://youtu.be/UIzVJy2jI5U

Link(Me) Vs Lucas(Temp)
http://youtu.be/av0G2C9mG3o
http://youtu.be/xVwewR0k_VE

Link(Me) Vs Marth(Temp)
http://youtu.be/mWdgwrrIWHk

Behold my beastly Link

 

[@TKbreezy]

damn JCaes pull it back some. LMAO

Edit: watched the Lucas vid. 4 stock first match. did not care to see the rest.

Edit 2: Man if I was Temp we wouldn't be friends anymore. uploading this ****.

 

[Mr.Pickle]

Good thing those don't matter if his moves get beaten by every other move in the game.

Lol I think you're being a little extreme, most of ike's moves are high in knockback and are disjointed, so they shouldn't get beaten out if they're used correctly. Now if the ike player isn't spacing correctly, or their opponent is spacing better, yeah I can see this being true. In that case it kinda applies to everyone, but I suppose ike would suffer from it more because of the long start up on some of his moves.

 

[Archangel]

Nice job strawmanning my post. That portion of my post wasn't directly related to the point which I was attempting to make. I would've given far more specific examples if I wanted a reply to how I play and its effect on those who I play; however, I will concede in that I didn't give enough information to evade such a reply and will explain my case. I understand that because I aimlessly camp, offline and on-stream, no one is particularly excited to play against me. Have you noticed that I tend fall into strange habits while many others are watching me play? Well, nonsensically playing unnecessarily defensively is one of them. It's something that I've known for a while and therefore don't need a refresher on.

Second; I was not referring to you or anyone who has come to know me outside of SWF with the statement, "Smashers generally look down on heavy defensive play, classifying it as an 'unmanly' and / or pansy-esque playstyle." In case you missed it, "generally" was the keyword there. I would definitely retract my statement if 70% of SWF replied saying the opposite or something different is true for them, but, hey, that hasn't occurred yet. I'm hoping that you didn't take my words to offense, as I already understand (and have grown an indifference for) what people usually think of my camp-ish playstyle; i.e, I'm aware of being regarded, by you and everyone else I've gotten to play against in that manner, as "annoying", "not serious", or anything else which comes close to defining what my drive to play this game is.

Next time, could you read a bit more deeply into my posts instead of skimming on the surface of what I say and picking away at something which obviously wasn't meant to be replied to? You might actually contribute to the ongoing argument


A lot of that is heavily opinionated garbage that is unhealthy for any competitive gaming community. Also, such a style of play doesn't exactly mean that one is solely abusing character mechanics or the game's physics. There is far more thought involved in playing "homo" than there is in playing what most people will regard as "approaching".

This is possibly the most ironic post I've seen from you. You put together this novel on JCaesar "skimming through and strawmanning your post. Then you turn around and do the exact same thing....odd.

@ the discussion of homosexuality I think alot of people get defensive, responsible, safe, and smart playing for the sake of victory confused with playing like a ***, scared, *****, abusing character's mechanics to gain a distasteful and seemingly undeserved victory. I admit it is a fine line to draw in the sand. Lets see if I can help.

Defensively responsible gameplay.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ787Wlke0s

Playing like a ******
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTNaAUJZz5k

watch both til the end and you'll get it.

 

[ELI-mination]

playing like a ******
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtnaaujzz5k

watch both til the end and you'll get it.

why would you do this to me

 

[iLink]

He's playing like a ******

 

[@TKbreezy]

that second vid was painful to watch. lol

 

[GHNeko]

A lot of that is heavily opinionated garbage that is unhealthy for any competitive gaming community. Also, such a style of play doesn't exactly mean that one is solely abusing character mechanics or the game's physics. There is far more thought involved in playing "homo" than there is in playing what most people will regard as "approaching".

"Homo" has no set definition. There is only a common "standard/baseline" that is defined by the community at the time, which of course, is opinion-based since it's a term that has no dictionary definition and was spawned by the communities with a common context.

What I speak of is the generally compilation of "Homo" across many fighting game communities. Hence me saying, "generally" and "commonly". The same applies to abusing character mechanics and game engine/physics. I used the world generally there to. As in, not always, but a lot of the time.

Again, no set definition, nor is my own definition absolute, and it spawns as a cumulative definition when spawned across fighting games communities.

And of course playing "Homo" is more mentally taxing. Your biggest priority is abuse and exploitation of dozens of traits and attributes that spawn across the game.

 

[9Kplus1]

This is possibly the most ironic post I've seen from you. You put together this novel on JCaesar "skimming through and strawmanning your post. Then you turn around and do the exact same thing....odd.

Are you really that dense? Is there any reason for me to completely reply to a post which contains several things that don't contribute a single thing to the current conversation? Granted, I'm a very good example of why defensive play can be frowned upon, but the way JCaesar worded it made it seem as if he read only some of my post. I'm not obligated to make a serious reply to an unsupported argument which held only some relevance to my point. I mean... only reiterating my point for mutual clarification is a hell of a lot better than saying "go **** yourself".

stuff

I never referred to it as an 'official' or "set" definition. I was attempting to say was that it's meaningless to even brand such a playstyle in that manner -- in any competitive fighting game community.

And of course playing "Homo" is more mentally taxing. Your biggest priority is abuse and exploitation of dozens of traits and attributes that spawn across the game.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, you're saying that 'thinking and playing the game to its limits' is usually frowned upon? Since when is that bad?

 

[Life]

Can I get a tl;dw for those vids?

I don't think there's such a thing as playing homo, but I play Brawl soooooooooooo

 

[iLink]

I dunno, it's more mentally taxing for me to time my l-cancels and compensate for hitlag/whiff then it is to pewpew.

Spoiler

yes I know this is just one example

 

[Archangel]

Recently edited by 9kplus1

Are you really that dense? Is there any reason for me to completely reply to a post that doesn't which contains many things that are not positive to the current conversation? Granted, I'm a very good example of why defensive play can be frowned upon, but the way JCaesar worded it made it seem as if he read only some of my post. I'm not obligated to make a serious reply to an unsupported argument which held only some relevance to my point. I mean... only reiterating my point for mutual clarification is a hell of a lot better than saying "go **** yourself".


I never referred to it as an 'official' or "set" definition. I was attempting to say was that it's meaningless to even brand such a playstyle in that manner -- in any competitive fighting game community.


If I'm interpreting this correctly, you're saying that 'thinking and playing the game to its limits' is usually frowned upon? Since when is that a bad thing?

Ok...you are quite clearly the smartest poster in this thread.

 

[9Kplus1]

Go **** yourself

 

[Archangel]

To be clear I have nothing against playing to win even if it's playing like a complete homo. I have something against playing that way for no reason. It's not playing to win if you aren't winning anything. If you aren't winning money then I see no excuse for doing it. You don't improve, lose respect, lose friends or potential friendships....you are a loser and you deserve to be taken into the street and publicly executed.


my 2 cent on homosexuality in smash.

 

[GHNeko]

I never referred to it as an 'official' or "set" definition. I was attempting to say was that it's meaningless to even brand such a playstyle in that manner -- in any competitive fighting game community.


If I'm interpreting this correctly, you're saying that 'thinking and playing the game to its limits' is usually frowned upon? Since when is that bad?

Except it's not meaningless.

And you're not interpreting correctly. No one has problems pushing the game to the limits, people encourage and respect it, but the style which its done is generally unappealing to many. People want the game pushed to its limits while being appealing.

 

[Shadic]

This conversation is going in circles.

Just like 9k.

 

[9Kplus1]

And you're not interpreting correctly. No one has problems pushing the game to the limits, people encourage and respect it, but the style which its done is generally unappealing to many. People want the game pushed to its limits while being appealing.

"Appealing" and "unappealing" are relative. Many people tend to get hyped over matches which are noticeably slower and campy than most; others pass off said matches as "boring" or anything of that nature.

Except it's not meaningless.

Elaborate. In campy and more active matches, both players' goals don't differ much. Why classify one match-style as less appealing than the other?

 

[iLink]

You are stupid if you think the general public would be appealed more by a campy playstyle compared to a fast paced active match. Both in and out of any kind of fighting game community.

 

[GHNeko]

It's relative yes. But again, going by a common standard across all communities. I'm not basing this off my own opinion. :/

It's easy to say that many communities prefer aggressive high-octane matches. Yeah, they get hyped over campy ones, but they are always more visibly excited by higher paced aggressive offensive matches. that is a definite.

Also, all playstyles have names. All. Campy is campy. Aggressive is aggressive. Zoning is Zoning. Their levels of appeal are subjective, but in a general sense, the communities define campy as less appealing vs aggressive matches. ._.

what are you trying to argue 9k? Are you just ****ing with me or what?

 

[DrinkingFood]

Has anyone really been far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

 

[9Kplus1]

You are stupid if you think the general public would be appealed more by a campy playstyle compared to a fast paced active match.

"Appealing" and "unappealing" are relative. Many people tend to get hyped over matches which are noticeably slower and campy than most; others pass off said matches as "boring" or anything of that nature.

You're completely missing my point. Where do I say that I believe that the brunt of Smashers would be "appealed more by a campy playstyle compared to a fast paced active match"? Previously, I said "A lot of that is heavily opinionated garbage that is unhealthy for any competitive gaming community." I'm not arguing that the opinions of most Smashers are untrue; my argument is that they will produce nothing but a problem.

God, do you people ever take the time to read before making such offensive posts?

I'm not basing this off my own opinion. :/

...and me arguing against it is not right way to go? You're presenting information in an argument which I oppose.

Also, all playstyles have names. All. Campy is campy. Aggressive is aggressive. Zoning is Zoning. Their levels of appeal are subjective, but in a general sense, the communities define campy as less appealing vs aggressive matches

I said that classifying it "in such a manner" (meaning describing conservative play as boring, uninteresting, etc) is a hindrance to the development of any community. Never once did I imply that every playstyle is one in the same?

what are you trying to argue 9k?

That there's far too many negatives of looking down so much on a legitimate playstyle.

edit: Alright, this isn't the place to have such a conversation. Based off of the amount of opposition against me, I'm fighting a steep, uphill battle, which will only drag on for many, many more posts. If anyone still has legitimate interest in this topic, then feel free to PM me. I don't want to again contribute to this thread becoming clustered with conversation unrelated to P:M.

k, one more:

I was responding mostly to this

You just helped my argument a bit. Why generalize playstyles in a particular manner when a strong opposition exists and can argue against it?

 

[GHNeko]

There are no tangible or legitimate negatives or positives to people looking down at any kind playstyle. At least in the grand scheme of things lol.

Also, how playstyles are defined don't hinder the community because competitive communities are smarter than that and don't let labels prevent them from playing to win. People disapprove of it from a spectator point of view, but those same people resort to such tactics in order to win.

We know better. People who let such opinions sway them aren't playing to win at the highest degree lol.

you can argue against public opinion. Sure if you want i guess lol.

 

[iLink]

I was responding mostly to this

Why classify one match-style as less appealing than the other?

And you missed my point apparently. There will always be people that enjoy something, but I was talking about the general public's opinion on what is more appealing.